No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The symbolic purpose of hate crime law: Ideal victims and emotion
Abstract
This article examines the symbolic function of hate crime law. By challenging the norms that sustain and promote prejudice, hate crime law seeks to contribute to claims for social justice on behalf of victim groups. This symbolic function cannot be achieved by legal rules alone. Drawing upon theories of emotional thinking, the article argues that the moral work of hate crime laws is dependent upon the capacity of victim groups to engender compassionate thinking that helps reconfigure perceptions of them as dangerous, illegitimate or inferior Others. This analysis seeks to contribute to our understanding of the processes through which some minority communities fall short of the image of ideal victims capable of contributing to the moral claim embedded in hate crime law.
... If we are to meaningfully address violence against sex workers, we must address this distinction. Incorporating sex workers into hate crime legislation could be symbolically important (Corteen, 2018;Mason, 2014;Christie, 1986). Those in favour of expanding hate ...
... Hate crime legislation, both as a concept and as a collection of policies, aims to combat bigotry in its various guises by criminalising behaviour as well as the prejudicial intent behind it (Chakraborti and Garland 2014;Mason, 2014). However, we argue that these prejudices are rarely created in a vacuumthey are formed, shaped and upheld by societal wide stigma. ...
... With 96% of hate crime reports not ending in a conviction, the deterrent value of prison is weak at best (Hall, 2005;Powell, 2021;Walters et al., 2017). Given the paucity of evidence to support increased sentencing as a form of deterrence, it is questionable that the heightened penalties imposed are capable of preventing hate crime (Mason, 2014;Dixon and Gadd, 2006) a point even acknowledged by those advocating for it (Sanders and Campbell, 2020). ...
On 23rd September 2020, the Law Commission launched their Hate Crime consultation paper, which suggested including ‘sex worker’ as a protected characteristic when considering hate motivated violence. The inclusion of sex workers in policing hate crime policy had already been implemented in Merseyside in 2002, and Yorkshire in 2017 (Sanders and Campbell, 2020). From a policing perspective, this approach has its advantages: it encourages a more coordinated approach to crimes against sex workers, as well as having an educative and awareness raising function around the discrimination they face (Sanders and Campbell, 2020; Chakoraborti and Garland, 2012). However, those who advocate for this approach caution that whilst it is an important first step to address crimes against sex workers, it can only go so far in a legal framework where sex work is still criminalised (Campbell, 2019; Campbell, 2014; Platt et al., 2018). This article challenges the idea that increased hate crime legislation will reduce violence against sex workers, suggesting that it may in fact put sex workers in even greater harm by increasing their interaction with the police. We emphasise that there is limited evidence that higher sentences deter hate crime offenders, and it is almost impossible to assess whether this type of legislation even provides the educative function it claims to. This paper argues that full decriminalisation of sex work is the most effective first step to responding to violence against sex workers, rather than increased legislation and tougher sentencing (CPS, 2019). In doing so, we add to the growing body of literature evidencing how full decriminalisation increases safety of sex workers. We also aim to contribute to a broader understanding that harsher sentencing and increased carceral responses do not best protect vulnerable communities of any sort.
... Studies of bias-motivated offending in criminology, termed as 'hate studies', have given rise to a plethora of research on the parameters of such crimes (see Hall, 2013;Perry, 2001) and their symbolic capacity within criminal justice processes (Mason, 2013). ...
... However, a failure to embed a comprehensive appreciation of the variety of Gypsy and Traveller ethnicities and cultures has meant that their experiences overall are not recognized and they thus experience social harms that are systemic as policing authorities practise badly and lack legitimacy for Gypsies and Travellers. The hate crime agenda has a symbolic function to challenge prejudice through legislative means (Mason, 2013), but it fails in this regard by being exclusive in protecting some groups more than others and subsequently augmenting the hierarchy of deserving victims (Chakraborti and Garland, 2012). As such, the current hate crime agenda actually produces a symbolic social harm as Gypsies and Travellers are either placed at the bottom of the hierarchy of provision or are left out of its protective mechanisms. ...
... As such, the current hate crime agenda actually produces a symbolic social harm as Gypsies and Travellers are either placed at the bottom of the hierarchy of provision or are left out of its protective mechanisms. Mason (2013) argues that hate crime legislation is reliant on victim communities' capacity to elicit some form of compassion from wider society for its symbolic function to be realized. Given the extensive and historic racism faced by many Gypsies and Travellers, their ability to stimulate concern from the wider social world is highly unlikely in the first instance (Pew Research Center, 2014). ...
This article sets out how a critical hate studies perspective can explain and illuminate the hate harms experienced by Gypsies and Travellers in the UK. In doing so, it directly responds to the question of how criminological theory can move beyond existing debates in studies of race and ethnicity and engage more effectively with the wider social sciences. The critical hate studies perspective provides a comprehensive theoretical approach to appreciating the harms of hate in late modernity. This framework challenges existing explanations for bias-motivated violence in society and proposes an approach that acknowledges the overarching role of neoliberal capitalism on individual subjectivity and subsequently the lived experience. By utilising this perspective, it is possible here to discuss the range and depth of hate experienced by Gypsies and Travellers and thus consider its genesis and the potential for positive praxis.
... Social movements based on identity politics play a pivotal role in establishing hate crime legislation (Jenness and Grattet, 2001;Perry, 2002;Klatran, 2019). Unlike other forms of criminal law that the police is tasked with enforcing, hate crime laws differ in that they not only condemn the deed itself, but they also implicitly seek to delegitimize and combat the existence of prejudice, thus seeking to remoralize the social landscape (Mason, 2014b;Mason, 2014a). The three core issues presented in this article are based on the argument that policing in general-and policing hate crime in particular-are inherently political activities (Bowling et al., 2019). ...
... However, hate crime legislation serve symbolic or moralizing functions. Enhanced sentencing for hate crimes is a way for the state to communicate to its citizens that hatred and prejudice, not just the crimes they cause, are undesirable (Mason, 2014b). ...
This article investigates how police officers and prosecutors make sense of and speak about their work with hate crimes. Our analysis rests upon Robert Reiner's widely acknowledged claim that policing is inherently political. We identified three core issues that illustrate the political nature of policing hate crimes. First, the politically contingent boundary work of distinguishing criminal from legal acts. Second, the impact of the enforcement of hate crime laws on the reproduction of social inequalities. Third, the “diversity politics” of gaining legitimacy and trust among minorities, which hate crime legislation is meant to protect. While a strong commitment to policing hate crimes is evident among our interviewees, we ask if the politically invested discourse they present may contribute to an absence of critical reflections regarding the limited effect of law enforcement, as well as a lack of engagement with pressing concerns regarding racialized crime control and racism.
... The U.S. Congress has enacted several hate crime statutes, establishing a formal and public stance against such behavior, and thereby advocating for respect, equality, and tolerance of all groups of people (Grattet & Jenness, 2001;Iganski, 2008;Mason, 2014). The first piece of federal legislation was the Hate Crimes Statistics Act (HCSA, 1990). ...
... Alongside arguments concerning the existence and function of hate crime law, there is ongoing discussion surrounding the inclusion (and exclusion) of groups of individuals as protected classes in hate crime legislation. Hate crime legislation is designed to uncover and denounce historical and likely ingrained attitudes toward marginalized groups, which can have a profound impact on their communities and larger society (Grattet et al., 1998;Mason, 2014;Ramirez et al., 2018). Hate crime laws are meant to protect the vulnerable, those who are at increased risk of being targeted and becoming a victim of a crime due to some intrinsic quality they possess, such as race or sexual orientation (Chakraborti & Garland, 2012;Grattet & Jenness, 2001;Mason, 2022;Olson, 2017) or a characteristic such as religion, which can be entrenched in people's identities (Glass et al., 2015). ...
Hate-motivated crime remains problematic in the United States. California passed the first hate crime law in 1978; Congress followed in 1990. States continue to amend their hate crime legislation, producing an amalgam of statutory provisions. This article creates a conceptual framework from which to classify hate crime legislation across the 50 states and Washington, DC. Laws were identified through Westlaw. Analyses compared the types of crimes covered, discrete and insular minorities protected, prosecutorial alternatives, mandates for law enforcement agencies, and additional rights provided to victims among states’ legislation. Considerable variation in scope and content of hate crime legislation exists among states, leaving several vulnerable groups unprotected, law enforcement underprepared, and victim rights and resources sparse. Future directions for hate crime policy and legislation are discussed.
... The last point is particularly worth elaborating on. There is a body of literature which "suggests that those victims most likely to be recognized as deserving state protection from injury or suffering are those who are capable of generating what are called sentimental emotions, such as feelings of sympathy, compassion or pity for the harm inflicted upon them" (Aradau 2004;Baier 1994;Nussbaum 2001;Walklate 2011, in Mason (2014). It is obvious, however, that not all victims will have the characteristics or resources to evoke positive emotions. ...
... In the context of hate crimes, it has been observed that some minority groups do not meet the standards set for the ideal victim by Christie (1986). Mason (2014) argues that the decision regarding whether someone should be granted the status of the ideal victim of hate crime laws depends on the scale of the victimisation, the perceived deservedness and the significance of the victimisation to those who make the judgement. She sums up her theoretical considerations by saying: ...
... Some groups are regularly targeted for violence or intimidation due to their identities but are not protected by hate crime legislation (e.g., goths, sex workers, and homeless persons; see Chakraborti & Garland, 2012;Garland, 2010). Mason (2014) notes that protected groups are those thought to merit compassion, show sufficient vulnerability without being too remote or strange, and not challenge society's moral beliefs. More recently, Godzisz and Mazurczak (2023) applied Christie's ideal victim model to observe reactions to anti-LGBT hate crimes with a large European sample. ...
