|
" A Thorn in the Eye: "
Conrad, H Keziah
Hollan, Douglas W
| Document Type
|
:
|
AL
|
| Record Number
|
:
|
1072545
|
| Doc. No
|
:
|
LA116174
|
| Call No
|
:
|
10.1163/22117954-BJA10020
|
| Language of Document
|
:
|
English
|
| Main Entry
|
:
|
Luis Manuel Hernández Aguilar
|
| Title & Author
|
:
|
The Interior Frontiers of Germany [Article]\ Luis Manuel Hernández Aguilar
|
| Publication Statement
|
:
|
Leiden: Brill
|
| Title of Periodical
|
:
|
Journal of Muslims in Europe
|
| Date
|
:
|
2020
|
| Volume/ Issue Number
|
:
|
10/1
|
| Page No
|
:
|
22–44
|
| Abstract
|
:
|
In 2012, the regional court of the city of Cologne ruled that ritual male circumcision constituted unjustified bodily harm. This prompted a nationwide debate culminating in the enactment of legislation guaranteeing male circumcision without medical justification under certain preconditions. This article proposes to approach the ‘circumcision debate’ as a discursive strand of the systematic problematisation of Muslims as ‘Muslims’, which I analyse through the analytic of the ‘Muslim Question’. In addition, I refer to the concepts of recursive history and of the interior frontier to contextualise the 2012 circumcision debate and the political purpose it has served, namely, to establish racial distinctions and interior frontiers between Germans, Jews and Muslims. In 2012, the regional court of the city of Cologne ruled that ritual male circumcision constituted unjustified bodily harm. This prompted a nationwide debate culminating in the enactment of legislation guaranteeing male circumcision without medical justification under certain preconditions. This article proposes to approach the ‘circumcision debate’ as a discursive strand of the systematic problematisation of Muslims as ‘Muslims’, which I analyse through the analytic of the ‘Muslim Question’. In addition, I refer to the concepts of recursive history and of the interior frontier to contextualise the 2012 circumcision debate and the political purpose it has served, namely, to establish racial distinctions and interior frontiers between Germans, Jews and Muslims. In 2012, the regional court of the city of Cologne ruled that ritual male circumcision constituted unjustified bodily harm. This prompted a nationwide debate culminating in the enactment of legislation guaranteeing male circumcision without medical justification under certain preconditions. This article proposes to approach the ‘circumcision debate’ as a discursive strand of the systematic problematisation of Muslims as ‘Muslims’, which I analyse through the analytic of the ‘Muslim Question’. In addition, I refer to the concepts of recursive history and of the interior frontier to contextualise the 2012 circumcision debate and the political purpose it has served, namely, to establish racial distinctions and interior frontiers between Germans, Jews and Muslims. In 2012, the regional court of the city of Cologne ruled that ritual male circumcision constituted unjustified bodily harm. This prompted a nationwide debate culminating in the enactment of legislation guaranteeing male circumcision without medical justification under certain preconditions. This article proposes to approach the ‘circumcision debate’ as a discursive strand of the systematic problematisation of Muslims as ‘Muslims’, which I analyse through the analytic of the ‘Muslim Question’. In addition, I refer to the concepts of recursive history and of the interior frontier to contextualise the 2012 circumcision debate and the political purpose it has served, namely, to establish racial distinctions and interior frontiers between Germans, Jews and Muslims.
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
‘Jewish Question’
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
‘Muslim Question’
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
interior frontier
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
racism
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
recursive history
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
ritual male circumcision debate
|
| Location & Call number
|
:
|
10.1163/22117954-BJA10020
|
| |