1

University of Southampton

Faculty of Social, Human and Mathematical Sciences

Department of Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology

Rejecting what’s halal: Perceptions of veganism within the Muslim community of Britain

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

MSc (Social Sciences) in Social Research Methods by instructional programme

By

Ellen Atayee-Bennett

25576526

Date of submission: 20 September 2019

Word Count: 15,000

2

3

Table of Contents

Table of Figures …………………………………………………………………………..5

Abstract ...…………………...……………………………………………………………7

1. Introduction .…………………………………………………………………………8

1.1 Rationale …………………………………………………………………..8

1.2 Study Overview ……………………………………………………….…..9

2. Literature Review …………………………………………………………………..12

2.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………12

2.2 Veganism in Academic Literature ………………………………………..12

2.3 Religion and Veganism …………………………………………………..15

2.4 Islam and Veganism ……………………………………………………...18

2.4.1 Animal Welfare ………………………………………………...18

2.4.2 Environmentalism ……………………………………………...20

2.4.3 Vegetarianism ………………………………………………….22

2.4.4 Resistance to Change …………………………………………..23

2.5 Research Objectives ……………………………………………………...24

2.6 The Subjective Turn in Religion …………………………………………25

3. Methodology ………………………………………………………………………...29

3.1 Research Design ………………………………………………………….29

3.2 Data Collection …………………………………………………………..30

3.2.1 Qualitative Interviews ………………………………………….30

3.2.2 Quantitative Surveys …………………………………………...33

3.3 Data Analysis …………………………………………………………….36

3.4 Reflections on the Methodology …………………………………………37

4. Results and Discussion …...………………………………………………………...40

4.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………40

4.2 Experiences of Muslim Vegans in Britain ………………………………..40

4.3 Perceptions of Veganism amongst the Muslim Community of Britain …...45

4.3.1 Interview Findings ….………………………………………….46

4.3.2 Survey Results ….……………………………………………...50

4

4.3.3 Summary ……………………………………………………….60

5. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………..61

5.1 Research Conclusions ……………………………………………………61

5.2 Implications of the Study …………………………………………………63

Reference List ……………………………………………………………………….......66

Appendices ……………………………………………………………………………...86

Appendix A: Glossary of Terms ………………………………………………..87

Appendix B: Ethics Form ………………………………………………………..88

Appendix C: ERGO Approval Email …………………………………………….96

Appendix D: Survey Questionnaire ……………………………………………...97

Appendix E: Selection of Survey Results ……………………………………….101

Appendix F: Interview Guide …………………………………………………...106

Appendix G: Coding Frame …………………………………………………….108

Appendix H: Coded Interview Transcript ……..………………………………..109

Appendix I: Summary of Interviews ……………………………………………126

5

Table of Figures

Table 1: Participant pseudonyms and key sampling information …………………………….31

Table 2: Survey respondent sampling information …………………….……….…………….35

Figure 1: Bar graph relating to the statement “It is acceptable in Islam to follow a vegan diet”

………………………………………………………………………………………………..51

Figure 2: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim can still practice Islam properly,

despite being vegan” …………………………………………………………………………51

Figure 3: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan for health reasons.

This is:” ………………………………………………………………………………………52

Figure 4: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan because they are

concerned with animal welfare. This is:” …………………………………………………….52

Figure 5: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan in order to help

the environment. This is:” …………………………………………………………………...53

Figure 6: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan because they feel

it is the Islamic thing to do. This is:” …………………………………………………………53

Figure 7: Bar graph relating to the statement “It is acceptable for a Muslim to justify their

veganism with ayahs from the Qur’an and ahadith” ………………………………………….54

Figure 8: Bar graph relating to the statement “It is acceptable for a Muslim to refuse to sacrifice

an animal on Eid-al-Adha” …………………………………………………………………..55

Figure 9: Clustered bar graph depicting gendered views towards the acceptance of a vegan diet

in Islam ………………………………………………………………………………………56

Figure 10: Clustered bar graph depicting the views of different generations of migrants

towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam …………………………………………….56

Table 3: Frequency Table of Islamic Practice ……………………………………………….57

6

Table 4: Frequency Table of Islamic Knowledge ……………………………………………57

Figure 11: Clustered bar graph depicting the variation of views according to the level of

Islamic practice towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam …………………………...58

Figure 12: Clustered bar graph depicting the variation of views according to the level of Islamic

knowledge towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam …………………………………58

Figure 13: Clustered bar graph depicting the variation of views according to accommodation

type towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam …………………………………………59

7

Abstract

Veganism is a hugely significant topic in contemporary society, however it is a subject that

remains massively under researched in the academic domain, especially within the religious

context. A variety of publications do exist on the topic, however, most relate to secular

themes, such as stigma and motivations, whilst other studies that explore the relationship

between veganism and religion focus mainly on Western religions, such as Christianity, and

Indic religions, such as Jainism. Islam meanwhile is absent from the debate. The purpose of

this study therefore is to explore the experiences of Muslim vegans in Britain, as well as to

examine the perceptions that exist within the wider Muslim community of Britain. In order to

fulfil these research objectives, a mixed methods approach was employed, comprising 6

qualitative interviews with Muslim vegans and a quantitative survey which generated 100

responses. The interviews were transcribed and coded, whilst the survey results were

descriptively analysed using SPSS. The findings revealed that on the whole it is easy to be a

Muslim vegan in Britain, due to the widespread availability of vegan products and

information, as well as the subjective turn in religion which fosters processes such as

reflexivity and individualisation. Furthermore, the study indicated that there are a diverse

range of perceptions towards veganism amongst the Muslim community of Britain, both

positive and negative. The positive perceptions are a likely result of reflexive and

individualised attitudes in Western society, whilst the existence of negative perceptions

demonstrated that culture and tradition are still hugely dominant within the Muslim

community and as such many still follow a religious habitus. This study, despite having been

conducted on a small scale, provides insightful information on the subject of veganism and

Islam, and is thus valuable for informing and shaping current debates.

Keywords: Veganism; Islam; Perception; Experience; Stigma; Subjective Turn in Religion;

Individualisation; Habitus; Reflexivity; Detraditionalization; Culture

8

1. Introduction 1.1 Rationale

This ground-breaking study presents a detailed focus on the relationship between

veganism and Islam in Britain, a topic never before discussed within the academic domain. In

my research I explore both the experiences of Muslim vegans in Britain, as well as the

perceptions towards veganism that exist within the wider Muslim community of Britain.

Veganism has become extremely popular in contemporary society and as such is debated

widely within the media. In academia however, it remains a hugely understudied topic;

publications that do exist on the subject largely relate to the secular context and even those

that do explore veganism in conjunction with religion are still very much in their infancy and

consequently are limited to only a few specific belief systems, predominately Christianity,

Judaism and Jainism. Islam on the other hand is absent from the debate; even vegetarianism

in Islam is still an extraordinarily under researched subject. My research therefore provides

valuable insight into the relationship between Islam and veganism at a time when Muslims

are beginning to debate and even adopt this lifestyle. As a result, my study constitutes a

major first step in encouraging and shaping dialogue within this community. As discourse

surrounding health, animal welfare and environmentalism continue to dominate

contemporary debate, veganism will undoubtedly remain a widely discussed topic. Given the

ongoing significance of religion in Western society, it is therefore essential that veganism is

explored within this context so as to inform future research. Furthermore, since Islam is the

world’s second largest religion and also the fastest growing religion (Sherwood, 2018), it is

imperative that the topic is examined within this faith in particular. By understanding the

experiences of Muslim vegans in Britain we can learn how to offer better support, in addition

to ascertaining where activism is best targeted. Moreover, by recognising the range of

perceptions that exist within the wider Muslim community, as well as the reasons behind

9

these perceptions, we can better direct discussion and foster improved dialogue between all

communities, as well as overcome stigma and misconceptions, which commonly result in

poor relationships between individuals.

1.2 Study Overview

In order to accurately understand this study and its objectives, it is imperative

definitions are offered for a number of key terms used throughout this paper. Although

commonly associated only with diet, veganism is in fact “a way of living which seeks to

exclude, as far as is possible and practicable, all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to,

animals for food, clothing or any other purpose” (The Vegan Society, 2019). By ‘experience’,

I refer to the way of life and daily events that leave an impression on the individual, whilst

‘perception’ refers to any opinion or attitude held, whether positive or negative that relates to

the topic of veganism. It is also important to acknowledge the difference between the terms

“Islamic” and “Muslim”. “Islamic” refers to that which is derived from the canonical sources

of the religion of Islam, whilst “Muslim” refers to the practices and beliefs of Muslims,

followers of Islam. These practices and beliefs may or may not be a result of the canonical

sources (Foltz, 2000:63); they could instead be a result of cultural influence. In this study, I

am interested in the practices and perceptions of Muslims and as such, I make use of the term

“Muslim”. The phrase ‘Muslim community’ therefore includes any individual who identifies

as Muslim and resides in Britain, regardless of whether they consider themselves an active

member of the wider community or not.

I begin this study with a literature review, which explores the existing literature

pertaining to veganism in general, religion and veganism and Islamic discussions on animal

welfare, environmentalism and vegetarianism. After formulating my research objectives, I

explore the theory relating to the subjective turn in religion, as well as other relevant

10

sociological concepts, namely habitus, detraditionalization, individualisation and reflexivity.

I then outline my methodological approach, which comprises of mixed methods, specifically

qualitative interviews with 6 Muslim vegans and a quantitative survey which generated 100

responses from members of the wider Muslim community aged between 18-30. In this

chapter I discuss my research design, my data collection methods and the forms of analysis I

employed. The qualitative interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, before being

coded and thematically analysed, whilst the survey results were uploaded to SPSS and then

descriptively analysed to produce both univariate and bivariate statistics. The next chapter is

dedicated to my results and discussion. Here I examine both my interview findings and

survey results in order to explore both experience and perceptions. In addition to

summarising my findings, I also refer back to the theory from my literature review, in order

to provide thorough answers to my research questions. Finally, I conclude this study with a

concise description of my research conclusions, as well as a discussion of the strengths and

weaknesses of a mixed methods approach, areas for improvement and suggestions for future

research.

It is important to highlight that my research is not generalisable to the entire Muslim

community in Britain due to the sampling strategy I adopted, however my findings are

transferable and replicable. Consequently, I am neither able to state that the perceptions

discussed in my study are the only perceptions in existence, nor can I suggest that they are

entirely representative of the Muslim population in Britain. Nevertheless, the perceptions

described are indeed held by individuals and are thus worthy of investigation and analysis.

By exploring the experiences of my interview participants, as well as the perceptions reported

both in the interviews and the survey, I can begin to examine what attitudes exist relating to

veganism in the Muslim community of Britain. This can inform future research, as it provides

a foundation upon which other theorists can build. Moreover, the more insight we have into

11

this topic, the more effective dialogue will be between activists and the Muslim community,

serving to further the vegan cause and encourage greater action within Muslim groups, where

health, animal welfare and environmentalism are concerned.

12

2. Literature Review 2.1 Introduction

Whilst veganism is extremely significant in contemporary society, belated scholarly

engagement has rendered it an understudied topic, even as we approach ten years of academic

interest in the subject. In this literature review, I will explore the existing publications

relating to veganism before focusing specifically on stigma. I will then review literature

relating to religions and veganism, before turning my attention to Islam in particular. At

present, no publications exist linking Islam with veganism, so I will instead explore related

topics, namely animal welfare, environmentalism, vegetarianism and resistance to change.

Having identified gaps in the literature, I will then outline my research questions, before

discussing the subjective turn in religion alongside associated sociological themes, namely

habitus, detraditionalization, ontological security and individualisation, since they explain the

processes involved in social change and thus prove insightful for this topic.

2.2 Veganism in Academic Literature

Veganism only entered academic debate in the last decade, due to its rapidly

increasing popularity, especially in the West (Petter, 2018), so studies on the subject are still

quite limited. Nevertheless, many scholars seek to define veganism. Some have likened it to a

religion (Rhodes, 2014:175), since it meets the legal definition under US law (Johnson,

2019:307), however many are against veganism being treated as such, both due to the lack of

spiritual beliefs (Rhodes, 2014:185) and the fear that it could set a precedent for illegal or

immoral practices to become protected (Johnson, 2019:310). Others instead take an economic

view, labelling it a consumer movement (Greenebaum, 2018:680), whilst others take a

political stance, describing it as collective individualised action in the form of a protest

(Bertuzzi, 2017:139). Veganism is most commonly referred to as a social movement that

13

requires lifestyle changes however (Cherry, 2006:156). Adams (2017:45) adds that veganism

is also a form of boycott and feminist action, seeking to dismantle patriarchal power

hierarchies (p.48), whereby women are visually consumed and animals literally consumed

(p.47).

Motivations are also widely discussed. Animal welfare is perhaps the most common

and longest lasting motivation (Janssen et al, 2016:649), whilst environmental concern is

becoming a more prevalent motivation (Meier and Christen, 2013:886). For others, health is a

key motivator, since plant-based diets are said to have multiple health advantages (Cramer et

al, 2017:561). Greater awareness and education surrounding these issues have helped with

the surge in veganism (Radnitz et al, 2015:35), for example, Thornes (2019:251) concluded

that veganism could improve both longevity and environmental problems considerably

(p.250), whilst Kemmerer (2012:292-300) detailed the atrocious treatment of animals in

factory farms and slaughterhouses. Moreover, increased scientific evidence is associated with

the uptake of plant-based diets (Vainio, 2019:75).

Numerous studies have also examined reasons for rejecting veganism. For some

people, their love of meat is too strong to allow them to abandon it (Graça et al, 2015:122), so

they display moral disengagement, whereby strategies are adopted, such as convincing

themselves that their behaviour is not unethical (Buttlar and Walther, 2019:73), becoming

argumentative and angry or even choosing ignorance so as to avoid moral dilemmas (Adams,

2017:54). Furthermore, when individuals realise the inconsistencies in their actions, many

resort to defensiveness as a form of self-protection (Adams, 1996:190).

The behaviour of vegans is also explored. Heiss et al (2017:129) found that eating

behaviours did not differ very much between vegans and omnivores, however vegans did

tend to be healthier. There is also a huge social element to veganism with many vegans

14

creating social events such as food festivals and potlucks (Twine, 2018:170), whilst others

turn to social media to share their food creativity (p.174).

Within the literature on veganism, stigma is arguably the most discussed topic,

however. Goffman (1963:9) remarks that stigma results when an individual is not accepted

by society due to “an attribute that is deeply discrediting” (p.13). In recent studies, Link and

Phelan (2001:367-375) produce a stigma model, comprising of five behaviours: labelling,

negative attribution, separation, marginalisation and discrimination. These are all discussed in

relation to veganism.

Labelling is most prominent where gender is concerned, with meat-eating associated

with masculinity and dominance and veganism associated with femininity and emotional

weakness (Greenebaum and Dexter, 2018:637). Adams (2000:199) agrees, suggesting that

meat has symbolic power; men who refrain from animal foods are deemed effeminate (p.44).

