STAD- Stop Transphobia and Discrimination

Project Title: Documentation of Transphobic Violence in Ireland

Grant number: C11-12

1. Introduction

The present report is an outcome of “Step up reporting on homophobic and

transphobic violence”, a project supported by ILGA-Europe, the European region
of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association. The
objective of the project was to empower European LGBTI civil society
organisations to more consistently monitor and report homophobic and
transphobic hate crimes and incidents.

This project was launched in 2013 through ILGA-Europe’s Documentation and

Advocacy Fund, with the support of the Government of the Netherlands. The
project provided dedicated resources to 12 national and local NGOs in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland,
Portugal, Spain, Turkey and Ukraine. These NGOs were trained on the
methodology previously developed by ILGA-Europe, and committed to apply it in
order to produce comparable data.

In January 2013, TENI launched the STAD Campaign, which aimed to enable the
trans* community to report crimes in a safe environment and without fear of
ridicule or discrimination. STAD is an abbreviation for Stop Transphobia and
Discrimination and is also the word for Stop in the Irish language. This project
also addressed the lack of legislation and policy protecting trans people by
providing robust evidence to be used to advocate for penalty enhancing
legislation and increased trans awareness and service provision by the Gardaí.
The outcomes of this project will provide important learning opportunities and a
good practice example for other trans organisations interested in third party
hate crime monitoring.

Data collection and publication is expected to be developed on a more

sustainable and professional basis in the future, thanks to the capacity building
aspect of the current project. Following this pilot initiative, ILGA-Europe’s
methodology will be made available to more European LGBTI civil society
organisations.

1
1.1. Methodology

ILGA-Europe developed a harmonised data collection methodology in 2012. The

methodology builds on international standards and on the expertise gained in
different past activities, such as the elaboration of European-wide submissions to
the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) in view
of its Annual Report on Hate Crime1 and ILGA-Europe’s participation to the
Facing Facts! Making hate crime visible project.2

1.2. Data Collection

TENI collected information about hate incidents experienced by individuals due

to their gender identity, gender expression or transgender status. The project
allowed individuals who were victims or witnesses of hate crimes and incidences
to submit these experiences through an online reporting form or phone-based
interviews. Face-to-face personal interviews were considered but were not
conducted due to limited capacity and resources.

Despite the fact that the option of phone based interviews were provided it was
not utilised. Instead, all reports were submitted online through two separate
‘Victim’ and ‘Witness’ forms. These forms were tailored specifically based on a
set of survey questions designed in collaboration with ILGA-Europe to facilitate
comparable data across nation specific projects. The online reporting forms were
hosted by Wufoo, a web-based platform that was managed by TENI staff and
which allowed for the anonymous collection and categorisation of data. Wufoo is
a secure online platform which ensures privacy and confidentiality through
password protection. IP numbers were recorded in the submission process but
were stripped of any personal identifying data to ensure no individual could be
linked to a report.

1.3. Outreach

TENI works directly with trans people and

their families at local and national levels.
We have built extensive links with
individuals and organisations which
facilitated the reporting of incidents. To
ensure that incidents would be reported it
was necessary that the trans community
was made aware of the STAD Campaign.
To efficiently and effectively reach out to
diverse members of the trans community
TENI created a Communications Strategy.
This was developed by TENI staff during a
brainstorming session in January 2013
and was used as a framework for all
outreach. A key element to this strategy

1 http://www.osce.org/odihr/108395
2 http://www.ceji.org/facingfacts/
2
was clear communication stressing the confidentiality of reporting and how the
data that was collected would be used.

TENI launched the STAD campaign in late February and unveiled the STAD logo,
a red stop sign with the word STAD. This was used to signify that transphobic
violence must be stopped. We developed a postcard that was distributed at trans
peer support groups, LGBT Community Centres, LGBT organisations, including
student societies, and among select health services. We distributed STAD
postcards at TENI events and trainings throughout the year. We also publicized
the campaign and discussed hate crimes against trans people in TENI’s 2013
publication Equality & Identity: Trans and Intersex Experiences in Ireland, which
had a print run of 1,000 copies.

In addition, we used a variety of internet-based strategies to ensure that the

campaign was widely disseminated. We announced the campaign through our e-
newsletter list which has a subscription level of almost 600 people. We shared
the campaign widely on social media. This included the utilisation of tweets from
TENI’s Twitter account to over 2,000 ‘followers’. We also shared the information
via TENI’s Facebook page which has almost 4,000 ‘likes’.

TENI set up the project-specific Facebook page called STAD- Stop Transphobia
and Discrimination, which was used to deliver information about the project and
make regular calls for individuals to report their experiences. The STAD
Facebook page has accumulated 226 ‘likes’ since March 2013.

1.4. Reporting Period

The reporting period began on 1st of March 2013 and closed on 31st of October
2013. During this time there were 80 forms submitted with 66 categorised as
Victim and 14 as Witness. Unfortunately, many of the submissions were
excluded due to incomplete information, irrelevant incidences or incidences that
occurred in other years. The data set that is analysed in this report pertains to
36 reports, of which 32 are from victims and 4 are from witnesses.

1.5. Limitations

Despite a communications strategy and extensive outreach, we received less

reports than initially expected. This is likely due to a variety of factors. As in
many countries in Europe, there is not a culture of reporting transphobic or
homophobic crimes in Ireland. While this pertains specifically to the police, there
are ramifications for this project as trans people will often choose not to report
the incident and instead seek support from friends or family. Despite this being a
third party reporting project, which was clearly separated from the police or
legal process, it may be that trans people are still uncomfortable sharing
personal information even when assured of their anonymity. Furthermore, they
may feel shame and stigma related to their identities and/or the incident that
prevents them from reporting. Finally, through discussions with trans community
members we heard anecdotally that some individuals felt that reporting was
3
pointless as “nothing would change”. For some, there was a lack of confidence
that the information would be utilised effectively to make positive change related
to hate crimes.

A further limitation to the project was the demographic of individuals who

submitted forms. Eighty-one percent of the individuals who completed the victim
form were under 44 years old. There were only three people over the age of 44
who submitted responses and no one over the age of 65 completed a form
(three people did not state their age) (See Table 4). This may be due to the fact
that younger people are more likely to utilise the internet and social media and
may be more connected to trans* or LGB communities and therefore aware of
the STAD campaign.

Another limitation was that the vast majority of individuals who reported
incidents were already involved in the trans* or LGB Community to varying
degrees (See Table 5). Only one respondent said they were not involved at all
with the trans* or LGB community and another respondent said this question
was not applicable to them. This, in conjunction with the fact that all
respondents reported being ‘out’ in at least one area of their lives (See Table 6),
may indicate a heightened level of empowerment and involvement in the LGBT
community which facilitated the reporting of hate incidents. This also suggests
that the STAD campaign did not reach the most vulnerable trans* or gender
variant people in the country such as individuals who may be living in rural
areas, who are isolated, who lack literacy skills or who are not ‘out’.

2. Key findings

The STAD campaign began on January 1st 2013 to raise awareness about
transphobic violence in Ireland and enable the trans* community to report hate
crimes and incidents in a safe environment and without fear of ridicule or
discrimination.

The reporting period began on 1st of March 2013 and closed on 31st of October
2013. The data set that is analysed in this report pertains to 36 reports, of
which 32 are from victims and 4 are from witnesses. The vast majority of
reported incidents took place in the Republic of Ireland (88%). Just 12% were
reported from Northern Ireland.

During the reporting period, there were fifteen incidents that can be categorised
as hate crimes: 1 incident of extreme physical violence, 6 assaults, 3 incidents of
damage against property and 5 incidents of threats and physical violence. There
were no reports of homicides or arson. There were also 17 incidents that were
reported that were categorised as ‘other incidents with a bias motivation’.

Over half of the respondents identified as trans women (56%). Forty-one

percent identified as female, which includes trans and cisgender identified
individuals. On the masculine spectrum, twenty-two percent identified as trans
men and 6% as male. Nineteen percent identified with transgender, a commonly
used umbrella term. Only one participant (3%) identified as intersex. Thirteen
percent identified as other, such as genderqueer or genderfluid.

4
The most commonly listed sexual orientation was lesbian (28%). One quarter of
respondents said they were not sure of their sexual orientation. Twenty-two
percent identified as bisexual. Two respondents identified as gay (6%) and two
respondents identified as heterosexual (6%). Thirteen percent identified as
other., such as pansexual or queer.

Respondents were between the ages of 17 and 63. Three-quarters were between
the ages of 18-44 at the time of the incident, with the average age of 31.

