Racialization of Sikhs in the United States

Kaur 13

Navjot Kaur

SOC 3410 Midterm

Racialization of Sikhs in the United States

Sikhs are an ethnic group. They share a common culture and identity which is mainly defined through their religion, Sikhism. Race is a group that is regarded as distinct in society due to particular characteristics which may indicate either their supremacy or inferiority (Higginbottom & Anderson). At times, society may perceive an ethnic group as a race. A common example would be the way in which Adolph Hitler classified Jews, an ethnic group, as a race in Nazi Germany. As a result, Jews were discriminated against as they were set apart by their racial entity, experiencing a process called racialization. Likewise, since the 1980’s, the racialization of Sikhs in the United States as "Muslim", "Muslim-looking" and/or "Terrorists" has led to detrimental effects on Sikhs, altering their identity and facing countless hate crimes.

What is Sikhism? “Sikhism is an independent, monotheistic religion, tracing its origins from Northern India, centering on service, egalitarianism, and engagement in daily life” (Singh 55). Sikhs believe in giving back to the community and helping those in need through selflessness. They do not differentiate individuals based on religion, caste, creed, age, gender, and the like. Sikhism is known to be the fifth largest religion in the world (“Sikhs”). And at its heart are five markers, the Five K’s, which symbolize the Sikh faith: kesh (uncut hair), kanga (wooden comb), kachha (specially-designed underwear), kara (steel bracelet), and kirpan (strapped sword)” (Singh 56). As a sign of respect, Sikh men cover their uncut hair with either a turban or patka. Hence, these markers physically distinguish Sikhs from others.

As of today, the United States is home to over 500,000 Sikhs (“Sikhs”). Despite such a large population in the country, the identity of Sikhs has been repeatedly questioned and challenged. In contemporary American society, Sikhs have been mistaken for and placed into different categorical groups. Such categories include: Muslims, Arabs and Terrorists. To a large extent, this is due to the lack of knowledge individuals have of who Sikhs are.

In consequence, Sikhs have suffered through a great deal of intolerance. Dating back to the 1980’s, there was much violence imposed by the Indian government upon Sikhs as a part of Operation Blue Star. In retaliation, “the Indian government labeled Sikhs as “terrorists” after Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by two of her Sikh bodyguards, causing Sikhs to be associated to the violent Middle East in American discourses” (Love 411). This false accusation not only affected Sikhs in India, but impacted the way individuals conceived Sikhs in the American society. American discourses that described Sikhs as destructive individuals had a lasting influence on the outlook of Sikhs in the United States after the events on September 11, 2001.

The attacks on September 11, 2001 in Washington, D.C. and New York City raised the issue of ‘Islamophobia’ among Americans. In fear of Islam and those who followed its policies and practices, Americans showed much hatred towards those who were Muslim or ‘Muslim-like’ (Love 402). As a result, Sikhs have been racialized in terms of their phenotype such as hair, wardrobe, language, etc. A newspaper article wrote that within a month of the terrorist attack “over 100 incidents of violence against Sikhs were reported across the country” (“Muslims”). An example is that on September 16, 2001, Balbir Singh Sodhi, a turbaned Sikh, was shot to death by a man who shouted ‘I stand for America all the way’ while being arrested (Love 402). In this personal attack of violence, the individual who killed Sodhi judged him based solely on appearance. The Sikh’s turban was misinterpreted by the shooter even though it was just a spiritual symbol.