Thomas (2016:85) suggests that these perceptions are changing, however. Whilst vegan men

are still regarded as less masculine than omnivorous men, vegetarian men are no longer

regarded as unmanly. Negative attribution is common within the media. Newspapers in

particular, often discredit veganism through ridicule and derogatory discourses, thus

strengthening speciesist attitudes in society (Cole and Morgan, 2011:134). Veganism is also

presented as deviant (p.136), a fad, an ascetic practice, impossible to sustain and an

oversensitive and hostile lifestyle (p.139). Many vegans also experience separation, with

many non-vegans admitting to keeping their distance from them (Markowski and Roxburgh,

2019:7). Furthermore, non-vegans fear that if they were to become vegan, they too would be

stigmatised and separated from social gatherings (p.1). Marginalisation is particularly evident

where race is concerned, since veganism is commonly associated with whiteness and

privilege (Greenebaum, 2018:680). Within coloured communities, veganism is often deemed

incompatible with ethnicity (p.682), with accusations including rejecting culture and family,

15

as well as acting white (p.690). To counteract this, many coloured vegans are creating their

own discourse, arguing that veganism decolonises the body from a harmful colonial diet

(Harper, 2010:48). Discrimination is also common. Where veganism challenges the dominant

meat-eating culture (Twine, 2014:628), many vegans are portrayed as judgemental activists

(Greenebaum, 2012:317-318). Moreover, many non-vegans report feeling uncomfortable and

guilty around vegans (Bresnahan et al, 2015:12), with many becoming defensive, even if the

vegan is silent (Twine, 2014:629).

2.3 Religion and Veganism

Most literature on veganism focuses on the secular context, however recent statistics

suggest that 84% of the global population follow a religion (Sherwood, 2018). It is therefore

essential to also consider the religious context. Whilst the debate surrounding animal rights is

thousands of years old (Dombrowski, 2004:22), most modern views link back to the

Enlightenment, when the emphasis on human rationality cemented an anthropocentric

worldview and the idea that humans had dominion over animals (p.23). These views can and

often do influence attitudes within religious communities, for example anthropocentric

worldviews continue to shape Christian beliefs today (Szücs et al, 2012:1500). Many

Christians emphasise power and dominion and neglect teachings on compassion and love

(Adams, 2017:52), whilst others become defensive, referring to Genesis 9:3 to argue that God

permitted meat-eating after the flood. Christian vegans meanwhile often draw upon Genesis

1:29 to argue that God wanted people to be plant-based (Linzey, 2004:189) and that even

after banishment from Eden, God commanded Adam to grow food, again implying a vegan

world (Rooke, 2019:218). Moreover, Isaiah 11:6-9 states this ideal will return (Frayne,

2019:207). Christian vegans also argue that since animals belong to God, to destroy them

needlessly is sinful (Linzey, 2004: p.193); factory farming therefore cannot be justified on

16

Christian grounds (Frayne, 2019:209). Adams (2017:45) therefore considers veganism a

fulfilment of Christian engagement.

Attitudes often differ amongst the individual denominations too; in some cases,

perceptions towards animals have deteriorated throughout history. For example, Evangelical

Christians traditionally considered animal advocacy a Christian duty, whereas nowadays

animals are seen as having been created for human use (Sampson, 2019:66). Similarly,

Mormonism has many pro-animal teachings, however followers are rarely aware of them and

consequently eat meat and profit from animal exploitation (Foster, 2019:110). Other

denominations present more favourable perceptions. Some Orthodox Christians, especially

monks, refrain from eating meat year-round, however in Lent all Orthodox Christians are

expected to adopt a vegan diet (Ware, 2019:133). Additionally, they are required, in

principle, to adopt a vegan diet on Wednesdays and Fridays, however in reality most only

adopt a pescatarian diet every Friday (Remele, 2019:117). Catholics traditionally regarded

abstinence from meat a virtuous act (Berkman, 2004:201), however after centuries of neglect

this practice was recently re-established on Fridays (Remele, 2019:123). Furthermore,

minority denominations, such as the Quakers and Order of the Cross also advocate plant-

based diets (Calvert, 2019:224).

Veganism is also evident in Jewish debate. Recent estimates suggest that around 5%

of the Israeli population are now vegan, whilst globally, numerous Jewish vegan

organisations, forums and communities now exist advocating the diet (Labendz and

Yanklowitz, 2019:ix). Scholars suggest that veganism ties in well with Jewish values

(Kalechofsky, 2004:173) and allows Jews to better follow prophetic teachings (p.176).

Additionally, the portrayal of both the Edenic world and the Messianic world as vegan has

resulted in many Jewish vegetarians throughout history (p.169).

17

Veganism has also gained popularity within Jainism. Non-violence is regarded the

highest religious duty (Tuminello, 2019:93) and consequently, diet is strictly regulated

(Babb, 2011:203). In India, all Jains are vegetarian (Tuminello, 2019:93), eating a diet

exempt from meat, fish, eggs, honey and root vegetables (Donaldson, 2016:53), however, in

the West, many young Jains are adopting veganism (Tuminello, 2019:94), upon learning

about the harms of the dairy industry (Shah, 2011:114). This decision is often criticised by

Jains in India since milk is permissible; Jains in the West therefore appear more open-minded

(p.116). Buddhism shares similar beliefs and practices with Jainism, such as an emphasis on

compassion and non-violence (Sciberras, 2011:229). Consequently, vegetarianism has always

been common, especially amongst monks and higher castes (Gaffney, 2004:232), however

recently, veganism has also entered Buddhist debate. Tuttle (2018:16) argues that the practice

of veganism complements Buddhist teachings, whilst Blatte (2018:30) suggests that some

Buddhist teachings even recommend veganism. In Indic religions, plant-based diets are rarely

adopted out of compassion for the animal however, but rather a concern for one’s own

spiritual positioning and karma accrual (Gaffney, 2004:226). Whilst vegetarianism is

common amongst Hindus (Long, 2011:196), it is not as widespread as the West believes and

was most likely influenced by the growing popularity of Jainism and Buddhism (Donaldson,

2016:40). Veganism therefore is yet to be explored.

Within Sikhism vegetarianism and veganism are also gaining interest. Many Sikhs

believe that the Gurus advocated plant-based diets due to associations with spirituality and

saintliness (Jhutti-Johal, 2019:152), with many non-vegetarian Sikhs choosing to avoid

animal-based foods on the days they visit the gurdwara (p.153). Veganism is also becoming

popular within minority religions, such as Rastafarianism, followers of which have long

avoided meat due to the teachings in Genesis (McFarlane, 2019:137). Even amongst societies

that are commonly considered human-centred, such as China (Cao, 2019:56), the popular

18

philosophy Daoism advocates vegetarianism and teaches that animals are embodiments of the

Dao (“the Way”) (p.59).

2.4 Islam and Veganism

2.4.1 Animal Welfare

No publications exist as yet linking Islam and veganism, however numerous studies

exist on related topics, such as animal welfare. The majority of Muslims eat meat (Foltz,

2006a:25) and do not question this as it was necessary for survival at the time of revelation

(pp.105-106). Amongst Muslims, attitudes vary considerably, from animal-lovers to strict

anthropocentrists (p.7); consequently, there is no unified view of animals (p.149). Islamic

tradition plays an important role in shaping Muslims’ attitudes (Tlili, 2018:3), however so do

culture, ideologies and politics (p.2).

Animal welfare is discussed extensively in Islam, but within the context of halal meat.

There must be compassion in slaughter (Foltz, 2006b:152), so there are lots of conditions, for

example only one cut is permissible, and animals should not be hoisted (Abdul Rahman and

Aidaros, 2012:28-29). In many instances however, up to 9 cuts are required to slaughter the

animal (Velarde et al, 2014:281) and hoisting is common (Farouk et al, 2014:508); these

slaughter practices openly violate Islamic teachings (Masri, 2007:87). Additionally, halal

meat can only come from well cared for animals, in accordance with Islamic principles

(Foltz, 2006a:126). Much is imported from non-Muslim countries however (p.118), where

animal cruelty is commonplace, rendering the meat unlawful (Masri, 2007:137). In some

cases, animals are fed swine, also making the meat haram (Benzertiha et al, 2018:4). Muslims

tend to focus only on slaughter however and not on the animals’ lifetime (Ramadan,

2004:243-244); even halal certification standards focus solely on slaughter (Furber, 2017:27),

contradicting Islamic law. Dairy and eggs deserve more attention too. Mothers and babies

19

must remain together (p.18), animals must not be milked if it would harm the young (Izzi

Dien, 1992:30), birds must not be kept in cages (Foltz, 2006a:33) and animals must not live

in cramped conditions (p.34). These intensive farming practices only exist due to consumer

demand for cheap food (Furber, 2017:19), so farmers seek to be efficient and cost-effective

(Tlili, 2012:5); prioritising profit over animal welfare (Masri, 2007:2). Additionally, major

agricultural organisations closely watch for legal developments that might implement

protection for animals, fearing their practices could be affected (Stilt, 2018:1385).

It is not possible to rear animals on a large scale without inflicting significant

suffering (Singer, 2004:115). Consequently, factory farming is now common in Islamic

countries (Masri, 2007:44), even though it is Islamically unacceptable (Farouk et al,

2016:65). Adulteration has also become common (Nakyinsige et al, 2012:208), for example,

some halal products are mixed with pork derivatives or blood plasma, making them haram

(p.209). There is therefore no longer any certainty surrounding permissibility (Foltz,

2006a:116), yet Islamic law dictates that when permissibility is doubtful the food should be

avoided (p.117). Many Muslims and scholars appear unaware of these practices (Masri,

2007:x), which could explain the silence surrounding factory farming (Foltz, 2006a:117).

Furthermore, cruel practices are often hidden from the public (Masri, 1987:1), since animal

cruelty is considered sinful (Masri, 2001:187). Conversely, kindness to animals is highly

rewarded by Allah (Kemmerer, 2012:245). Scholars maintain that Islam is animal-friendly,

but they rarely explore the issue in any depth (Foltz, 2006a:88). Many Muslims therefore are

ignorant and become defensive (Perlo, 2009:112), referring to Qur’an 2:29 to support the

argument of dominion (Stilt, 2009:16), which is used to justify meat-eating and animal

exploitation (Furber, 2015:5). These individuals often display anthropocentric and speciesist

attitudes, and consequently also a guiltless entitlement to use animals for human needs (Tlili,

2012:6).

20

Despite widespread animal cruelty, animal advocacy is on the rise. Many Muslims

quote the legal maxim, “one may not forbid something which Allah has made permissible”,

however Muslim activists are now highlighting another maxim, “allowed unless specifically

disallowed” (Foltz, 2006a:99). The innumerable Hadith reporting Prophet Muhammadصلى الله عليه وسلم’s

compassion for animals (Frayne, 2019:205), coupled with the prevalent plant food imagery in

the Qur’an (Perlo, 2009:95) are also emphasised to affirm the importance of animal welfare.

A large number of Muslim animal activists are Western converts however (Foltz, 2006a:84),

which could hamper advocacy, due to differences in culture and ideology (Tlili, 2018:15).

Another relevant topic is that of animal sacrifice, a practice originating in pre-Islamic

society (Foltz, 2006a:123), which is still performed yearly on Eid-al-Adha. The Qur’an does

not evidence God’s pleasure in this act, however many Muslims regard it a religious duty

(p.121). Islam asserts that sacrifice is an institution of charity (Masri, 2007:111) and a social

obligation (p.116); consequently, it is widely practiced (Foltz, 2006a:105). The implications

of this, however, include extensive waste (Masri, 1989:117), which defeats the original

purpose and becomes sinful, since animal death without necessity is forbidden (Masri,

2007:119).

2.4.2 Environmentalism

Environmentalism is another issue relevant to veganism that has been discussed in the

context of Islam. Islamic environmentalists consider environmentalism to be a component of

the Qur’anic concept of stewardship (Foltz, 2000:64), yet religious scholars rarely discuss the

topic (Nasr, 2003:87). In the past, environmental protection was discussed, however

nowadays scholars seem to lack knowledge of the severity of the situation (Nasr, 2010:86), as

well as animal agriculture’s responsibility for a significant share of environmental damage

(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2006:284), The West exerts a

21

great deal of control over Muslim countries, especially where modern technology and science

are concerned (Nasr, 2003:88); consequently, traditional Islamic values have been abandoned

and environmental problems have intensified (Wersal, 1995:451). According to Islamic law,

Muslims are required to act responsibly towards both the environment and animals (p.453),

since the Qur’an refers to humans as being both in the service of Allah and viceregents of

Allah (Nasr, 2010:82). Moreover, Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم encouraged Muslims to care for the

natural environment (Nasr, 2003:97), whilst forbidding wastefulness, needless destruction

and pollution (p.98), since nature is considered the property of all of Creation (Masri,

1992:6).

Perceptions towards environmentalism vary within the Muslim community. Foltz

(2000:66) attended the Conference on Islam and Ecology in May 1998 at the Harvard Center

for World Religions and found that environmental destruction was generally characterised as

a symptom of social justice. Moreover, overpopulation was dismissed as a non-issue, despite

scientific evidence that mass migration, urbanisation and industrialisation all have a

devastating impact on the natural environment (Nasr, 2003:90). He argues that the dominant

attitude expressed by Muslims was an outright refusal to acknowledge any link between a

rapidly increasing human population and the challenges of social injustice, economic

disparity and environmental degradation (Foltz, 2000:67). Often there is a lack of political

freedom in Muslim countries however, so it is possible that scholars do not feel able to

openly discuss environmental issues (Nasr, 2003:102).

Whilst governmental policies are often in opposition to environmental movements

(Nasr, 2003:91), Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran are three examples of countries that have

implemented positive developments. The creation of governmental and nongovernmental

organisations dedicated to environmental protection and sustainable development, coupled

with policy implementation all benefit environmentalism (Foltz, 2000:69). Iran is particularly

22

unique in that both official and public attitudes toward environmentalism express some

progressive perspectives (p.71). Significantly more progress globally is required, however.

2.4.3 Vegetarianism

There is a long history of kindness to animals in Islamic history (Stilt, 2009:13),

however discourse on vegetarianism is difficult to locate (Foltz, 2001:39). Many influential

jurists have spoken out against vegetarianism, with the most common argument appearing to

be the belief that Muslims must not prohibit that which is deemed halal. This view suggests

that it is un-Islamic to be vegetarian (Izzi Dien, 2000:146). Other arguments include the fact

that Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم ate meat and so meat-eating is therefore sunnah (Furber, 2017:26).

Stigma is consequently evident within the Muslim vegetarian community, with many being

criticised for their dietary choices (Foltz, 2006a:108). Moreover, non-vegetarians often

display confusion, hostility or rejection towards vegetarianism (Ali, 2015:273), with others

taking offense at meat refusal (p.276).

