Our second point is that this violence does not occur out of the blue. It can be seen as a pendulum swinging back after remarkable advances in LGBTQ+ rights in recent decades. Indeed, a spike in violence often follows major advances in human rights. I can't help but think of the massacre at École Polytechnique on December 6 or the growth of the masculinist movement, which so aptly exemplifies the negative reaction to feminist struggles of the day.
Anti-LGBTQ+ violence is also the result of anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. On that point, I'd like to share some thoughts on the concept of dangerous speech. Dangerous Speech Project defines dangerous speech as any form of expression, such as speech or images, that can increase the risk that its audience will condone or participate in violence against members of another group.
This kind of dangerous speech can be identified based on several hallmarks, including rhetorical hallmarks often found in anti-LGBTQ+ discourse. Examples include dehumanization; portraying the targeted group as a threat to the integrity or purity of the group, including the idea that LGBTQ+ people are recruiting or confusing young people; accusing LGBTQ+ people of attacking women and girls, including accusations of psychological manipulation towards LGBTQ+ communities, or a fear that trans women will attack cisgender women.
Dangerous Speech Project produced a document on the use of dangerous anti-trans rhetoric in the 2024 U.S. election. However, we know that Quebec and Canada—