“The true north, strong and queer?” : (un)mapping discourses of homonationalism, colonialism and activism within the Canadian prison reform movement

In the last 50 years, Canada has embodied a public national and international image of benevolence, which has supported the narrative of Canada as being a "uniquely progressive country" and "LGBTQ safe-haven."Despite this narrative, many racial and social groups in Canada remain marginalized, criminalized, and invisible.With the theoretical and conceptual guidance of a number of critical scholars in the fields of Prison Studies and Queer Theory, this dissertation explores two trusted institutionally-based prison reform organizations via Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA); identifying, unpacking and disrupting dominant discourses of sexuality, nationalism and reform which perpetuate and nurture the ongoing marginalization and criminalization of LGBTQ2+ people in Canada.The findings of this dissertation sheds light on a number of different institutional discourses which hinder transformative social change in Canada, elucidates and explores the bridge formed by institutional organizations between radical social movements and the status quo, and further stands as an ongoing call-to-action for both our trusted organizations, activists and broader social movements to reflect on whether their fight against oppression challenges neoliberal and homonational ideologies, or whether it supports a narrative of benevolence which renders certain social groups invisible.April 17 th , 2020."We have to talk about liberating minds as well as liberating society". -Angela Davis Glossary of TermsCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, enacted in 1982, is part of Canada's Constitution.The Charter is in place to protect every Canadian's right to be treated equally under the law.More specifically, the Charter guarantees broad equality rights and other fundamental rights such as the freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion.However, the Charter only applies to governments, and not to private individuals, businesses or other organizations.Therefore, this means that for the most part, a person is unable to mount a Charter challenge against a private business, a private organization, or a person who is not acting on behalf of the government, laws, policies and security institutions such as police (CHRC, 2019).Despite this, the Canadian Government argues that according to Statistics Canada, Canadians rank the Charter as our "most important national symbol"-beating out other "national symbols" such as hockey or the beaver (Justice Canada, 2019).Cisgender:The term cisgender can be used to describe individuals who possess "male or female reproductive organs (sex) typical of the social category of man or woman (gender) to which that individual was assigned at birth" (Aultman, 2014, p.61).Accordingly, cisgender emerged from trans activist discourse in the 1990s, which criticized many "common" ways of describing sex and gender.Therefore, the terms man and woman, when left "unmarked," tend to normalize cisness-"reinforcing the unstated 'naturalness' of being cisgender" (Aultman, 2014, p.61).Cisnormativity: Cirsnormativity is referred to as a cultural and societal bias (sometimes unconscious) that privileges cisgender identities and gender norms and ignores or underrepresents trans identities and/or gender diversity by "assuming that all people are cisgender and will express their gender in a way that aligns with perceived gender norms" (Egale, 2019, p.12).Heteronormative/Heteronormativity: Culture and societal bias (sometimes unconsciously) that privileges heterosexuality, and "ignores or underrepresents diversity in attraction and behaviour by assuming all people are heterosexual" (Egale, 2019, p.12).Heterosexism: Heterosexism is used to describe prejudice and discrimination in favour of heterosexuality.According to Egale (2019), this includes the "presumption of heterosexuality as the superior and more desirable form of attraction" (Egale, 2019, p.13).Intersectionality: While only scratching the surface of an explanation of "Intersectionality", in its simplest form it is a theoretical and conceptual term coined by scholar Kimberle Crenshaw (1994) employed as a means of engaging with and acknowledging the ways the ways in which power and oppression collide, interlock and intersect (Crenshaw, 1994, p.12).Specifically, Crenshaw used intersectionality as a way to articulate the interaction of racism and patriarchy generally (Crenshaw, 1994, p.12).LGBTQIA2S+:LGBTQIA2S+ is an acronym for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and/r Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, Two-Spirit, and + to symbolize any additional affirming terms in which people choose to self-identify.As described in the limitations section of this thesis, different acronyms will be used throughout the writing based on which acronym the cited source chose to utilize.(Example:LGBTQIA2S vs LGBTQ)Prison Abolition: Prison abolitionists reject the current carceral state due to its ineffective, inhumane response to the complexity of social, political, economic, and personal problems, which resulted in incarceration in the first place (Culhane, 1991).Angela Davis (2005) furthers the explanation of prison abolition by arguing that while challenging the current prison state, prison abolition is not "imagining or urging the isolated dismantling of correctional facilities and prisons"; but rather prison abolition strategies reflect an understanding of the complex connections between institutions that are often seen as inherently disconnected (Davis, 2005, p.60).Prisoner Rights: been raised among critical scholars in Canada and the United States surrounding legal rights reform, activist discourse, recognition/exclusion, and the future of transformative change in Canada.More specifically, while Canada has gained its title as a 'progressive' and 'LGBTQ safe' country through legal reform, many social activists and critical scholars are still asking why legal rights and policy reform have not brought about the transformative changes the movement is supposedly seeking (Spade, 2015; Stanley & Smith, 2015; Dryden & Lenon, 2015).It is here where this dissertation begins, developing within and through the tensions between prevalent global images of Canada as a "progressive and liberal safe-haven," and the remaining exclusion of public discourse surrounding LGBTQ2S+ persons within the criminal justice landscape.Due to the fact that many queer studies and prison scholars such as Elias Vitulli (2012), Dean Spade (2011), Regina Kunzel (2008) and Eric Stanley (2011) argue that "prisons are queer spaces" (Vitulli, 2012, p.121), this dissertation will explore the discursive tensions within two trusted institutionally-based prison reform organizations via conducting a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of both organizations National websites.Specifically, this research navigates how each organization constructs narratives of gender, sexuality, racialization, nationalism, and activism within their public policy documents in order to identify, (un)map, and in the end, disrupt any dominant legal discourses which perpetuate and nurture the ongoing social and legal marginalization and criminalization of LGBTQ2+ people in Canada.Grounded in theoretical understandings of gender, incarceration, and legal reform, this dissertation sheds light on a number of different institutional discourses which hinder transformative social change in Canada.With there being very little research on LGBTQ2+ incarceration and criminalization in Canada, this research provides a unique and critically informed exploration of the remaining institutionally based exclusion and criminalization ofLGBTQ2+ folk, even amongst social justice organizations, which address human rights within the Canadian carceral system.Furthermore, in mapping the bridge formed by institutional organizations between radical social movements and the status quo, this research contributes to identifying current gaps and limitations within broader social justice organizing in Canada.Specifically, the research sought to identify the following three questions;1. How does the organization discursively construct gender and sexuality?2. How does the organization discursively construct the nation, citizenship, and government/governance?3. How does the organization discursively construct activism and reform?Each of these questions is explored individually to develop a well-rounded analysis of the types of discourses presented by two of the key institutionally-based reform organizations offering policy recommendations to government legislature.These findings are thus further theorized to highlight the ways in which these discourses impact broader social movement organizing in Canada.The following research will be divided amongst seven chapters dedicated to a review of critical literature, theoretical frameworks, methodology, individual findings, a theoretical discussion of findings, and a reflective conclusion which re-visits the goals of the research, provide applicable recommendations for activists within prison reform and broader social movement organizing, and explores limitations and potential for future research. Chapter Two: Conceptual Literature ReviewCanada is often considered to be at the forefront of LGBT rights internationally (Forbes, 2019;Nomadicboys 2019; CBC News, 2019), and as a country with a long-standing history of passing

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.