Muslims rarely advocate vegetarianism (Ali, 2015:273), however some scholars are

now speaking out in support of it, suggesting that excessive meat-eating is reprehensible

(Foltz, 2006a:108), whilst also emphasising the Qur’anic verses that promote a plant-based

diet (Frayne, 2019:207). Masri (2007:97) adds that Islam does not demand meat-eating; the

individual therefore has freedom of choice (p.86), since according to Islamic law, things are

“allowed unless specifically disallowed” (Foltz, 2006a:99). Even more recently, theorists

have argued that due to changed conditions, God would not permit today what he allowed in

the 7th Century (Masri, 2007:142; Perlo, 2009:133). Muslims are therefore becoming more

open to the idea of vegetarianism (Foltz, 2006a:109).

Vegetarianism is not uncommon in Islamic history. Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم and some

other early Muslim role models are regarded by many as having been semi-vegetarian (Ali,

23

2015:272), whilst 10th Century poet al-Ma’arri adopted veganism and was accused of “trying

to be more compassionate than God” (van Gelder, 2000:88). Similarly, an early female Sufi,

Zaynab, was persecuted for her abstinence from meat (Smith, 1978:154), whilst 15th Century

Sufi mystic Kabir openly condemned meat-eating (Bennison, 2011:218). Most accounts of

Sufi vegetarians originate in South Asia however, suggesting an Indic influence (Schimmel,

1975:348). This would also account for the fact that Sufis advocate “harmlessness as a

principle of faith” (Said and Funk, 2003:174), as well as consider vegetarianism a form of

spiritual discipline (Foltz, 2006b:154) and ascetic practice (Frayne, 2019:205). However, it is

also argued that Sufis base their vegetarianism on Qur’anic teachings (Bennison, 2011:218),

relating to the health of the body and soul (Foltz, 2001:47). Based on Sufi practice, it is

certainly arguable that vegetarianism is permissible for Muslims (Robinson, 2019:87).

Nowadays, an increasing number of Muslims are adopting vegetarianism and

veganism, especially in the West (Foltz, 2006b:155), both for spiritual reasons (Foltz,

2006a:109) and compassion for animals (p.111). Vegetarian and animal rights organisations

are being established across the Islamic world, arguing that a plant-based lifestyle is

preferable for Muslims, due to its numerous benefits and compatibility with Islamic teachings

(Foltz, 2001:54). Whilst there are no specific publications relating solely to veganism and

Islam, it is clear that veganism can complement the faith, however few Muslims have made

this connection.

2.4.4 Resistance to Change

Vegan activists often consider organised religion an ideological opponent (Singer,

2006:617), since many followers are fiercely resistant to veganism. The most common

argument is that it is forbidden to proscribe the things that God made permissible (Tlili,

2015:227); many Muslims are therefore conditioned to believe that animal exploitation is

24

religiously sanctioned, so they readily defend this viewpoint (Kemmerer, 2012:278).

Moreover, many argue that halal slaughter is an ethical practice (Perlo, 2009:102), with some

even considering animal suffering to be acceptable because God will compensate the animal

in the Afterlife (Tlili, 2015:231). Theistic subjectivism, which refers to Muslims surrendering

their moral judgements to the decisions of God, is another aggressive strategy adopted by

conservative Muslims (Hourani, 1985:184), whilst tawakkul, trust in God, is commonly cited

in response to doomsday scenarios (Foltz, 2000:67). Two other common responses to factory

farming include denial and a continued belief that it is religiously acceptable, and welfarist

attitudes, whereby animal exploitation is acknowledged to be wrong, but where reform is

favoured over veganism (Kemmerer, 2012:280).

2.5 Research Objectives

Having only entered academic debate in the last decade, the literature on veganism is

still very limited, with most publications situated in the secular context. Nevertheless, some

studies do indeed discuss religion, but considering Islam is the second largest religion in the

world (Sherwood, 2008), its absence from the debate is particularly striking. Studies do exist

where animal welfare, environmentalism and vegetarianism are concerned, but veganism is

yet to be explored. Given this major gap in the literature, I have formulated the following

research objectives:

- What have the experiences of Muslim vegans in Britain been?

- What are the perceptions of veganism amongst the Muslim community of Britain?

To help answer these research questions, I will discuss the subjective turn in religion and

associated sociological themes, namely habitus, detraditionalization, ontological security and

individualisation, since they provide insight into this subject and highlight the processes

involved in social change.

25

2.6 The Subjective Turn in Religion

In traditional societies identities are fixed (Kellner, 1992:141), since social

institutions, such as religion serve to socialise the masses. Bourdieu (1990:53) explains this

process through his concept of habitus, whereby practices and perceptions linked to social

structures predispose people to behave in particular ways. Habitus is first constructed within

the family, before also being shaped by other social institutions, such as schools and religion

(Bourdieu, 1977:87). Bourdieu (1990:55) argues that there is a degree of flexibility within

habitus, however due to its nature practices are to some extent predictable. Ostrow

(2000:318) agrees, suggesting habitus does not tell us what to do, rather it provides a set of

expectations. As modern society is becoming more detraditionalized and more individualised

however, a reflexive habitus is becoming the norm (Sweetman, 2003:529). Shah (2014:515),

in her studies on Jain practice, found that many second-generation Jains living in the West

demonstrated a reflexive habitus and as such were showing a renewed interest in their

religion, but instead of blindly accepting cultural practices, they engaged in religious

exploration (p.516). This is representative of a cataphatic reflexivity (Mouzelis, 2012:217),

whilst others who seek to deconstruct traditional practices, without maintaining a religious

practice demonstrate an apophatic reflexivity (p.218). The adoption of veganism is an

increasingly common means of constructing a religious biography for individuals in the West

(Shah, 2014:519), and this is likely due to the influence of Western social movements, such

as animal rights (p.520). Reflexivity in the religious context is much more common amongst

the younger generation who place emphasis on values, whereas the older generation

unreflexively perform traditional cultural practices and thus disapprove of religious

reflexivity (p.522).

The subjective turn in religion refers to the increase in the number of people

identifying as spiritual but not religious (Hiebert, 2018:55), a phenomenon common amongst

26

atheists as well as those who believe in religious teachings (p.59). In the West, the general

trend is a move away from God in favour of an exploration of the self (Houtman and Aupers,

2007:309) and spirituality (Shah, 2014:512). Whilst religion is no longer central to people’s

lives (Voas and Crockett, 2005:24), religious beliefs are still influential for many people

(Houtman and Aupers, 2007:306). Despite living in a late modern society, religion is

becoming more significant for those whose family are from religious cultures, such as

Muslims (Knott and Khoker, 1993:598) and Jains (Shah, 2014:513), whilst for many others

who do not have this religious heritage, religion is being explored and adopted for the first

time (Beck, 2010:29). Berger (1999:2) therefore argues that to regard the world as secularised

now is wrong and that it is still very much religious.

Reflexivity and the subjective turn in religion have in part been made possible by

processes of detraditionalization. Detraditionalization is one of the major forms of social

transformation in modernity and involves the disappearance of social norms and practices

(Beck, 1992:2). This has resulted largely due to globalisation (Giddens, 2002:43), since

individuals, in the face of multiple beliefs and practices, often have to justify their own

behaviours and attitudes (p.45). This is especially the case in the West where traditions are

considered to impede progress and innovation (Eyerman, 1999:120). Furthermore, many

religious followers are beginning to reject religious authority and instead examine their own

identity, due to the breakdown of tradition and marketization of religion (McAlexander et al,

2014:865). Detraditionalization consequently results in “precarious freedoms”, as well as

anxieties and difficulties (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2002:2). This is due to the lack of

support networks available and the insecurities individuals face with self-identification

(Giddens, 1991:32-33). Therefore, as traditions break down and their power and influence

decline (Campbell, 1996:149), individualisation becomes necessary (Giddens, 1994:56) in

order to redefine and reconstruct one’s identity (Morris, 1996:225). People no longer depend

27

on traditions in the construction of the self (Giddens, 1991:32-33); rather they must rely on

self-exploration (Giddens, 1990:36). The subjective turn in religion is therefore linked to

reflexivity and individualisation (Shah, 2014:526), whereby individuals have freedom over

the construction of their religious biography (Mouzelis, 2012:216). The subjective turn is

often about leaving duties and obligations and instead finding meaning and subjective

experience (Hiebert, 2018:63), since spirituality is internal to the individual whereas

religiosity is external, often residing in social institutions (p.57).

Ontological security refers to the sense of order and continuity one experiences as part

of everyday life. This feeling of security is reinforced by routine and habit and minimises the

feelings of anxiety and precariousness associated with modernity (Giddens, 1991:44). Where

this was once established through community, religion and tradition (Shah, 2014:514), this is

now achieved through the process of individualisation (Bauman, 2001:144). Individualisation

refers to the disintegration of traditional social institutions, disenchantment from culture and

religion and the construction of new social forms (Beck, 1992:127), which obligates

individuals to make decisions pertaining to all aspects of their identity (Beck, 1994:15).

Individualisation therefore becomes a responsibility (p.13). In the process of identity

formation, people are vulnerable to the influences present in society, such as marketisation

and consumerism. Both the media and advertisement channels can impact an individual’s

behaviours and desires (Featherstone, 1992:270), both in positive and negative ways. Where

veganism is concerned, the increase in education and scientific evidence linked to animal

agriculture has helped many individuals to adopt and assume a vegan identity (Radnitz et al

2015:35). Similarly, in Labendz’s (2019:303) study on identity reconstruction amongst

Jewish vegans, he found that there was a global need to reinvent Jewish culinary and ritual

traditions by creating new cuisines and developing a responsible Jewish food culture. Whilst

foods themselves are easy to replace, it is more difficult to reinvent rituals. This is due to the

28

fear of losing them, as well as the fact that some people will not want to let go of traditions

involving animal foods. This can cause disagreements within the community over what can

be changed and what should not be changed (p.304). Such disagreements can encourage

greater reflexivity and thus further the subjective turn in religion (McAlexander et al,

2014:865).

29

3. Methodology 3.1 Research Design

For this study I adopted a mixed methods approach, using an exploratory format,

whereby I conducted both qualitative interviews and a quantitative survey in parallel (Flick,

2007:94). My first research question concerns experiences and beliefs, which are best

explored through in-depth analysis (Creswell, 2015:5) so I conducted qualitative interviews

with Muslim vegans. My second research question explores the range of perceptions (p.76),

so I conducted a quantitative survey. I analysed the qualitative data for themes (Creswell and

Plano Clark, 2018:240), whilst the quantitative data provided insight into the commonality of

those themes (p.193). To ensure validity, I used two different samples (p.252), the

quantitative sample being the larger of the two (Creswell et al, 2008:76).

I chose a mixed methods approach, predominately for triangulation and completeness

reasons, however other benefits include expansion and validity (Bryman, 2006:105-107).

Mixed methods provides greater insight than a single methodology, since the findings from

each method often highlight different aspects of the topic in question (O’Reilly and Kiyimba,

2015:99). Since my topic is hugely understudied, I felt mixed methods would offer

completeness (p.106), thus enhancing knowledge on the topic and creating a foundation

which other theorists can develop. Triangulation would also help me to answer my research

questions better. Through this process, two sources of data are combined to gain additional

knowledge (Moran-Ellis et al, 2006:47) or to check validity (Hammersley, 2008:23). It is

especially beneficial when exploring experiences as it can inform how perspectives differ

(p.25). Methodological triangulation maximises validity (Denzin, 1970:310), since the

weaknesses of each method are offset (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018:12), emphasising

their combined strengths (Creswell, 2015:2).

30

Existing studies on veganism make use of both qualitative and quantitative methods.

Quantitative research has been used to explore perceptions (Bresnahan et al, 2016; Thomas,

2016), environmental impacts (Meier and Christen, 2013) and motivations (Radnitz et al,

2015; Janssen et al, 2016), whereas eating behaviours (Twine, 2018) and stigma

(Greenebaum and Dexter, 2017) have been examined through a qualitative lens. Where

religion is concerned, qualitative research is the dominant approach (Shah, 2011; Adams,

2017; Labendz, 2019), with literature on Islam and eating habits all favouring secondary data

in particular, since religious texts form the main source of information (Foltz, 2001; Tlili,

2012; Ali, 2015). This highlights the need for more primary data relating to religious

individuals. Since mixed methods is a reasonably new methodology, theorists studying either

veganism or religion have not yet utilised it, however I feel it offers huge potential for

expanding knowledge.

When analysing, I used thematic analysis to explore the interviews and descriptive

statistics to analyse the surveys. I then combined my analyses and used interpretivism to

analyse the data overall, since my research questions explored perception and values

(O’Reilly and Kiyimba, 2015:11). I found that my results were complementary; the

qualitative findings provided greater context and meaning to the quantitative findings (Flick,

2007:101).

3.2 Data Collection

3.2.1 Qualitative Interviews

I interviewed six Muslim vegans, all of whom lived in Britain and were aged 18-30. I

chose this criteria as Muslim vegans was my chosen demographic, whilst the requirements of

residence in Britain and age maintained a consistent sample. Eighteen formed the lower age

limit, both for ethical reasons and the assumption that adults are more likely to make personal

31

lifestyle decisions than minors. To source participants matching these criteria, I firstly used

non-probability purposive sampling, whereby I selected individuals based on particular

factors (Flick, 2009:122) and who I knew personally. Samples obtained through this

approach are rarely representative of the wider population (Neuman, 2014:274), however in

exploratory research they prove highly insightful (p.273), since the individuals most relevant

to our research questions can be selected (Mason, 1996:93-94). To source my remaining

participants, I used convenience sampling, which is where individuals are recruited in an

easy, convenient manner (Neuman, 2014:273); I posted in vegan groups on social media

platforms. Some theorists argue that when sampling we should seek to achieve saturation of

ideas; however, this is not always appropriate (O’Reilly and Kiyimba, 2015:81). Given the

timescale available, I opted to stop sampling once I had sourced six participants, since this

was a manageable number and would generate sufficient data.

Table 1: Participant pseudonyms and key sampling information

The interviews were semi-structured, to ensure I reviewed the topics relevant to my

research questions, whilst also giving my participants the opportunity to direct discussion

(Rubin and Rubin, 2012:31). To achieve this, I prepared an interview guide, consisting of

open, exploratory questions that would enable in-depth exploration of the topics of interest

(Legard et al, 2003:14; May, 2011:134). The interviews lasted between fifty and seventy

minutes, with two of the interviews being conducted face-to-face, since the participants lived

locally, whilst the remaining four were conducted via Skype. For the face-to-face interviews I

Pseudonym Gender Ethnicity Situation Motivation Layla Female Syrian Vegan for 5 years Animal welfare Nabila Female Bengali Vegan for 1 year Animal welfare Fatima Female Caucasian Vegan for 4 years Ethics and animal welfare Mina Female Somali Vegan for 1 year Health then animal welfare Zahra Female Pakistani Vegan for 2 years Animal welfare Razia Female British Vegan for 5 years Health then animal welfare

and environment

32

obtained signed consent (Wiles, 2013:26), whereas with Skype, the consent form was either

signed electronically or verbal consent was recorded (Lo Iacono et al, 2016:14). I audio-

recorded the interviews, both to assist with analysis and to enable me to engage more with the

discussion, since I did not have to make notes (Brinkmann and Kvale, 2015:205). This also

facilitated probing, which involves the interviewer asking questions in order to extract more

information and discover underlying meanings (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:140). Probing also

encourages more effective communication and greater rapport between the researcher and

participant (Silverman, 2006:110).

