Study Guide for The Final
How to Study: 2
PART I OF COURSE: 2
*(Assume that homeless community and homeless includes those who are at riskof being
completely homeless) 2
Different categorizing of homeless 3
How the housed community engages with the homeless community 3
Public and private space means based on how we understand homeless
Safe streets act 4
Clinique Droits Devant (infractions – accumulating tickets) 4
Case Study : Safe Streets Act Construction 4
Is soliciting money a commercial or political act? 4
Migrant Communities 5
Sex Work 5
PART III 6
Short Answer: 5 questions – choose 4 (20 each)
1 long answer – February 14 – April 10 notes
Essay: introduction (thesis statement) – body – conclusion
How you integrate the material from the course, lectures, + readings into the essay, and how
you support your arguments
How to Study:
● se the class lectures as a guide to study – supplement the class lectures with the
● f not mentioned in class (or in ppt), then don’t need to know that material
● Don’t know or memorize cases we haven’t specified
● Guest lectures potentially on exam (Jacinthe + Gabrielle)
● Don’t need to memorize dates (but evolution of laws = important
○ .e prostitution laws – know old/new regime
● now name of authors
● Know evidence that you know the concept is,and what the law is about; also looking for
the relationship between the social and legal construction of something
● ooking for some kind of comprehension that you have the sense of the significance of a
social or legal principle – why does this matter? Why do we bother?
○ Analytical questions that will ask us to apply our knowledge
PART II OF COURSE:
*Looked at various communities: what does society say about these communities? How is this
idea constructed? What kind of ideas and knowledges get created about this community by the
way society talks about them?
Assume that homeless community and homeless includes those who are at risk of
being completely homeless
*Homeless community (HC); Eligibility Review Officer (ERO)
*Know the difference between Visible and Hidden; The discourse of homeless as
criminals and the problems with this discourse
● what does society say about these communities? ee Social
● How is this idea constructed? ee 1,3,4 (Soc.)
● hat kind of ideas and knowledges get created about this community by the way
society talks about them?
● Janet Moshner “The Shrinking of public and Private Spaces of the Poor”
○ Moshner argues that privacy is not equitably distributed across society (some
enjoy a great deal more privacy than others) and this represents an injustice.
Also iscusses the R. v. Dyment (1988) case
● David Schneiderman “The Constitutional Disorder of the Safe Street Act”
➔ Schneiderman argues in his text that “The purported intention of this Act [the
SAA] is to remove from the public sight individuals whose conduct isdeemed to
have crossed the frontier of our social and ethical order: the beggars, the
squeegee kids and the homeless, those who have “voluntarily” removed
themselves from our moral community” (P.138)
● R. Rosenthal “Imagining Homelessness & Homeless People)
○ Rosenthal defines the different categories of homeless perceived by our society
(slackers, lackers, involuntary victims)
Different ategorizing omeless
1. Deserving (Lacker & Involuntary Victim)
○ Homeless Because
■ Individual causes out of their own control ental &/or physical
illness, family breakdowns, abuse)
■ Structural causes that are also out of their control entrification,
economic consequences (unemployment), collective social and
governmental decisions (i.e. reduced investment in aff. Housing))
■ Substance abuse isalso considered an effect of homelessness
and those who fal into i after becoming homeless or because of
the problems that lead them to homelessness, could be
○ Homeless Because
■ Individual causes i rresponsibility, laziness, substance abuse)
3. What is eserved* is idand espect.
● Apart from the old, intoxicated, disgruntled, disturbed and incoherent beggar with a hat
or hand out.