This research explored the content of hate crime prototypes in a North American context, with particular attention to how such prototypes might influence blame attributions. In Study 1a, participants were recruited from a blended sample of universities (n = 110) and community members (n = 102) and asked to report their thoughts about typical hate crime offenses, victims, and offenders. These open-ended responses were coded, and common themes were identified. In Study 1b, a new group of participants (n = 290) were presented with these themes and asked to rate each for their characteristics of hate crimes. Studies 1a and 1b confirmed the presence of a clear prototype of hate crimes, such that (a) perpetrators were believed to be lower status White men with clear expressions of bias, (b) hate crime offenses were believed to be acts of interpersonal violence accompanied by slurs or verbal abuse, and (c) hate crime victims were thought to be members of a marginalized group who remain passive during the offense. Study 2 explored the consequences of victim prototypes on assessments of victim blame. Participants (n = 296) were recruited from York University and presented with a case vignette that varied the prototypicality of a victim of hate, depicting him as either Black or White and either passive, verbally responsive, or physically confrontational in the context of an assault. Participants showed greatest sympathy for the Black victim who passively ignored verbal harassment but increasingly assigned blame when the Black victim spoke or reacted physically. When the victim was White, participants showed little variation in their assessment of blame as a function of the victim’s behavior. These results suggest that Black victims are subjected to greater behavioral scrutiny than White victims and that sympathy for victims of hate may be contingent on their passivity in the face of harassment.
... 123-124). Así, la función simbólica de los delitos de discurso de odio no habría sido utilizada conforme a su propósito fundamental de combatir los prejuicios contra determinados colectivos minorizados (Perry 2001, Chakraborty y Garland 2012, Mason 2014en España, Landa 1999), sino para, contrariamente, fomentarlos. Emplear los delitos de discurso de odio para neutralizar y criminalizar al movimiento independentista por parte del Gobierno y del MF supone utilizar el derecho antidiscriminatorio para, paradójicamente, discriminar a y fomentar la discriminación contra el colectivo independentista por razón de su ideología y nacionalidad. ...
Este artículo tiene por objeto el análisis de las acusaciones por delitos de odio en que la supuesta víctima serían miembros de las Fuerzas y Cuerpos de Seguridad del Estado en el contexto del procés independentista en Catalunya. Se pretende mostrar el uso político que se ha hecho de esos delitos y, en un plano más teórico, extraer alguna conclusión respecto a la caracterización de los estados de excepción no formales. Para ello, se ha recurrido, mayormente, a documentos de las instituciones del Estado (sentencias, instrucciones, manuales, etc.) o, en su defecto, a noticias periodísticas, todo ello complementado con bibliografía secundaria especializada en la materia. Se concluye que la intencionalidad resulta clave para distinguir un mero uso incorrecto de la ley, del uso político o excepcional.
... La singularitat d'aquest tipus de legislació s'explicita en el caràcter simbòlic de les lleis anti-odi, ja que el seu propòsit original és promoure una societat més tolerant, augmentant l'atenció i la resposta als problemes de les minories i els grups estigmatitzats, reconeixent la seva equitat respecte als grups majoritaris o hegemònics. Per tant, el que es persegueix amb les lleis anti-odi, castigant de manera explícita els prejudicis, el biaix i l'hostilitat grupal com un element de conducta criminal, és dotar a la llei d'una funció simbòlica i, no només per condemnar la conducta, sinó també el prejudici inherent (Mason, 2014). De manera que la finalitat ulterior d'aquestes lleis és la justícia social (Mason, 2007). ...
Les experiències de victimització que deriven de la violència interpersonal motivada pel prejudici, l’hostilitat o l’odi són altament freqüents en grups socials minoritaris, com les persones que formen part del col·lectiu de minories sexuals.
Rigorosos estudis de revisió (Friedman et al., 2011) han constatat que el nombre d’experiències de victimització que ha d’afrontar aquest col·lectiu, tant durant la infància i l’adolescència, per part dels iguals i els propis cuidadors, com a l’edat adulta, per part de victimaris diversos, és molt més elevat que el que afronten persones heterosexuals. Per a molts individus amb una orientació sexual gai, lesbiana o bisexual, fer front a la violència es constitueix en una condició vital crònica.
Aquestes experiències de victimització generen multitud de problemes psicosocials tant a la infància i adolescència (Collier et al., 2013) com a l’edat adulta (Mustanski et al., 2016; Pitoňák, 2017; Plöderl i Tremblay, 2015), relatius a la vinculació i el rendiment escolar, l’abús de substàncies i altres conductes de risc, problemes de tipus internalitzant (símptomes posttraumàtics, depressió, conductes suïcides) i externalitzant (conducta disruptiva, agressivitat), així com una baixa autoestima i una menor satisfacció vital.
Al context espanyol, són escassos els estudis duts a terme sobre victimització en el col·lectiu de minories sexuals i, la majoria de treballs publicats sobre victimització en adults s’han centrat en els delictes d’odi i en la violència en les relacions de parella (Rodríguez-Otero et al., 2017), però no s’ha dut a terme cap estudi que mantingui una perspectiva centrada en la victimologia del desenvolupament, per a poder valorar l’acumulació d’experiències de victimització en el col·lectiu de minories sexuals i els seus efectes acumulatius en la salut física i psicosocial.
... This strategic use of emotions influences what Johnson (2022) among others calls "affective citizenship", how emotional subjects are constituted as well as how we are encouraged to perceive social relations and political solutions. The practice of communicating censure and sympathy, which is intimately linked to the discourse on crime and punishment, is partly an emotional practice; emotional expressions can be used in order to reinforce this ideological and moral communication (Hochschild 1979;Karstedt 2006;Mason 2014). ...
The aim of the present article has been to explore how the public is encouraged to engage emotionally in criminal policy matters. By comparing how two of the largest political parties in Sweden-the Moderate Party and the Social Democratic Party-express emotions during the 2018 election campaigns, the article has illustrated an emotional political struggle over voters. Even though worry and (dis)trust are prominently articulated emotions by both political parties, they address these emotions in different ways and the parties also differ regarding which emotions they encourage in the public. The Moderate Party describes worry and distrust as a result of a correct evaluation of society's state, the constituted solution being to change social conditions through an advancement of state control. Instead, The Social Democratic Party portrays worry as a result of the uncertainty of the future, and the party encourage the public to invest in trust in others to overcome this worry.
... [31] Azokban az esetekben, amelyek mégis eljutnak vádemelésig, az igazságszolgáltatási szervek gyakran nem tudják vagy nem akarják felismerni a háttérben húzódó csoport elleni gyűlöletet mint motívumot. [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [32] Megfelelő bizonyítékok hiányában a bíróságok nem látják igazoltnak a gyűlöletmotívumot, és rendre alulminősítik a bűncselekményeket, azaz csak az alapbűncselekményben állapítják meg a büntetőjogi felelősséget. Ezért is alapvető jelentőségű, hogy a nyomozó hatóság maradéktalanul tárja fel az állítólagos gyűlöletmotívum és a bűncselekmény közötti kapcsolatot. ...
Andrea Tünde) http://ijoten.hu/szocikk/gyulolet-buncselekmenyek (2023). Konkrét szöveghelyre való hivatkozáshoz javasoljuk a szövegbeli bekezdésszámok használatát, pl. [8] vagy [12]-[18]. A modern civilizációban nagyon hosszú ideje társadalmi konfliktusok mérgezik az egyének és csoportok közötti viszonyokat, amelyeknek csak egyik és igen szélsőséges formája a gyűlölet-bűncselekmény. A csoport elleni gyűlöleten alapuló hátrányos megkülönböztetés és a gyűlöletbeszéd a csoporttal szembeni gyűlölet kifejeződésének a mindennapokban elterjedtebb formája. Ez utóbbi magatartások jogszabályi kezelése azonban komoly alkotmányos kérdéseket vet fel, hiszen egyrészről súlyosan sérti az egyéni érdekeket és a társadalmi békét, másrészről jogszabályi korlátozásuk a magánviszonyokba, a magánéletbe vagy a szólásszabadságba történő beavatkozást jelent. A jogalkotónak ezért fokozott körültekintéssel kell eljárnia, amikor meghatározza, hogy melyek azok a deviáns, gyűlöletet sugárzó, keltő vagy fokozó jelenségek, amelyeknek intézményes megelőzése, valamint a gyűlöletet elszenvedő áldozatok védelme és megsegítése egy jogállamban állami, társadalmi kötelezettség. A gyűlölet motiválta, illetve a védett tulajdonsággal rendelkező sértettekkel szembeni cselekmények okainak, természetének és következményeinek kutatása olyan feladat, amelynek hiányában a jelenség nem kezelhető hatékonyan. Tartalomjegyzék 1. Bevezetés 2. Büntetőpolitikai megoldások, kodifikációs technikák 2.1. Súlyosító körülmény, minősítő körülmény, sui generis tényállás 2.2. Alapbűncselekmények 2.3. Védett csoportok 2.3.1. Zárt vagy nyitott lista 2.3.2. Kisebbségvédelmi vagy semleges (két irányban védő) tényállás 2.3.3. A védett tulajdonságok köre 2.3.4. Valós, vélt csoport-hovatartozás, kapcsolódás egy védett csoporthoz 2.4. Gyűlölet, előítélet vagy diszkriminatív kiválasztás 3. Nemzetközi kriminálpolitikai kötelezettségek, hazai megoldások 3.1. Nemzetközi joganyag 3.2. Hazai joganyag 4. A sui generis gyűlölet-bűncselekmény tényállás Magyarországon 4.1. A közösség tagja elleni erőszak kodifikációja (Btk. 216. §) 1. oldal
... According to him, the public grants full victim status when the victim is: (1) "weak"; (2) carrying out a respectable project at the time of their victimization; (3) blameless; (4) the offender is "big and bad"; (5) the offender is unknown to the victim. To summarize, the "ideal victim" thus forms a continuum, and, ultimately, it is the position in which an individual finds themselves that determines the level of responsibility attributed to them for their victimization (Mason, 2013). In light of Christie's (1986) initial propositions, Hopkins (2016) adapted the framework to understand victimized businesses. ...