Interviews were the most appropriate method for the qualitative element of my study,

since they offered insight into the participant’s own perspectives (Brinkmann and Kvale,

2015:27), enabling me to explore their feelings towards particular ideas (Lichtman,

2014:246). The open-ended questions provided rich, valid data (Oppenheim, 1966:81) and

since participants could answer in their own words (May, 2011:135), interviewing proved

useful for in-depth examination of meanings (Hitchings, 2012:65), experiences (Edwards and

Holland, 2013:90) and social realities (Schwartz-Shea and Yanow, 2012:4). I was able to

explore events that I had never experienced, as well as complex social matters, namely

religion and veganism, which are often invisible in society (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:3-5).

Because of this, interviewing served to fill the gaps in existing knowledge, which adds to

completeness (p.60), one of my reasons for choosing a mixed methods approach. Qualitative

interviews regularly produce highly credible results, which contributes to the robustness and

validity of conclusions (p.64). Moreover, interviews proved an economical choice, in terms

of the time and resources I had available (Silverman, 2006:113).

Qualitative interviews have limitations too, however, such as their inability to offer

generalisability (Oppenheim, 1966:67), due to small sample sizes (Creswell, 2015:5). This is

rarely the objective of qualitative theorists, anyway. Furthermore, their reliance on

33

interpretation increases the risk of misrepresentation and misinterpretation, especially since

language can be ambiguous and meanings contested (Edwards and Holland, 2013:93).

Misrepresentation can also occur when an interviewee inaccurately recounts an event, either

due to forgetfulness or ignorance of particular circumstances (May, 2011:158). Additionally,

if a participant does not already hold an opinion on a particular topic, their answer will be

formed during the interaction and consequently may not be entirely reliable (Peek and

Fothergill, 2009:47).

I maintained quality assurance by selecting knowledgeable participants with first-

hand experiences, as well as asking open, exploratory questions to encourage detailed

answers, which provided a range of themes and perspectives useful for answering my

research questions. I also sought to be thorough in my discussions, by probing where I

identified missing information and where I suspected alternative explanations. All of these

practices, as well as recording and transcribing the data, enabled me to achieve credibility,

validity, richness and accuracy in my data (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:60).

3.2.2 Quantitative Surveys

I produced a self-administered online questionnaire which generated 100 responses.

Given the timescale available and the sampling difficulties I experienced, 100 responses were

the most achievable for acquiring insightful data. The criteria included identifying as Muslim,

living in Britain and being aged 18-30. This kept the sample consistent with my qualitative

sample, however was directed at the wider Muslim community. The questionnaire consisted

of 35 questions, took approximately ten minutes to complete and was completely anonymous.

Since the main purpose of my questionnaire was to explore different perceptions, I

used Likert scales, where I asked respondents to indicate how well they agreed or disagreed

with a list of statements (De Vaus, 2002:101). I also included a middle option (p.106) to

34

avoid forcing respondents into giving an opinion they did not have (Nardi, 2006:74).

Additionally, I provided a definition of veganism before the scale-based questions, to ensure

respondents could answer accurately (De Vaus, 2002:140). I also included demographic

questions which were multiple-choice with nominal categories, so that I could obtain

descriptive statistics (p.105).

It was not possible to obtain a convenient sampling frame of my target population, as

a complete list of Muslims in Britain aged 18-30 does not exist. For this reason, simple

random sampling was not possible (Nardi, 2006:113) and undercoverage in my sample was

likely (Groves et al, 2009:54). I decided to use convenience sampling, which relied on

individuals seeing my survey advertised and volunteering. As a result, my data had limited

generalisability since members of the population had an unequal chance of selection.

Moreover, those with a chance of selection could have had different characteristics to those

who did not (Nardi, 2006:119). Nevertheless, the survey still provided valuable insight into

perceptions within the community. Larger sample sizes are better (p.122) but I did what was

manageable in the timeframe available. The survey link was shared on online platforms,

either by myself, my contacts or Islamic groups and centres that I had contacted. This form of

advertisement can help to obtain respondents from a wide range of sites (De Vaus, 2002:74),

however it is not possible to calculate response rates for this method of sampling (pp.138-

139). This is because we do not know how many people see the link (p.127). The software I

used shows that 704 people clicked on the survey, with 100 completing it and 604

abandoning it. I cannot be certain of the reasons for nonresponse, however I would speculate

that reasons included not meeting the criteria or loss of interest in participating.

35

Men Women Practicing (4+)

Knowledge (4+)

1st Generation Migrant

2nd + Generation Migrant

British Heritage

Men 29 26 23 9 18 2 Women 71 67 62 16 47 8 Practicing (4+) 26 67 93 82 22 62 9

Knowledge (4+) 23 62 82 85 23 55 7

1st Generation Migrant

9 16 22 23 25

2nd + Generation Migrant

18 47 62 55 65

British Heritage 2 8 9 7 10

Table 2: Survey respondent sampling information

Surveys have many strengths. Typically, they offer insight into generalisability

(Creswell, 2015:76), however given my sampling approach this is not something I can claim

(Nardi, 2006:148). I chose web-based surveys because they are the most cost and time-

effective mode (Sarracino et al, 2017:151), as well as ideal for investigating different

attitudes that are not observable (Nardi, 2006:67). Many individuals prefer self-administered

surveys because they are flexible (Revilla, 2010:151) and respondents can take their time

when answering (p.154). They therefore tend to be more reliable, however the fact they are

more private (de Leeuw, 2008:133) and so less affected by social desirability bias (p.78) and

researcher presence help too (Nardi, 2006:68).

Two significant drawbacks to web-based surveys are the issues of access and

computer literacy (Nardi, 2006:69). These mostly affect the older generation however (Bech

and Kristensen, 2009:1), hence my decision to target younger people, for whom the internet

is now widely accessible (de Leeuw, 2018:77). Due to issues with access, internet samples

are also unlikely to be representative of the wider population (De Vaus, 2002:76). Similarly,

small or single samples, like mine, introduce a higher risk of sample bias, whereby many

individuals who fit the criteria are discounted. Because of this, my sample cannot be said to

generalise (Fowler, 2009:13). Nevertheless, such samples can still offer value. The greatest

36

challenges with online surveys are therefore coverage, sampling and non-response (de Leeuw

and Hox, 2008:254).

To improve the quality of surveys, the questionnaire design should first be scrutinised

(Biemer and Lyberg, 2003:196). I achieved this through pre-testing, whereby I asked some

friends, who are trained in sociology and research, to critically analyse my questionnaire

(Brace, 2008:179). Through this exercise, I discovered how the questions were interpreted

and whether they were understood correctly. When discrepancies were found, I revised the

questionnaire design (Conrad and Blair, 2004:67) and eliminated the errors before making the

survey public (Willis, 2004:24). Once released, it is advisable to repeat samples as this

reduces sampling error (Fowler, 2009:14); I did not have sufficient time or resources to do

this, however. Quality is also improved with an adequate sampling frame (p.173).

3.3 Data Analysis

To analyse my interviews, I used thematic analysis, a process which identifies and

analyses patterns in a data set facilitating interpretation (O’Reilly and Kiyimba, 2015:75). I

began by transcribing the recordings before identifying themes within the transcriptions

(Gibbs, 2007:38; Barbour, 2008:217). Using these themes, I created a coding frame (see

Appendix G), allocating a different colour to each code (Gomm, 2008:245). I then

highlighted the transcriptions accordingly. I conducted data-driven coding, where themes are

seen to emerge from the data (Gibbs, 2007:45), however, having read extensively around the

topic already, I had some ideas of what the codes were likely to be. Coding is an important

part of thematic analysis as it facilitates data retrieval (Gibbs, 2007:48; Rubin and Rubin,

2012:192); making comparisons, looking for patterns and producing explanations become

easier (Gibbs, 2007:78).

37

With the use of SPSS, I conducted descriptive statistical analysis to analyse my

survey data, namely univariate analysis to explore the frequency of particular attitudes, and

bivariate analysis to explore similarities, differences and associations between characteristics

and attitudes (Blaikie, 2003:29). Whilst conducting univariate analysis, I produced

percentages (p.59), and displayed my data using frequency tables (De Vaus, 2002:212) and

bar graphs (Blaikie, 2003:62). Whilst conducting bivariate analysis, I produced cross-

tabulations, since these display the relationship between two variables (p.91) and indicate

association (De Vaus, 2002:241), then displayed the data using clustered bar graphs (p.249).

The risk of coding errors in my analysis was minimal as I conducted the analysis myself

(Groves et al, 2009:344).

To analyse my findings as a whole, I adopted the interpretivist approach. This is the

best method for exploring perceptions and experiences (Hunter and Ainlay, 1986:3;

Lichtman, 2014:12), as well as culture (Benton and Craib, 2011:234) and religion (Geertz,

1973:14; Wuthnow, 1986:121). Interpretivism is also ideal for extracting meanings and

values (Schwartz-Shea and Yanow, 2012:46), which provide insight into social practices and

behaviours (Hay, 2011:172). Whilst religious texts consist of a set of rules, teachings may be

interpreted differently by different people, since individuals have agency (Schwartz-Shea and

Yanow, 2012:46). Interpretivism is therefore vital for understanding the various perceptions

in existence, regardless of what the teachings themselves say (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:62).

3.4 Reflections on the Methodology

Sampling was my greatest challenge. I struggled to find six interviewees, so had to

use convenience sampling to recruit enough people. I had hoped to interview some men,

however I could not find any male Muslim vegans. I do not know whether this is due to an

unwillingness to participate or because there are not many of them. I had similar difficulties

38

with the survey. I had hoped that Islamic university societies would share the link, however

the majority did not respond to my emails. In order to get enough responses, I shared the link

myself, as well as with my contacts, local mosques and Islamic groups. Because of this

sampling approach, my survey respondents were predominately female, not a 50:50 divide

representative of the population. I also found that a high number of people were clicking on

my survey but then abandoning it. Again, I do not know the reason; perhaps they realised

they did not meet the criteria, or they lost interest. As my sample was not random, I cannot

assume generalisability, however I feel that my research is still valid, as it provides insight

into existing experiences and perceptions. Nevertheless, I would like, with more time and

resources, to repeat the study, but with improved sampling approaches.

I maintained ethical practice by obtaining informed consent (O’Reilly and Kiyimba,

2015:53) and ensuring confidentiality and the use of pseudonyms in the interviews and

anonymity in the survey (Wiles, 2013:41). I also clarified that participation was entirely

voluntary and could be withdrawn (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:88-89). A further ethical

implication is the fact that some individuals who met the criteria could have been discounted

from the study, due to lack of Internet access (Nardi, 2006:69). Given the high prevalence of

technology use amongst the younger generation today however (de Leeuw, 2018:77), I would

consider this risk minimal.

Reflexivity and positionality are key concepts to be aware of in interpretivist research,

especially for the qualitative element. Some theorists are concerned that misunderstanding

can result if researchers cannot grasp certain social meanings (Geertz, 1973:14). Being a

Muslim vegan myself however, I already had a deep understanding of Islamic teachings and

experiences as a vegan, so I was not at risk of cultural bias (Neuman, 2014:440). However, as

a revert with a secular, white British background, I lacked knowledge of cultural influences.

39

Interviews often depend on the researcher’s competence (Legard et al, 2003:142) so

my previous experience of conducting semi-structured qualitative interviews helped ensure

the success of my interviews in this study. As an interviewer, I was an active participant

(Silverman, 2006:112) so my own attitude and social positioning had the potential to

influence the discussion (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:72), since qualitative research requires an

investment of the self (Oakley, 1981:41; Birks, 2014:26). Therefore, sharing a common

understanding with my participants helped to build rapport (Rubin and Rubin, 2012:76) and

made them feel at ease to provide honest answers (Lichtman, 2014:252).

40

4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Introduction

My study seeks to answer two research objectives. The first enquires into the

experiences of Muslim vegans in Britain, and the second investigates the perceptions of

veganism amongst the Muslim community of Britain. I will begin this chapter with an

exploration of experience, which I will discuss in relation to the qualitative interviews that I

conducted. I will also consider sociological themes such as the subjective turn in religion and

individualisation to explain how these have contributed to my interview participants’

experiences. I will then examine the perceptions that exist within the Muslim community of

Britain. I will first consider those that were reported in the qualitative interviews, before

discussing the findings from my quantitative survey. Again, I will draw on themes such as

habitus and detraditionalization to argue why perceptions in the Muslim community are so

diverse.

4.2 Experiences of Muslim Vegans in Britain

When asked to describe their experience as a Muslim vegan, the general consensus

was that it was easy. The reasons given were numerous, however most were a direct result of

living in the West, such as the widespread availability of vegan options, open-minded

attitudes in society, independence and the ability to cater for oneself. The availability of both

vegan products in supermarkets and vegan options in restaurants was mentioned by all six

participants as a major factor contributing to the ease of their experience. It was also

suggested that living in the West increased the likelihood of one becoming vegan. From a

sociological standpoint, the West is described as undergoing a process of individualisation

and detraditionalization (Beck, 1992) which contributes to open-mindedness and greater

reflexivity since individuals are encouraged to explore and make decisions relating to their

41

own identities (Beck, 1994:15). Zahra explained, “I think being raised in England has had a

really big impact on me more than anything as I feel more open-minded than the people in

my family who weren’t born here, so I am really open to other religious points of views and

even non-religious points of view”, whilst Razia demonstrated a cataphatic reflexivity, stating

“we must not take everything literally. We need to understand the wisdom behind teachings

and understand their conditions”. By living in Britain and interacting with a wide range of

people, including non-Muslims, vegans and vegetarians, my participants explained that they

had been exposed to pro-vegan information, such as scientific evidence and footage from

factory farms detailing animal cruelty that had helped them make the connection and adopt

veganism; a finding also made by Radnitz et al (2015:35). All six participants consequently

quoted animal welfare as a major motivation in their decision to become vegan. This

corresponds with the findings by Janssen et al (2016:649) that animal welfare is the most

widespread motivation amongst vegans in the West and Foltz’s (2006a:111) argument that

compassion for animals is a common motivation amongst Muslims. Moreover, Mina and

Razia claimed that health had also played a role in their decision to change their eating habits,

with Fatima explaining how she too had experienced health benefits since adopting a vegan

diet. Health was therefore important for my participants too, a conclusion echoed by Cramer

et al (2017:561). In addition to the availability of vegan products therefore, the accessibility

of information in the West has also made being vegan easier.

