Chih Hoong Sin, Sanah Sheikh and Mohini Khanna
This paper aims to examine the extent to which police services are set up to deal with hate crime against people with learning disabilities; looking at infrastructure, policies…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to examine the extent to which police services are set up to deal with hate crime against people with learning disabilities; looking at infrastructure, policies, procedures and levels of awareness and understanding.
Design/methodology/approach
Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with representatives from 14 police services in England. Key documents submitted by the police services were reviewed, and a focus group with eight people with learning disabilities was conducted.
Findings
Many police services are committed to tackling hate crime against people with learning disabilities. A wide variety of individuals have responsibility for dealing with hate crime and accountability structures are often unclear. Many services do not have hate crime policies that deal specifically with people with learning disabilities, or even disabled people in general. More training is required to ensure relevant staff are equipped to deal with the issues. Hate crime statistics are regarded as unreliable due to significant under‐reporting, although a few services have implemented innovative interventions to encourage reporting through awareness‐raising and multi‐agency working.
Originality/value
The Coalition Government has called for greater efforts at combating disability hate crime. It is widely acknowledged that the police are still failing disabled victims and witnesses. This paper identifies specific areas for improvement as well as innovative and effective practice that should be shared more widely.
Details
Keywords
Taking as a point of departure the edited collection Yaraana (1999), ostensibly the first mainstream publication on gay writing from India, the purpose of this article is to trace…
Abstract
Purpose
Taking as a point of departure the edited collection Yaraana (1999), ostensibly the first mainstream publication on gay writing from India, the purpose of this article is to trace the way Indian authors have dealt with the growing visibility of nonnormative sexualities. It suggests that from the start this debate has centered on a dyad between local and culturally specific sexual identities vs its globalized opposite, which is held to threaten regionally specific expressions. The continuing struggle for recognition and equality is revealing for a growing divide between those whose sexuality can rely on growing representation in Indian popular media, and those who feel increasingly marginalized.
Design/methodology/approach
This article revisits important texts that were published and publicly accessible in India from 1999 onwards. All the text considered and discussed were accessible outside academic networks and thus, available in mainstream bookstores, produced by Indian authors or long-term residents and available in English. Considering the vast language diversity of India as well as the complexity of gaining access to locally published materials, the analysis does not include texts that are only available in a vernacular language. Besides this, the article benefits from the direct input of key activists and scholars from India working on this topic.
Findings
Even if homosexuality has now been decriminalized in India, what emerges from the writing is a concern that globally hegemonic expressions of alternate sexualities might impact, homogenize and eventually eradicate locally specific expressions. Considering socioeconomic equality in India, this raises serious questions about those whose precarious positions may see them further marginalized because of this.
Originality/value
While there have been various overviews and analyses of the fight for decriminalization of homosexuality in India, so far there has not been an analysis how this benefited from a growing awareness and discussion in popularly accessible texts. This analysis also raises concerns that the fight for decriminalization might have negative consequences for those in marginalized positions.