○ Those incompetent due to their own weaknesses, irresponsibility and laziness
⟴ .e. omeone who spent alltheir money on sex,drugs,R&R
○ Those who are incompetent from no fault of their own
⟴ i.e. mentally il people who live on the streets)
● Involuntary Victim
○ Those who are competent but are caught in situations they could not really
⟴ i.e. eterans who comeback and are unemployed, gentrification victims
➢ They can soon be considered incompetent and/or undeserving
How he oused ommunity ngages ith he omeless ommunity
*the following terms are ones i have assigned to the types of people and how they deal with the
1. Individualist advocates/activists
○ Those who believe there are both non and deserving homeless people
○ Don’t necessarily disregard structural causes, but focus almost entirely on the
○ From these branch the Lobbyists dvocates/activists
■ they in advocating for and “helping” the HC, they focus primarily on the
most efficient way to get results or the immediate help disregarding the
possible effect these images, they are promoting as a means to an end,
have towards the HC
■ They create issues between the Housed community and the HC and even
within the HC
⟴ i.e. he homeless being portrayed even more as undeserving and
deserving and a part of society strange to what the housed
community is, divisions among homeless not wanting to be
grouped with the ones who are portrayed negatively involuntary
victims not wanting to be mixed with slackers to not carry the
2. Structuralist activists/advocates
○ Those who believe all homeless deserve (some even believe they are entitled
to) aid and respect
➢ Do not disregard individual causes but see structural causes as the main
causes of homelessness
Public nd rivate pace eans ased n ow e nderstand omeless
● Private can be considered as spaces that or things like
○ Entail the notion of privacy, ability to control access to, partiality and autonomy.
○ Zones of privacy are spatial/territorial (property), information and the people
themselves (their bodies)
○ A place where people can do things considered private
⟴ i.e. bathroom necessities, fuck, sleep, be naked, etc.
● Private and the homeless
○ Those without a private space
➢ They are in constant friction with the legal system because
● They have no private space to do private things
⟴ i.e. bathroom uses, sleep, eat, drink, change
○ Those with a private space
➢ Due to welfare reforms experience
● limited privacy and control over their lives through “consented”
⟴ i.e. nexpected visits from ERO’s, welfare has access to
all info within the public and health sector and sets
conditions and regulations that restrict life and mobility
● Fear of being arbitrarily
○ Taken off of welfare by an ERO and no longer be able to
afford a private space
○ Evicted by landlords who are overly strict with welfare
recipients or people within the HC
● Public can be considered spaces that
○ (Brett’s theory) promote norms of fairness, impartiality and equality.
➢ (Waldron) Because they are spaces that anyone in society can use and
be in without having to secure the permission of anyone.
○ (practice) In reality “public” is simply used as a term to imply that all or most
people within a community are affected and not any compliance with norms of
⟴ i.e. ocial profiling, nonhomeless (looking atleast)
● Public and the HC
○ Due to the Safe Street Act
➢ All activities that are necessary for the survival ( .e.squeegee and
panhandling) are virtually prohibited and criminalized
➢ Homeless people are given a ridiculous amount of tickets, which is
exacerbated with the social profiling they are victims of.
● Evidently targets those who are homeless
○ idle persons who, not having visible means of maintaining themselves, live
○ al persons who, being able to work and thereby or other means to maintain
themselves and families willfullyrefuse or neglect to do so,
■ Homeless people simply can’t do so or itis very improbable and hard for
them to do so.
○ al persons openly exposing or exhibiting in any street, road, public place, or
highway any indecent exhibition, or openly or indecently exposing their person…”
■ Homeless people in any point where they need to use the bathroom,
change or when they don’t have clothes to put on.
afe treets ct
● What i does
■ the use of public space f
■ the ability of homeless people to make a living (survive)
■ Freedom of speech (Prohibiting solicitation of captive audience)
■ Unreasonable s&s (social profiling enabled by the SSA)
○ Uses language like ggression, drugs and alcohol nd panhandling & squeegee
● What i achieves
○ I allows for “peaceful and secure” use of public spaces for the housed
○ I removes the HC from sight and gives a false sense of security and peace.
■ Puts a patch on a cracked window rather than fixing it.
○ “The purported intention … is to remove from public sight individuals whose
conduct is deemed to have crossed the frontier of our social and ethical
order...”voluntarily” removed themselves from our moral community.”
Clinique roits evant infractions ccumulating ickets)
● Homeless people are more likely to get tickets because of social profiling and because
the simple fact that they are in the streets for a larger amount of time than the housed
community is,the probabilities of getting caught or committing an infraction are much
○ Turning them into passive violators of the law
● The courts have become more understanding with the paying of tickets and there is a
ase tudy afe treets ct onstruction
○ s soliciting money a commercial or political act?