Ninety-four percent of respondents had some involvement with the trans* or

LGB community in Ireland. All respondents were ‘out’ in at least one area of
their lives.

Respondents were asked if they reported the incident or crime to the police.
More than half said they had not (56%). The reasons for not reporting included
fear, not being ‘out’, doubting the severity of the incident, feeling the incident
was commonplace and not believing that anything would be done by the police.
Of those who did report the incident to the police, the response was mixed:
three respondents said the police were dismissive, two found the police to be
neutral, two found the police to be supportive and one did not answer. When
asked if the police considered the incident to be a hate crime four said no. Only
one respondent said that the police considered the incident to be a hate crime.
This respondent was located in Northern Ireland, where there is more robust
hate crime legislation than in the Republic of Ireland.

3. Bias Motivated Violence Against Trans and Gender Variant People

3.1. The Legal Situation of Homophobic and Transphobic Hate Crime

Trans people face some of the highest rates of stigmatisation, discrimination and
marginalisation in Ireland. In a recent survey, trans people reported high levels
of discrimination, hate crimes and hate incidents due to being trans (Table 1)3.

Table 1: Experiences Due to Being Trans (N=129)

(%)
Experienced silent harassment 72
Been made fun of or called names because of trans identity 64
Been objectified or fetishized sexually because of trans identity 50
Experienced physical intimidation and threats because of trans identity 36
Experienced sexual harassment because of trans identity 36
Suspected they have been turned down for a job because of trans identity 29
Experienced domestic abuse because of trans identity 20
Been hit or beaten up because of trans identity 16
Been sexually assaulted because of trans identity 12
Experienced some form of police harassment because of trans identity 12
Been raped because of trans identity 6

Despite these experiences, trans people are not expressly protected under any
equality or hate crime legislation in Ireland. In part this is due to the fact that
Ireland has limited hate crime legislation in general. The only exception to this

3 Speaking from the Margins: Trans Mental Health and Wellbeing in Ireland (2013).
5
lack of legislation is the underutilised Incitement to Hatred Act, 1989. This
statute makes it an offence to incite hatred against a group of persons on the
basis of race, colour, religion, nationality, ethnic or national origin, membership
of the Traveller community or sexual orientation. Unfortunately, gender identity,
gender expression or transgender status are not covered.

At present prejudice or bias related crimes, with the exception of Incitement to

Hatred, do not attract any special attention from the criminal law system in
Ireland. Offences against the person, property offences and public order offences
motivated by hate are not treated any differently from such offences where a
prejudicial motive is absent. Where criminal assaults are committed from a
prejudicial motive they are simply prosecuted as generic assaults or assaults
causing harm and so forth. It is at the discretion of the individual sentencing
judge as to whether to attach significance to the fact that the offence was
prejudicially motivated. In these circumstances, this is done post-conviction, and
the prejudicial motivation may form no part of the original trial. Where an
individual pleads guilty to the offence, the fact that the crime was prejudicially
motivated may never be revealed.

Furthermore, the Gardaí do not collect or publish data on transphobic incidents.

There is no monitoring or recording mechanism in the PULSE system (how crime
is recorded) to document transphobic incidences. This means the full extent of
the problem is not known because the lack of data makes it difficult to assess
whether crimes are actually reported and what the police response is to them.

TENI has worked with the Public Interest Law Alliance (PILA) in an effort to
gauge what legislative options would be the most effective in the Irish context.
In particular, we have undertaken research into penalty enhancing legislation for
crimes involving bias against trans people. This may function as a deterrent to
transphobic crimes. TENI is also advocating for Ireland’s Equality legislation to
be expanded to explicitly protect individuals on the basis of ‘gender identity
and/or gender expression.’

3.2. Homophobic and Transphobic Hate Crimes and Hate incidents

This report pertains to hate crimes and incidents that were reported to TENI via
an online form between 1st of March 2013 and 31st of October 2013. The data set
that is analysed in this report is derived from 36 reports, of which 32 are from
victims and 4 are from witnesses. The percentages that are provided are based
on the victim reports. Given the small number of witness reports and the limited
data that was provided in them, these reports have been treated as
supplementary data.

This section begins with respondent profiles, which provides a snapshot of the
characteristics of the individuals who completed a report. The next section looks
at the incidents that were reported and provides an overview that
contextualises the incidents. The final section classifies the incidents as hate
crimes or other incidents with a bias motivation through the utilisation of a
framework provided by ILGA-Europe. This ensures that the data is comparable
across national contexts and uniformly understandable.

6
In the following sections, those who submitted reports are referred to as
‘respondents’, ‘individuals’ and ‘victims’ interchangeably. This language was
deliberately selected to offset the negative connotation associated with the term
‘victim’, which can be viewed as disempowering.

3.3. Respondent Profiles

3.3.1. Gender Identity

Respondents were asked to list their gender identity when completing the form.
They were provided with a list of commonly used terms and could select any
that applied. Among the 32 respondents to the victim form there were 51 terms
selected, indicating that many individuals identified with more than one gender
identity. In an effort to recognise the diversity of individuals completing the
form, there was also an option to select an ‘other’ category which provided room
for respondents to self-identify their gender identity.

Over half of the respondents identified as trans women (56%). Forty-one

percent identified as female, which may include trans and cisgender identified
individuals. On the masculine spectrum, 22% identified as trans men and 6% as
male. Nineteen percent identified with transgender, a commonly used umbrella
term. Only one participant (3%) identified as intersex. Of those who identified as
other (13%), these participants listed their gender identity as ‘androgynous’,
‘genderqueer’ and ‘gender fluid’. As indicated above, many respondents selected
multiple gender identities which is why the percentages do not equal 100% in
the table below.

Table 2: Gender Identity of Victims

N %
Trans woman 18 56
Female 13 41
Trans man 7 22
Transgender 6 19
Other 4 13
Male 2 6
Intersex 1 3

In the witness reports, the respondents were asked to identify the victim’s
gender identity to the best of their ability. Given that the respondent may not
have known the victim these reports must be treated with caution as it may be
based on perception and not the actual gender identity of the individual. Victims
were identified as male, trans man/male, trans woman and unknown.

3.3.2. Sexual Orientation

Respondents were asked to list their sexual orientation when completing the
form. Despite the fact that the STAD campaign was specifically aimed at
recording hate crime and incidents against trans and gender variant individuals,
it was acknowledged that for many individuals there is a fluidity between their
gender identity, gender expression and sexual orientation which should not be
ignored. For instance, a trans man who also identifies as a lesbian or a
genderqueer person who is pansexual. Furthermore, there is anecdotal evidence
that transphobia and homophobia is linked. Individuals who are trans may face

7
transphobia due to their gender identity and gender expression in conjunction
with homophobia due to their sexual orientation. Furthermore, cisgender (non-
trans) individuals who identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual may experience
transphobia due to their gender expression. Perpetrators who attack or target
trans people may also conflate gender identity with sexual orientation, making
the motive for the attack difficult to clearly ascertain in some situations.

Respondents were provided with a list of commonly used terms for sexual
orientation and could select any that applied. In an effort to recognise the
diversity of individuals completing the form, there was also an option to select
an ‘other’ category which provided space for respondents to self-identify.

The most commonly listed sexual orientation was lesbian (28%). One quarter of
respondents said they were not sure of their sexual orientation. Twenty-two
percent identified as bisexual. Only two respondents identified as gay (6%) and
two respondents identified as heterosexual (6%). Of those who identified as
other (13%), these respondents identified their sexual orientation as
‘transsexual’, ‘pansexual’ and ‘queer’.

Table 3: Sexual Orientation of Victims

N %
Lesbian 9 28
Not Sure 8 25
Bisexual 7 22
Other 4 13
Gay 2 6
Heterosexual 2 6
Total 32 100

In the witness reports, the respondents were asked to identify the victim’s
sexual orientation to the best of their ability. Given that the respondent may not
have known the victim these reports must be regarded with caution as it may be
based on assumptions or stereotypes. Victims were identified as heterosexual,
lesbian and unknown.

3.3.3. Age

Respondents were asked the age they were at the time of the incident. The
youngest was 17 and the oldest was 63. Three-quarters of the respondents were
between the ages of 18-44 at the time of the incident, with the average age of
31.

Table 4: Age at time of Incident

N %
Under 18 2 6
18-25 11 34
26-44 13 41
45-64 3 9
65+ 0 0
Not Stated 3 9
Total 32 99

In the witness reports, the respondents were asked to identify the extent of the
victim’s involvement with the trans* or LGB community. Given that the

8
respondent may not have known the victim these reports must be regarded with
caution. Indeed, respondents likely speculated as to the victim’s involvement. In
these reports the victims involvement with the community were identified as:
Regularly go to trans* or LGB venues (2), went to at least once to a Pride event
or to a trans* or LGB venue (2), participate at some events (1), regularly
participate in trans* or LGB events (1) and not applicable (1).

