300 likes | 436 Vues
Homophobic Experiences in Policing: A Case Study . Presented By: Karen Lancaster-Ellis E-Mail Address: lancasterellis@hotmail.com. Outline. 1.Background 2. Definition 3.Significance 4.Nature of Problem 5.Purpose of Study 6.Theories 7.Past Research 8.Objectives
E N D
Homophobic Experiences in Policing: A Case Study Presented By: Karen Lancaster-Ellis E-Mail Address: lancasterellis@hotmail.com
Outline • 1.Background • 2. Definition • 3.Significance • 4.Nature of Problem • 5.Purpose of Study • 6.Theories • 7.Past Research • 8.Objectives • 9. Research Questions • 10.Method • 11.Setting & Subjects • 12.Data Types • 13.Findings • 14.Conclusion • 15.Recommendations
USA 3539 km or 2199 miles from USA 6377 km or 3962 miles from Canada T & T
Background • T&T demographics • Emergence of groups • Social norms • Religion, Values & Norms • Alternative lifestyle • Legislation • Safety & Security Challenges • Same-sex relations • Closeted lifestyle
Definition - Homophobia Homophobia is a term used to describe the fear, discomfort, intolerance, or hatred of homosexuality or same sex attraction in others and in oneself. (GLSEN, 2002).
Is it Important? • Culture of silent prejudice (Gopie, 2011) • Little empirical research (Lyons et al, 2005) • Implications for inter-personal relationships • Hidden influence • Hegemonic masculinity
Acceptable Behaviour????? “Gay people are people too, they are citizens of T&T and they make a valuable contribution to the country...They should not be treated as though they don’t belong or have no rights,” Excerpt from: MK Interview
The Problem • Homophobia –Homosexuals & lesbians • Private behaviour • Increasing phenomenon in the TTPS. • Inadequacy of Legislation
Theoretical Framework • Symbolic Interactionism • Phenomenology • Ethnomethodology
Past Research • Tolerance = Satisfaction (Inglehart & Welzel, 2007) • Vignettes varying gender & sexual orientation (Younglove, Kerr & Vitello, 2002; Lyons et al 2005) – No difference • Attitudes towards gays (Younglove, Kerr & Vitello, 2002; Lyons et al 2005; Arnott 2000; Burke, 1994) • Perception of the Police (Blood, 2005) • Increased tolerance (Chadee, 2011) • Adoption of new narratives (Stanislas, 2013)
Objectives • To determine if the experiences of homophobic victim and offender influence working relationships • To assess whether these experiences influence the quality of service provided to the public • To find out how officers describe their homophobic experiences
Research Questions • How do police officers describe their homophobic experiences in the Trinidad & Tobago Police Service as victim and offender? • What is the extent of Homophobia in the TTPS? • Do these experiences influence the quality of relationships with colleagues? • Do these experiences influence the quality of service provided to members of the public?
Methodology • Qualitative • Survey • Unstructured Interviews Survey : - Survey Monkey - Survey Web Link via E-Mail: 112 Participants, 9 Ranks, Anonymous Responses - Homophobic Scale/Index : Likert Scale (Wright, Adams & Bernat) - Bio Data Unstructured Interviews: - Purposive Sampling/Gatekeeper – 15 Officers, 4 Ranks, 3-30 yrs. Service in 6 Dept’s/Units - Data Analysis: Codes & Themes
Settings/Subjects • 112 Participants • Shift and Mon-Fri. • Work with civilian employees • Uniformed/Plainclothes officers • General Policing, Administration & Specialist Areas • Secondary/Vocational & Tertiary level education • 8 mths to over 30 years service • First and Second Division Officers
CONVERSATIONAL DATACASE OF MIRANDA • A female officer between 50 & 55 yrs. with 30 yrs experience. Would you treat a homosexual victim/offender any different to someone who is straight? “Yes, I will be skeptical to ask them a question but I will think twice because they may want to lie and I want to know the truth. I not suppose to do that based on what I have learnt. But if anybody see yuh talking to them they will feel yuh in de same category as they are.”
CONVERSATIONAL DATACASE OF RUTH • A female officer with 19 years experience and between 40 & 45 years. Would you treat a homosexual victim/offender any different to someone who is straight? “Sometimes I may unconsciously because what I will do is if yuh know they are I will talk to them about it & give them some counselling about their lifestyle. But I will also do that with other normal suspects but for a different reason. But they may know what they doing is wrong so you will see if they can change the situation.”
CONVERSATIONAL DATACASE OF BELINDA • A female officer with 9 years experience and between 30 & 35 years. Would you treat a homosexual victim/offender any different to someone who is straight? “No, because I am a professional and choose not to allow my personal opinion to interfere with my duty as a police officer”.
SURVEY DATAWhat was revealed? Survey Data: • 20%+ Response Rate, 76% Port-of-Spain • 31 to 59 years • 47% Married & 26% Common-Law • Roman Catholic/Protestant – 52% • African 74%, Mixed 16%, East Indian 5% • 63% - Tertiary Education • Lesbian/Homosexuals – 30% vs. 10% • Social Functions – 55% uncomfortable
Are you Homophobic? I am not Homophobic but I will prefer to work with persons I know to be straight. No, but it have conditionality. No, I am neutral, me and dem good, we quarrel regular but we good (Disgusting; Displayed homophobia in thoughts).
Documented Data Legislation • The Constitution , Chapter 1:01 • Equal Opportunity Act No. 69 of 2000 • Sexual Offences Act #27 of 1986 – Section 13 • Section 8 of the Immigration Act, Chapter 18:01 • Extradition Act, Chapter 12:04
Findings Unstructured Interviews: 80% persons were Homophobic Unacknowledged/Denied Homophobia Used derogatory terms to describe Gays/Lesbians Practiced discrimination against Gay/Lesbian members of the public Didn’t openly display Homophobia Still silent, closeted & not trusting Codes & Themes
Findings • Non-confrontational • Influences relationship with colleagues but not public • Less experience/Youthfulness = Greater tolerance (Chadee, 2011) • More tolerant of Lesbians than Homosexuals • Participants in Unstructured Interview held open discussions
Findings • Victim – Embarrassed, Prejudicial, Deceitful, Distrusting • Offender – Embarrassing, Nasty, Necessary, Lowered Legitimacy, Disrespectful, Lack Spirituality, Alienation from Homosexuals & lesbians • Extent – Homophobic
Discussion • Culture influenced homophobia rather than religion • Offender sexual orientation was not a factor • Deviance > acceptable normative • Police Perception • Increased tolerance
Conclusion/Recommendation • Policing ‘macho’ profession • Role seemingly being redefined • Challenges to contend • Education (Van de Ven, 1997; Olivero & Murataya ) • Code of Conduct (Derogatory terms, such as “battie boy”) • Annual Assessments • Revision of Standing Orders & Publication of Departmental Orders (e.g. Equal Opportunity Clause) • Forum for affected persons • Update UCR
Any Questions? Thank You!!