Islamophobia is not a comfortable study in the academic world in general and particularly in French academia especially when the researcher is Muslim. It is not a mainstream topic in social sciences disciplines like geography, and my experience as a French Muslim geographer can attest to this. The traditional French scientific culture expects researchers to be objective, neutral and external to their object of study. My training and my university career in France therefore delayed the importance of situating my research from my own eyes by mobilizing a reflexive approach. It was precisely while writing my book on ‘Spatialized Islamophobia’ that I personally felt the need for the first time in my career to clearly express my positionality in order to reflect critically and authentically on the study of ‘Everywhere Islamophobia.’ Drawing on the feminist standpoint theory developed by philosopher Sandra Harding, I was able to do this work of reflection and thus understand that the best way to grasp and understand oppression is to study it from the point of view of the oppressed (Harding, 1986, 2004). Being directly affected by everyday discrimination myself reinforces for me the importance of discussing it.

Studying Islamophobia in a hostile and subversive context such as France led me to make important decisions that could have a direct impact on my own professional development. These necessary sacrifices prompted significant critical reflection on the state of academia and the functioning of scientific research in France. It was increasingly clear to me that I would undoubtedly experience differential treatment because of who I am and my research projects. To circumvent this, one of the most important decisions I made was to stop writing articles in French or to apply for various grants and positions in France, and to become more involved in the Anglo-American academic world where research on race, ethnicity, religion, and discrimination is more advanced (Staszak, 2001) and accessible to researchers from racial minorities. Indeed, there are significant reactionary forces in France working to eliminate certain themes (notably the study of Islamophobia) and to avoid involving racialized and Muslim researchers. This reflection has begun to develop within French academia (Mondoloni, 2019; Leprince, 2019; Hajjat, 2020; Hammou and Harchi, 2020) with numerous testimonies from researchers (from ethnic minorities or not).

This seriously threatens academic freedom (Lentin et al., 2020) and mainly researchers working on these issues who can see their academic position being questioned. Such authoritarianism is strongly associated with several ‘prohibitions’ imposed by the doxa of rational objectivity of the French academic world that explains that serious knowledge can only be produced by researchers who are foreign to what they describe (Weber, 1959; Grasland, 2012; Morelle and Ripoll, 2009). This obviously excludes researchers who are directly concerned, those who are activists and those who have obvious political activities (Hancock, 2016; Grasland, 2012). But it implies above all that researchers must not state their personal position in order to engage in their field of research. This calls into question the issue of positionality, which is very little addressed in French geography. Here, the difference with the Anglo-American academic world is more than significant (Staszak, 2001; Gintrac, 2015). This is why, in such a context, studies on systemic racism and Islamophobia have been constantly marginalized in social sciences in France, as there are no departments of racial studies or religious studies in France because of the refusal of its Constitutional Council to construct any framework on a racial or religious basis.

Therefore, French academia wants researchers to be external and little involved in what they study, as if this guaranteed de facto a neutral, rational and partial scientific production. This injunction to exteriority raises on the contrary the question of the dominant knowledge that frames the possibilities of the debate. Such reasoning cannot be taken seriously because it implies that only white heterosexual men, Christians or atheists and from middle or privileged classes must work on the issues of discrimination, oppression and injustice. Their scientific knowledge would be the only applicable one since they are not discriminated against. But even if they are not victims of discrimination, they are nonetheless involved since they benefit from it (directly or indirectly) and therefore have a significant interest in maintaining it. Some may even consider themselves “critical” researchers (Ahmed, 2012), but their work is more likely to follow a dangerous dominant trend under the cover of great values such as republican equality or secularism that serve to reaffirm their superiority over their dominated colleagues and over the oppressed in general. It is therefore dangerous here to allow, in the name of objectivity and neutrality, all the French scientific space to be occupied by researchers who may themselves be sexist, racist or Islamophobic.