3.3.4. Involvement with Trans* or LGB Community

Respondents were asked about their level of involvement with the trans* or LGB
community. They were permitted to select multiple answers to fully capture the
extent of their involvement and most respondents agreed with multiple
statements, which means the percentages do not add up to 100% in the table
below. The majority of respondents had regular involvement with the trans* or
LGB community with 50% reporting regularly participating in trans* or LGB
events or regularly going to trans* or LGB venues. Forty-one percent
participated in some events and another 41% said they went to at least one
pride event or trans* or LGB venue. Nine percent said they were an activist
working in a trans* or LGB NGO. Only one respondent said they were not
involved at all with the trans* or LGB community and another respondent said
this question was not applicable to them (Table 5).

Table 5: Involvement with Trans* or LGB Community

N %
I regularly participate in Trans* or LGB 16 50
events
I regularly go to Trans* or LGB venues 16 50
I participate at some events 13 41
I went at least once to a Pride event or to 13 41
a Trans* or LGB venue
I’m an activist or working in a Trans* or 3 9
LGB NGO
I’m not involved at all with the Trans* or 1 3
LGB community
Not applicable 1 3

In the witness reports, the respondents were asked to identify the extent of the
victim’s involvement with the trans* or LGB community. Given that the
respondent may not have known the victim these reports must be regarded with
caution. Indeed, respondents likely speculated as to the victim’s involvement. In
these reports the victims involvement with the community were identified as:
Regularly go to trans* or LGB venues (2), went to at least once to a Pride event
or to a trans* or LGB venue (2), participate at some events (1), regularly
participate in trans* or LGB events (1) and not applicable (1).

3.3.6. Being ‘Out’

Respondents were asked the extent to which they were out and to who they
were out to. The concept of ‘being out’ was left to the interpretation of each
respondent and may have been in reference to their gender identity, gender
expression, sexual orientation or a combination of the above. All respondents
reported that they were out in at least one area or facet of their lives. Three
quarters of respondents reported being out in the trans* or LGB community,
72% reported being out to all family and 72% reported being out to friends.
9
Forty-four percent were out to one or both parents and 22% were out to their
siblings. Thirty-eight percent reported being out in the workplace. One
participant reported ‘other’ but did not elaborate as to where or who else they
were out to (Table 6).

The vast majority of respondents were out in more than one area of their lives:
41% were out in 2-3 areas, 19% were out in 3-4 areas and 22% were out in
more than 5 areas of their lives. Only 19% were out in just one area of their life.

Table 6: Extent of ‘Being Out’

N %
Out in the trans* or LGB community 24 75
Out to all family 23 72
Out to friends 23 72
Out to one or both parents 14 44
Out in workplace 12 38
Out to brothers/sisters 7 22
Other 1 3

In the witness reports, the respondents were asked to identify the extent to
which the victim was ‘out’. Given that it is unclear if the witness knew the victim
these reports must be regarded with caution. In two reports, this question was
not answered. In one report the witness said the victim was out to all family, out
to brothers/sisters, out to friends, out in the trans* or LGB community and out
in the workplace. In another report, the victim was identified as being out to all
family and out to one or both parents.

3.3.7. Location of Incident

The vast majority of reported incidents took place in the Republic of Ireland
(88%). Just 12% were reported from Northern Ireland. This was likely reflective
of the outreach techniques employed by TENI, which works mainly in the
Republic. Furthermore, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has a more
extensive and effective reporting system that specifically records bias in crimes
and incidents. Furthermore, Northern Ireland also has more robust hate crime
legislation which might account for individuals not feeling the need to report
incidences to a third party.

The reported incidents took place in a variety of settings, with the majority
occurring in public spaces: One quarter were recorded as ‘other public spaces’
which were not further clarified by respondents. The remaining incidences that
took in public occurred near home (19%), commercial store (9%), club/bar
(9%), and public transportation (3%). Nine percent of incidents took place either
at work (6%) or school (3%). Thirteen percent of incidents took place inside the
home and 9% took place near or inside a trans* or LGB venue (Table 7).

Table 7: Place of Incident

N %
Other Public place 8 25
Near home 6 19
Home 4 13
Commercial store 3 9
Club/Bar 3 9

10
Near or inside a trans* or LGB venue 3 9
Work 2 6
School 1 3
Public transportation 1 3
Other: Over the phone 1 3
Total 32 99

In the witness reports, all incidents took place in the Republic of Ireland. One
incident took place near or inside a trans* or LGB venue, one took place on
Grafton Street (main public thoroughfare in Dublin), one took place in a school
and one took place in ‘other public space’.

3.3.8. Motive for Incident

Respondents were asked to indicate if they thought a personal characteristic,

either real or perceived, acted as a motivation for the incident. Reports that
were submitted that had no identifiable bias as part of the motive were removed
from the sample as this project aimed to collect data on hate crimes and
incidences against trans and gender variant people.

The most widely reported motives were: Gender identity (78%), sexual
orientation (75%) and gender expression (72%)(Table 8).

Table 8: Motive for Incident

N %
Gender Identity 25 78
Sexual Orientation 24 75
Gender Expression 23 72
Gender 11 34
Race/Ethnicity 1 3
Nationality 1 3
Age 1 3
Not stated 3 9

The vast majority of respondents felt that incidents occurred because of multiple
motives occurring simultaneously (e.g. gender identity and sexual orientation).
Fifty-three percent felt that the incident was due to 2-3 motives and 28%
reported more than three motives with one individual reporting 5 separate
motives for the incident. Only 9% felt that there was just one motive for the
incident and in each of these cases this was listed as gender identity (Table 9).

Table 9: Motive for Incident

N %
Gender Identity 3 9
Gender Identity & Sexual Orientation 2 6
Gender Identity & Gender Expression 4 13
Gender Expression & Sexual Orientation 3 9
Gender Identity & Gender 1 3
Gender Identity, Gender Expression & 4 13
Sexual Orientation
Gender Identity, Gender Expression & 2 6
Gender
Sexual Orientation, gender expression and 1 3
Gender
Gender Identity, Gender Expression & 7 22
Sexual Orientation and Gender
Gender Identity, Gender Expression & 1 3
11
Sexual Orientation and Age
Gender Identity, Gender Expression Sexual 1 3
Orientation, Race/Ethnicity & Nationality
Not stated 3 9
Total 32 99

In the witness reports, the motives for the incident were reported: Gender
identity (3), sexual orientation (2), gender expression (2) and gender (1). In
one report, no motive was stated.

3.3.9. Bias Indicators

Respondents were asked why they believed the incident was motivated by
certain perceived characteristics, such as gender identity or sexual orientation.
This information was categorised as a bias indicator which means the
information that clarifies a particular motive as being based in bias or prejudice.

Seventy-eight percent of respondents said the bias indicator was the language
and words used. This included words like ‘tranny’, ‘faggot’ or other pejorative
terms such as ‘it’ or ‘that thing.’ Over half of the respondents said it was
because the perpetrator read them as trans or LGB. Nineteen percent said it was
due to the fact that they had experienced previous threats or other incidents and
13% said it was the location of the attack (e.g. near or inside a trans* or LGB
venue) (Table 10). Half of the respondents listed 2-3 bias indicators while 34%
listed just one. Six percent listed 4 or more and the remaining did not elaborate
on the bias indicator.

Table 10: Bias Indicators

N %
Language and words used 25 78
The perpetrator knew (or thought) I was 17 53
trans* or LGB or had a trans history
Previous threats or other incidents 6 19
Place of attack 4 13
Not stated 3 9
Signs left at the place of the incident 1 3
I don’t know 1 3

3.3.10. Perpetrators

Respondents were asked about the individuals who perpetrated the attack or
incident. In 38% of the cases, there was only one perpetrator. Twenty-two
percent said there were 2-3 perpetrators and 19% said there were more than 4
perpetrators. In nearly one fifth of the incidents, the number of perpetrators was
unknown. This was true for the anonymous incidents, for instance in many of the
damage to property cases and incidents involving threats and psychological
abuse (Table 11).

Table 11: Number of Perpetrators

N %
1 12 38
2-3 7 22
4+ 6 19
Unknown 7 22
Total 32 101

12
Respondents were also asked if they knew the perpetrator(s) prior to the
incident. The vast majority (78%) reported not knowing the perpetrator(s). Just
19% reported knowing the perpetrators, which included members of the LGBT
community, neighbours and a family member (Table 12).