It is evident that individualisation also played an important role in my interview

participants’ experiences. All interviewees had the freedom and ability to cater for

themselves, despite differing home situations; four lived with parents, one lived with her

husband and another lived with a housemate. For those living with family, the parent that

cooked also catered for the vegan by either cooking vegan dishes for all the family or

adapting the main dish so that it was vegan. This helped to make the experience of being a

42

Muslim vegan easier. In terms of the wider Muslim community however, only Fatima

considered herself an active member and this could be down to that fact that she had found

most members quite accepting of her veganism. The other five participants however did not

engage with the Muslim community to a huge extent and as such led individualised lives,

independent from religious influence. Zahra made the conscious decision to avoid Islamic

events, explaining, “I feel very left out at these sorts of gatherings, which is why I don’t

bother going anymore, if I don’t have to. I’d rather avoid getting upset.” Others described not

being part of the community, due to not knowing anyone, not living near a mosque or having

a busy life, which did not leave time for active participation in the wider Muslim community.

Detraditionalization involves the disappearance of social norms and practices (Beck, 1992:2)

however in the case of the Muslim vegans I interviewed, it was not so much that the social

norms and practices had disappeared from the Islamic way of life, rather these individuals

had chosen not to integrate with the wider Muslim community; they were therefore not

influenced by Islamic customs and beliefs. For these individuals, the long-held traditions did

not have as much power and influence as they would have over strongly affiliated members

of the community (Campbell, 1996:149). It is consequently arguable that experience is made

easier by this separation as individuals have more freedom to make their own decisions in

regard to their lifestyle, as well as being less influenced by the beliefs and practices of others.

They therefore construct their identity through reflexive practice linked to their own

experiences and decisions (Giddens, 1990:36).

The subjective turn in religion, although commonly used to describe the move away

from religion towards spirituality (Hiebert, 2018:55), can also refer to the reinterpretation of

religious belief and practice (Shah, 2014:516), which was indeed the case for my interview

participants. Layla portrayed a strong reflexive attitude towards her Islamic identity, stating

“I’m coming to terms with my own experience of being a Muslim, it doesn’t necessarily have

43

to be exactly the same as my parents … It’s something I’m still trying to figure out”. The

other five participants demonstrated cataphatic reflexivity, whereby they identified as

religious, however instead of credulously following cultural beliefs and practices, they were

engaged in actively researching the religion in order to understand and practise it in a way

that made sense to them and which was still in line with the teachings. There was a great

emphasis placed on values, with all participants arguing that they felt veganism and Islam

were complementary, especially where animal welfare was concerned. A point emphasised

by every interviewee was the fact that halal slaughter and the treatment of animals on farms

are subject to a large number of conditions (Abdul Rahman and Aidaros, 2012:28-29),

however in the majority of cases, these conditions are not being met, and in many instances

they are even being violated (Masri, 2007:87). Nabila explained how “it’s impossible the way

animals are slaughtered or even treated today for it to meet those conditions so when you’re

eating it, it’s not actually halal is it, and you’re not allowed to consume non-halal meat”.

Zahra added, “the halal label doesn’t guarantee anything about animal welfare, it just

guarantees that the animal’s neck was slit and that some halal circumstances were met.

Anyone could place a halal sticker on a haram product.” Layla and Razia meanwhile also

mentioned the consequences of animal agriculture in other areas and how they contradict

Islamic values. Layla found it perplexing that Muslims consider animal products to be halal,

especially since we are now aware of the harmful impact that animal agriculture has on the

environment and our health, whilst Razia explained that in Islam there is “the permissibility

to eat meat and the command to protect the environment and they are contradicting one

another, threatening one another … It’s not bad to be vegan but it is bad to harm the

environment … People shouldn’t be so hung up on a permissibility when it means they are

neglecting a command.” In every interview, it was argued that there is an urgent need for

Muslims to reflect on the conditions of consuming animal products and the context in which

44

we live and eat, as well as think critically about such matters and consider whether in the

process of following cultural norms, we are in fact failing to follow other commands

properly. All six participants therefore incorporated extensive reflexivity into the construction

of their religious biographies, focusing predominately on values rather than cultural

traditions, behaviour also observed by Shah (2014:515) and Labendz (2019:303).

Despite describing their experience as easy overall, my interviewees still reported

experiencing numerous difficulties. The difficulty of lifestyle change was described by Mina

and Razia, who explained that at first it was difficult to know which foods were and were not

vegan, as well as where to get certain nutrients. Lack of support is another difficulty many

new vegans face, but for Muslim vegans this can be extra difficult. Zahra explained, “another

hard part about being a Muslim vegan is finding other vegans who are Muslim also. I know

there are many of us worldwide, but I have yet to be friends with one.” Mina added that

although she has non-Muslim vegan friends, she wished she also had Muslim vegan friends

with whom she could share a common background and understanding. This links to

ontological security and the desire for a sense of order, involving shared experiences so as to

overcome the feelings of anxiety caused by modernity (Giddens, 1991:44).

Another commonly quoted difficulty was travelling, especially if there was a cultural

and language barrier. Fatima explained that other countries do not label allergens or

ingredients as well as the West does and Nabila added that commonly, other countries do not

even know what it means to be vegan. Moreover, if the destination was a Muslim country,

and especially one where family members reside, this could prove extra difficult; Nabila

explained, “the way Bengali culture is, it’s very family-oriented, it’s not individualistic so

much, so you will be expected to eat what they cook and if you don’t, it’s seen as kind of

rude”. Whilst the experience of being a Muslim vegan in Britain is easy due to the

availability of both products and information, as well as the individualised and reflexive

45

nature of society (Beck, 1994:15), one’s experience would be vastly different in other cultural

contexts where traditions and religion are more authoritative.

By far the most common difficulty mentioned by my interviewees, however, was dealing

with family and social situations. Whilst most of the interviewees tended to avoid such

interactions, there were times when this was unavoidable and consequently, they had to

attend a social gathering, where most members would be meat-eaters who either did not

understand or did not approve of the individual’s veganism. This indicates that within the

Muslim community, detraditionalization has not occurred to the same extent as it has within

the secular, Western context; consequently, traditions and beliefs are still very dominant

(Berger, 1999:2). This has a huge influence on perception.

4.3 Perceptions of Veganism amongst the Muslim Community of Britain

It is evident from the previous section on experience that some individuals hold very

strong positive views towards veganism since they themselves are vegan, however given that

they are a minority group, it is important to explore how the wider Muslim community view

this lifestyle too. In order to explore the perceptions held by the wider community therefore, I

asked my interview participants to detail how others had responded to their adoption of

veganism, as well as conducted a quantitative survey, which asked a range of perception-

based scale questions. As discussed in the previous chapter on methodology, the data

generated is not representative of the whole population, however it is still insightful as it

indicates the types of perceptions in existence amongst the Muslim community of Britain.

The survey only obtained data from Muslims aged between 18-30, so I cannot test for

differences amongst age, however the interviews did report perceptions held by a variety of

Muslims, including older individuals. Due to these differences, I will analyse the interview

findings and survey results separately.

46

4.3.1 Interview Findings

I asked my interview participants to describe how Muslim family, friends and

community members had responded to their adoption of veganism. Whilst a range of both

positive and negative perceptions were reported by all, there appeared to be a much longer

list of negative perceptions. Dealing with these negative perceptions was commonly quoted

as a difficulty, however despite this their experience was largely described as easy; five of the

six participants generally avoided interacting with the Muslim community however and led

very individualised lives.

A number of positive perceptions were reported by all interview participants, all of

which link to my previous argument that living in the West makes being vegan easier. Both

Mina’s mum and Zahra’s best friend were supportive from the outset, however others

experienced great negativity from their immediate family members at first, which has

improved over time. These same family members now accept their veganism and in many

cases, cater for them by cooking vegan food. Razia, speaking about her husband, said he

“used to say things like “when are you going to stop all this vegan rubbish?” but over time,

maybe because I’ve stuck with it or maybe also because he’s learnt more about it he’s

become a lot more understanding”, whilst Zahra said, “My father was quite angry at first …

We ended up falling out for a while, but he soon learned that it wasn’t what he thought and

he ended up learning about it. He is very supportive now and even cooks vegan meals for

me”. In the West, there is greater accessibility to information and pro-vegan activism

(Radnitz et al, 2015:35) so even if an individual is not vegan, they are more likely to have an

accurate understanding of it, thus encouraging them to hold more positive views.

Furthermore, when eating out in restaurants or at a friend’s house, Fatima and Mina

explained how their friends were very thoughtful and always made sure that there would be

vegan options available. With the widespread availability of options in eateries in the West

47

nowadays, this makes socialising with vegans much easier as well as exposes non-vegans to

plant-based dishes, thus improving their perceptions.

In terms of the wider community, Zahra remarked how other Muslims regularly show

an interest in her lifestyle. “Even my teacher in school who was a Muslim was very

fascinated and understanding of me being a vegan. Despite being part of the older Muslim

generation himself, he was still willing to talk to me about it, which was a surprise, as you’d

expect the older generation to be against it the most. This might be down to the fact that he

himself was born and raised in England, possibly making him more open-minded”. Fatima

also explained how the community that she was part of had generally demonstrated accepting

views. Reflexivity and individualisation are common features of modern life in the West

(Beck, 1994:15) and are generally associated with increased open-mindedness and a

willingness to learn more.

Although numerous positive perceptions were described, an even greater number of

negative perceptions were reported. Using Link and Phelan’s (2001:367-375) stigma model,

it is possible to categorise the negative perceptions quoted into each of the five behavioural

types. Where labelling is concerned, some of my interviewees explained how they had been

called stupid, crazy and brainwashed, whilst Zahra reported having been called a fake

Muslim due to her vegan diet. Others described comments linked to negative attribution.

Some family members became angry or shocked, believing that veganism was impossible to

sustain, whilst others could not understand why anyone would want to be vegan. The older

generation also tended to regard veganism as a joke and consequently made patronising

remarks. Layla explained, “I feel like their reactions are patronising, like they’re always like

“it’s a phase, don’t worry, like you’ll be eating meat in a couple of years, we’ll laugh at you

then”, I think they think I’m still a child”. All of these responses demonstrate ignorance and

as such, suggest that the older generation has not had the same level of exposure to the

48

scientific evidence and pro-vegan information that the younger generation, and especially

non-Muslims, are used to seeing. They are also more likely to be influenced by culture and

tradition and as a result, have not experienced individualisation to the same degree as the

vegan Muslims in my study.

Separation was also described. Mina reported feeling as though the Muslim

community treated her differently, whilst Zahra explained that she often felt left out and as

though other Muslims treated her like an outcast. By being vegan, these individuals are

deviating from the behavioural norms dictated by their culture’s habitus (Bourdieu, 1990:53),

so consequently members of this culture often keep their distance and treat them differently

(Markowski and Roxburgh, 2019:7). Foltz (2006a:108) claims that many Muslim vegetarians

are also criticised for their dietary choices and this was indeed the case for all six of my

interview participants. Negative comments, debates and arguments had been experienced by

all, again demonstrative of the strength of tradition and habitus in the Muslim community.

The moral disengagement of other Muslims also resulted in dismissive comments such as

“it’s OK to eat meat”, “you’re missing out”, “I couldn’t quit meat”, “if it’s labelled halal, it’s

fine” and “there are more important issues than animal rights”. These comments also indicate

an anthropocentric and speciesist attitude, which is common amongst Muslims (Tlili,

2012:6), and representative of the fact that reflexivity is not widely practiced in cultures

where tradition and religion have great power over behaviour and perception.

Marginalisation, and in particular the belief that veganism is a threat to the religion,

constituted the majority of negative perceptions within the Muslim community. Greenebaum

(2018:682) found that veganism was often deemed incompatible with ethnicity, and the same

appears true in Islam. Almost all of my interview participants described how others quoted

Islamic references to argue against veganism, for example many drew on the argument of

dominion to justify the consumption of animal products. Numerous Muslims have tried to

49

lecture Mina on how God created meat for humans to eat and so being vegan is wrong, whilst

Razia explained that many Muslims argue, “don’t make what’s halal, haram”, a phrase that

Foltz (2006a:99) and Tlili (2015:227) also found common. Similarly, Nabila had on multiple

occasions been told that veganism is an innovation, a sin in Islam, and is thus haram. Layla

described how many members of the community considered meat-eating to be a command

and that to be vegan was to go against the command of God; as a result, many Muslims could

not comprehend how it was possible to be both Muslim and vegan, a question Zahra was

asked a lot. Fatima added that many seemed confused that she would question something that

is allowed in the religion. The Muslim community of Britain still has a strong religious

habitus therefore, which influences their perceptions and renders them less open-minded than

those individuals who have adopted a reflexive habitus. Moreover, it is clear that Islamic

traditions and practices are still highly influential (Tlili, 2018:3) and as such the process of

detraditionalization has not yet had much impact on the Muslim community.

I also asked my interview participants to speculate whether they thought particular

groups of Muslims were more or less likely to hold favourable views towards veganism. All

six interviewees felt that the younger generation was more open-minded, however Zahra did

add “personally I have found that Muslims from any age and background have different

views on this and that opinions on veganism are completely down to the person”. Fatima,

Zahra and Razia also mentioned how living in the West could make people more open-

minded, whilst Nabila emphasised the influence of culture, “they’re so ingrained in that

culture, they’re like this is our food, this is how we do things, whereas if you’re just a general

British Muslim, it’s not so ingrained in a specific culture, you will follow the teachings of

Islam or you will research it a lot more and then you will be like open-minded”. Fatima

added that older people tended to be more influenced by culture, whilst Razia argued that

family could be very influential too, for example if a young person was raised in a strict,

50

cultural family, they are more likely to share perceptions held by the older generation. Where

Islamic practice was concerned, Layla and Fatima had opposing suggestions. Layla explained

how she had found less religious people to be more understanding, whilst Fatima said in her

experience, it was actually the most pious and practicing who were more accepting. I will

discuss these speculations in conjunction with my survey results.

4.3.2 Survey Results

As part of my mixed methods study, I conducted a quantitative survey, targeted at the

younger generation of Muslims in Britain, which asked a range of perception-based

questions. Due to the small sample size and lack of randomness, the results cannot be said to

be generalisable, however they have proved highly insightful. Where I only surveyed

younger people, I cannot test for differences according to age, however the overall consensus

appears to be largely favourable, which does indicate that younger people on the whole are

more open-minded towards veganism, a suggestion made by all of my interview participants.

Moreover, as my survey was targeted only at Muslims in Britain, I cannot explore the

perceptions held by Muslims in other countries. It is therefore difficult to test whether culture

and living in the West do indeed influence perception, however given the widespread

prevalence of favourable perceptions, it could indeed be argued that Western influence has a

positive impact. Nevertheless, the results indicated a diverse range of perceptions, with every

single question achieving at least one answer in every category, from strongly disagree to

strongly agree. A selection of statistical tables can be found in Appendix E.