● Dauvergne article – know the concept of illegality and how we construct this idea of
migrants as illegal
○ ”illegal migrant” is a construction of the law
■ Anyone who is in contravent to the migration laws of the state has an
○ historically in the mid 20th century, the noun “illegal” was in reference to the
○ The term “illegal migrant” has a certain connotation, different from “visitor”,
“refugee”, “resident” or “guest worker”. The term “illegal”is precise in its
relationship with the law (p.115)
○ Ex. : Article “Montreal women denied entry to U.S., told she needs immigration
visa” Manpreet Kooner, a woman that was born and raised in Montreal by indian
parents was denied entry at US borders because she “lacked valid immigration
visa”. However, she was told at the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, she was told that
she did not need one and it would be a waste of money to get one.
● How do societies frame and talk about people who migrate?
● How do societal constructions (ideas) of race impact on immigration policy?
● What does i mean to be constructed as “the other” in law and society?
● What are the implications of the criminalization of race for immigration policy? Or the
criminalization of migration?
How migrants are defined as good migrant or bad ones. Whether they migrate for good or bad
reasons (different determinants).
Are characterized by the perceptions every society has.
There are ideas that immigrants are illegal > and that does not exist i is not true
*do not memorize the definitions. Understand the sense and the difference and the notions that
feed our ideas.
● (Im)migrant: Someone who moves to Canada intending to stay permanently.
Landed immigrants/ permanent residents are not citizens, but are people who have been legally
admitted to Canada for a undetermined period of time.
● Migrant: connotations of someone “in movement” as opposed to “landed” or “moving
somewhere. Or that they are headed somewhere
● Refugee: Someone who moves to Canada under a special category ("refugee") because
they are fleeing (race, religion, nationality, political opinion, persecution or war in) their
own country; many reasons are NOT recognized and refugees can often not claim
*Asylum seeker is the status before your refugee claim is recognized by the state.
“The raison d’être of the state isto produce order, and we call states failed states when they
cannot produce order anymore. So it comes as no surprise that power would need to absolutely
vilifyand criminalize “the migrant” and turn her or him into a fearful figure. In a period when
people are challenging the ability of the state to maintain order, the punishment of the migrant is
one of the ways in which the state demonstrates its ability to assert order…The claim to be
imposing “order at the border” is thoroughly ideological. I don't think the “order at the border”
discourse is ultimately aimed at ending undocumented immigration.” (Nandita Sharma, p83,
Nothing to Lose But Our Fear, 2015)
…but why is that happening??? In each context (economic, social)
we are really invested in that idea of nationalism, and that borders actually exist.
egal: Jakubowki and Comack
➔ Canada has a history of racist immigration law and policies, these discriminatory
policy are enshrined in our law with:
○ 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act
○ The concept of race is a concept that iscemented, partly defined by law.
● 1880: recruitment of ndesirables”
■ Influx of Chinese immigrants to Canada to build CN Rail
● 1885 Chinese Immigration Act : Head Tax – was meant to curve the
■ Chinese men: 50$ (1885); 100$ (1900); 500$ (1903) and no
women or children allowed
● 1910 Immigration Act, s.38(C)
**(First time that the word race appeared – i is basically saying: in relation to race we will or will
not accept people to this place we call Canada) – discrimination is enshrined in law.
**Strong antimigration sentiment.
○ “Any nationality or ace of immigrants…d eemed unsuitable for the Canadian
climatic, industrial, social, educational, labour [conditions] (people from hot
underdeveloped…or because uch immigrant are deemed undesirable owing
to their peculiar customs, habits, modes of life, methods of holding property and
because of their probable inability to become readily assimilated or to assume
the du1es and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship within a reasonable time
after their entry”
● 1967 Points System (Post World War 2, immigration movement)
○ I was introduced as a colorblind policy.
(*perception of race and what that means) & subtle racism stil exists and that the system allows
for too much discretion.
Class versus race.
The need to control the borders.
Itwas only later that the charter started to apply to immigrants.
○ 6 categories:
1. Language Skills (French & English)
2. education and training
a. personal assessment/suitability; occupational demand;
5. Arranged employment
a. relatives in Canada; and employment opportunities in the area of
● 1976 Nondiscriminatory clause addition not enough:
○ s.11(3): (p102) “authorized officers to exercise their iscretion (think of
judiciary in respect of immigrants who applications are unitrated under the
selection criteria, and to accept or refuse to accept an applicant, whether the
applicant achieves or does not achieve the number of units of assessment”
○ Immigration officers are the final word on whether you enter the country
of not (can go bad or good).
● 1992 Bill C86
○ The most extensive amendment to the immigration Act.