Table 12: Knowledge of Perpetrator

N %
Known 6 19
Unknown 25 78
Not stated 1 3
Total 32 100

3.4. Incidents

This section looks at the reported incidents as based on the information given in
the victim and witness forms. The intent is to provide an overview that
contextualises the incidents. In the following section (3.4.2.), the data will be
analysed according to ILGA-Europe’s measures of hate crimes and other
incidents with a bias motivation.

3.4.1. Type of Incident

Respondents were asked to indicate what type of incident they had experienced.
They were provided with a list of possible types of incidents (e.g. verbal abuse or
insults, physical violence, etc.) and asked to select all that applied. These
categories were chosen to aid the respondent to accurately describe the incident
while simultaneously making the form easy to complete.

The most common type of incident was verbal abuse or insults, which were
reported by 88% of respondents. In many cases, verbal abuse or insults
accompanied other incidences such as physical violence and refusal of
commercial services. Twenty-eight percent said they experienced threats of
violence, 19% reported physical violence and 9% were chased. Sixteen percent
reported being refused commercial services and 6% were refused a job or fired.
Property damage accounted for 13% of incidents. Two individuals reported being
sexually harassed (6%) and one reported being raped. Of those who reported
other incidences these included refusal of access to public toilets and transphobic
interrogation (Table 13).

Table 13: Type of Incident

N %
Verbal Abuse or Insults 28 88
Threats of Violence 9 28
Physical Violence 6 19
Refusal of Access to Commercial Services 5 16
Property damaged 4 13
Chased 3 9
Sexually Harassed (Without assault) 2 6
Refused a job/fired 2 6
Rape 1 3
Other 2 6

13
In the witness reports, the following types of incidents were reported: Insults or
verbal abuse (3), threats of violence (2), chased (1), refusal of access to
commercial service (1) and refusal of a job/fired (1).

3.4.2. Incidents as Hate Crimes

The above section provides a detailed outline of the incidents that were
reported. In an effort to ensure that the data is comparable across national
contexts and uniformly understandable, this section will further classify the data
according to a framework provided by ILGA-Europe.

Each incident is classified in one of six broad categories of hate crimes. In

certain cases, while an incident may have occurred due to bias or prejudice it
may not be an actual hate crime. These incidents are recorded as “other
incidents with a bias motivation” (See Annex 1 for more information).

The following sections will report on these seven categories:

I. Homicide
II. Extreme physical violence
III. Assault
IV. Damage against property
V. Arson
VI. Threats and psychological violence
VII. Other incidents with a bias motivation

I. Homicide

There was no recorded incident of homicide in the witness reports. Furthermore,

TENI monitors media sources and there were no reported incidences of LGBTI-
phobic murders in Ireland in 2013. Please note that this does not mean that this
type of hate crime did not occur only that there is no record.

II. Extreme Physical Violence

Extreme physical violence is defined as any attack on a person that potentially

causes serious physical harm. This includes an attack by weapon or other
objects that can be used to harm. This category also includes rape, sexual
assault and sexual harassment, including unwelcome sexual advances, requests
for sexual favours, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.

There was one recorded incident of extreme physical violence. An eighteen year
old trans man was physically attacked, chased and raped. He experienced
broken ribs and his face, legs and back were bruised. The attack took place near
his home by one perpetrator who was unknown to the victim. The motives for
the incident were recorded as the victim’s gender identity, gender expression
and sexual orientation which he identified due to the language the perpetrator
used and his knowledge of his victim being trans. The victim did seek medical
care but did not report the incident to the police.

14
III. Assault

Assault is defined as any physical attack against a person which does not pose a
threat to their life. This includes throwing of objects at a person. It also includes
an attempted assault which fails, due to self-defence, or if the victim runs away.

There were six recorded incidents of assault. Due to the small number of
recorded incidents it is not possible to make generalisations or statistical claims
about assault facing the trans community in Ireland.

Gender Identity

The victims identified their gender identities along a spectrum, four identified
with just one identity (i.e. female, genderfluid, trans woman and trans man)
while two individuals identified with three gender identities (i.e. male/trans
man/transgender and female/trans woman/intersex). In one instance, the
respondent selected ‘female’ but it is unclear whether they were cisgender or
transgender (Table 14).

Table 14: Gender Identity

N
Trans woman 2
Female 2
Trans man 2
Transgender 1
Other 1
Male 1
Intersex 1

Sexual Orientation

The sexual orientation of the victims were also diverse, with lesbian identity
accounting for two cases (Table 15).

Table 15: Sexual Orientation

N
Lesbian 2
Not Sure 1
Bisexual 1
Other 1
Heterosexual 1
Total 6

Age

The age profile of the respondents shows that three quarters of the victims were
under the age of 25. The oldest victim was 35 and one individual did not provide
a specific age but said they were in their twenties (Table 16). Due to the limited
number of cases, it is hard to ascertain why assaults appear to disproportionally
affect younger people. This may be due to the fact that younger people are more
likely to be targeted for this type of hate crime or they may be more likely to
report these incidents on an online form.

15
Table 16: Age at time of Incident
N
Under 18 1
18-25 3
26-44 1
45-64 0
65+ 0
Not Stated 1
Total 6

Being ‘Out’

All respondents were ‘out’ in some capacity in their lives. All but one respondent
was out to all their family (Table 17). Being ‘out’ may be linked to heightened
visibility and being perceived as trans or gender variant which may increase the
risk of being attacked.

Table 17: Extent of ‘Being Out’

N
Out in the trans* or LGB community 4
Out to all family 5
Out to friends 4
Out in workplace 3

Type of Assault

The assaults varied in terms of severity but all included insults and verbal abuse.
Four individuals were physically assaulted and two had objects thrown at them
from which they ran away. See below text box for additional information on
three of the assaults.

“It was a bank holiday, I opened my wallet and noticed I had no money, after I had ordered
food. decided to go across the street I live to withdraw money at the ATM, when I crossed back
I bumped in a group of 5 (not nice) guys, I heard one of them shout to the other 'let’s kick
some trannies', I tried to cross back to the other side of the street when I felt a punch in my
face, I felt stoned for 5 seconds, when I noticed the other one was coming towards me to kick
me, so I ran into a Thai restaurant that was open. They stayed outside shouting at me, saying I
was either a tranny or a faggot and they would give me what I deserve. Once they noticed I
had my phone in hand and was trying to call the Gardaí (they never came) they left and got
into a bus. I went home shaking.” – 23 year old trans man.

“While cycling just near to where I lived, I passed 3 teenage boys, one of which went ‘lads,
lads, oh my god, that THING is a woman’. I passed them, without saying anything (which made
me feel even more like hell, for not standing up for myself, but since it was 3 against 1, I didn't
fancy my chances) and they threw stones after me (which, thankfully I dodged).” – 24 year old
genderqueer/lesbian.

“I was walking done the street and talking in my phone. These boys started by throwing stones
after me, and when I ignored them they took my wig and ran off. Got my hair back after I
threatened them to go to the policy (was near a garda station).” – 24 year old trans woman.

Motive & Bias Indicator

When respondents were asked about the motive for the assault, all responded
that it was combination of their gender identity or gender expression and sexual
orientation. This illustrates that with these assaults, the motive is rooted in both
16
transphobia and homophobia. In addition, two individuals believed there were
additional motivations. One listed their race/ethnicity and nationality while
another included their gender (Table 18).

Table 18: Motive for Incident

N
Gender Identity 5
Sexual Orientation 6
Gender Expression 6
Gender 1
Race/Ethnicity 1
Nationality 1

Respondents were asked why they believed that the assault was motivated by
one of the above characteristics. Five of the six victims said it was due to the
language or words used. For instance, one trans woman said, “they yelled I was
a fucking fag and I shouldn’t be allowed to walk on the streets.” Two individuals
said it was due to the fact that the perpetrator read them as trans or LGB. One
trans man explained, “I present myself quite masculinely [sic] and I had a very
feminine looking school bag with me.” Two individuals said it was because they
had experienced previous threats or other incidents. One trans woman said, “I
got a lot of homophobic verbal abuse before and after the incident.” (Table 19).

Table 19: Bias Indicators

N
Language and words used 5
The perpetrator knew (or thought) I was 2
trans* or LGB or had a trans history
Previous threats or other incidents 2
I don’t know 1

Perpetrators

All assaults were perpetrated by individuals who were unknown to the victims. In
all but one case the assault was perpetrated by 2 or more assailants (Table 20).