Assumptions Americans have about the turban have frequently led Sikhs to a mistaken identity. David explains that “the turban and beard that most Sikhs wear look like Osama bin Laden's”. This led “some people to believe Sikhs are allied with the al-Qaeda terrorist network” (“Sikhs”). Taking this into account, my grandfather, a taxi driver in Maryland, confronted many comments where passengers would observe his turban and call him by names such as “Bin Laden”. In spite of correcting the individuals of the false label and explaining his distinctiveness as a Sikh, passengers would not believe him. This supports Singh’s statement that “the racialization of Sikhs has been a process marked by denial of identity” (85). Since those involved with Al-Qaeda were distinguished by their turbans and long beards, many Sikhs came in conflict with this mode of identification as they also had such physical characteristics. Singh states that “Sikhs argued that phenotypic traits, specifically the turban and beard, should not be used to place them in the “Muslim” or “terrorist” categories, but instead that religion (namely religious differences from Muslims) should be the sole tool used to place them in a different racial category altogether” (78). Hence, Sikhs did not want to be put into the wrong racial category, they wanted individuals to view them as a separate entity, as a religious entity, as Sikhs. They wanted their true selves to be recognized by the American society. If they didn’t do so, they would continue facing the blame and have to endure the consequences of the wrongful actions committed by another group. Singh states that “this parallels the logic that underlies racial profiling and hate crimes: the terrorist was a member of group X, therefore all members of group X must be terrorists” (79). Since the terrorist were of Muslim background and because Sikhs were viewed as Muslim, society deemed all Sikhs as terrorists.

There were many remarks of dislike related to the origin of the “Muslim-Looking” Sikhs within the United States. For example, “Avtar Chiera, a Phoenix truck driver, was shot by three men who told Chiera to “[g]o back to where you belong to” (Singh 76). Where were the attackers demanding Chiera to go? Referring to their statement, the assault took place because the attackers perceived the victim to be of Muslim origin. Similarly, at the time of 9/11 my family and I resided in Queens, New York. Days after the 9/11 attacks, individuals would approach us and because my mother wore a salwar kameez at the time, people would furiously state “Go back to your country”. Even though the outfit was of Indian descent, individuals considered the foreign attire a threat. It was not a common dress form known to Americans. However, since Muslim women, a majority of who are Pakistani, also wear such clothing, we were most likely considered Muslim as well. Moreover, that statement really troubled me as America is my country. My siblings and I were all born in the United States making us citizens of this nation. This country is all I know about. Where else would we go? In the same manner, Falcone explains that “second-generation Sikh Americans on such occasions assert[ed] that "America is my homeland” (104).

Furthermore, there are many other fields in which Sikhs were discriminated against due to misunderstood identity. The government played a large role in affecting the treatment of the Sikh community. For instance, “one Sikh man who was trying to defend a case in court, for example, was not allowed into the courtroom under the court’s “no hats” policy” (Singh 76). In this case, even though the purposes of both the headdresses are completely different, the turban was compared to a hat. There was no distinction made between the two. For Sikhs, removing one’s turban is known as “the most humiliating form of disrespect” (Puar 56). The turban is representative of one’s pride and reverence toward their religion whereas a hat may be seen as a fashion statement or an accessory to protect one from the sun. There were many offensive comments made about Sikhs’ turbans such as “‘Hey you fucking terrorist, take that turban off!’” (Puar 56). Thus, failure to comply to such demands may have lead to even further violence and hatred. This includes: “grabbing, unraveling, knocking and pulling off the turban, pulling of unshorn hair, and occasionally, even cutting off hair” (Puar 56). Wearing a turban is not thought of as American. It is not part of the “normal” dress code in the United States. However, “turban removal functions as a reorientation into masculine patriotic identity” (Puar 56). Therefore, Sikhs that refused to disrobe their turban were targeted against.

On the other hand, discrimination against Sikhs was also seen in workplaces and airports. Singh states that “corporations and the penal system alike, regulate one’s ability to keep articles of the Sikh faith (including the turban, beard and kirpan), regardless of the fact that these are religiously mandated” (76). Based on their ethnic background, Sikhs would unlawfully be fired for no apparent or legitimate reason and refused to be hired by employers. Individuals behaved unfairly towards Sikhs, singling them out from others within the American society. They were not accepted or rejected into businesses based on their qualifications but rather assessed by their ability to follow certain standards of appearance. Moreover, Singh states that “under the guise of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the government allows extensive screening of turbans at airports, including physical handling by TSA officials and public removal” (76). Because turbans are closely connected to the identities of individuals involved in terrorist activities, Sikhs are misunderstood and racialized as terrorists for wearing turbans. For this reason, they were subject to further inspection and interrogation. It was commonly thought that Sikhs would have something hidden in their turban. They were beings of suspicion as individuals would require an examination of their turbans to see if there was anything ‘unsafe’ or ‘dangerous’ underneath. Additionally, Sikhs also faced prejudice on flights themselves. Singh states that “a U.S. Airways flight refused to take off with three Sikh men on board” (77). As a result of racialization, individuals feared of traveling together with Sikhs following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Society was paranoid as they linked Sikhs with terrorists.