■ Stated it was not discriminatory.
○ Managing immigration for the safety of the country
■ “Safe Country Provision”
■ emphasizes that there issomething that needs to be managed and that it
concerns national security
○ Response to moral panic around “illegalimmigration”
○ Who gets leftout?
○ People coming from certain countries.
○ It frames the country itself(what Trump isdoing)
○ Was a problem because you had to travel/ go through one country in
order to immigrate to another.
■ EX: from bosnia go to germany then immigrate to canada
Controls who gets into the country depending from where you
come from. Because they felt they needed to control the borders.
○ Critique of this Bill:sometimes you have to migrate illegally because you
do not have the resources to do i legally. Travelling costs a lo of money
● 2001 Immigrant and Refugee Protection Act
○ Supposed to be a modern and balanced policy.
■ The context sets the stage for a harsher law/policy on immigration (9/11).
○ See and understands refugees as dangerous. (e.g. efugee crisis)
○ Replaces the Immigration Act
○ Here: immigration is a matter of security (different moments of ideas,
example back then immigration was an idea of labour (CN rail), i evolves,
but still cemented in legislation)
■ Language: “foreign nationals”; must carry Permanent Resident
■ Emphasis on deterring criminality and immigration, not on right to
move across borders: Chinese Exclusion Act
■ 1910 Immigration Act (brings language of undesirable
communities; race as prohibitive criteria)
■ Bil C86 – frame and construct different societies as more
dangerous than others; as unsafe to be moving through
● Case Study: LCP (Live in caregiver program)
○ See “Federal livein caregiver program being criticized for exploiting
workers” article (available on moodle and was handed in class)
○ This federal initiative allowed families to hire someone from another
country to live with them and provide care for children, seniors and people
with medical needs or disabilities. After two years in the program, the
caregiver could then apply to become a permanent resident.
○ In 2014, new applicants were no longer required to live in their employers’
homes. However, people already employed through the livein program
would continue in that stream, and couldn’t apply for socalled “liveout”
jobs. Along with that amendment, caregivers lost the right to apply for
permanent resident status.
○ No employer = no home
○ Work a lot of unpaid overtime and are asked to do tasks that are outside
of their job description. They can’t decline without risking their job.
Dauvergne: On Being Illegal (2012)
The idea of othering communities.
● Discourses of illegality
● Construction of “immigration problem”
● “illegal migrant” is a construction of law
● who gets for in the #s?
● Othered “they have broken our law” (p.16)
● focus on “illegal” encourages perspectives of “good” and “bad” migration
Case Study: LiveInCaregiver Program (LCP), 19922014
● Means of gaining
● How migrants have been welcomed
● Prior: 1910: only women between 21 and 35, no sponsorship for children etc, had to be
not married and had an employer assigned
● 3 fundamentals elements:
● mandatory livein requirement
● employerspecific work permit: this creates opportunities for employers to abuse human
rights. Maintain migrants outside the citizenship circle. Still experience that otherness
and racism .
· ex Work
● Sex Worker
■ Are sexually abused, violated
■ Sex slave and exploited
■ They’re unable to realize their reality
■ Clients are exploiter and abusers
➢ Can’t apply to all because some choose to work, some do i because they
lack proper access to the legal job market
○ Vectors of disease
■ Sexuality issomething to be feared, protected from and controlled
■ Perverse people out of the “Normative Sex” (standards of how, when,
where and why) reference frame, like extramarital sex.
■ Criminal law can discourage health challenges
● Vagrancy laws
● major provisions (210; 212; 213) (before)
● (after) Bill c36
àLaws before + after encompass the social
o ase Studies:
§ edford (struck down parts of before laws)
§ uave (before Bedford) Charter challenge that looked at these laws
§ hey challenged different laws; slight differences between the two
SEX ORK ND HE AW March 14 & 16 , 2017
How is prostitution constructed in the law? In societies?
● Prostitution is constructed as deviant or victimizing (e.g. image of them dying, drugged,
etc. are stereotypes they are constructed as victims)
● People who work in the sex industry are dichotomized as victims or criminals
● These constructions have dire consequences on the health and safety of sex workers
(detrimental to this community)
What are the social discourses made of ?
When there is an idea stigma you are often marked from it.
● I have exchanged sex for…? Think about the different ways of why you have sex: for a
warm place to sleep, for a drink, for many things. Well some people itis for money.
