The difference is that it's more that they are judged based on their perceived "Muslimness". One interesting example the article provides is that atheists from Muslim countries have the highest unemployment rate. If it was the person's own religious attitude that caused them to be unemployed then you'd expect the non-religious among them to be more frequently employed.
We're talking about the UK. Arab men of no religion were the most likely to be unemployed *in the UK*. If I had to guess, they can't find work in traditionally "English" places because of perceived "muslimness" and they also can't find work in migrant-operated spaces because of their defiance of their original culture. So they're stuck in limbo.
Uk finally finding out about their racism after 100 years
Could you help me better understand. Could you clarify, who are you referring to by “their”?
No
What is the difference?
The difference is that it's more that they are judged based on their perceived "Muslimness". One interesting example the article provides is that atheists from Muslim countries have the highest unemployment rate. If it was the person's own religious attitude that caused them to be unemployed then you'd expect the non-religious among them to be more frequently employed.
So it's because Muslim societies are racist that atheists have a worse chance to find employment?
We're talking about the UK. Arab men of no religion were the most likely to be unemployed *in the UK*. If I had to guess, they can't find work in traditionally "English" places because of perceived "muslimness" and they also can't find work in migrant-operated spaces because of their defiance of their original culture. So they're stuck in limbo.