Research shows that customers are insufficiently motivated to protect themselves from crimes that may derive from data theft within an organization. Instead, the burden of security is placed upon the businesses that host their personal information. Companies that fail to sufficiently secure their customers’ information thus risk experiencing potentially ruinous reputational harm. There is a relative dearth of research examining why some businesses that have been breached stay resilient in the face of negative public reaction while others do not. To bridge this knowledge gap, this study tackles the concept of cyber-resilience, defined as the ability to limit, endure, and eventually bounce back from the impact of a cyber incident. A vignette-based experimental study was conducted and featured: (1) a breached business described as having a strong cyber-resilience posture; (2) a breached business described as having a weak cyber-resilience posture. Overall, a convenience sample of 605 students in Canada were randomly assigned to one of the two main experimental conditions. The results show that a strong cyber-resilience posture reduces negative customer attitudes and promotes positive customer behavioral intentions, in comparison to a weak cyber-resilience posture. Similarly, the more negative attitudes a customer holds toward a breached business, the less likely they are to behave favorably toward it. As a result of this study, cyber-resilience, which has hitherto primarily received conceptual attention, gains explanatory power. Furthermore, this research project contributes more generally to business victimology, which is an underdeveloped field of criminology.
... Within academia, considerable efforts have been put into understanding how someone's personal or behavioral characteristics may put them at a greater or lesser risk of victimization (Walklate, 2007, p. 51) and how such factors may influence the public recognition of one's victimhood. Scholars (e.g., Donovan & Barnes, 2018;Mason, 2014) suggested that LGBT victims may be far from what Christie (2018Christie ( [1986) described as the ideal victim, suffering from a "credibility deficit." A handful of studies (e.g., Lyons, 2006;Plumm et al., 2010) provided empirical support for various elements of the theory. ...
Using data from a cross-national survey conducted on representative samples of populations from 10 European countries (n = 10,766), the present study is the first one to empirically measure the validity of Christie’s influential ideal victim model. We use a range of scenarios built around common types of anti-LGBT violence to verify the extent to which the public’s empathy for victims is contingent on the victim’s identity and the circumstances of the crime. The results provide strong evidence that, when applied to this group of victims, the rules of the ideal victim work, adequately moderating the public’s emotional reactions. We found that all victims receive relatively high levels of empathy, but the further the victim is from the ideal, the less support they can count on. Thus, even though no victim is “rejected,” a clear hierarchy of victimization emerges. As a group, LGBT people suffer from an empathy deficit, but there also are considerable variations within this group, with a lesbian attacked by extremists receiving the most, and a drunk transgender person receiving the least empathy from the public. The study contributes to the development of theory by embedding the ideal victim model in a broader sociological paradigm of dramaturgical analysis. Since our research shows that the victim’s LGBT status decreases the levels of empathy (being seen as a type of stigma), we call for more attention to be paid to the actor’s identity in Goffman’s framework. Implications for practice and further research are offered.
... The criminal law in this regard not only denounces hate-based conduct but aims "to help reconfigure perceptions of such groups as deviant, dangerous or illegitimate Others". 145 Duff argues that the ultimate aim of the criminal law is to persuade members of society to "refrain from criminal wrongdoing because they realize that it is wrong". 146 In other words, the law has an educative role in that it raises greater awareness as to specific wrongfulness of hate-based conduct. ...
If the enactment of hate crime legislation serves to address social injustice, what social groups are deserving of its special protection? This question continues to challenge policy makers and legislatures globally. In the US, where modern hate crime statutes were first enacted, different group characteristics have been included at both state- and federal-level legislation. The Hate Crime Statistics Act 1990 was the first piece of federal legislation that required the Attorney General to collect data on hate crimes motivated by race, ethnicity, religion, disability and sexual orientation bias. In 1994 Congress enacted the Hate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act, which required the US Sentencing Guidelines Commission to enhance penalties for crimes motivated by bias against a victim’s race, colour, national origin, ethnicity, religion, gender, ethnicity and sexual orientation. However, federal jurisdiction initially extended only to race, colour, national origin and religion, meaning that crimes motivated by bias towards a victim’s sexual orientation, gender or disability could only be pursued if the federal government obtained jurisdiction in some other way. This limitation of jurisdiction was changed by the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act 2009, which extended the reach of federal law to cover sexual orientation, gender or disability. State legislators have also taken diverging approaches to legislating for hate crime, using different models of legislation and including different protected characteristics. There are currently 47 States in the USA with hate crime statutes. All of these states include hate based on race, religion, and ethnicity, while 34 cover disability, 34 sexual orientation, 30 gender, 22 transgender/gender identity, 14 age; 6 political affiliation and 3 (and additionally Washington, D.C.) protect homelessness.
... The criminal law in this regard not only denounces hate-based conduct but aims "to help reconfigure perceptions of such groups as deviant, dangerous or illegitimate Others". 145 Duff argues that the ultimate aim of the criminal law is to persuade members of society to "refrain from criminal wrongdoing because they realize that it is wrong". 146 In other words, the law has an educative role in that it raises greater awareness as to specific wrongfulness of hate-based conduct. ...
There are varied pathways for the process of criminalising conduct within liberal states, which tend to draw on a number of common moral and ethical considerations. Theorists of “liberal criminal law”, if such a thing can be said to exist, have typically focused on individual liberty as “the primary unity of ethical concern”. Traditionally, the creation and enforcement of criminal laws has held the purpose of furnishing the boundaries of individual freedom, curtailing only those conducts that are harmful or that restrict the interests of others. One would expect at the very least that criminal laws protect against conducts that seek to undermine certain liberties, such as freedom from violence, persecution and false imprisonment (e.g. assaults, rape, homicide, slavery, human trafficking) as well as public security and safety (harassment, stalking, public order offences). We would also expect that it should prevent invasion of bodily autonomy (e.g. assaults without injury, sexual offences). While ownership of property, central to liberalism, is likely to play a key role in liberal criminal law frameworks (e.g. theft, fraud, burglary).
... They are (a) weak or vulnerable; (b) involved in a respectable activity at the time of victimization; (c) blameless in the circumstances of their victimization; (d) victimized by a vicious offender; and (e) victimized by an unknown offender. The victim must also be strong enough to convince those in decision-making and legal gate-keeping positions that they have truly suffered (van Wijk, 2013) -without presenting as too strong, which may raise questions about their role in victimization provocation or muddy their presentation as an ideal victim (Christie, 1986;Mason, 2014). For female victims of violence against women, this balance must be struck between appearing stalwart, but making sure to appear warm and caring, features that accentuate stereotypical "emphasized femininity" (Budgeon, 2014;Connell, 1987). ...
While research shows that “ideal victims” still receive more media coverage and more favorable depictions and results in the criminal justice system, it is not clear whether this is how victims of crime want to present themselves. We code and analyze the transcripts of 21 violence against women survivor victim impact statements (VIS) from YouTube videos, to assess how survivors present their victimization. While survivors of violence discuss their pain and trauma, they also call for better services and protection for other survivors, and attempt to bring awareness about the ubiquity of violence while motivating other survivors to come forward. Survivors rarely present themselves as stereotypically defined “ideal victims,” though in some cases, they do focus on their own blamelessness and the motherly, familial relationships that have been negatively impacted by their victimization. Though ideal victim presentation may be a rational response for those seeking justice from patriarchal legal institutions, survivors resist ideal victim presentations based on stereotypical notions of femininity, demonstrating that from their perspectives, hierarchies between “deserving” and “undeserving” victims may be dissipating.
... Among law enforcement, identification of hate crime victims is often associated with incidents such as violent acts, including assault or some form of intimidation , and more likely among victims commonly linked with hate crime such as racial minorities as compared to other groups such as the people with disabilities (Mason 2014, Pezzella et al. 2019). Victim recognition is multifaceted, and scholars such as Chakraborti (2015) argue that rates of victimization are likely much higher than officially reported because many instances of hate crime may go unrecognized by criminal justice agencies, nongovernment organizations, or service providers, as well as victims themselves who do not self-identify as a hate crime victim. ...
Hate crimes, often referred to as bias-motivated crimes, have garnered greater public attention and concern as political rhetoric in the United States and internationally has promoted the exclusion of people based on their group identity. This review examines what we know about the trends in hate crime behavior and the legal responses to this problem across four main domains. First, we describe the legal framework and recent attempts to expand hate crime protections beyond historically disenfranchised groups. Second, we examine recent trends and patterns of hate crime victimization. Third, we review what is known about those who perpetrate hate crimes and those who experience hate crime victimization. Finally, we examine the efficacy of efforts to respond to and prevent hate crime. This review examines a wide range of bias-motivated harms and suggests how future research and policy can be more inclusive of victimization extending beyond traditionally understood hate crimes.
Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 6 is January 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
This book aims to find out how and why states in various regions and of diverse cultural backgrounds fail in their gender equality laws and policies. In doing this, the book maps out states’ failures in their legal systems and unpacks the clashes between different levels and forms of law—namely domestic laws, local regulations, or the implementation of international law, individually or in combination. By taking off from the confirmation that the concept of law that is to be used in achieving gender equality is a multidimensional, multi-layered, and to an extent, contradictory phenomenon, this book aims to find out how different layers of laws interact and how they impact gender equality. Further to that, by including different states and jurisdictions into its analysis, this book unravels whether there are any similarities/patterns in how these states define and utilise policies and laws that harm gender equality. In this way, the book contributes to the efforts to devise holistic and universal policies to address various forms of gender inequalities across the world.
This volume will be of interest to scholars and students in Gender Studies, Sociology, Law, and Criminology.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
The enjoyment of sexual and reproductive health and rights remains a daily struggle for many sex workers. The reality of laws and policies in different countries in the global north and global south and their impact on sex workers is indisputable even where they have ratified and domesticated international human rights treaties. This chapter explores the barriers in the face of state accountability that hinder the enjoyment of sexual and reproductive health and rights and exacerbates inequalities and discriminatory practices in Kenya. The chapter draws from the empirical research for a wider rights-based study on the promotion of sexual and reproductive health and rights of sex workers conducted in 2015, to expose what is framed in international human rights instruments, national laws and policies, and sex workers’ lived experiences. Information was collected through semi-structured interviews, focus group discussion and analysis of legal and policy documents.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
Debates about hate speech legislation tend to be dominated by the conflict between freedom of expression on the one hand and freedom from the harms of hatred on the other; it is pervasively claimed that a balance must be struck between these competing interests. This chapter carefully examines this framing of the issue, drawing on parliamentary debates to foreground the classificatory assumptions and power imbalances that are at play in such purportedly neutral balancing exercises. These insights are used to contextualise the question of whether the stirring up hatred offences of England and Wales should be extended to encompass gender hatred. With a focus on the pursuit of intersectional equality, the chapter raises important dynamics that advocates of such offences should consider beyond the headline issue of free speech.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
Over 30 years of initiatives to improve the career progression of women in the solicitors’ profession in England and Wales have failed to achieve gender equality in practice. Equality legislation from the 1970s onwards, has still not translated to equality for women solicitors in retention, progression, partnership and equal pay in private practice. Significant numbers of women have entered the profession and remained at junior levels since the 1970s, outnumbering male entrants since 1992-3 and practising men solicitors since 2017. A gap persists between participation rates for men and women, with the number of women active in the profession reducing with age and experience. This chapter presents a practical, intersectional, socio-legal approach to overcome the barriers faced by many women solicitors, based on current issues identified by practising, non-practising solicitors and left professionals. Practical initiatives are developed to effect meaningful change in practice to maximise opportunities available for all.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
Legal control of land as well as legal and social recognition of women’s uses of and rights to land can have catalytic effects of empowerment, increasing women’s influence and status in their communities. During past decades, changes in the Chinese land tenure rights and practices have brought important incentives for rural developments including farmer income and living standards. However, the law in books differs from the law in action and the lack of women’s land use rights recognition deprives them of their chances of surviving in rural China. They become legally invisible, ignored and forgotten. This qualitative research is mainly based on interviews conducted in China. The data will be analysed within the framework of theories and philosophies grounding Chinese ideology. As this research focus on women in rural areas, feminism form the theoretical and ideological background.KeywordsChina
Hukou
Land rightsRural womenWomen’s rights
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
Transgender individuals in Pakistan have been excluded from political and economic systems. In 2009, the Supreme Court of Pakistan for the first time recognised the unique gender identity of transgender individuals. This Order initiated reforms for the protection of the rights of transgender individuals and compelled various government departments to devise guidelines for the issuance of National Identification Cards (NICs) to all transgender individuals and created a legal framework for their full and equal participation in society. This chapter will analyse the effectiveness of this reform project in relation to other legal rules and entrenched social norms. It will start with an analysis of the historical discriminatory laws which led to a marginalisation of transgender individuals, and evaluate whether the recent developments in law, particularly the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act 2018, are sufficient to protect the rights of transgender in Pakistan.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
To tackle sexist advertisements, each EU state must tread a fine balance of two conflicting fundamental rights: maintaining the protection of gender equality whilst simultaneously avoiding the curtailment of freedom of expression. In performing this balance, the majority of member states follow the legal norm of establishing a self-regulation organisation, allowing the industry to develop advertising codes and denigrate advertisements. Since 2004, Spain has sought to tackle sexist advertisements under the guise of wider legislative measures that aimed at reducing “intimate partner violence” based on its Gender Violence Act . The act places obligations upon advertisers and prohibits adverts that use a woman’s body detached from the advertised object or uses an image that portrays women in stereotyped behaviours. This chapter explores Spain’s route into the legislation to strike down sexist advertisements and analyses two of the court’s founding rulings: the RyanAir calendar and Cillit Bang cases.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
The UN Commission on the Status of Women stated that addressing gender stereotypes “must be a key element in all efforts to achieve the realization of women’s human rights” (2010). Leading human rights organisations (African Union, Council of Europe, European Union, Organization of American States and the United Nations) have introduced instruments aimed at the elimination of gender stereotypes, like CEDAW or the Istanbul Convention. Feminist legal scholarship reaffirms this position, considering stereotyping to be one of the biggest challenges for realisation of human rights in contemporary society. Nevertheless, the topic remains largely under-researched. Drawing on feminist legal theory, this chapter addresses the following question: Can and should law be used to address gender stereotyping? It explores the complexity of this topic, with focus on the opportunities and constrains of using law to affect substantive change. This chapter takes up an interdisciplinary approach of law and politics.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
After independence in 1956, Tunisia introduced a “progressive” Personal Status Code abolishing polygamy and allowing men and women the right to divorce on an equal basis. This chapter explores how citizens experienced divorce in Ben Ali’s repressive regime, drawing on fieldwork (2004–2008) in a family court and a neighbourhood of Tunis alongside readings of divorce files. It traces the ensuing tensions as women and men navigated divorce procedures. In Tunisia’s courts, competing definitions of gendered personhood and “equality” collided, whilst there was a contradiction between the state instrumentalisation of women’s rights and the progressive reputation of Tunisia’s marriage and divorce laws seen as supporting gender equality. Litigants’ experiences of divorce created considerable anxiety. Beyond this, the laws served a political role in bolstering Ben Ali’s repressive regime as—through their texts and procedures and by taking some rights more seriously than others—husbands were subject to policing by the state.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
This book started off its analysis with the promise of finding out whether states, which were handled by the contributors, present similarities or differences in the way that they fail in achieving gender equality. As demonstrated in each chapter, the states have taken progressive measures in addressing gender inequality over the last few decades, yet challenges and backlashes remain. Discriminatory legal practices and social norms are still pervasive; women and sexual and gender minorities continue to face unequal treatment, prejudice and violence. On this final note, by drawing upon the case studies presented in each chapter, we aim to bring together the patterns that the states present in how and why they fail in achieving gender equality. We observe that there are four overarching reasons why the states studied in this book fall short in bringing justice to gendered matters: (1) the states’ tolerance of friction and ambiguity in laws, (2) the states’ inertia in fully pursuing a human rights-based approach, (3) the states’ oversight of intersecting marginalisation of women as well as sexual and gender minorities and (4) the states’ problematic approaches towards gender-based violence. Each of these themes will be discussed in turn below.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
Turkey has had a unique and troublesome relationship with the Istanbul Convention. It was both the first country to ratify the Convention and the first country to withdraw from it after implementing the Convention for six years. This chapter focuses on the legal steps taken by Turkey between its ratification and its withdrawal from the Convention. In this analysis, I argue that, even before its withdrawal, Turkey had been sweeping between two ends: its progressive legal steps to address violence against women on one hand, and its legal and political attitude threatening gender equality in general, on the other. This chapter, therefore, argues that Turkey was already failing to effectively implement the Convention, and its withdrawal from the Convention should only be considered a reflection of Turkish government’s insincerity in its political commitment to address gender-based violence from the outset.
... It therefore seems reasonable to suggest that the enactment of national stirring up gender hatred offences could have a similar declarative and de-normalising effect. This corresponds with academic work on the moralising effect of criminal law (Mason, 2014a;Bottoms, 2002, pp. 25-26) and the importance of legal recognition for self-esteem (Thompson, 2012). ...
Not every person who gives birth is a woman or mother. However, legal frameworks in many countries insist that they are. This chapter demonstrates that legal frameworks around pregnancy, childbirth and parenthood are often repronormative in their effects, maintaining the hegemonic sex/gender order at the expense of the dignity of trans people who have given birth to their own children. To explore why and how these repronormative effects persist, this chapter explores two case studies of trans men who have given birth in the UK and Israel respectively, and the legal battles they faced to be recognised as fathers who have given birth. It pulls together sociological and legal scholarship to critique existing legal frameworks in Europe and beyond and explore potential solutions to the barriers they create. It concludes by placing these arguments in a wider sociological and political debate around trans and reproductive rights.
... Ainsi, la décision de l'État d'inclure des catégories de personnes comme membres d'un groupe identifiable vise à démontrer l'importance accordée au bien-être des communautés vulnérables (Brax et Munthe 2015 ;Martin 1996 ;Mason 2014 ;Perry 2009). Ces objectifs peuvent néanmoins varier selon l'époque et le lieu, les contextes politiques, culturels et historiques produisant des définitions différentes d'un crime haineux (Coliandris 2012). ...