Table 20: Number of Perpetrators

N
1 1
2-3 2
4+ 3
Total 6

Reporting

Under reporting of crimes is an issue in LGBTI communities and anecdotal

evidence has shown that this is particularly true in trans communities. Two
thirds of the victims did not report the assaults to the police. Of the two
individuals who did, one found the police to be supportive while the other found
them to be dismissive.

Medical & Psychological Support

Three of the victims reported physical injuries; however, only one individual
sought medical care. For this individual, care was sought because: “They
17
punched me in the ear. I felt deaf for a while and had to go to a GP. I had blood
inside my ear and am still feeling quite deaf.”

In addition to physical injuries, the assaults also took a psychological toll on the
victims. Five respondents said that the assault had an impact on their personal
or social life. However, none sought psychological support from professionals.
Instead, these individuals turned to their friends and family for support. See
below text box for more detail on the psychological effects of the assault.

“I’m used to getting verbal abuse every day and have been attacked before but I’m feeling a bit
more fearful.” – 35 year old trans woman.

“It made me feel bad about who I am.” – 17 year old trans man.

“Considering it was at my door, every time I leave to work I have to go downstairs three minutes
before the bus time and run to get it and every time I get back home I have to phone one of my
flatmates to have them pick me up at the bus stop, I’m scared of walking on my own street. Am
thinking of moving place.” - 23 year old trans man.

“It has gotten me exceedingly down. I have been met with this sort of behaviour before – but it’s
made me fearful of strangers and has really stayed in my mind for longer than I should really
grant it. It’s just…tiring. So, so tiring to feel like you have to explain yourself to people you don’t
know/don’t care about.” - 24 year old genderqueer/lesbian.

IV. Damage against Property

Damage against property includes any physical attack directed against property,
which is not life-threatening and it appears that the property has been
specifically targeted because of the fact that there is a perceived connection
between the owner and the LGBTI community.

There were three recorded incidents of damage against property. Due to the
small number of recorded incidents it is not possible to make generalisations or
statistical claims about the situation of hate crime facing the trans community in
Ireland.

Gender Identity

Two of the victims identified as trans woman and one identified as female.
However, it is unclear whether this individual was cisgender or transgender.

Sexual Orientation

The two trans women identified as lesbians while the individual who identified as
female said she was not sure of her sexual orientation.

Age

The age profile of the respondent’s show that all victims were between 43-51
years of age. These victims were significantly older than the ones who
experienced assault.

18
Being ‘Out’

All respondents were ‘out’ in some capacity in their lives. All respondents were
out in the trans* or LGB community, out to one or both parents and out to
friends. Being ‘out’ may be linked to heightened visibility and being perceived as
trans or gender variant which may increase the risk of being targeted (Table
21).

Table 21: Extent of ‘Being Out’

N
Out in the trans* or LGB community 3
Out to all family 1
Out to one or both parents 3
Out to friends 3
Out to brothers/sisters 1
Out in workplace 1

Type of Damage to Property

The damage to property varied in terms of severity. See text box for additional
information on three incidents of damage to property.

“Ongoing attacks on my property (car), eggs being thrown and wiped on my car, wipers broken
and laid on top of my car, mirrors being broken […]. I am also hearing jeering and shouting,
which seems to be aimed at me, however I cannot identify the perpetrators.” - 51 year old
female.

“A neighbour which I regularly have difficulty with approached my house after been asked to
leave the property grounds because of trespassing and verbal abuse, armed himself with a
sledge hammer and damaged the front gate and fencing in a threatening behaviour.” – 43 year
old lesbian trans woman.

“A neighbour drunk and verbally abusive used a sledge hammer to damage my property. It was
related to a radio programme I appeared on that morning in relation to abuse although no
names were mentioned. That morning before I went to the studio I discovered two of my tyres
had been deflated. – 43 year old lesbian trans woman.

Motive & Bias Indicator

When respondents were asked about the motive for the damage against
property, two responded that it was their gender identity. One said it was a
combination of their gender identity and sexual orientation and one did not
complete that part of the form (Table 22).

Table 22: Motive for Incident

N
Gender Identity 2
Sexual Orientation 1
Not stated 1

Respondents were asked why they believed the incident was motivated by one
of the above characteristics. Two said it was due to the fact that they were being
read as trans* or LGB, one of whom also said the incident was linked to the
19
language and words used. This trans woman, who also identifies as a lesbian,
said, “this incident is not a one off incident as the person sits outside his house
with a group of neighbours verbally abusing and intimidating me on a daily
basis.” The trans woman who did not state a motivation or bias indicator did
explain that the individual took a sledgehammer to her car while being verbally
abusive (Table 23).

Table 23: Bias Indicators

N
Language and words used 1
The perpetrator knew (or thought) I was 2
trans* or LGB or had a trans history
Not stated 1

Perpetrators

In two incidents the damage to property was perpetrated by individuals who

were unknown to the victims. In one incident, the damage was done by a
neighbour. In two of the three incidents there was only one perpetrator while in
one incident the victim was not sure how many perpetrators there were.

Reporting

Two victims reported the crimes to the police, while one did not complete that
part of the form. One victim found the police to be supportive while the other
listed “I don’t know”. None of the victims knew if their reports were classified as
hate crimes.

Medical & Psychological Support

Given the nature of the crimes, there were no physical injuries. However, these
attacks did have a psychological impact on the victims. Two respondents said
that the incident has an impact on their personal or social life. While one also
said it had an impact on their job conditions. One respondent did not complete
this part of the form. As a result of the incident, one individual sought
psychological support from professionals while the other individual turned to
trans*/LGB NGOs and friends for support.

See below text box for more detail on the psychological effects of these
incidents.

“This incident is not a one off incident as the person sits outside his house with a group of
neighbours verbal abusing and intimating me almost on a daily basis. They are also linked with
physical cruelty to my two dogs.” – 43 year old lesbian trans woman.

“I already suffer from depression and have been hospitalised due to a number of suicide
attempts due to my situation of coming out as Transgender. I attend a self-harm clinic also.
Since the attack I have been suffering from sleepless nights, paranoia, hypersensitivity, my
depression has got worse. I feel that it is hard enough with my personal situation, but to have
to endure this form of abuse from invisible perpetrators, is very distressing.” – 51 year old
female.

20
V. Arson

Arson is defined as an attack on property where there is no threat to life, for

instance if the building is uninhabited at the time of the attack. This also
includes failed attempts, for instance attempted arson where the fire fails to
catch or the arsonist is disturbed.

There was no recorded incident of arson in the reports. Furthermore, TENI

monitors media sources and there were no reported incidences of LGBTI-phobic
arson in Ireland in 2013. Please note that this does not mean that this type of
hate crime did not occur only that there is no record.

VI. Threats and Psychological Violence

Threats and psychological violence is defined as a specific threat which can be

either verbal or written. This can also include stalking, including repeated
undesired contact, following or lying in wait for the individual or making threats
to the individual or her/his family.

There were five incidents of threats and psychological violence. Due to the small
number of recorded incidents it is not possible to make generalisations or
statistical claims about the situation of hate crime facing the trans community in
Ireland.

Gender Identity

The victims identified with diverse gender identities. One identified with just one
identity (i.e. trans man) while four individuals identified with two or more gender
identities (i.e. female/trans woman, trans woman/transgender/genderqueer,
female/trans man and female/trans woman/transgender) (Table 24).

Table 24: Gender Identity

N
Trans woman 3
Female 3
Trans man 2
Transgender 2
Other 1

Sexual Orientation

The sexual orientation of the victims were also diverse, with lesbian and bisexual
identities accounting for two cases each (Table 25).

Table 25: Sexual Orientation

N
Lesbian 2
Bisexual 2
Other 1
Total 5

Age

The age profile of the respondents shows that four of the five victims were under
21
the age of 25. The oldest victim was 33 (Table 26). Due to the limited number of
cases, it is hard to ascertain whether this is due to the fact that younger people
are targeted more for this type of hate crime or if it is more likely that younger
people will report these incidents on an online form.

Table 26: Age at time of Incident

N
Under 18 0
18-25 4
26-44 1
45-64 0
65+ 0
Not Stated 0
Total 5

Being ‘Out’

All respondents were ‘out’ in some capacity in their lives. Being ‘out’ may be
linked to heightened visibility and being perceived as trans or gender variant
which may increase the risk of being attacked (Table 27).

Table 27: Extent of ‘Being Out’

N
Out in the trans* or LGB community 2
Out to one or both parents 3
Out to brothers/sisters 1
Out to all family 1
Out to friends 3

Types of Threats and Psychological Abuse

The victims experienced a range of threats and psychological violence. In most

cases, these were also specific threats of physical violence. See below text box
for additional information on four of the incidents.

