The role of (in)visibility in hate crime targeting transgender people
| Date | 01 April 2022 |
| Published date | 01 April 2022 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1748895820930747 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895820930747
Criminology & Criminal Justice
2022, Vol. 22(2) 235 –253
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1748895820930747
journals.sagepub.com/home/crj
The role of (in)visibility in hate
crime targeting transgender
people
Ben Colliver
Birmingham City University, UK
Marisa Silvestri
University of Kent, UK
Abstract
This article explores incidents of hate crime targeted at transgender people. Drawing on in-
depth interview data, it challenges and extends established theorisations of the significance of
‘difference’ and ‘vulnerability’ in relation to victimisation. It introduces and emphasises the idea
of ‘visibility’ as a more useful lens through which to understand the systematic harm caused
by hate crime victimisation. Through an analysis of complex identities, the article argues that
current conceptualisations of ‘visibility’ do not appreciate the complex, intersectional nature of
visibility, which is key in understanding how people navigate their identities in different spaces
and contexts.
Keywords
Difference, hate crime, transgender, visibility, vulnerability
Introduction
The term ‘hate crime’ has recently garnered significant attention in social, political and
academic spheres and is now arguably embedded within a number of academic disci-
plines (Chakraborti and Garland, 2012). Encompassing a broad range of victimisation,
hate crimes are a subset of crimes representing around 1%–2% of recorded crime in
England and Wales (Home Office, 2019). Although a small percentage of overall crime,
Corresponding author:
Ben Colliver, School of Social Sciences, Birmingham City University, Curzon Building, 4 Cardigan Street,
Birmingham B4 7BD, UK.
Email: ben.colliver@bcu.ac.uk
930747CRJ0010.1177/1748895820930747Criminology & Criminal JusticeColliver and Silvestri
research-article2020
Article
236 Criminology & Criminal Justice 22(2)
incidents of recorded hate crime are increasing annually with 103,379 hate crimes being
recorded by police forces in 2018–2019, an increase of 10% from the previous year
(Home Office, 2019).
Hate crimes targeting an individual’s transgender identity account for the smallest
amount of recorded hate crime, standing at 2% (Home Office, 2019); however, the total
number of transphobic hate crimes has increased year on year since it was added to the
list of monitored categories in 2009. It is likely that official statistics significantly under-
estimate the prevalence and extent of transphobic hate crime, and studies have shown
significantly higher rates of victimisation (Chakraborti et al., 2014; METRO, 2014).
High rates of victimisation targeting transgender people have been documented in stud-
ies across the global north (Antjoule, 2013; James et al., 2016; Turner et al., 2009).
In this article, we focus our attention on transphobic hate crime, that is, incidents of
hate crime targeted at transgender individuals. We draw on Hines’s (2010) definition of
‘transgender’ in which she notes transgender as
a range of gender experiences, subjectivities and presentations that fall across between or
beyond stable categories of ‘man’ and ‘woman’. Transgender includes gender identities that
have, more traditionally, been described as ‘transsexual’, and a diversity of genders that call
into question an assumed relationship between gender identity and presentation and the ‘sexed’
body’. (p. 1)
This definition of ‘transgender’ is particularly useful as it acknowledges gender
expressions that fall between and beyond the gender binary of ‘man’ and ‘woman’. We
appreciate, however, that there is some contention within and between communities over
the use of the term ‘transgender’ and Monro (2003) acknowledges the problematic nature
of the term, suggesting that the inclusivity of such an array of social groupings neglects
to acknowledge their range of needs and interests. The abbreviated term ‘trans’ is also
used throughout this article to denote transgender identities. When the term ‘trans’ is
used, it can be assumed to function as an umbrella term, inclusive of all people who do
not identify as cisgender.1 Despite the inclusivity of gender identities within this research,
it is important to note that there is no specific legal recognition or protection of non-
binary identities in the United Kingdom.
Made up of three parts, the first part of the article explores official and academic con-
ceptualisations of hate crime and draws attention to some of the problematic definitional
issues that have shaped the discourse on hate crime. We go on to outline the methodo-
logical approach and processes adopted in the study. In the third and final part, we report
our findings and emphasise the concept of ‘visibility’ through two key themes developed
from the interview data, that of, ‘intersectional visibility’ and ‘discursively constructed
visibility’. In this final section, our three key arguments are developed. First, that exist-
ing dichotomous concepts of (in)visibility are limited, in that they may only be useful in
understanding some identities at particular times and in specific spaces and therefore do
not consider the complicated nature of (in)visibility. In this article, we emphasise greater
complexity through an appreciation of the ongoing negotiation and fluidity of identities.
We draw upon aspects of intersectionality throughout to demonstrate the complexity in
negotiating (in)visibility, emphasising the significance of intersecting social identities
and the implications of occupying multiple marginalised social positions (Mattias de
To continue reading
Request your trial