Au cours des dernières années, le rôle des forces policières dans la lutte contre les actes haineux s’est profondément transformé au Québec. D’acteurs se limitant à réagir face à cette criminalité, les principales organisations policières tentent aujourd’hui d’être de plus en plus proactives face aux diverses manifestations de la haine. Ainsi, en 2016, le Service de police de la ville de Montréal (SPVM) a créé une unité d’enquête spécialisée sur les actes haineux. Cette transformation traduit une prise de conscience des impacts de la haine dans la société et un changement de paradigme dans les politiques de sécurité publique amorcé après l’attentat de St-Jean-sur-Richelieu et amplifié par l’attentat à la grande mosquée de Québec. Le rapprochement avec les différentes communautés culturelles et ethniques, le dialogue avec certains groupes marginalisés et vulnérables ou encore la prise en charge systématique des événements haineux non criminels – qualifiés d’incidents haineux – sont quelques-unes des stratégies adoptées par les principales organisations policières du Québec.
... Knowledge on how such issues impact any mediated communication needs to be developed and transferred so that translators and interpreters can challenge role assumptions and develop strategies within the boundaries of their expertise to live up to the challenge of effectively overcoming cultural boundaries and engaging citizens in cross-identity dialogue. Their strategies can determine how the perils and displays of intergroup conflict evolve and how society faces post-Babelic anxieties and provides a secure environment for continuous social and economic growth (Dharmapala and McAdams 2005;Parekh 2005;Harvey 2012;Mason 2013;Chakraborti 2015). With the help of translators and interpreters, Babel may become "come torre ferma, che non crolla già mai la cima per soffiar di venti" 4 (Alighieri [1304(Alighieri [ -1321(Alighieri [ ] 1985. ...
Complex identities, social practices, and cultural products are increasingly required to conform to the expectancies of a monolingual norm that is no longer considered reasonable. In this postmonolingual age, it is essential that the approaches and initiatives used to counter these demands aim not only at understanding these hyper-diverse societies but also at de-minoritizing underprivileged communities. ‘Translating and Interpreting Justice in a Postmonolingual Age’ is an attempt to expand the limits of postmonolingualism as a framework for exploring the possibilities of translation and interpreting in mediating between the myriad of sociocultural communities that coexist today. Challenging assumptions about the role of translation and interpreting, the contributions gathered in this volume focus on intercultural and intergroup understanding as a process and as a requisite for social justice and ethical progress. From different but complementary approaches, practical experiences and existing legal and policy frameworks are scrutinized to highlight the need for translation and interpreting policies in legal and institutional contexts in multicultural societies. Researchers and policymakers in the fields of translation and interpreting studies, multiculturalism and education, and language and diversity policies will find inspiring perspectives on how legal and institutional translation and interpreting can help pursue the goals of democratic societies.
... 14 This increases the time period normally permitted in calculating a rate: here, the calculations are over five-year periods and (for the total) over twenty years.11 As is clear in the research, and recalling the point made byMason (2014) that some groups do not merit inclusion as a vulnerable group, it is a perverse consequence if the instrument counts bias against pedophiles as bias against gays. Avoiding that, the team found a sizeable minority of the cases involved homicides between individuals separated by twenty or more years in which police noted or circumstances supported the former bias assessment. ...
This article explores a high-profile review of cases of alleged historical investigatory police bias in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, referred to in The New York Times article, “When Gangs Killed Men for Sport: Australia Reviews 88 Deaths.” The title of the article contains the terms of a well-known feature of moral panic—a discovered crime fact and demand for an enforcement response disproportionate to the fact. Our analysis explores the response to the review of the list of cases, Strike Force Parrabell, as an illustration of runaway constructionism. Demand group-interest in the positive designation of the cases (as bias crime) was a means of acknowledging the prejudicial conduct of police during a time of wider attitudinal change. In spearheading the verification of this list of cases, demand groups and crusaders placed a high semiotic burden beyond its capacity as a comparable objective measure. The fitness of the list of 88 cases as a totem for police and societal wrongdoing requires evidence regarding disproportionality based on valid and reliable measures. Despite worldwide interest in NSW for its comparative high ranking in gay bias homicides, however, such ranking does not exist. Nonetheless, despite the impossibility that it stands in as proof of decades long prejudice, corruption or criminal negligence, the list of cases appears to do so anyway. As such, it is illustrative of the occupation of media frames and formats by weak data or of the runaway character of crime stories in an era of “fake news.”
... The theory behind hate crime largely lies in the symbolic field (Mason, 2013). Firstly, the criminal act itself is conceptualized as a message from the perpetrators to the public, a symbolic act of communication. ...
This article presents the results of a study of the victimization of queer people in Russia before and after the ‘gay-propaganda’ bill was signed into law in 2013. Despite the development of hate crime legislation, few violent incidents against LGBTIQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and questioning) individuals are recorded in the Russian legal system. An original method of court rulings analysis is put forward in order to move towards an actual number of criminal offences against these groups. All court decisions that mention non-heterosexual victims are reviewed to identify whether these cases could have been considered hate crimes. As a result, 267 first-instance criminal court rulings dealing with 297 LGBTIQ victims are identified in 2011–16. Descriptive statistical analysis demonstrates that the number of victims grew substantially after 2013.
This article draws on a qualitative study that examines how Asian-descendant victims of hate activities in Canada perceive, interpret, and engage with hate crime laws and the legal system. My findings show that participants’ understanding of these laws is deeply relational, shaped by their encounters with perpetrators, the legal system, and the nation-state. While participants acknowledge the symbolic promise of protection and justice that hate crime laws offer, they also perceive these laws as potential sources of burdens and harm. This ambivalence stems from personal experiences and broader social and institutional contexts that influence how marginalized individuals perceive legal protections and justice. By examining these dynamics, this study advances law and society scholarship by offering a nuanced understanding of how marginalized communities navigate and interpret legal protections, emphasizing the need to critically assess legal processes through the lived experiences of underrepresented individuals.
Globally, there is no shortage of examples demonstrating lethal and non-lethal violence motivated, at least in part, by a hatred of women and girls because of their sex or gender. Such violence is not a new phenomenon. Despite this, there remains little consideration of sex/gender-based violence (S/GBV) motivated by hatred in the hate/bias crime literature, including a recent comprehensive review published in this journal. Drawing from a comprehensive scoping review of international literature, this article discusses why this might be the case, identifying both the benefits and challenges of treating sex/gender-motivated violence as a form of hate. The review examined primarily legal- and case-based analyses, grey literature, and some empirically based research articles, both qualitative and quantitative, the latter of which largely had only a peripheral focus on the question posed—the consideration or recognition of sex/gender-motivated hate that leads to violence. Themes surrounding benefits and challenges of doing so were identified. Among the findings was that, while there are valid arguments for and against the inclusion of, or emphasis on, S/GBV as a form of hate, what is largely absent from the body of literature is systematic, empirically based evidence examining the validity of the arguments identified, particularly in recent years. The article concludes by highlighting four broad research and policy priorities which can further (or arguably begin) the conversation about the role of hate in S/GBV.
While Law & Emotions movement made large waves in the international academic community in the last 30 years, it remains virtually unknown in Poland. However, applying perspectives of this multidisciplinary research enterprise in Polish law and jurisprudence could yield promising results. As the field is vast and consists of many voices, an attempt at consolidating its findings and demonstrating their relevance is needed. The objective of the text is thus to provide a cross-section of this influential movement and point out why it potentially revolutionizes thinking about law. To this end, the text analyses a body of works dealing with the relationship between law and emotion, evaluates their usefulness and presents the finding across a range of potential implications for: theory and philosophy of law, study of constitutional law and lawmaking, particular doctrines of law and knowledge about emotions of legal actors.
Hate crimes are reprehensible acts driven by animosity and bias against specific target groups, transcending borders and geographical boundaries. Effectively addressing hate crimes necessitates a profound understanding of the victims impacted by prejudice and hostility. To combat crimes rooted in prejudice, it is crucial to delve into the experiences of the victims. A comprehensive understanding of their needs, characteristics, and perspectives becomes paramount for conducting thorough investigations, countering criminal activities, and preventing further victimization. Within this framework, this chapter encompasses the identification of victim groups affected by hate crimes and a detailed exploration of the requisite measures to eradicate victimization. This multifaceted approach aims not only to address the immediate consequences of hate crimes but also to implement proactive strategies that contribute to the prevention of recurrent victimization.
This introductory chapter lays the groundwork for a comprehensive analysis of the challenges in developing state responses to anti-LGBT hate crimes. Integrating key findings from queer politics and criminological studies that examine the complex interactions between LGBT communities and the state, the chapter explores the intricate dynamics between state policies, societal attitudes, and activism in the formulation and implementation of the hate crime policy model. This analysis is placed within the broader context of how Western democracies address various threats and uncertainties. The primary argument suggests that “progressive” states exhibit a complex and contradictory approach to anti-LGBT violence. Despite advancements in legal protections, internal inconsistencies and inflammatory rhetoric fuel societal polarisation, casting doubt on efforts to eradicate discrimination, hate speech, and violence against LGBT individuals.
Hate crime legislation is a crucial mechanism through which hate crimes can be effectively challenged and prosecuted against (Walters et al. in Criminal Law Review, 12:961–986, 2018). Indeed, the establishment of an effective legislative response to hate crime not only supports the symbolic message that there is no place for criminalised expressions of hate, but that prejudice-incited hate in and of itself is wrong (Mason in Theoretical Criminology, 18:75–92, 2013). The ongoing revision of policy is therefore necessary to reflect a forever changing and dynamic social, political, and economic context within England and Wales.
Since the announcement of the Independent Review of Hate Crime Legislation (the Bracadale Review) in 2017, Scotland has embarked on a journey towards modernising and consolidating hate crime legislation. These attempts invited have consideration of adding sex and/or gender to the Scottish hate crime framework, predominantly to enable recognition of hate crime directed at women because they are perceived as women. Following two consultations and a vivid, yet deeply polarising political and social debate, the Scottish Parliament passed the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act in 2021 without capturing sex and/or gender. This chapter scrutinises the period of hate crime reform between 2017 and 2021, leading to consideration of the work of the Working Group on Criminal Justice and Misogyny in Scotland.