My first two questions asked about veganism and Islam in general. Both attracted a

range of responses, however on the whole perceptions were more favourable. 68%

considered it acceptable to follow a vegan diet in Islam, whilst only 12% disagreed with this

statement. Similarly, 84% said a Muslim vegan can still practice Islam properly, whilst only

51

7% thought it not possible. The media and advertisements often influence individuals

(Featherstone, 1992:270) so these favourable views could indeed be a result of living in the

West and being surrounded by vegan discourse. Even if one is not vegan themselves, having

knowledge of the lifestyle can help to overcome misconceptions and encourage a more

favourable perception.

Figure 1: Bar graph relating to the statement “It is acceptable in Islam to follow a vegan diet”

Figure 2: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim can still practice Islam properly, despite being vegan”

52

I was also interested in exploring perceptions towards different motivations, so I

offered 4 different reasons for becoming vegan and asked what the survey respondents

thought of each. The first three were all deemed “absolutely fine” by the vast majority; health

being the most accepted with an 89% acceptance rate. Animal welfare and environmental

reasons were also widely accepted, however they attracted more disapproving attitudes than

health. This could be indicative of defensive attitudes linked to the beliefs that Islam is

animal friendly (Stilt, 2009:13) and kind to nature (Nasr, 2003:97); veganism therefore

implies that God made something permissible that harms these two things.

Figure 3: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan for health reasons. This is:”

Figure 4: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan because they are concerned with animal welfare. This is:”

53

Figure 5: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan in order to help the environment. This is:”

The fourth motivation I suggested was “because they feel it is the Islamic thing to do”. This

generated mixed responses, with just over a third both agreeing (36%) and disagreeing

(38%).

Figure 6: Bar graph relating to the statement “A Muslim chooses to be vegan because they feel it is the Islamic thing to do. This is:”

Other questions that tied in closely with Islam also generated very mixed responses,

for example the question that asked whether it was acceptable to justify one’s veganism with

54

quotes from the Qur’an and ahadith. Whilst approximately two fifths said they did not have

any strong opinion on the topic, the proportion of people in agreement (35%) was only

slightly higher than the proportion of those who disagreed (24%). The results discussed thus

far demonstrate that whilst younger Muslims may hold largely favourable views towards

veganism, there is still a tendency to want to keep it separate from Islam and assert that it is

not an Islamic practice (Izzi Dien, 2000:146).

Figure 7: Bar graph relating to the statement “It is acceptable for a Muslim to justify their veganism with ayahs from the Qur’an and ahadith”

Another controversial topic was that of animal sacrifice. Most schools of thought do

not consider it obligatory for Muslims to sacrifice an animal on Eid-al-Adha, however it is

widely regarded a recommended practice and therefore a religious duty (Foltz, 2006a:121).

For this reason, when asked whether it would be acceptable for a vegan Muslim to refuse to

sacrifice an animal, a higher percentage of individuals found this to be unacceptable, 41%

compared to 33% in favour. This demonstrates the strength of tradition within the Muslim

community and the important role it plays in shaping Muslims’ attitudes (Tlili, 2018:3).

Detraditionalization therefore has not occurred to a huge extent within the Muslim

community, and consequently many still display a strong religious habitus, whereby

55

particular views linked to religious ideas are commonly shared amongst community members

(Bourdieu, 1990:53).

Figure 8: Bar graph relating to the statement “It is acceptable for a Muslim to refuse to sacrifice an animal on Eid-al-Adha”

To expand on these findings, I also conducted bivariate statistics, hoping to locate

instances of association which would indicate reasons for particular views. However, despite

asking a variety of demographic questions, I was unable to find any strong associations.

Zahra’s speculation that perceptions are diverse and thus down to the individual therefore

seemed most probable.

Most survey respondents were female, nevertheless males gave similar answers;

gender therefore did not seem to influence views. This could be indicative that Thomas’s

(2016:85) argument that gendered perceptions are becoming more equal is indeed the case,

even amongst the Muslim community.

56

Figure 9: Clustered bar graph depicting gendered views towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam

Figure 10: Clustered bar graph depicting the views of different generations of migrants towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam

I also wanted to explore whether a Western influence impacted perception, so I asked

my survey respondents to indicate which generation of migrant they were. Again, views were

very diverse, with little indication of any trend, however some weak associations were clear.

More first-generation migrants approved of a vegan diet than third-generation migrants, a

57

surprising find, since the latter group would have spent more time in Britain. However, one

could speculate that the third-generation migrants who disagreed with the statement could

have been brought up in strict and traditional households (Knott and Khoker, 1993:598),

albeit in Britain, whilst the first-generation migrants who agreed with the statement could

have been refugees or economic migrants who were well integrated into the British way of

life and who had consequently adopted a reflexive habitus (Shah, 2014:515). Further research

would be required to test for this. On the whole however, given the tendency for opinions to

be in agreement, it can be argued that Western influence does have a positive impact on

perception.

Where Islamic practice and knowledge is concerned, views were once again very

diverse. However, for these two categories it is important to note that a considerably higher

number of respondents identified as both practicing and knowledgeable compared to those

who claimed to not practice the religion or know much about it, which could distort the

results.

Table 3: Frequency Table of Islamic Practice Table 4: Frequency Table of Islamic Knowledge

Linking back to the speculations of my interview participants, Layla suggested that Muslims

who practiced less were more open-minded, whilst Fatima argued that it was actually the

most pious and practicing who were more understanding. To some extent, my results support

both these arguments, since 100% of non-practicing individuals held favourable views

58

towards the acceptability of veganism in Islam, whilst approximately two thirds of those who

selected 6 or 7 for Islamic practice claimed to agree with the statement. More broadly, those

who selected 4 or higher for Islamic practice were more likely to have diverse views, albeit

still more favourable than not. The situation was almost identical for Islamic knowledge.

Further research with a larger number of individuals would be required to offer a more

definitive conclusion to this hypothesis, however.

Figure 11: Clustered bar graph depicting the variation of views according to the level of Islamic practice towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam

Figure 12: Clustered bar graph depicting the variation of views according to the level of Islamic knowledge towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam

59

Once again, perceptions were extremely diverse for accommodation type as well,

suggesting that the younger generation of Muslims in Britain today are less influenced by

their home surroundings and thus also the traditions and beliefs of the wider community.

Figure 13: Clustered bar graph depicting the variation of views according to accommodation type towards the acceptance of a vegan diet in Islam

Perceptions are likely to be diverse due to a number of factors. The positive

perceptions towards veganism can be explained by the processes of individualisation and

reflexivity in Western society (Giddens, 1990:36), whereby individuals reflect upon and re-

interpret traditions and practices, thus coming to their own conclusions (Beck, 1994:15), as

well as instances of detraditionalization, which involves the reduced influence of traditions

(Campbell, 1996:149). The negative perceptions meanwhile exist due to the ongoing power

of religion in society (Berger, 1999:2), which limits the extent to which detraditionalization

can take place. Furthermore, with a religious habitus and the predisposition for Muslims to

possess particular viewpoints and to behave in specific ways, it is unsurprising that some

perceptions are disapproving of veganism. Since the Muslim community is still regarded an

ethnic minority in the West, it is to be expected that perceptions will be diverse. Some

individuals will have integrated more and will demonstrate British values and behaviours,

60

whilst others will be deeply immersed in Islamic culture and as such be influenced strongly

by tradition and practices. This variety can be further explained as a result of globalisation

and the multicultural society that we live in (Giddens, 2002:43).

4.3.3 Summary

In summary, it is evident that perceptions towards veganism within the Muslim

community of Britain are very diverse, with a range of both positive and negative attitudes.

The interview data detailed some positive perceptions, however more negative perceptions

were reported, which could be due to the fact that most responses described came from

family and community members who were older. The survey results on the other hand were

generally very positive, indicating that the younger generation of Muslims are indeed more

open-minded. Considering these two sources of data in conjunction with one another, it is

certainly arguable that perceptions within the Muslim community of Britain are on the whole

more favourable than not, however there are still a huge number of misconceptions and

prejudices, that not only contribute to stigma towards Muslim vegans, but that also prevent

more Muslims from exploring a vegan diet themselves.

61

5. Conclusion 5.1 Research Conclusions

In this study, I sought to explore both the experiences of Muslim vegans and the

perceptions of veganism amongst the Muslim community of Britain. I began with an

exploration of existing literature pertaining to veganism in general, religion and veganism

and Islamic discussions on animal welfare, environmentalism and vegetarianism. This

enabled me to formulate my research objectives and directed me towards the theory on the

subjective turn in religion which helped me to answer these research questions. I then

outlined my methodology, which consisted of mixed methods; I interviewed 6 Muslim

vegans and conducted a quantitative survey which generated 100 responses. Using thematic

analysis for the qualitative interviews and descriptive statistical analysis for the quantitative

survey, I was then able to analyse my results, which, in accordance with the theory from my

literature review, enabled me to answer my research questions below.

What have the experiences of Muslim vegans in Britain been?

On the whole, the experience of being a Muslim vegan in Britain was described as easy. This

was in large part due to living in Britain, where there is a widespread availability of vegan

options both in shops and restaurants. Similarly, there is greater accessibility to information

and pro-vegan activism, which helps encourage more open-minded attitudes. It was also

evident that the subjective turn in religion was taking place, whereby my participants adopted

a reflexive habitus and reinterpreted religious practice in line with their values. Moreover,

processes of reflexivity and individualisation in Western society made it easier for my

interviewees to cater for themselves and lead more individualised lives, which in most cases

resulted in separation from the wider Muslim community. All participants described

experiencing some difficulties too, however. Firstly, there was the challenge associated with

62

lifestyle change, however this was only temporary during the transition period. Other

difficulties included feeling lonely due to the lack of Muslim vegans, travelling, when there

were cultural and language barriers, and dealing with the negative perceptions of others.

What are the perceptions of veganism amongst the Muslim community of Britain?

Perceptions of veganism amongst the Muslim community of Britain are hugely diverse, with

a variety of both positive and negative viewpoints. My interview participants described

positive perceptions as including having family and friends cater for them, other community

members showing an interest in their lifestyle and many individuals generally having

accepting views. As with experience, it is likely that these perceptions exist due to the

positive influence of the individual and living in the West where there is an abundance of

vegan products, information and open-minded attitudes linked to widespread reflexivity and

individualisation. Negative perceptions were more numerous, however, but these came

predominately from the older generation. Examples included labelling, derogatory or

patronising comments and discrimination. Many also referred to Islamic references to argue

both the permissibility of consuming animal foods and the legal maxim “don’t make what’s

halal, haram”. Some could not understand why one would question something that is

permissible, whilst others asserted that veganism is an innovation and thus haram. These

negative perceptions are likely to be a result of the dominance of tradition and culture in the

Muslim community, where a religious habitus is highly authoritative and anthropocentric

attitudes linked to beliefs surrounding dominion exist. The survey results meanwhile were

largely favourable, suggesting that the younger generation are more open-minded. Again,

individualisation and reflexivity, as well as access to information are the likely reasons for

these favourable results. There were however a few individuals who considered veganism

unacceptable and impermissible. The questions that asked whether veganism could be both

63

justified with Islamic teachings and considered the Islamic thing to do were much less

popular, however. Moreover, the question relating to the acceptability of refusing animal

sacrifice was also very unpopular with equal proportions of individuals agreeing and

disagreeing. This demonstrates the strength of tradition in the Muslim community and

evidences that whilst Muslims are generally accepting of veganism, they are also keen to

assert that it is an un-Islamic practice. I also sought to explore whether certain groups were

more predisposed to particular views than others, however I could not identify any

associations. Overall, perceptions were highly variable and likely to be specific to the

individual.

5.2 Implications of the Study

Since my samples were small and not randomly selected, my results cannot be said to

be generalisable to the whole Muslim population of Britain. I would argue that my findings

are transferable and replicable, indicators of quality in mixed methods research (O’Cathain,

2010:533-534), however, since the data generated indicates likely trends in the population, as

well as what perceptions exist. My study adopted a mixed methods approach, which I argue

was most effective for exploring my research objectives, as it offered completeness and

enabled me to provide detailed answers to my research questions. The combination of

qualitative and quantitative data in a mixed methods study is an efficient means for producing

insightful conclusions (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018:13), since it is possible to achieve

findings that would not be manageable from one approach alone (Tashakkori and Teddlie,

2008:102). Consequently, it permits the harnessing of each of the individual methodology’s

strengths, whilst, at the same time, offsetting any weaknesses (Creswell and Plano Clark,

2018:12). In this process however, more time and resources are required (p.15), which can

make a mixed methods study more challenging. Analysis can also be testing, firstly because

64

results could be inconclusive or divergent (Doyle et al, 2016:632) and secondly because it is

important to integrate the analyses well (Bryman, 2008:99) and not favour one method over

the other (p.13). Furthermore, since the methodological approach of mixed methods is still

somewhat new, it is not considered a credible approach by all theorists (Creswell and Plano

Clark, 2018:16). There are a number of ways to improve the credibility and validity of mixed

methods research however, all of which I feel I have done in my study. Triangulation is a

very effective method (O’Reilly and Kiyimba, 2015:31), and one that was a main motivation

for my adopting mixed methods from the outset; by triangulating my findings from the

interviews with my findings from the survey, I could reach more complete conclusions.

Whilst the results from each method were not identical, however, they were complementary

as some similarities were apparent. In regard to the differences, the likely reason for these

was that the perceptions described in the interviews came predominately from the older

generation, an age group which did not complete my survey. Other techniques for improving

credibility include transparency and reflexivity, which I have demonstrated throughout the

course of this study. Although there are indeed limitations to my study, I argue it is of good

quality, since I was able to triangulate my findings and thus obtain greater completeness,

ultimately providing insightful answers to my research questions.

To improve the study, I would repeat it with a greater number of participants. I would

also employ a better sampling strategy, involving a more random sourcing of participants.

Where the interviews are concerned, it would be beneficial to also interview male Muslim

vegans to explore whether gender affects one’s experience. I had hoped to interview male

Muslim vegans in this study, but I was unable to source any on this occasion, however. A

larger number of participants would also prove more insightful, thus improving

transferability. In terms of the survey, generalisability could be improved by sourcing more

65

respondents from a more diverse demographic background, for example more men and more

non-practicing Muslims, since a low number of such individuals completed my survey.

It would also be interesting to add an element of qualitative research to the survey,

especially where the negative perceptions are concerned. The survey results have informed

me that there are people who have such disapproving attitudes towards veganism, however I

do not know the reasons why. To combine the survey with an element of qualitative research

therefore would enable me to better explore the reasons behind such negative perceptions.