Another area where the targeting of Sikh identity was prevalent is the neighborhoods in which Sikhs were situated. For example, “in 1997, there was a disagreement over the construction of a gurdwara, a place of worship for Sikhs, in San Jose, California” (Singh 76). Singh states that “the plans for the gurdwara met all of the city’s requirements and the city officials themselves “expressed no real opposition to the plans.” Local citizens, however, were opposed to the construction of the place of worship, stating that they “[didn’t] want it in our neighborhood” because the gurdwara’s accompanying noise, traffic and differential architectural style would disrupt the neighborhood” (76). Would community members have reacted the same way if instead of a gurudwara, there was a church being constructed in the vicinity? This demonstrates how members of the contemporary American society were bigoted. They had a stereotyped image of Sikhs and didn’t want to socialize with them. Thus, they provided excuses for their resistance of the gurdwara in their surrounding area. In addition, vandalism against gurdwara’s was also seen. When I lived in New York, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, there were occurrences where individuals would attack Sikhs and the structure of the gurudwara by throwing rocks, for instance.

Because of a lack of comprehension, even Police enforcement demonstrated discriminatory behavior towards Sikhs. For instance, upon summoning the police for a burglary that had taken place, the police began questioning a Sikh woman about the kirpan she was wearing (Singh 77). Instead of focusing on the crime and realizing that the issue at stake was the individual who committed the crime, the police was concerned with the victim’s possessions. The Sikh woman explained:

“the kirpan was an article of her faith and offered to leave if it was causing a problem, but she was: ordered to “shut up” and a taser was aimed at her head, forced to the ground with “a knee . . . put to her back” and handcuffed by three officers, and subjected to watching the handcuffing of her family, including her sixty-year-old mother. The family was asked if they had “heard about the bombings in Bombay” and were told by the police that they (the police) “knew about Muslims.” (Singh 77).

Even after clarifying that the kirpan was not used as a weapon but symbolized her religious beliefs, the police denied her identity. They used coercive power to depict their superiority of the Sikhs. Hence, the Sikhs were forced to submit in return for their wellbeing.

Sikhs have been affected in many ways as a result of these hate crimes imposed on them due to racialization. For instance, “unlike most of their fellow Americans, Sikhs were not permitted unrestricted entry into the communitas of national grieving” (Falcone 89). Sikhs were deprived of their privilege to mourn for the loss that occurred to the nation. They were isolated from the rest of the American society. Sikhs were treated as “different” from others and excluded as members of their communities. Falcone states that “Sikh Americans reported being unable to protest American foreign policies that they disagreed with because they were compelled to

reiterate and "prove" their American patriotism ad nauseam” (91). Sikhs constantly had to demonstrate who they were to American people and explain their identity since they were mischaracterized. They were stripped of their rights and, to an extent, dehumanized by society. Verma explains that “families that had spent some amount of time building up their lives to make America their new home also began to experience a crumbling or crashing down of their sense of belonging, of their communities and of their lives as immigrants in the United States” (91). Individuals treated Sikhs as outsiders and didn’t thoroughly accept them as Americans. Hence, Sikhs felt abandoned from the country they considered their own. The United States was a country individuals came to in search for a better life. In the past, this country provided Sikhs with a vision of hope and success. Yet in the contemporary period, Sikhs are put at a disadvantage.