This chapter will outline the historical developments of hate crime in Scotland both immediately prior to the Devolution settlement and since the re-establishment of a Scottish Parliament at Holyrood. It highlights the path taken in Scotland towards crimes of hate (and prejudice) and the associated public policy issues, but also explores the reasons and developments behind this. The contextual and historical discussions here outline the political, social and legislative tensions surrounding hate crime legislative reform in Scotland. In offering an overview of a more proactive willingness to consider and discuss the challenges of embedding hate crime protections in Scots criminal law, keeping in line with societal changes, it charts the milestones, landmarks and controversies, all the while outlining the Scottish approach vis-à-vis developments across the UK.
Muslim’s women’s visibility and perceived vulnerability make them primary targets of routine Islamophobia in public spaces. This article builds on existing research on intersectionality between Islamophobia, gender, and victimisation. It offers fresh data on Islamophobia against women by analysing complaints of interpersonal hostility ( N = 73) made to the Islamophobia Register Australia between 2016 and 2017. This quantitative analysis confirms that there is much consistency between Western nations in the nature of Islamophobia directed to women. At the same time, the article brings new perspectives to our understanding of Islamophobic hostility. Drawing on an in-depth analysis of eight case studies, the article illuminates the restrictive impact that routine Islamophobia has on Muslim women’s daily lives, generating a sense of responsibility for their own safety in the absence of bystander intervention. Yet, with comparatively high levels of social capital, participants in our study did not simply acquiesce to stereotypes that deny them the status of ‘ideal’ victim. Instead, they sought to reduce the destructive impact of victimisation through active attempts to raise public awareness and reassert agency. Our study shows that Muslim women’s responses to Islamophobia are not homogeneous. This variation originates in heterogeneity between Muslim women in Western countries.
The aim of this study was to analyze the risk factors for robbery or assault victimization in Israel. The analyses were based on the data collected by the European Social Survey for the years 2008-2017. The sample comprised of 12,411 respondents aged 15 and above, sampled from Israeli private households by methods of probabilistic strata and cluster sampling. The logistic regression model that has been constructed included sociodemographic variables, subjective variables, as well as variables directly related to the lifestyle, routine activities of the respondents. The findings revealed that a higher risk of victimization was related to young age, being a male, high level of education, living in a rural area, having a physical or mental disability, and experiencing social discrimination. Similarly, a high level of social activity, and a low level of personal safety were also associated with an increased risk of victimization. A major contribution of the study relates to the importance of subjective variables for the prediction of victimization, especially respondents' feelings of personal safety. Further research is needed to identify the variables that predict feelings of personal safety. The study has both theoretical and practical implications: Identifying and minimizing known risk factors may help to decrease and even prevent the risk of victimization.
Hate crime victimization is harmful for victims and those who share the victim’s identity. It may also be harmful for the broader community. Yet, few studies focus on the ripple effects of hate. This paper examines how secondary exposure to hate crime in the neighborhood, through witnessing or hearing about hate crime, influences individual perceptions of ethnic minorities, which in turn can harm social relations. Findings reveal that those who witness hate crime express greater anger towards ethnic minorities. Those who rely on second-hand information about hate crime in the community are more likely to anticipate rejection on the basis of their ethnicity, hold negative attitudes towards ethnic migrants and intend to take actions to exclude new migrants from their communities when compared to those who do not have such information. These findings have implications for community cohesion in multi-ethnic neighborhoods.
This chapter engages critically with a range of terminology that are difficult to define and outlines current debates regarding the use of particular language. In doing so, this chapter highlights the importance of language and power in the construction of ‘legitimate’ hate crime victims. I provide the reader with an overview of legislation that polices hate crime within England and Wales. In relation to hate crime, this chapter also addresses some of the key theoretical and conceptual ideas that dominate hate crime discourse. In particular, this chapter addresses the use of ‘strain’, ‘doing difference’ and ‘vulnerability’ in current hate crime scholarship, outlining the emergence of these theories and concepts in relation to hate crime. Given that these are dominant theoretical and conceptual ideas within hate crime scholarship, it is key to provide a strong critique of these ideas in order to provide a foundation for the analyses presented throughout this book.
This paper features an oral history conversation and interview that the author had with Judah Samet who survived imprisonment in the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp during the Holocaust. Samet also survived a near brush with death as he was arriving to attend services at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania as the deadliest anti-Semitic attack in American history was underway. Samet would later be a featured guest during the 2019 State of the Union Address. This paper is predominantly focused on some select larger questions posed by the author to Samet that considered aspects of these facets of Samet’s life history. Some larger reflections on the interview and The Tree of Life shooting, in particular, are also discussed.
Legislatures worldwide experience the same problem in drafting or amending hate crimes statutes: How is it possible to discriminate between victim groups, and which groups are worthy of legislative protection? This article explores some of the experiences of legislatures, highlighting the political inconsistencies which go on to shape the legal system. It focusses on the experience of a number of common law jurisdictions, and seeks to establish a normative platform from which hate crimes statutes can be based, drawing on the legislative experiences of the United States. This platform draws on two other areas of law, particularly the criminal defence of provocation and equality legislation, and shows that the determination of victim groups for hate crimes legislation need not be the politically charged, discriminatory, and exclusionary process that it is today.
Disability hate crimes are a global problem. They are often violent and hyper-aggressive, with life-changing effects on victims, and they send consistent messages of intolerance and bigotry. This ground-breaking book shows that disability hate crimes do exist, that they have unique characteristics which distinguish them from other hate crimes, and that more effective policies and practices can and must be developed to respond and prevent them. With particular focus on the UK and USA's contrasting response to this issue, this book will help readers to define hate crimes as well as place them within their wider social context. It discusses the need for legislative recognition and essential improvements on the reporting of incidents and assistance for individual victims of these crimes, as well as the need to address the social exclusion of disabled people and the negative attitudes surrounding their condition.
Our principal concern in this paper is with the accusation that hate crime legislation violates the principle of proportionality and related principles of just sentencing, such as parity, fair notice, and representative labelling. We argue that most attempts to reconcile enhanced punishment for hate crimes with the principle of proportionality fail. More specifically, it seems that any argument that tries to justify hate crime legislation on the grounds that such crimes are more serious because their consequential harms are worse or their perpetrators are more culpable than their nonhateful counterparts will fail, and thus enhanced punishment will violate the principle of proportionality.
Given the seeming irreconcilable tension between proportionality and hate crime legislation, we turn to consideration of hybrid theories of punishment that permit deviations from strict proportionality when needed to serve other important and legitimate purposes of sentencing. We argue that even if such hybrid theories can justify the enhanced punishments for hate crimes, existing theories cannot provide any principled limit on the extent from which proportionality can be deviated. We suggest such a limit and provide a principled justification for it.
Hate crimes, it has been said, are ‘message’ crimes to which society needs to respond using the most powerful and unambiguous means of communication at its disposal, the criminal law. Using empirical data collected in the course of research conducted by the authors on racially motivated violence and harassment in North Staffordshire, this article sets out to interpret the messages about hate crime sent to perpetrators, and people from their local communities, by the creation, in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, of a new category of racially aggravated offences. To this end two possible anti-hate crime messages and three potential audiences are identified and evaluated in the light of data generated from biographical interviews with perpetrators and focus group discussions with other local people in and around the city of Stokeon-Trent. Our conclusion is that the supposedly clear deterrent and denunciatory or declaratory messages contained in the 1998 Act are either drowned out or distorted by other signals coming from successive ‘New’ Labour governments about crime, immigration, nationality and ‘community cohesion’, and by the highly idiosyncratic and unpredictable ways in which they are mediated and interpreted by their intended recipients.
This article argues that if crime prevention policies are to succeed in the political or public spheres they must address some of the deeper emotional or affective dimensions of crime and its place in society. While crime prevention remains a predominantly `rationalist' approach to criminal policy it will fail to compete successfully with the more emotive law and order policies which tend to resonate with the public and which appear to meet deep-seated psychological and affective needs. It suggests that crime prevention can address the three core elements that must make up a response to crime: the instrumental, the emotional and the production of social cohesion. It outlines a range of values and symbols which crime prevention may tap into in order to meet some of the affective dimensions of criminal justice policy.
Over the course of the last decade or so, it has become increasingly apparent that modern penality is undergoing significant change. One aspect of this refiguring of the penal spectrum involves a growing recourse to what I refer to as emotive and ostentatious punishments of varying kinds - although this must be set against the enhanced continuity at the same time of a long-established trend towards bureaucratic rationalism in this area. The article draws on the theoretical constructs of Norbert Elias to explain this refiguring, arguing that what we can now see taking place in the penal arena is a decivilizing interruption in various localized sites to the broader continuity of the civilizing process.
Following in the tradition of the Clarendon Law Series, Criminal Justice is an extended essay on the core concepts, structures, and processes of the criminal justice system. The book prefers theoretical reflection above detailed description and favours provocative questions over simple answers. Its primary aim is to stimulate students of criminal justice to think critically about what they have learned. Criminal Justice challenges conventional understanding of crime, criminal justice and punishment by revealing their meanings to be open to multiple interpretations. It explores the historical contingency and cultural specificity of the institutions and practices of criminal justice. And it considers the many, often conflicting, roles fulfilled by the various players in the criminal process. In so doing, it reveals criminal justice to be more diverse and its purposes more contested than conventional accounts allow. The book concludes by examining radical changes in crime control and the pursuit of security and considering their import for criminal justice as we know it.