● What is sex work?
● What images do we see of sex workers? Attached with ideas of dirty, etc.
Social discourses around sex work
What work is? We tend to think of work and labor inmainstream ways, therefore the types of
work that are not formal tends to be criminalized. Often gets defined as a lifestyle rather than a
labor. But what about babysitting?
Constantly moving between the protection of the female (victim) and the construction of
sexuality as deviant
1. Sex worker as criminal or deviant
Common notion: they are whore, they are exploiting themselves, this notion of badness, etc.
1. Main tenants of the discourse:
1. Sex work, like other sexual acvies and sexual idenes, is immoral (very common idea
in our society)
2. Immoral behavior is harmful
3. Harm needs to be criminalized
4. Immoral behavior will disappear
2. Problems with this discourse…
1. Sex worker as vicm
As prevalant as sex worker as criminal and deviant
Assumes that these community lack agency
1. Main tenants of the Abolionist Perspecve and its proponents
1. Sex workers are sexually abused (hence, vicms): women are physically abused point, no
proof that sex workers were more abused than other women not in the industry.
2. Sex worker as violated
3. Client as abuser/exploiter
4. Sex workers as void of any analysis or ability to see her enslavement
2. Problems with this discourse…
In this capitalist society we are not under the realm of choice, we make decision everyday. (I just
like this quote)
1. Sex worker as diseased
Not an uncommon idea that sex workers are dirty and not using protection: symbol of everything
that has gone wrong with sexuality.
**Sex work is a mirror of society and how we understand sexuality.
Normal sex versus sex worker argument.
Refer to the criminalization of anal sex with more than three people (in Canada)
1. Main tenants of the discourse:
1. Sexuality is something to be feared, protected, and controlled
2. There is a “normave sexuality”
3. Criminal law can deter health challenges
4. Extramarital sex is dirty‐belief that only certain groups have extramarital sex
2. Problems with this discourse
1. Contagious Diseases Act,1964 (Walcowitz)
1. Sex work as work
1. Main tenants of the discourse:
1. Sex work is a job (not like any other) : pressure of sex workers to absolutely love
their jobs, but most people go to work to make money and not always excited to
go to work. (people say: when will you get a real job)
2. Where sex work is not recognized as work possibilies for exploitaon and bad
labor condions exists
3. Sex workers need recognion as workers and occupaonal health and safety
standards because they are extremely vulnerable because they do not have that
security and the protecon of the law because they are being criminalized
4. Decriminalizaon of the sex industry
e.g. Gary ridgeway: did i because I knew could get away with.
Construction of the client
● Perceived as male à perceived as violent
● Viewed as predators
● No typology of a client: ordinary men purchasing sex for a variety of reasons
● Men from lower socioeconomic strata who are criminalized
● Authentic relationships formed with sex workers
● Are often resources for sex workers
Construction of the Pimp
● Image largely constructed by media
● America Pimp circa 1970
● Procure, ply, trick, steal, lure
● Often a: he and a black male
● Exploitation idea and sometimes means money (e.g. pimp my ride)
● Racialized terminology
● Third parties: anyone who isneither the client nor the worker
● Occupy many roles of security, relationship, family, etc
● Sex workers hire, work with and work for third parties
● Often beneficial for the sex worker for someone to know where they are and can protect
them IF nything was to happen
Laws Regulating Prostitution:
Vagrancy (1759), Nova Scotia Act – one of the first law regulating this community.
“ dle persons who, not having visible means of maintaining themselves, live without
employment allpersons who, being able to work and thereby or other means to maintain
themselves and families, illfull refuse or neglect to do so, l persons openly exposing or
exhibiting in any street, road , public place, or highway any indecent exhibition or openly or
indecently exposing their person…”
Laws regulating Prostitution until December 2014
● CCC Section 210: Bawdy House
● CCC Section 211: Transporting to a Bawdy House
● CCC Section 212: Procuring and living on the avails
● CCC Section 213: Communicating
● Provincial and municipal laws:
○ Loitering, Nuisance, Highway traffi act
Failure And Applications of the Laws (and the violation of …… …... workers’ human
● Section 210: Bawdy House
○ Anyone who isfound in a house where prostitution ishappening, you can be
○ Contradicts 213: cannot work indoors cannot work outdoors
○ Precarious housing conditions (la