This could be done through an explanatory sequential approach, whereby quantitative

methods are conducted first, followed by qualitative methods which serve to explain the

quantitative results in greater depth (Creswell, 2015:6). Additionally, it would be interesting

to also interview and survey a wider range of age groups, especially the older generation, so

that I could compare similarities and differences where age is concerned and explore whether

the younger generation is indeed more open-minded. Similarly, if I could examine

perceptions held by individuals in other countries as well, this would help to indicate whether

living in the West also makes Muslims more open-minded to veganism.

66

Reference List Abdul Rahman, S. and Aidaros, H. (2012) ‘Islam and Animal Welfare with special reference

to Cruelty to Animals during Transport and Slaughter’, Journal of Commonwealth Veterinary

Association, 28(2), pp.27-30.

Adams, C. J. (1996) ‘Caring about Suffering: A Feminist Exploration’, in Donovan, J. and

Adams, C. J. (eds.) Beyond Animal Rights: A Feminist Caring Ethic for the Treatment of

Animals. New York: The Continuum Publishing Company, pp.170-196.

Adams, C. J. (2000) The Sexual Politics of Meat. New York: The Continuum Publishing

Company.

Adams, C. (2017) ‘The Poetics of Christian Engagement: Living Compassionately in a

Sexual Politics of Meat World’, Studies in Christian Ethics, 30(1), pp.45-59.

Ali, K. (2015) ‘Muslims and Meat-Eating: Vegetarianism, Gender and Identity’, Journal of

Religious Ethics, Inc., 43(2), pp.268-288.

Babb, L. A. (2011) ‘Jainism’s Ethics of Non-Harm’, in Vyas, M. A. (ed.) Issues in Ethics and

Animal Rights. New Delhi: Regency Publications, pp.198-211.

Barbour, R. (2008) Introducing Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bauman, Z. (2001) The Individualized Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bech, M. and Kristensen, M. B. (2009) ‘Differential response rates in postal and Web-based

surveys among older respondents’, Survey Research Methods, 3(1), pp.1-6.

Beck, U. (1992) Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.

67

Beck, U. (1994) ‘The Reinvention of Politics: Towards a Theory of Reflexive

Modernization’, in Beck, U., Giddens, A. and Lash, S. (eds.) Reflexive Modernization:

Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.1-

55.

Beck, U. (2010) A God of One’s Own. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Beck, U. and Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002) Individualization. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bennison, R. (2011) ‘The Qur’ân, Shari’a Law and the Exclusion of Nonhuman Animals’, in

Vyas, M. A. (ed.) Issues in Ethics and Animal Rights. New Delhi: Regency Publications,

pp.212-222.

Benton, T. and Craib, I. (2011) Philosophy of Social Science. 2nd edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Benzertiha, A., Kierończyk, B., Rawski, M., Józefiak, A., Mazurkiewicz, J., Józefiak, D.,

Salah Messikh, M. and Światkiewicz, S. (2018) ‘Cultural and practical aspects of halal

slaughtering in food production’, Medycyna Weterynaryjna, 74(1), pp.1-6.

Berger, P. L. (1999) ‘The desecularization of the world: A global overview’, in Berger, P. L.

(ed.) The desecularization of the world: Resurgent religion and world politics. Grand Rapids:

William B. Eerdmans, pp.1-18.

Berkman, J. (2004) ‘The Consumption of Animals and the Catholic Tradition’, in Sapontzis,

S. F. (ed.) Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. New York: Prometheus Books,

pp.198-208.

Bertuzzi, N. (2017) ‘Veganism: Lifestyle or Political Movement? Looking for Relations

beyond Antispeciesism’, Relations, 5(2), pp.125-143.

68

Biemer, P. P. and Lyberg, L. E. (2003) Introduction to Survey Quality. Hoboken: John Wiley

& Sons, Inc.

Birks, M. (2014) ‘Practical Philosophy’ in Mills, J. and Birks, M. (eds) Qualitative

Methodology: A Practical Guide. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.17-30.

Blaikie, N. (2003) Analyzing Quantitative Data. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Blatte, D. (2018) ‘Vegan Dharma’, in Tuttle, W. (ed.) Buddhism and Veganism: Essays

Connecting Spiritual Awakening and Animal Liberation. Danvers: Vegan Publishers, pp.25-

34.

Bourdieu, P. (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1990) The Logic of Practice. Translated by R. Nice. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Brace, I. (2008) Questionnaire Design: How to Plan, Structure and Write Survey Material

for Effective Market Research. 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page Ltd.

Bresnahan, M., Zhuang, J. and Zhu, X. (2016) ‘Why is the vegan line in the dining hall

always the shortest? Understanding vegan stigma’, Stigma and Health, 1(1), pp.3-15.

Brinkmann, S. and Kvale, S. (2015) InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research

Interviewing. 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bryman, A. (2006) ‘Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?’,

Qualitative Research, 6(1), pp. 97-113.

Bryman, A. (2008) ‘Why do Researchers Integrate/Combine/Mesh/Blend/Mix/Merge/Fuse

Quantitative and Qualitative Research?’, in Bergman, M. M. (ed.) Advances in Mixed

69

Methods Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.87-100.

Buttlar, B. and Walther, E. (2019) ‘Dealing with the meat paradox: Threat leads to moral

disengagement from meat consumption’, Appetite, 137, pp.73-80.

Calvert, S. J. (2019) ‘Eden’s Diet: Christianity and Vegetarianism’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey,

C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.223-

231.

Campbell, C. (1996) ‘Detraditionalization, Character and the Limits to Agency’, in Heelas,

P., Lash, S. and Morris, P. (eds.) Detraditionalization. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd,

pp.149-169.

Cao, D. (2019) ‘Confucianism and Daoism: Animals in Traditional Chinese Thought’, in

Linzey, A. and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics.

Oxon: Routledge, pp.56-62.

Cherry, E. (2006) ‘Veganism as a Cultural Movement: A Relational Approach’, Social

Movement Studies, 5(2), pp.155-170.

Cole, M. and Morgan, K. (2011) ‘Vegaphobia: derogatory discourses of veganism and the

reproduction of speciesism in UK national newspapers’, The British Journal of Sociology,

62(1), pp.134-153.

Conrad, F. G. and Blair, J. (2004) ‘Data Quality in Cognitive Interviews: The Case of Verbal

Reports’, in Presser, S., Rothgeb, J. M., Couper, M. P., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., Martin, J.

and Singer, E. (eds.) Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. Hoboken:

John Wiley & Sons, Inc, pp.67-88.

70

Cramer, H., Kessler, C. S., Sundberg, T., Leach, M. J., Schumann, D., Adams, J. and Lauche,

R. (2017) ‘Characteristics of Americans Choosing Vegetarian and Vegan Diets for Health

Reasons’, Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 49(7), pp.561-567.

Creswell, J. W. (2015) A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

Creswell, J. W. and Plano Clark, V. L. (2018) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods

Research. 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Creswell, J., Plano Clark, V. and Garrett, A. (2008) ‘Methodological Issues in Conducting

Mixed Methods Research Designs’, in Bergman, M. M. (ed.) Advances in Mixed Methods

Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.66-83.

De Leeuw, E. D. (2008) ‘Choosing the Method of Data Collection, in de Leeuw, E. D., Hox,

J. and Dillman, D. (eds.) International Handbook of Survey Methodology. Abingdon: Taylor

& Francis Group, pp.113-135.

De Leeuw, E. D. (2018) ‘Mixed-Mode: Past, Present and Future’, Survey Research Methods,

12(2), pp.75-89.

De Leeuw, E. D. and Hox, J. (2008) ‘Self-Administered Questionnaires: Mail Surveys and

Other Applications’, in de Leeuw, E. D., Hox, J. and Dillman, D. (eds.) International

Handbook of Survey Methodology. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis Group, pp.239-263.

Denzin, N. K. (1970) The Research Act. Chicago: Aldine.

De Vaus, D. (2002) Surveys in Social Research. 5th edn. London: Routledge.

71

Dombrowski, D. (2004) ‘A Very Brief History of Philosophical Vegetarianism and its

Influence’, in Sapontzis, S. F. (ed.) Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. New

York: Prometheus Books, pp.22-33.

Donaldson, B. (2016) ‘From Ancient Vegetarianism to Contemporary Advocacy: When

Religious Folks Decide that Animals Are No Longer Edible’, Religious Studies and

Theology, 35(2), pp.37-57.

Doyle, L., Brady, A. and Byrne, G. (2016) ‘An overview of mixed methods research –

revisited’, Journal of Research in Nursing, 21(8), pp.623-635.

Edwards, R. and Holland, J. (2013) What is Qualitative Interviewing?. London: Bloomsbury

Academic.

Eyerman, R. (1999) ‘Moving Culture’, in Featherstone, M. and Lash, S. (eds.) Spaces of

Culture. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.116-137.

Farouk, M. M., Al-Mazeedi, H. M., Sabow, A. B., Bekhit, A. E. D., Adeyemi, K. D. and

Ghani, A. (2014) ‘Halal and Kosher slaughter methods and meat quality: A review’, Meat

Science, 98, pp.505-519.

Farouk, M. M., Pufpaff, K. M. and Amir, M. (2016) ‘Industrial halal meat production and

animal welfare: A review’, Meat Science, 120, pp.60-70.

Featherstone, M. (1992) ‘Postmodernism and the aestheticization of everyday life’, in Lash,

S. and Friedman, J. (eds.) Modernity & Identity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, pp.265-

290.

Flick, U. (2007) Managing Quality in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications

Ltd.

72

Flick, U. (2009) An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 4th edn. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

Foltz, R. C. (2000) ‘Is There An Islamic Environmentalism?’, Environmental Ethics, 22,

pp.63-72.

Foltz, R. (2001) ‘Is Vegetarianism Un-Islamic?’, Studies in Contemporary Islam, 3(1), pp.39-

54.

Foltz, R. (2006a) Animals in Islamic Tradition and Muslim Cultures. Oxford: Oneworld

Publications.

Foltz, R. (2006b) ‘“This she-camel of God is a sign to you”: Dimensions of Animas in

Islamic Tradition and Muslim Culture’, in Waldau, P. and Patton, K. (eds.) A Communion of

Subjects: Animals in Religion, Science and Ethics. New York, Columbia University Press,

pp.149-159.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2006) Livestock’s Long Shadow:

Environmental Issues and Options. Available at: http://www.fao.org/3/a0701e/a0701e.pdf

(Accessed: 22 August 2019).

Foster, C. (2019) ‘Mormonism: Harmony and Dissonance between Religion and Animal

Ethics’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal

Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.107-115.

Fowler, Jr., F. J. (2009) Survey Research Methods. 4th edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Frayne, C. T. (2019) ‘Animals in Christian and Muslim Thought: Creatures, Creation, and

Killing for Food’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion

and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.201-215.

73

Furber, M. (2015) Rights and Duties Pertaining to Kept Animals: A Case Study in Islamic

Law and Ethics. Abu Dhabi: Tabah Foundation.

Furber, M. (2017) Intensive Animal Farming: Wrongs & Responsibilities. Abu Dhabi: Tabah

Foundation.

Gaffney, J. (2004) ‘Eastern Religions and the Eating of Meat’, in Sapontzis, S. F. (ed.) Food

for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. New York: Prometheus Books, pp.223-235.

Geertz, C. (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, Inc.

Gibbs, G. (2007) Analysing Qualitative Data. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Giddens, A. (1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Giddens, A. (1991) Modernity and Self-identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Giddens, A. (1994) ‘Living in a Post-Traditional Society’, in Beck, U., Giddens, A. and Lash,

S. (eds.) Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social

Order. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp.56-109.

Giddens, A. (2002) Runaway World. London: Profile Books Ltd.

Goffman, E. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Hammondsworth:

Penguin Books Ltd.

Gomm, R. (2008) Social Research Methodology: A Critical Introduction. 2nd edn.

Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Graça, J., Calheiros, M. M. and Oliveira, A. (2015) ‘Attached to meat? (Un)Willingness and

intentions to adopt a more plant-based diet’, Appetite, 95, pp.113-125.

74

Greenebaum, J. B. (2012) ‘Managing Impressions: “Face-Saving” Strategies of Vegetarians

and Vegans’, Humanity & Society, 36(4), pp.309-325.

Greenebaum, J. (2018) ‘Vegans of color: managing visible and invisible stigmas’, Food,

Culture & Society, 21(5), pp.680-697.

Greenebaum, J. and Dexter, B. (2018) ‘Vegan men and hybrid masculinity’, Journal of

Gender Studies, 27(6), pp.637-648.

Groves, R. M., Fowler, Jr., F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E. and

Tourangeau, R. (2009) Survey Methodology. 2nd edn. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Hammersley, M. (2008) ‘Troubles with Triangulation’, in Bergman, M. M. (ed.) Advances in

Mixed Methods Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.22-36.

Harper, A. B. (2010) Sistah Vegan: Black Female Vegans Speak on Food, Identity, Health,

and Society. New York: Lantern Books.

Hay, C. (2011) ‘Interpreting Interpretivism Interpreting Interpretations: The New

Hermeneutics of Public Administration’, Public Administration, 89(1), pp.167-182.

Heiss, S., Coffino, J. A. and Hormes, J. M. (2017) ‘Eating and health behaviors in vegans

compared to omnivores: Dispelling common myths’, Appetite, 118, pp.129-135.

Hiebert, D. (2018) ‘“The Massive Subjective Turn”: Sociological Perspectives of

Spirituality’, Journal of Sociology and Christianity, 8(2), pp.55-75.

Hitchings, R. (2012) ‘People can talk about their practices’, Area, 44(1), pp.61-67.

Hourani, G. F. (1985) Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

75

Houtman, D. and Aupers, S. (2007) ‘The spiritual turn and the decline of tradition: the spread

of post-Christian spirituality in fourteen Western countries (1981–2000)’, Journal for the

Scientific Study of Religion, 46(3), pp.305–320.

Hunter, J. D. and Ainlay, S. C. (1986) ‘Introduction’, in Hunter, J. D. and Ainlay, S. C. (eds.)

Making Sense of Modern Times: Peter L. Berger and the Vision of Interpretive Sociology.

London: Routledge & Kegan Paul plc, pp.1-8.

Izzi Dien, M. (1992) ‘Islamic Ethics and the Environment’, in Khalid, F. and O’Brien, J.

(eds.) Islam and Ecology. London: Cassell Publishers Limited, pp.25-35.

Izzi Dien, M. (2000) The Environmental Dimensions of Islam. Cambridge: Lutterworth.

Janssen, M., Busch, C., Rödiger, M. and Hamm, U. (2016) ‘Motives of consumers following

a vegan diet and their attitudes towards animal agriculture’, Appetite, 105, pp.643-651.

Jhutti-Johal, J. (2019) ‘Sikh Dharam: Ethics and Behavior toward Animals’, in Linzey, A.

and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon:

Routledge, pp.150-158.

Johnson, L. (2019) ‘Veganism as a Legally Protected Religion’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C.

(eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.307-

313.

Kalechofsky, R. (2004) ‘The Jewish Diet and Vegetarianism’, in Sapontzis, S. F. (ed.) Food

for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. New York: Prometheus Books, pp.168-176.