The impression often conveyed by the media about hate crime offenders is that they are hate-fuelled individuals who, in acting out their extremely bigoted views, target their victims in premeditated violent attacks. Scholarly research on the perpetrators of hate crimes has begun to provide a more nuanced picture. However, the preoccupation of researchers with convicted offenders neglects the vast majority of hate crime offenders that do not come into contact with the criminal justice system. This book widens understanding of hate crime by demonstrating that many offenders are ordinary people who offend in the context of their everyday lives. The book takes a victim-centred approach to explore and analyse hate crime as a social problem, providing an empirically informed and scholarly perspective. The book draws out the connections between the individual agency of offenders and the background structural context for their actions. It adds a new dimension to the debate about criminalising hate in light of concerns about the rise of punitive and expressive justice, scrutinising the balance struck by hate crime laws between the rights of offenders and the rights of victims.
Emotions shape the landscape of our mental and social lives. Like geological upheavals in a landscape, they mark our lives as uneven, uncertain and prone to reversal. Are they simply, as some have claimed, animal energies or impulses with no connection to our thoughts? Or are they rather suffused with intelligence and discernment, and thus a source of deep awareness and understanding? In this compelling book, Martha C. Nussbaum presents a powerful argument for treating emotions not as alien forces but as highly discriminating responses to what is of value and importance. She explores and illuminates the structure of a wide range of emotions, in particular compassion and love, showing that there can be no adequate ethical theory without an adequate theory of the emotions. This involves understanding their cultural sources, their history in infancy and childhood, and their sometimes unpredictable and disorderly operations in our daily lives.
“Hate crime” has become an important focus in contemporary lesbian and gay politics. This article explores an aspect of this resort to law that has not been addressed in the sexual politics of “hate crime”—the emotional investments that are being made in and through this demand for law. Recognition of the emotions underscoring a demand for law challenges the foundational assumption about the nature of law—that it is quintessentially associated with reason and rationality. A key theme within the hate crime canon is the demand for enhanced penalties attached to existing offences when those offences are motivated by hatred proscribed by law. The author argues that the gay and lesbian demand for law reform feeds a law and order politics of retribution and revenge that may be implicated in the promotion, institutionalization, and legitimation of hate. The author does not intend, however, to dismiss the turn to “hate” or “bias” crimes on the basis that they will be ineffective or destructive of social cohesion. Instead, he hopes to draw attention to the complex and contradictory nature of the relationship between sexuality, state, and violence in order to contribute to a debate that will query the alliance that lesbians and gay men are making with law and order.
The impression often conveyed by the media about hate crime offenders is that they are hate-fuelled individuals who, in acting out their extremely bigoted views, target their victims in premeditated violent attacks. Scholarly research on the perpetrators of hate crime has begun to provide a more nuanced picture. But the preoccupation of researchers with convicted offenders neglects the vast majority of hate crime offenders that do not come into contact with the criminal justice system. This book, from a leading author in the field, widens understanding of hate crime by demonstrating that many offenders are ordinary people who offend in the context of their everyday lives. Written in a lively and accessible style, the book takes a victim-centred approach to explore and analyse hate crime as a social problem, providing an empirically informed and scholarly perspective. Aimed at academics and students of criminology, sociology and socio-legal studies, the book draws out the connections between the individual agency of offenders and the background structural context for their actions. It adds a new dimension to the debate about criminalising hate in light of concerns about the rise of punitive and expressive justice, scrutinizing the balance struck by hate crime laws between the rights of offenders and the rights of victims.
It is often useful within the social sciences to rely on personal experiences, or at least take this as our point of departure. So, given the challenge to lecture on the topic “Society and the victim,” I started out with some reflections on my own past history. Had I ever been a victim, and if so, when and how? And I will ask you in this audience to engage in the same exercise. Have you ever been victims? When was that? Where was it? What characterized the situation? How did you react? How did your surroundings react? Maybe I could ask you to scribble down just a few words from your own personal histories as a victim, not for my use, but for your own. Such personal memories might prove valuable during my presentation, and particularly during our later discussions.
International governmental organisations (IGOs) understand discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals mostly as unequal treatment in spheres such as employment, pensions, housing or insurances. Hate crimes are Often not taken on board, though they can be regarded as the most cruel and violent form of discrimination and oppression of minorities. This article explores to what extent IGOs, that is the European Union, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe, the Organization of American States and the United Nations have incorporated the issue of hate crime in their policies to fight discrimination against LGBT persons. These organisations vary in their response, but most approaches so far are only partial ones. This is not only a question of a lack of political will. Sound analyses, coherent concepts and methodologies and the collecting of relevant and comparable data are also part of the equation.
This engaging and thought-provoking text provides an accessible introduction to the subject of hate crime. In a world where issues of hatred and prejudice are creating complex challenges for society and for governments, this book provides an articulate and insightful overview of how such issues relate to crime and criminal justice. It offers comprehensive coverage, including topics such as: Racist hate crime; Religiously motivated hate crime; Homophobic crime; Gender and violence; Disablist hate crime The book considers the challenges involved in policing hate crime, as well as exploring the role of the media. Legislative developments are discussed throughout. Chapter summaries, case studies, a glossary, and advice on further reading all help to equip the reader with a clear understanding of this nuanced and controversial subject. Hate Crime is essential reading for students and academics in criminology and criminal justice.
Hate crime laws, on both the federal and state levels, increasingly include gender, yet the category continues to be controversial and rarely implemented. Law enforcement officials themselves view the gender category differently from other forms of bias crimes, such as those based on race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. Why are these types of bias crimes reported more extensively than those gender-biased crimes? Jessica P. Hodge uses extensive empirical research, including newspaper accounts, legislative histories, and interviews with criminal justice professionals and advocacy groups to investigate the creation and implementation of the gender category in New Jersey. She finds several reasons why the gender category is (or is not) included and/or implemented in particular cases. Extrapolating her findings beyond the Garden State, Hodge illuminates the challenges of developing definitive and effective gender-inclusive bias crime statutes.
Should laws about sex and pornography be based on social conventions about what is disgusting? Should felons be required to display bumper stickers or wear T-shirts that announce their crimes? This powerful and elegantly written book, by one of America's most influential philosophers, presents a critique of the role that shame and disgust play in our individual and social lives and, in particular, in the law. Martha Nussbaum argues that we should be wary of these emotions because they are associated in troubling ways with a desire to hide from our humanity, embodying an unrealistic and sometimes pathological wish to be invulnerable. Nussbaum argues that the thought-content of disgust embodies "magical ideas of contamination, and impossible aspirations to purity that are just not in line with human life as we know it." She argues that disgust should never be the basis for criminalizing an act, or play either the aggravating or the mitigating role in criminal law it currently does. She writes that we should be similarly suspicious of what she calls "primitive shame," a shame "at the very fact of human imperfection," and she is harshly critical of the role that such shame plays in certain punishments.Drawing on an extraordinarily rich variety of philosophical, psychological, and historical references--from Aristotle and Freud to Nazi ideas about purity--and on legal examples as diverse as the trials of Oscar Wilde and the Martha Stewart insider trading case, this is a major work of legal and moral philosophy.
In contrast to other figures generated within social theory for thinking about outsiders, such as Rene Girard's 'scapegoat' and Zygmunt Bauman's 'stranger', Foucault's Monsters and the Challenge of Law suggests that the figure of 'the monster' offers greater analytical precision and explanatory power in relation to understanding the processes whereby outsiders are constituted. The book draws on Michel Foucault's theoretical and historical treatment of the category of the monster, in which the monster is regarded as the effect of a double breach: of law and nature. For Foucault, the monster does not simply refer to a particular kind of morphological or psychological irregularity; for the body or psyche in question must also pose a threat to the categorical structure of law. In chronological terms, Foucault moves from a preoccupation with the bestial human in the Middle Ages to a concern over Siamese or conjoined twins in the Renaissance period, and ultimately to a focus on the hermaphrodite in the Classical Age. But, although Foucault's theoretical framework for understanding the monster is affirmed here, this book's study of an English legal history of the category 'monster' challenges some of Foucault's historical claims. In addition to considering this legal history, the book also addresses the contemporary relevance of Foucault's theoretical framework. Structured around Foucault's archetypes and the category crises they represent - admixed embryos, conjoined twins and transsexuals - the book analyses their challenge to current distinctions between human and animal, male and female, and the idea of the 'proper' legal subject as a single embodied mind. These contemporary figures, like the monsters of old, are shown to threaten the rigidity and binary structure of a law that still struggles to accommodate them.
Criminology: theory and context, third edition, expands upon the ideas presented in previous editions, while introducing new material on critical theory, feminism, masculinities, cultural criminology and postmodernism. The text has been thoroughly updated throughout to reflect key perspectives in contemporary criminological theory. Relevant updates include discussions on New Labour’s criminal justice and penal policies in its third term in office, and the latest developments in criminal justice and the politics of law and order in the UK and US. This edition revisits societal and cultural influences that have shaped the discipline and invites the reader to re-examine the phenomena of crime and deviance.
Sexual prejudice refers to negative attitudes toward an individual because of her or his sexual orientation. In this article, the term is used to characterize heterosexuals' negative attitudes toward (a) homosexual behavior, (b) people with a homosexual or bisexual orientation, and (c) communities of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people. Sexual prejudice is a preferable term to homophobia because it conveys no assumptions about the motivations underlying negative attitudes, locates the study of attitudes concerning sexual orientation within the broader context of social psychological research on prejudice, and avoids value judgments about such attitudes. Sexual prejudice remains widespread in the United States, although moral condemnation has decreased in the 1990s and opposition to antigay discrimination has increased. The article reviews current knowledge about the prevalence of sexual prejudice, its psychological correlates, its underlying motivations, and its relationship to hate crimes and other antigy behaviors.
