1 / 30

Homophobic Experiences in Policing: A Case Study

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

ziva
Download Presentation

Homophobic Experiences in Policing: A Case Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Homophobic Experiences in Policing: A Case Study Presented By: Karen Lancaster-Ellis E-Mail Address: lancasterellis@hotmail.com

  2. 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

  3. USA 3539 km or 2199 miles from USA 6377 km or 3962 miles from Canada T & T

  4. Background • T&T demographics • Emergence of groups • Social norms • Religion, Values & Norms • Alternative lifestyle • Legislation • Safety & Security Challenges • Same-sex relations • Closeted lifestyle

  5. 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).

  6. Celebrate Or Denounce?

  7. 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

  8. POLICE LEGITIMACY

  9. 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

  10. The Problem • Homophobia –Homosexuals & lesbians • Private behaviour • Increasing phenomenon in the TTPS. • Inadequacy of Legislation

  11. Purpose

  12. Theoretical Framework • Symbolic Interactionism • Phenomenology • Ethnomethodology

  13. 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)

  14. 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

  15. 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?

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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.”

  19. 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.”

  20. 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”.

  21. 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

  22. 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).

  23. 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

  24. 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

  25. 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

  26. Findings • Victim – Embarrassed, Prejudicial, Deceitful, Distrusting • Offender – Embarrassing, Nasty, Necessary, Lowered Legitimacy, Disrespectful, Lack Spirituality, Alienation from Homosexuals & lesbians • Extent – Homophobic

  27. Discussion • Culture influenced homophobia rather than religion • Offender sexual orientation was not a factor • Deviance > acceptable normative • Police Perception • Increased tolerance

  28. 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

  29. Any Questions? Thank You!!

More Related