Such an absence in French universities reveals “empty spaces” and “silenced voices” that lead to exclusionary scientific productions and academic practices (which can be observed in the corridors of departments, in conference rooms, in the knowledge produced, in citation and/or editorial practices and in recruitment processes). Indeed, these minority groups deserve to occupy privileged spaces and to bring new knowledge that contradicts the traditional university system. Consequently, it is the time to appropriate this scientific space that has so far not been granted (or very little) to researchers wishing to question this reality and to those who are directly concerned by discrimination. Including the insiders is essential in order to allow a new wave of researchers and critical students directly concerned to better serve our society. It seems that researchers and students interested in feminist and queer studies who are part of the insider category are increasingly well perceived and welcomed in French universities, but this is still not the case for those interested in racial and religious studies. I would therefore like to see more Black, Brown and Muslim colleagues and students populating the different social science departments of French universities to deal with subjects that directly concern them. Social sciences need them and their critical stance to bring fundamental knowledge to its creative development (Mott and Cockayne, 2018).

On a personal level, I can analyze and discuss a phenomenon such as Islamophobia that I have seen with my own eyes. Thus, from my own individual identity, I can speak for a collective identity (Collins, 2002) while critiquing the illusion that knowledge could be non-situated and neutral. All knowledge is situated and cannot come from a position of total neutrality (hooks, 2000; Harding, 1986, 2004; Husson, 2014; Bourdieu, 2001; Harvey, 2001). First of all, my Master’s degree was about the spatial practices of immigrant religious groups (Muslims and Buddhists) and their integration in France. I could already see at that time how difficult it was to address such a topic in France. Therefore, for my PhD, I opted for another issue related to urban segregation. But as this topic raised important debates on ethnic data, ghettos, racism and governmental actions, it was also difficult to study it within a department in quantitative geography (a type of geography that is generally perceived as too close to the State and at the service of dominant economic interests (Harvey, 1972)). Then, I wanted to scientifically analyze the issue of Islamophobia from a geographical perspective through a postdoctoral project on spaces of anti-Muslim acts. But my application for a national grant was not accepted. One year later, it was selected for one of the most competitive and prestigious grants in Europe (the Marie Curie scholarship).

From then on, I knew that my research interests would not be fully recognized by French scientists and would generate significant criticism. I have indeed faced negative comments and attacks from French colleagues questioning my academic skills and scientific rigor. Some have even publicly denigrated my work on Islamophobia, using specific words describing my research as ‘vague’, ‘disappointing’, ‘not serious’, etc. while claiming that my work was a militant propaganda that hinders the criticism of Islam and does not respect the values of secularism. These types of comments are very different and disconnected from what my co-authors and I offer in our joint work; namely a geographical comparison of anti-Muslim acts in two important European capitals (Paris and London). I knew that I should not let myself be distracted by unfounded comments and attacks aimed at discrediting my scientific work that was rewarded abroad. Indeed, I knew very well that the problem was directly linked to my identity which amplifies the level of criticism and tensions to which I could be exposed in French academia.

Finally, I knew that not being part of the dominant categories while seeking to fight against injustices was also a strength. Although my trajectory has been accompanied by several years of unemployment, isolation, despair and precariousness, such a journey clearly explains who I am and why I study such subjects with a real commitment to research that makes a distinctive change and that goes beyond career motivations. But this also implies that we must work ten times harder, that we must learn other languages, systems and networks, that we must accept discomfort, unfair failures and uncertainty. Despite all these difficulties, we must continue the fight because one day there will be a small door ajar in front of us, and on that day, we will have to be ready to take it, push it, appropriate it and express ourselves there. I believe that we do not have to follow what the mainstream system has planned for us. Researchers should be able to transcend their knowledge and to be proud of who they are and what they can bring. I particularly want to say to those French Muslim insiders who would recognize themselves in my words that even on the other side of the Channel, I will always be there to speak and denounce their oppressions and to support their struggle, my struggle!