This article considers contemporary Parliamentary approaches to law-making in respect of homosexuality and religious belief through an analysis of debates regarding the creation of the offence of incitement to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation (Section 74 and Schedule 16 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008). By far the most contentious issue in debates about the legislation concerned the types of speech that would be captured by the offence, with skeptics and opponents arguing that the legislation risked criminalising religious believers who voiced objections to homosexuality. The analysis specifically examines how legislators shaped the construction of the law by drawing on representations of 'traditional' Christians and other religious believers as a minority group needing protection from unwarranted complaints and investigations, and by placing them within an equalities hierarchy where religion and sexual orientation are seen to be in competition. Parliamentarians repeatedly weighed religion and sexual orientation in relation to one another as categories worthy of protection and, in doing so, often represented religiously based opposition to homosexuality as a legitimate rationale for limiting the scope of the protections available to gays and lesbians by law. The analysis identifies a number of shifts and tendencies in Parliamentary rhetoric about homosexuality that require ongoing attention, especially within the context of the new coalition government. © The Author [2011]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Hansard Society; all rights reserved.
During the last decade, a process of ‘emotionalization of law’ has spread around the globe, changing the criminal justice system in many ways. Anger, disgust and shame are perceived as ‘valuable barometers of social morality’ and brought back to criminal procedures. The ‘return of emotions’ to penal law and criminal justice is linked to and illuminates the moral imagination of late modern societies. This article seeks to address two facets of the ‘return of emotions’ to criminal justice. The first part explores the changes in the public sphere and in the pattern of emotional culture in late modern societies that are responsible for the reemotionalization of the penal realm. In the second part, problems that emerge in the criminal justice system are addressed. Bringing emotions back involves profound problems that go beyond the mere instrumental use of emotions in criminal justice, or a restricted perspective of ‘what works’. Three ‘core’ problems—and associated—questions are discussed: first, are emotional reactions towards crimes ‘natural’ or ‘primordial’ such that they should occupy a prominent place in criminal justice that has been unduly ignored? Second, and relatedly, do emotions constitute our moral principles? Finally, should institutions elicit or even require ‘authentic emotions’ from individuals? These questions are addressed within the framework of contemporary emotion theory and the consequences of this perspective for the ‘use’ of emotions in criminal justice are discussed.
This article suggests that the concepts of vulnerability and ‘difference’ should be focal points of hate crime scholarship if the values at the heart of the hate crime movement are not to be diluted. By stringently associating hate crime with particular strands of victims and sets of motivations through singular constructions of identity, criminologists have created a divisive and hierarchical approach to understanding hate crime. To counter these limitations, we propose that vulnerability and ‘difference’, rather than identity and group membership alone, should be central to investigations of hate crime. These concepts would allow for a more inclusive conceptual framework enabling hitherto overlooked and vulnerable victims of targeted violence to receive the recognition they urgently need.
The purpose of this article is to examine the ways in which studies of criminal victimization have contributed to this presumption of human vulnerability, and to examine the potential in understandings of resilience for overcoming this presumption. In order to do this the argument falls into three parts. In the first part I shall consider the different ways in which victimization and vulnerability have been linked together. In the second I shall examine the concept of resilience and its relationship, if any, with vulnerability and victimization. Throughout this discussion I shall draw on feminist informed work as a way of suggesting a differently oriented approach to both of these concepts: presented here as thinking otherwise. In the final and concluding part of this article the implications of contemporary understandings of these concepts will be situated within the broader policy context characterized by Aradau (2004) as informed by a ‘politics of pity’.
Since 2003, three Australian jurisdictions - New South Wales, the Northern Territory and Victoria - have codified the common law rule that a motive of prejudice against and/or hatred for a group of people is an aggravating factor at sentencing. In this article, we analyse the courts’ interpretation of these new provisions. In particular, we consider the evidence regarded by the courts as sufficient proof of a motive of prejudice or group hate beyond reasonable doubt, and the groups that have been held to be contemplated by these provisions. We argue that while there is much consistency in judicial constructions of the scope of these provisions, enabling the identification of common features to cases where the provisions have been enlivened, some interpretations fail to promote their purpose, raising challenges for this rapidly emerging area of sentencing law.
So-called ‘faith hate’, or religiously aggravated crime stands out starkly as being the uncharted territory in hate crime scholarship and policy research. When the evidence about the problem in the United Kingdom is unfolded, it suggests that there may be valuable policy learning to be gained. There are some fundamental questions that need to be addressed, however. Are victims really targeted because of their faith or because of something else? Are such crimes different to other acts of hate crime, such as racist crime? And who are the perpetrators of ‘faith hate’ crime? Are they any different from those who commit race hate crime? These questions have important implications for policy and practice learning.
Sexual prejudice refers to negative attitudes toward an individual because of her or his sexual orientation. In this article, the term is used to characterize heterosexuals' negative attitudes toward (a) homosexual behavior, (b) people with a homosexual or bisexual orientation, and (c) communities of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people. Sexual prejudice is a preferable term to homophobia because it conveys no assumptions about the motivations underlying negative attitudes, locates the study of attitudes concerning sexual orientation within the broader context of social psychological research on prejudice, and avoids value judgments about such attitudes. Sexual prejudice remains widespread in the United States, although moral condemnation has decreased in the 1990s and opposition to antigay discrimination has increased. The article reviews current knowledge about the prevalence of sexual prejudice, its psychological correlates, its underlying motivations, and its relationship to hate crimes and other antigay behaviors.
This work addresses a central question in both social problems theory and sociolegal studies: how can we understand and account for the content of legal categories that define social problems and attendant victims? It offers an empirical analysis of the emergence and evolution of federal hate crime laws-the Hate Crimes Statistics Act, the Violence Against Women Act, and the Hate Crimes Penalty Enchancement Act-that determine who is and is not eligible for hate crime victim status. By examining the legislative histories of these laws as evidence of "critical discursive moments" (Gamson 1992). I show how the substantive character of the law was shaped over time: I first establish a historical context for federal hate crime law; then I analyze how an important element hate crime law-the adoption of select status provisions, such as race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, and disabilities-unfolded such that some victims of discriminatory violence have been recognized as hate crime victims while others have gone unnoticed. In particular, people of color, Jews, gays and lesbians women, and those with disabilities increasingly have been recognized as victims of hate crime, while union members, the elderly, children, and police officers, for example, have not. The findings suggest that the content of federal hate crime law was shaped by a series of temporally bound institutionally qualified processes whereby: 1) the empirical credibility of the scope of hate crime as a social problem was established by the claimsmaking of established social movement organizations; 2) a trio of core provisions for hate crime law-race, religion, and ethnicity-was cemented as the anchoring provisions of all hate crime law through discursive strategies that rendered particular types of violence empirically credible and worthy of federal attention; 3) the domain of the law expanded to include additional provisions, most notably sexual orientation and gender, in qualitatively distinct ways; and 4) the increased differentiation of legal subjects in subsequent law occurred in ways consistent with previously established and institutionalized policy pedigrees. Taken together, these findings reveal how microlevel processes of categorization work, mesolevel processes of social movement mobilization, and larger processes of institutionalization interface as political actors create and coalesce around legal meanings that define both "condition-categories" and "people-categories" (Loseke 1993).
We examine the processes by which states pass hate crime laws. We argue that states' decisions to enact such legislation are influenced by both state characteristics and the monitoring of the actions of other states. We find that the repeal of a sodomy law in a state does not increase its rate of enactment, but as more and more states enact hate crime laws, these that have repealed their sodomy laws are more likely to follow suit. We also find that states in which the political party of the governor differs from that of the majority of legislators are more likely to become referents to this process, so that once they have enacted a hate crime law, others quickly follow suit. We find no support for the claim that hate crime laws diffused within regions. Finally, with regard to state-level characteristics, we find that wealthier states with Democrat-dominated legislatures that have been policy innovators in the past have higher rates of enactment. Those states that have passed an earlier, less controversial hate crime law have lower rates of enactment.
Gail Mason, Director, Sydney Institute of Criminology Faculty of Law, University of Sydney, Australia delivered the 2009 J.V. Barry Memorial Lecture on the penal politics of hatred. On the 31 May this year, between 2000 and 5000 students, led by the Federation of Indian Students in Australia, rallied in the CBD in Melbourne.The anger of these international students has been sparked by concerns that they are being specifically targeted for robberies, assaults and other forms of attack. The perception has been that these incidents are not random and cannot be attributed to the kind of bad luck that comes with living in a modern metropolis. Rather, the ire of these international students has been raised by the belief that there is something more insidious behind the violence experienced by members of their community. The claim that comes across loudly and clearly from these rallies is that it is prejudice and racism that lie behind the attacks or, even more specifically, some kind of anti-Indian sentiment. These protests have also managed to convey the message that many international students, not just from India, are deeply dissatisfied with the conditions under which they study, work and live while in Australia. The extent to which these claims are an accurate representation of the problem is not a question I address in this lecture. Instead, I am interested in the kinds of responses that these claims have generated. The issues themselves have attracted extensive media attention both in Australia and India and, in terms of the latter, this coverage has been fiercely critical of the problem of racism in Australia. This, in turn, has led to comment and action at the highest level of government. Julia Gillard and John Brumby are just two Federal and State politicians who have already visited India in an attempt to reduce the fallout to Australia's international education industry. We have also seen a concerted and targeted policing response, the establishment of a hot-line for victims, a Senate inquiry into the welfare of international students and a number of other governmental initiatives in the migration, education and employment sectors.