Kellner, D. (1992) ‘Popular culture and the construction of postmodern identities’, in Lash, S.

and Friedman, J. (eds.) Modernity & Identity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, pp.141-177.

76

Kemmerer, L. (2012) Animals and World Religions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Knott, K. and Khoker, S. (1993) ‘Religious and ethnic identity among young Muslim women

in Bradford’, New Community, 19(4), pp.593–610.

Labendz, J. A. (2019) ‘Jewish Veganism as an Embodied Practice: A Vegan Agenda for

Cultural Jews’, in Labendz, J. A. and Yanklowitz, S. (eds.) Jewish Veganism and

Vegetarianism. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp.289-313.

Labendz, J. A. and Yanklowitz, S. (2019) ‘Introduction: Considering Jewish Veganism and

Vegetarianism’, in Labendz, J. A. and Yanklowitz, S. (eds.) Jewish Veganism and

Vegetarianism. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp.ix-xxiii.

Legard, R., Keegan, J. and Ward, K. (2003) ‘In-depth Interviews’ in Richie, J. and Lewis, J.

(eds.) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers.

London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.138-169.

Lichtman, M. (2014) Qualitative Research for the Social Sciences. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

Link, B. G. and Phelan, J. C. (2001) ‘Conceptualising Stigma’, Annual Review of Sociology,

27, pp.363-385.

Linzey, A. (2004) ‘The Theological Debate about Meat Eating’, in Sapontzis, S. F. (ed.)

Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. New York: Prometheus Books, pp.186-

197.

Lo Iacono, V., Symonds, P. and Brown, D. H. K. (2016) ‘Skype as a Tool for Qualitative

Research Interviews’, Sociological Research Online, 21(2), pp.1-24.

77

Long, J. D. (2011) ‘Compassion for All Beings: Ethical Treatment of Animals in the Indic

Religions’, in Vyas, M. A. (ed.) Issues in Ethics and Animal Rights. New Delhi: Regency

Publications, pp.189-197.

Markowski, K. L. and Roxburgh, S. (2019) ‘“If I became a vegan, my family and friends

would hate me:” Anticipating vegan stigma as a barrier to plant-based diets’, Appetite, 135,

pp.1-9.

Mason, J. (1996) Qualitative Researching. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Masri, B. A. (1987) Islamic Concern for Animals. Petersfield: The Athene Trust.

Masri, B. A. (1989) Animals in Islam. Petersfield: The Athene Trust.

Masri, B. A. (1992) ‘Islam and Ecology’, in Khalid, F. and O’Brien, J. (eds.) Islam and

Ecology. London: Cassell Publishers Limited, pp.1-23.

Masri, B. A. (2001) ‘They Are Communities Like You’, in Walters, K. S. and Portmess, L.

(eds.) Religious Vegetarianism from Hesiod to the Dalai Lama. Albany: State University of

New York Press, pp.181-191.

Masri, B. A. (2007) Animal Welfare in Islam. Markfield: The Islamic Foundation.

May, T. (2011) Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process. 4th edn. Maidenhead: Open

University Press.

McAlexander, J. H., Dufault, B. L., Martin, D. M. and Schouten, J. W. (2014) ‘The

Marketization of Religion: Field, Capital, and Consumer Identity’, Journal of Consumer

Research, 41(3), pp.858-875.

78

McFarlane, A. A. (2019) ‘Rastafarianism: A Hermeneutic of Animal Care’, in Linzey, A. and

Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge,

pp.136-141.

Meier, T. and Christen, O. (2013) ‘Environmental Impacts of Dietary Recommendations and

Dietary Styles: Germany As an Example’, Environmental Science and Technology, 47(2),

pp.877-888.

Moran-Ellis, J., Alexander, V. D., Cronin, A., Dickinson, M., Fielding, J., Sleney, J. and

Thomas, H. (2006) ‘Triangulation and integration: processes, claims and implications’,

Qualitative Research, 6(1), pp.45-59.

Morris, P. (1996) ‘Community Beyond Tradition’, in Heelas, P., Lash, S. and Morris, P.

(eds.) Detraditionalization. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, pp.223-249.

Mouzelis, N. (2012) ‘Modernity and the secularization debate’, Sociology, 46(2), pp.207–

223.

Nakyinsige, K., Bin Che Man, Y. and Qurni Sazili, A. (2012) ‘Halal authenticity issues in

meat and meat products’, Meat Science, 91, pp.207-214.

Nardi, P. M. (2006) Doing Survey Research: A Guide to Quantitative Methods. 2nd edn.

London: Pearson Education.

Nasr, S. H. (2003) ‘Islam, the Contemporary Islamic World, and the Environmental Crisis’,

in Foltz, R. C., Denny, F. M. and Baharuddin, A. (eds.) Islam and Ecology: A Bestowed

Trust. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp.85-105.

Nasr, S. H. (2010) ‘Ecology’, in Sajoo, A. B. (ed.) A Companion to Muslim Ethics. London:

I. B. Tauris & Co. Ltd., pp.79-90.

79

Neuman, W. L. (2014) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.

7th edn. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.

Oakley, A. (1981) ‘Interviewing women: a contradiction in terms’, in H. Roberts (ed.) Doing

Feminist Research. London: Routledge, pp.30-61.

O’Cathain, A. (2010) ‘Assessing the Quality of Mixed Methods Research: Toward a

Comprehensive Framework’, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (eds.) SAGE Handbook of

Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.531-

555.

Oppenheim, A. N. (1966) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement.

London: Pinter Publishers Ltd.

O’Reilly, M. and Kiyimba, N. (2015) Advanced Qualitative Research: A Guide to Using

Theory. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Ostrow, J. (2000) ‘Culture as a fundamental dimension of experience: a discussion of Pierre

Bourdieu’s theory of human habitus’, in Robbins, D. (ed.) Pierre Bourdieu: Vol. 1. London:

Sage, pp.302-322.

Peek, L. and Fothergill, A. (2009) ‘Using focus groups: lessons from studying daycare

centers, 9/11, and Hurricane Katrina’, Qualitative Research, 9(1), pp.31-59.

Perlo, K. W. (2009) Kinship and Killing: The Animal in World Religions. New York:

Columbia University Press.

Petter, O. (2018) ‘Number of vegans in UK soars to 3.5 million, survey finds’, Independent, 3

April. Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/vegans-uk-rise-

80

popularity-plant-based-diets-veganism-figures-survey-compare-the-market-a8286471.html

(Accessed: 22 August 2019).

Radnitz, C., Beezhold, B. and DiMatteo, J. (2015) ‘Investigation of lifestyle choices of

individuals following a vegan diet for health and ethical reasons’, Appetite, 90, pp.31-36.

Ramadan, T. (2004) Western Muslims and the Future of Islam. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Remele, K. (2019) ‘There is something fishy about eating fish, even on Fridays: On Christian

abstinence from meat, piscine sentience, and a fish called Jesus’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C.

(eds.) Ethical Vegetarianism and Veganism. Oxon: Routledge, pp.117-126.

Revilla, M. (2010) ‘Quality in Unimode and Mixed-Mode designs: A Multitrait-Multimethod

approach’, Survey Research Methods, 4(3), pp.151-164.

Rhodes, A. B. (2014) ‘Veganism as a Nontraditional Religion: First Amendment Protection

for Employees and Prisoners?’, The Dartmouth Law Journal, 12(1), pp.165-185.

Robinson, N. (2019) ‘Islam: Ants, Birds, and Other Affable Creatures in the Qur’an, Hadith

and Sufi Literature’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion

and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.80-90.

Rooke, D. W. (2019) ‘“You Shall Not Eat Any Abominable Thing” (Deut. 14:3) – An

Examination of the Old Testament Food Laws with Animal Ethics in Mind’, in Linzey, A.

and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon:

Routledge, pp.216-222.

Rubin, H. J. and Rubin, I. (2012) Qualitative Interviewing. 3rd edn. London: SAGE

Publications Ltd.

81

Said, A. A. and Funk, N. C. (2003) ‘Peace in Islam: An Ecology of the Spirit’, in Foltz, R. C.,

Denny, F. M. and Baharuddin, A. (eds.) Islam and Ecology: A Bestowed Trust. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press, pp.155-184.

Sampson, P. (2019) ‘Evangelical Christianity: Lord of Creation or Animal among Animals?

Dominion, Darwin and Duty’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook

of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.63-72.

Sarracino, F., Riillo, C. A. F. and Mikucka, M. (2017) ‘Comparability of web and telephone

surveys for the measurement of subjective well-being’, Survey Research Methods, 11(2),

pp.141-169.

Schimmel, A. (1975) Mystical Dimensions of Islam. Chapel Hill: University of North

Carolina Press.

Schwartz-Shea, P. and Yanow, D. (2012) Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and

Processes. New York: Routledge.

Sciberras, C. (2011) ‘Animals in Buddhism: In Defence of Hierarchical Evaluation’, in Vyas,

M. A. (ed.) Issues in Ethics and Animal Rights. New Delhi: Regency Publications, pp.223-

234.

Shah, B. (2011) ‘Vegetarianism and Veganism: Vehicles to Maintain Ahimsa and

Reconstruct Jain Identity among Young Jains in the UK and the USA’, in Vyas, M. A. (ed.)

Issues in Ethics and Animal Rights. New Delhi: Regency Publications, pp.108-118.

Shah, B. (2014) ‘Religion in the everyday lives of second-generation Jains in Britain and the

USA: resources offered by a dharma-based South Asian religion for the construction of

82

religious biographies, and negotiating risk and uncertainty in late modern societies’, The

Sociological Review, 62, pp.512-529.

Sherwood, H. (2018) ‘Religion: why faith is becoming more and more popular’, The

Guardian, 27 August. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/27/religion-

why-is-faith-growing-and-what-happens-next (Accessed: 22 August 2019).

Silverman, D. (2006) Interpreting Qualitative Data. 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications

Ltd.

Singer, P. (2004) ‘Animal Liberation: Vegetarianism as Protest’, in Sapontzis, S. F. (ed.)

Food for Thought: The Debate over Eating Meat. New York: Prometheus Books, pp.108-

117.

Singer, P. (2006) ‘Animal Protection and the Problem of Religion’, in Waldau, P. and Patton,

K. (eds.) A Communion of Subjects: Animals in Religion, Science and Ethics. New York,

Columbia University Press, pp.616-618.

Smith, M. (1978) The Way of the Mystics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stilt, K. (2009) Animal Welfare in Islamic Law. Cairo: Animal People.

Stilt, K. (2018) ‘Constitutional Innovation and Animal Protection in Egypt’, Law & Social

Inquiry, 43(4), pp.1364-1390.

Sweetman, P. (2003) ‘Twenty-first century dis-ease? Habitual reflexivity or the reflexive

habitus?’, Sociological Review, 51(4), pp.528–49.

Szücs, E., Geers, R., Jezierski, T., Sossidou, E. N. and Broom, D. M. (2012) ‘Animal Welfare

in Different Human Cultures, Traditions and Religious Faiths’, Asian-Australasian Journal of

Animal Sciences, 25(11), pp.1499-1506.

83

Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (2008) ‘Quality of Inferences in Mixed Methods Research:

Calling for an Integrative Framework’, in Bergman, M. M. (ed.) Advances in Mixed Methods

Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.101-119.

The Vegan Society (2019) Definition of Veganism. Available at:

https://www.vegansociety.com/go-vegan/definition-veganism (Accessed: 4 September 2019).

Thomas, M. A. (2016) ‘Are vegans the same as vegetarians? The effect of diet on perceptions

of masculinity’, Appetite, 97, pp.79-86.

Thornes, T. (2019) ‘Animal agriculture and climate change’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey, C.

(eds.) Ethical Vegetarianism and Veganism. Oxon: Routledge, pp.245-253.

Tlili, S. (2012) Animals in the Qur’an. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tlili, S. (2015) ‘Animals would follow Shāfi’ism: Legitimate and Illegitimate Violence to

Animals in Medieval Islamic Thought’, in Gleave, R. and Kristó-Nagy, I. T. (eds.) Violence

in Islamic Thought from the Qur’an to the Mongols. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,

pp.225-244.

Tlili, S. (2018) ‘Animal Ethics in Islam: A Review Article’, Religions, 9(9), pp.1-18.

Tuminello III, J. A. (2019) ‘Jainism: Animals and the Ethics of Intervention’, in Linzey, A.

and Linzey, C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon:

Routledge, pp.91-100.

Tuttle, W. (2018) ‘Introduction: Do Buddhist Teachings Mandate Veganism?’, in Tuttle, W.

(ed.) Buddhism and Veganism: Essays Connecting Spiritual Awakening and Animal

Liberation. Danvers: Vegan Publishers, pp.15-23.

84

Twine, R. (2014) ‘Vegan killjoys at the table – Contesting happiness and negotiating

relationships with food practices’, Societies, 4(4), pp.623-639.

Twine, R. (2018) ‘Materially Constituting a Sustainable Food Transition: The Case of Vegan

Eating Practice’, Sociology, 52(1), pp.166-181.

Vainio, A. (2019) ‘How consumers of meat-based and plant-based diets attend to scientific

and commercial information sources: Eating motives, the need for cognition and ability to

evaluate information’, Appetite, 138, pp.72-79.

van Gelder, G. J. (2000) Of Dishes and Discourse: Classical Arabic Interpretations of Food.

Richmond: Curzon.

Velarde, A., Rodriguez, P., Dalmau, A., Fuentes, C., Llonch, P., von Holleben, K. V., Anil,

M. H., Lambooij, J. B., Pleiter, H., Yesildere, T. and Cenci-Goga, B. T. (2014) ‘Religious

slaughter: Evaluation of current practices in selected countries’, Meat Science, 96, pp.278-

287.

Voas, D. and Crockett, A. (2005) ‘Religion in Britain: Neither Believing nor Belonging’,

Sociology, 39(1), pp.11-28.

Ware, K. (2019) ‘Orthodox Christianity: Compassion for Animals’, in Linzey, A. and Linzey,

C. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics. Oxon: Routledge, pp.127-

135.

Wersal, L. (1995) ‘Islam and Environmental Ethics: Tradition Responds to Contemporary

Challenges’, Zygon, 30(3), pp.451-459.

Wiles, R. (2013) What are Qualitative Research Ethics? London: Bloomsbury Publishing

Plc.

85

Willis, G. B. (2004) ‘Cognitive Interviewing Revisited: A Useful Technique, in Theory?’, in

Presser, S., Rothgeb, J. M., Couper, M. P., Lessler, J. T., Martin, E., Martin, J. and Singer, E.

(eds.) Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. Hoboken: John Wiley &

Sons, Inc, pp.23-44.

Wuthnow, R. (1986) ‘Religion as Sacred Canopy’, in Hunter, J. D. and Ainlay, S. C. (eds.)

Making Sense of Modern Times: Peter L. Berger and the Vision of Interpretive Sociology.

London: Routledge & Kegan Paul plc, pp.121-142.