“I was walking with 2 friends when a man started asking if I was a guy or a girl. When I didn't
answer and walked on he started shouting louder threatening to hit me. He then decided I was
a girl and started singing a song about how he was going to rape me. He followed us down the
road singing this song till he got bored of us not replying.” – 22 year old bisexual trans man.

“just abusive phone calls making very violent threats and intentions. Such as, when they see
me they will hang me from a tree with a live electric cable... yet I don't know who the phone
call was made by.” – 20 year old lesbian trans man/female.

“I was essentially forced by an awkward conversation-with/interrogation-by an acquaintance to

admit my trans status at which point she began to scream at me that I was 'a freak' for some
time and she threatened violence whilst cornering me. When I made a (feigned) motion to
defend myself I was violently grabbed by a staff member and forced to leave.” – 24 year old
pansexual genderqueer/trans woman.

“Was walking down the street when I heard loudly behind me "Ya fuckin' tranny queer."
Ignored it and walked on, held my head high. "Tranny queer." This continued for a good bit
before eventually "Watch your back next time I see you." – 18 year old bisexual trans woman.

22
Motive & Bias Indicators

In all cases the motive for the incident was recorded by the victim as being a
combination of their gender identity, gender expression and sexual orientation.
This illustrates that with these incidents, the motive is rooted in both
transphobia and homophobia (Table 28).

Table 28: Motive for Incident

N
Gender Identity 5
Sexual Orientation 4
Gender Expression 4
Gender 4

Respondents were asked why they believed that the threats and psychological
abuse was motivated by one of the above characteristics. All five victims said it
was the language and words used. One bisexual trans woman wrote, “’Tranny
queer’ is definitely language. Along with watch your back.’” A lesbian trans
woman, who also cited her being read as trans as a motivation for the incident
elaborated, “I’ve been screamed at about how ‘I’m disgusting for being
transsexual, the idea of anyone being with me, asking me out, fancying me […]
was elaborated as disgusting […] [she stated] we aren’t real women, we’re
trannies […].” (Table 29).

Table 29: Bias Indicators

N
Language and words used 5
The perpetrator knew (or thought) I was 3
trans* or LGB or had a trans history
Previous threats or other incidents 2
Place of attack 1

Perpetrators

Three of the incidents were perpetrated by individuals who were known to the
victims. In two cases the incident was perpetrated by one individual while two
incidents were committed by two or more assailants. In one anonymous call, the
victim was unsure how many perpetrators there were (Table 30).

Table 30: Number of Perpetrators

N
1 2
2-3 2
Unknown 1
Total 5

Reporting

As discussed previously, under reporting of crimes is an issue in trans

communities. Three of the victims did not report the incidents to the police. Of
the two individuals who did, one found the police to be neutral while the other
found them to be dismissive.

23
Medical & Psychological Support

Given the nature of the incidents, there were no physical injuries. However,
these attacks did have a psychological impact on the victims. All five
respondents said that the incident had an impact on their personal or social life.
In addition, two individuals said it also had an impact on their family and one
individual said it had an impact on the trans* or LGB community.

However, only one individual sought psychological support from a professional

psychologist. The majority of individuals turned to their friends, family or
trans*/LGB NGO for support. See below text box for more detail on the
psychological effects of the threats and psychological abuse.

“I'm afraid to go down the town by myself out of fear of someone jumping me. I tend to not go
out much anymore.” – 18 year old bisexual trans woman.

“I just wanted to, and sometimes still do, want to end it all. I think everybody would be better
off if they didn't have my problems to deal with, and I just think I would be at rest if I um,
well, if I ended my life... I have tried, and failed... obviously... the medical care I sought was
for advice mainly. I never admitted to receiving threatening phones calls though...” – 20 year
old lesbian trans man/female.

“It made me scared, it made me feel like a weirdo, It made me embarrassed and it made me
feel uncomfortable given what he was saying. He was much bigger than me and making
comments about rape made me very uncomfortable. I found it very hard to let my guard down
for a few days after.” – 22 bisexual trans man.

VII. Other Incidents with a Bias Motivation

The majority of the incidents that were reported would not qualify as crimes
under Irish law and cannot be accurately identified as hate crimes. However, the
incidents do reflect transphobic and homophobic bias, prejudice and/or
discrimination and as such provide important information on the current context
in Ireland. This section will detail incidents that have been categorised as (A)
Abusive Behaviour and (B) Discriminatory Incidents.

A. Abusive Behaviour

Abusive behaviour can include different types of hate speech or transphobic

language that is delivered face-to-face or via other mediums such as telephone
calls. However, it is usually more general and/or less severe which is why it is
categorised separately from threats or psychological abuse (Section VI).

There were nine incidents of abusive behaviour. Due to the small number of
recorded incidents it is not possible to make generalisations or statistical claims.

Gender Identity

The victims identified their gender identities along a spectrum; however, three
quarters identified as trans women. Seven identified with just one gender
identity (e.g. trans man) and two individuals identified with two or more gender
identities (i.e. Female/trans woman and female/trans woman/transgender)
(Table 31).

24
Table 31: Gender Identity
N
Trans woman 6
Female 4
Trans man 1
Transgender 1

Sexual Orientation

The sexual orientation of the victims were also diverse (Table 32).

Table 32: Sexual Orientation

N
Lesbian 2
Bisexual 3
Not sure 3
Other 1
Total 9

Age

The age profile of the respondents shows that five of the nine victims were
between the ages of 26-55. The youngest victim was 17 and the oldest victim
was 63 (Table 33).

Table 33: Age at time of Incident

N
Under 18 1
18-25 1
26-44 5
45-64 1
65+ 0
Not Stated 1
Total 9

Being ‘Out’

All respondents were ‘out’ in some capacity in their lives. Eight out of the nine
respondents were out to their families (Table 34). Being ‘out’ may be linked to
heightened visibility and being perceived as trans or gender variant which may
increase the risk of being targeted.

Table 34: Extent of ‘Being Out’

N
Out in the trans* or LGB community 6
Out to one or both parents 4
Out to brothers/sisters 4
Out to all family 8
Out to friends 5
Out in workplace 4

Types of Abusive Behaviour

The victims experienced a range of abusive behaviour. See below text box for
additional information on five of the incidents.
25
 “Went to pride for the first time, and then I went to the village area at Merrion square. There
were outdoor separate toilets so I queued and went into one of the toilets. The door was
repeatedly kicked and the toilet rocked violently by a woman calling out "gay man", "tranny" -
when I left there was lots of people there, no one said anything or did anything to help.” – 35
year old bisexual trans woman.

“Had faggot screamed at me a number of times on shop floor by teenage boys.” – 34 year old
trans woman.

“[…] I became aware of someone walking far to close behind me. When I passed a shop
window I caught a reflection of a man in his late 30's early 40's who had his hand ready to grab
my bum. I turned and asked him to back up and leave my personal space […]. He did for a few
seconds, and then put his hand on my shoulder and forced me to turn. He asked what I was
listening to, and when I replied he asked in a very loud voice (where as previously he had
spoken relatively softly). ‘Are you a fucking man, or a fucking woman?’ I said ‘I'm a woman.’
He responded to this by following me the length of the Main Street from the courthouse to the
start of the Youghal Road shouting as loudly as he could ‘It's a fucking man’, ‘tranny-freak’,
‘Fucking faggot’ and so on.” – 43 year old lesbian trans woman.

“Every day called tranny, lezzer, lesbian, ‘it’s a man’, ten to twenty times a day every day in
Dublin” – Female (no age stated).

“I left the bar with my friends for a smoke , on the way back in the bouncer let all my friends
and blocked my re-entry, when one of my friends asked: ‘why is she not allowed back in?’ the
bouncer replied: ‘she, HA, IT is not allowed back in, and I don't have to give a reason.’ It took
20 min for me to get the head door man to come out, I threatened to call the police and write
letters to GCN, and other publications, the bars owner and the manager of the bar. I was
allowed back in only if I promised not to send letters.” – 27 year old bisexual trans woman.

Motive and Bias Indicator

In most cases the motive for the incident was recorded by the victim as being a
combination of their gender identity, gender expression and sexual orientation
(Table 35). This illustrates that with these incidents, the motive is rooted in both
transphobia and homophobia.

