Victimhood and Socio-Legal Narratives of Hate Crime Against Queer Communities in Canada, 1985-2003
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VICTIMHOOD AND SOCIO-LEGAL NARRATIVES OF HATE CRIME AGAINST QUEER COMMUNITIES IN CANADA, 1985-2003 b y Allyson M. Lunny A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Doctoral degree. Centre of Criminology University of Toronto © Copyright by Allyson M. Lunny 2011 Victimhood and Socio-legal Narratives of Hate Crime Against Queer Communities in Canada, 1985-2003 Allyson M. Lunny Doctoral Degree Centre of Criminology University of Toronto 2011 Abstract This dissertation analyzes personal and institutional narratives that shape the Canadian phenomenon of anti-LGBT violence as hate crime and locate queers within and without the discursive figure of the responsible, legitimate and undeserving victim of hate crime. These socio-legal narratives were taken from interviews with LGBT community activists involved in anti-violence projects, mainstream and gay print news media reportage of two notable homicides, Parliamentary debates of the enhanced sentencing provision that sought to include ‘sexual orientation’ to the list of biased motivating factors, Senate witness testimony on the amendment to Canada’s hate propaganda statutes which sought to include ‘sexual orientation’ to the list of protected groups, interviews with police officers who had direct experience with anti-hate crime initiatives, and judicial reasons for sentence. Utilizing an interdisciplinary analysis and drawing on hate crime scholarship and victimology, this dissertation asks: how is legitimate and, consequently, illegitimate LGBT hate crime victimization being represented and constituted through Canadian socio-legal narratives? ii In revealing how socio-legal actors and institutions have positioned LGBT individuals discursively within or without legitimate victimhood, that is, within and without the status of innocent victim deserving of social empathy and socio-legal institutional response, my dissertation illustrates how the spectre of illegitimate victimization is repeatedly invoked in socio-legal narratives of anti-LGBT hate crime. My analysis of these narratives about queer victimization and hate crime suggests that the figure of the responsible, legitimate and undeserving victim of hate crime remains an elusive and unstable identity for the queer victim of hate crime. Insofar as hate crime scholars have argued that the mobilization of hate crime activism has produced a victim whose hate crime status ensures its legitimacy, I contribute to this scholarship by arguing that this status is particularly challenging for the queer victim of hate-motivated violence. I demonstrate that the resiliency of the figure of classic victimology’s self-endangering and risky ‘homosexual’ and the sustained ideological resistence to LGBT individuals as full citizens, despite their notable legal gains, positions LGBT individuals, particularly gay men, ambiguously, situating them conceptually both without and within legitimate victimhood. iii Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my father, Kenneth Urban Lunny, whose steadfast love, generosity of heart, and conviction of spirit is, and will continue to be, with me as I move through this life, this intrepid journey, this heartfelt stumbling, this curiosity of struggle. I thank you for all that you have given me – I love you, dad. iv Acknowledgements I have no doubt that without the intellectual guidance and support of Rosemary Gartner I would not have finished this project. For that and your friendship, Rosemary, I thank you. To Mariana Valverde, thank you for critical and provocative insights; I have learned from them. To Adam Green and Paula Maurutto, thank you for stepping in at a critical time and offering me challenges to my thinking. To Carolyn Strange, thank you for your insights and guidance at the beginning of this project. And to Barbara Perry, my fellow hate crime scholar, thank you for your expertise and offer of collegial mentorship. A deep gratitude to my partner, Trish Tervit, who saw me lovingly and patiently through the last stages of this journey, and to my life-friends, Linda Wayne and Lorraine Baker, who saw it all and never faltered, and to Joya Banik who knew the beginning. Friends have a special place in this acknowledgement. My dear friend, David Sealy, I thought we would be doing this together; you are sadly missed and fondly remembered. A special big hug to Dena Demos, Mickey Cirak, Alka Tandan and Rashmee Singh for your intellectualism, friendship and encouragement. Vanessa Iafolla, Kirsten Kramar, and Kellie Leclerc thanks for sharing a few good laughs, some provocative ideas and several glasses of wine. To my friends and colleagues at York University: Kimberley White, Annie Bunting, David Szablowski, Richard Weisman, and Dorathy Moore, thank you for your support and belief in me. I have mentioned a number of people who have had a great impact on me and this project. I especially want to acknowledge three others whom I view as mentors and friends: Elizabeth Harvey, Leslie Moran, and the late Dianne Martin. I have learned much from you and am indebted for that and your longstanding support and friendship. Thank you to the Centre of Criminology administrative staff and library faculty for your help in navigating the University of Toronto system. A special gratitude to Tom Findlay, Andrea Shier and Monica Bristol. v A warm thank you to all my engaging interviewees, especially the LGBT anti- hate-motivated violence activists in Toronto and Vancouver and the officers from the Vancouver Police Department and the Toronto Police Services who shared with me their thoughts, experiences, and stories. The generosity of Xtra West and Xtra Toronto greatly facilitated various research components of this dissertation. A special thank you to Robin Perelle for her warm hospitality while in Vancouver. To Myron Claridge and the B.C. Attorney General’s Office, thank you for the access to several key unreported hate- motivated legal cases. This dissertation was funded in part by a doctoral scholarship from SSHRC and by the Centre of Criminology (University of Toronto). vi Table of Contents Abstract............................................................... i i Dedication............................................................. i v Acknowledgements.......................................................v 1. Introduction.......................................................1 Theoretical Methodology.......................................3 Fundamentals about Hate Crime................................1 2 Victimology. ...............................................2 3 Etymology of the term ‘victim’............................2 4 Classic victimology and the ‘homosexual victim’.............2 6 The making of the ‘legitimate’ victim ......................3 2 Queers and the critique of responsibilization................4 0 Data Collection.............................................4 6 Organization of the Thesis.....................................5 8 2. News Stories of Homicide...........................................6 2 Prologue...................................................6 3 Kenneth Zeller..............................................6 6 Figuring Violence. ..........................................7 5 Aaron Webster..............................................8 1 Ambiguous Victimization......................................8 8 Conclusion.................................................9 3 vii 3. Narratives of Trauma and Community. 9 6 Imagined Community........................................106 Traumatic Failings. ........................................117 4. Legislating Victims of Hate.........................................125 Liberal Promises...........................................127 The Logic of Exclusion.......................................130 “Backdoor” Legislation. ....................................140 Illegitimate Victims. ........................................155 5. Sentencing Hate..................................................169 Apprehensions.............................................174 Judicial Pronouncements of Penalty............................180 Case Analyses pre-718.2(a)(i): A Legacy of Citation?..............184 Enhanced Sentencing: An Analysis of Cases......................199 Peeping Toms and Fucking Voyeurs............................220 Conclusion................................................227 6. Telling Stories and the Policing of Hate. 229 Official and Counter Narratives of the Policing of Hate.............236 “The Ladies” and “Legal Mumbo-jumbo”.......................241 Policing the Good Queer Victim of Hate Crime...................246 Concluding Remarks........................................252 7. Bill C-250: Fantastical Fears........................................258 Fantastical Apprehensions....................................264 viii And What of Paranoid Scenarios?..............................279 Conclusion................................................288 8. Conclusion......................................................290 My Findings...............................................291 Limitations................................................300 Future Research............................................302 Works Cited...........................................................303 ix Chapter One Introduction I am offered a text. This text bores me. It might be said to prattle. The prattle of the text is merely that foam of language which forms by the effect of a simple need of writing. Here we are not dealing with perversion but