Table 35: Motive for Incident

N
Gender Identity 7
Sexual Orientation 4
Gender Expression 7
Gender 2

Respondents were asked why they believed that the abusive behaviour was
motivated by one of the above characteristics. All nine victims said it was the
language and words used. On trans woman wrote, “Faggot says it all, it’s a
derogatory term.” Over half of the victims also said that the motive was based in
part on being read as trans or LGB. One bisexual trans woman wrote, “He
referred to me as ‘it’ and refused me entry into the club because of my gender.”
Another trans woman, who said the motive was based on her sexual orientation
and gender expression said, “They shouted homophobic language at us. They
didn’t know we were trans* and were shouting lesbians, faggots, dykes at us.”
Two victims said the incident was motivated by their location. On trans woman

26
elaborated, “The place that I was on my way into is known as a gay/trans bar in
the part of the city that is known as the gay/trans part of the city.” (Table 36).

Table 36: Bias Indicators

N
Language and words used 9
The perpetrator knew (or thought) I was 5
trans* or LGB or had a trans history
Previous threats or other incidents 1
Place of attack 2

Perpetrators

Seven of the incidents were perpetrated by individuals who were unknown to the
victims. Two incidents were perpetrated by individuals who were known by the
victim, including one who was victimised by a family member.

In five cases the incidents were perpetrated by one individual while in two other
cases the incidents were committed by two or more perpetrators. In one
anonymous call, the victim was unsure how many perpetrators there were and in
another case the number of perpetrators was listed as unknown (Table 37).

Table 37: Number of Perpetrators

N
1 5
2-3 1
4+ 1
Unknown 2
Total 9

Reporting

None of the victims reported the incidents to the police. Despite the fact that
the incidents were clearly motivated by bias and prejudice, for many of the
events reported in this section, there were no crimes committed according to
Irish law.

Medical & Psychological Support

Given the nature of the incidents, there were no physical injuries. However, they
did have a psychological impact on the victims. Five respondents said that the
incident had an impact on their personal or social life.

However, only two individuals sought psychological support from a professional

psychologist. The majority of individuals turned to their friends, family or trans*
or LGB NGO for support. See below text box for more detail on the psychological
effects of the abusive behaviour.

27
“Constantly on edge, feeling suicidal and a lot of that's, to do with the Irish public reaction to
people like me.” – 34 year old bisexual trans woman.

“I was very upset, it is the first time I received any trans phobic abuse/ discrimination... I cried
many times after wards. It was a horrific situation. He refused me entry in front of 20 to 30
people, then proceeded to out me publicly, and my bag/coat wallet were all in the bar, so I
could go nowhere, because of the rain, and because he outed me I started getting hassle of
lads in the smoking area.” -27 year old bisexual trans woman.

“Because of all this I am on antidepressants I intend to increase my dose until I can emigrate
from this country can’t afford to go to a councillor or therapist.” – Female (age not stated).

“A marked increase in number and severity of panic attacks. I already suffer from PTSD due to
childhood sexual abuse and this unwanted physical contact as well as the verbal abuse has
brought that PTSD to a new more difficult to manage level.” – 34 year old lesbian trans woman.

“I don't want to hide away, but it just reminded me of the terrible ignorance out there.” – 34
year old trans woman.

Discriminatory Incidents

Discriminatory incidents are any incidents that have a discriminatory element

and may be the result of bias. In this reporting cycle, there were eight incidents
of discriminatory incidents. Due to the small number of reports it is not possible
to make generalisations or statistical claims.

Gender Identity

The respondents identified their gender identities along a spectrum, however,

the majority identified as trans women. Four identified with just one identity
(e.g. trans man) while three individuals identified with two or more gender
identities (i.e. Trans woman/transgender/genderqueer, female/trans woman and
male/androgynous) (Table 38).

Table 38: Gender Identity

N
Trans woman 5
Female 3
Trans man 1
Transgender 2
Male 1
Other 2

Sexual Orientation

The sexual orientation of the victims were also diverse (Table 39).

Table 39: Sexual Orientation

N
Lesbian 1
Bisexual 1
Gay 2
Not sure 2
Heterosexual 1
Other 1
Total 8
28
Age

The age profile of the respondent’s show that half of the victims were between
the ages of 26-55. The youngest victim was 19 and the oldest victim was 53
(Table 40).

Table 40: Age at time of Incident

N
Under 18 0
18-25 2
26-44 4
45-64 1
65+ 0
Not Stated 1
Total 8

Being ‘Out’

All respondents were ‘out’ in some capacity in their lives. Seven of the eight
respondents were out in the trans* or LGB community. Being ‘out’ may be linked
to heightened visibility and being perceived as trans or gender variant which
may increase the risk of being targeted (Table 41).

Table 41: Extent of ‘Being Out’

N
Out in the trans* or LGB community 7
Out to one or both parents 2
Out to brothers/sisters 1
Out to all family 6
Out to friends 5
Out in workplace 2

Types of Discriminatory Incidents

The victims experienced a range of discriminatory incidents. The majority of

these incidents were related to denial of commercial services or denial of access
to appropriate restrooms. See below text box for additional information on four
of the incidents.

29
 “After management were informed I was trans and planned to transition, I was suspended from
employment for two weeks, while they discussed the issue” – 53 year old bisexual trans woman.

“I was in a shopping centre in Limerick. I looked towards the female toilets. I was immediately
stopped by a lady in charge of the toilets and told that I couldn't use them, that I could either
use the disabled or the men's. This had been decided by centre security, who had harassed me
in the past. I was mortified, hurt and felt violated. I went to see this same bullying security
team, who addressed me using male pronouns throughout and told me to speak to the centre
manager. I was told by the Gardaí that no crime had been committed, that it was a civil
matter, and it appeared that they felt I should be happy to be allowed to use the disabled
toilets. I cried for hours, and writing these lines is bringing it back. Tears are not far away now
as I relive it.” – 34 year old trans woman.

“A group of were in a club, 4 trans girls and one cis[gender] guy. We were all called lads by
door staff on our way into the club. Then, when we were in the club about twenty minutes, a
manager and doorman approached our table and told us there had been complaints about us
using the ladies, because of this we had to show ID to prove we were female to use the toilets.
One of us had ID the rest including me didn't. I asked, ‘what happens if we don't have ID and
use the ladies toilets?’ The doorman loomed over me and said ‘then we will have a problem.’ I
asked him if he wanted me to strip naked as I haven't carried ID when going to a club in over
twenty years, I also told them this was discrimination. They allowed us to use the ladies in the
end. I have never felt so embarrassed or humiliated in my life as this was done in a small area
where there were loads of other people.” – 39 year old lesbian trans woman.

“Not being particularly confident with my appearance I attempted to use the male toilets in a
bar and was redirected by a customer. Fearfully I obeyed, and was told I was in the wrong
place again when attempting to enter the female toilets. On the second attempt to enter the
males', I was aggressively, vocally refused entry by another customer and immediately asked
to leave by a bouncer.” – 23 year old pansexual trans woman/genderqueer.

Motive and Bias Indicators

In most cases the motive for the incident was recorded by the victim as being a
combination of their gender identity, gender expression and sexual orientation
(Table 42). This illustrates that with these incidents, the motive is rooted in both
transphobia and homophobia.

Table 42: Motive for Incident

N
Gender Identity 5
Sexual Orientation 4
Gender Expression 5
Gender 2
Age 1
Not stated 1

Respondents were asked why they believed that the incident was motivated by
one of the above characteristics. Six of the eight victims said it was due to the
language or words used during the incident. For instance, one trans woman said,
“I was on my own and they were saying, ‘is that a man or a woman? It’s a
woman, no oh it’s a man, oh it’s a man. He scares me.” Five individuals said it
was due to the fact that the perpetrator read them as trans or LGB. One trans
woman explained, “they knew my history, I’m from here. They had known me
for 20 years. Once a man, always a man in their eyes.” The bisexual trans
woman who did not state a motive did note a bias indicator in another part of
the form explaining, “After management were informed I was trans and planned
to transition, I was suspended from employment for two weeks.” (Table 43).
30
Table 43: Bias Indicators
N
Language and words used 6
The perpetrator knew (or thought) I was 5
trans* or LGB or had a trans history
Previous threats or other incidents 1
Place of attack 1
Particular signs left at the place of the 1
incident
Not stated 1

Perpetrators

In all cases the perpetrators were unknown to the victims. The number of
perpetrators ranged from one perpetrator (1), 2-3 perpetrators (1) and 4+
perpetrators (3). In three cases it is unknown how many perpetrators there were
as they were either unlisted or that section of the form was not completed
(Table 44).

Table 44: Number of Perpetrators

N
1 1
2-3 1
4+ 3
Unknown 3
Total 8

Reporting

Three quarters of the victims did not report the incidents to the police. For
many of the incidents reported in this section, there were no official crimes.
However, two individuals did report the incidents. One individual reported what
she felt was harassment by a group of young people in her place of work. She
found the police to be neutral but the incident was not taken seriously and not
treated as a hate crime. Another women reported being refused the use of the
appropriate toilet in a shopping centre to the Gardaí; however, she reported
being treated dismissively and told that “no crime had been committed.”

Medical & Psychological Support

Given the nature of the incidents, there were no physical injuries. However,
these incidents did have a psychological impact on the victims. Six respondents
said that the incident had an impact on their personal or social life and two did
not complete that section of the form.

However, only one individual sought psychological support from a professional

psychiatrist. The majority of individuals turned to their friends, family or trans*
or LGB NGO for support. See below text box for more detail on the psychological
effects of the discriminatory incidents.

“Crying for hours, which my mother had to witness. It's made me nervous elsewhere, I'm
wondering whether similar problems will emerge elsewhere, either toilets or changing rooms,
melancholy, sadness at the state of my native city, not being able to use these facilities which I

31
often had frequented.” – 34 year old trans woman.

“Mental scars, nervousness and anxiety about future work, doubts about my ability to go on
living in this area, doubts that spread to concerns over housing, Am I unsafe living here, could
I ever live in a housing estate, etc.” -34 year old trans woman.

“It made me feel like there was something wrong with me, but women regularly look at me like
I am in the wrong place.” – Gay female (age not stated).

“I was left shaken and on edge. I was shocked and surprised at how I was treated. I took time
in the changing room to think things over and to relax. I felt like a freak for wanting to try on
these short shorts. I would have suffered worse had I been transgender because I would have
become paranoid about my success at passing and posing as my preferred gender. I would
have become overly and obsessively self-aware and self-conscious about my appearance. I now
fear buying female items of clothing again in apprehension of the same thing happening to
me.” – 19 year old gay androgynous male.

4. Police and Law Enforcement

In this report, the term police refers to the Gardaí (Republic of Ireland) and the
PSNI (Northern Ireland). Respondents were asked if they reported the incident
to the police. More than half said they had not (56%) (Table 45). In some cases,
this was due to the fact that the incident would not be considered a crime.
However, in many instances, there was a clear criminal element. For instance,
one individual was “receiving abusive phone calls making very violent threats
[…] such as when they see me they will hang me from a tree with an electric
cable”. In another instance, a young trans man was on his way home from
school and was physically assaulted while being called “tranny”. Furthermore,
the respondent who reported being raped did not report the incident to the
police.

Table 45: Reported Incident to Police

N (%)
No 18 56
Yes 8 25
Not applicable 2 6
Not stated 4 13

Respondents that did not report the incident were asked why they did not report
the incident as a hate crime. The reasons that were reported included fear, not
being ‘out’, doubting the severity of the incident, feeling the incident was
commonplace and not believing that anything would be done by the police. In
one case, the respondent believed the attack would be “laughed off” by police.

“I was scared. I don’t want the police involved.” – Respondent who had received abusive phone
calls.

“I did not see it as serious enough, the boys were underage.” – Respondent who had experienced
insults and verbal abuse.

“I didn’t feel anything would or could be done.” – Respondent who had experienced verbal abuse
and stone throwing.

“Only ‘out’ to other trans friends and did not wish to become involved with the police at that
time.” – Respondent who was sexually harassed and verbally abused.

32
“Why? No one cares.” – Respondent who had experienced threats of violence and verbal abuse.

“Happens nearly every day here.” – Respondent who experienced verbal abuse.

“I didn’t think it was worth it.” – Respondent who was physically assaulted and verbally abused.

“At first I was too shaken, later I realised that in Middleton such an attack would be simply
laughed off” – Respondent who was chased and verbally abused.

One quarter of respondents did report the incident to the police. When asked
about the reaction of the police, three respondents said the police were
dismissive, two found the police to be neutral, two found the police to be
supportive and one did not answer. When asked if the police considered the
incident to be a hate crime four said no. Three respondents were not sure if the
police considered the incident to be a hate crime. Only one respondent said that
the police considered the incident a hate crime. This respondent was located in
Northern Ireland, where there is more robust hate crime legislation than in the
Republic of Ireland.

33
ANNEX 1

Group I

Category Subcategory Description

1. Homicide • Any attack on a person that causes loss of
life.
2. Extreme • Any attack on a person that potentially
physical causes serious physical harm.
violence • Any attack on property, for example by
arson or petrol bombs, where there is the
potential for people in the property to be
killed, for instance if the building is
inhabited or occupied at the time of the
attack.
• Bombs, including letter bombs. This
includes any viable device that either
detonates or is defused, and therefore was
life threatening. It also includes any device
which is assessed to have been intended by
its sender to be viable, even if after
analysis it is found that it was incorrectly
constructed and therefore would not have
gone off.
• Kidnapping.
• Shooting.
• Attack by weapon or any other object that
can be used to harm.
Sexual assault An act of sexual violence can be committed by
the victim’s partner (married or not), previous
partner, family member or co-habitant.
• Rape4.
• Sexual assault5.
• Sexual exploitation by a helping
professional, i.e. sexual contact of any kind
between a helping professional (doctor,
therapist, carers, teacher, priest, professor,
police officer, lawyer, etc.) and a
client/patient.
Sexual harassment, including unwelcome
sexual advances, requests for sexual favours,
and other verbal or physical conduct of a
sexual nature.

4
Rape can be defined as forced sexual intercourse, including vaginal, anal, or oral penetration.
Penetration may be by a body part or an object. Rape victims may be forced through threats or
physical means. Anyone may be a victim of rape: women, men or children, straight or gay.
5
Sexual assaults can be defined as unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or
attempted rape. This includes sexual touching and fondling.
34
3. Assault • Any physical attack against a person or
people, which does not pose a threat to their
life and is not serious. This would include
lower level assaults.
• Attempted assault which fails, due to self-
defence, or if the victim runs away.
• Throwing of objects at a person or people,
including where the object misses its target.
4. Damage of • Any physical attack directed against property,
property which is not life-threatening. This includes also
the daubing of abusive slogans or symbols, or
placing stickers or posters on property,
including graffiti, or damage caused to
property, where it appears that the property
has been specifically targeted because of the
fact that there is a perceived connection
between the owner and the LGBTI
communities.
• Damage to cars or other personal property
belonging to members of LGBTI communities,
where it is apparent that they have been
targeted for this reason.
5. Arson • Arson attacks on property where there is no
threat to life, for instance if the building is
uninhabited at the time of the attack.
• Failed attempts, for instance attempted arson
where the fire fails to catch or the arsonist is
disturbed
6. Threats and • Any clear and specific threat, whether verbal or
psychological written. If the threat is not clear and specific
violence then the incident should be recorded as Abusive
Behaviour.
• Any 'bomb' which is assessed to be a hoax. This
would include something that was designed to
look like a real device but not intended to be
viable, for instance if it does not contain any
explosive material.
• Stalking, including repeated undesired contact
(phone calls, emails, letters, show up
unexpectedly, etc.), following or lying in wait
for the individual, making threats to the
individual or her/his family.
• Blackmailing to divulge publicly, or to family
members or at work, that a person belongs to
the LGBTI community.
• Restriction of freedom (e.g. locking up a
person).
• Defamation, such as outing the LGBTI identity.
• Bullying (e.g. at school, at work place).

35
Group II: Other incidents with a bias motivation (category 7)

Abusive behaviour Hate speech • Individually targeted verbal abuse, whether

face-to-face or via telephone or answer
phone messages. This includes abuse that
is mistakenly directed at, or overheard by,
people who are not members of the LGBTI
communities.

• Individually targeted written abuse

(including emails, mobile phone text
messages, and social media (facebook,
twitter, etc.) as well as targeted letters
(that is, those written for and sent to or
about a specific individual). This includes
written abusive comments about LGBTI
communities or persons that are sent to
individual people, regardless if they are
members of the LGBTI communities. This is
different from a mass mailing of abusive
leaflets, emails or other publications, which
is dealt with by the separate Literature
category.

• Not individually targeted verbal or written

abuse (e.g. general homophobic and
transphobic comments not addressed to
anyone in particular), including those
channelled via the internet and social
media.

• Public hate speech e.g. by politicians.

Literature and • Mass-produced abusive literature or music

Music that is sent to more than one recipient.
This covers mass mailings rather than
individual cases of hate mail, which would
come under the category of Abusive
Behaviour or Threats (depending on
content).
• Literature that is abusive in itself,
irrespective of whether or not the recipient
is from the LGBTI communities.

Discriminatory • Any form of discriminatory incidents which

incidents is not considered a crime.

36