This thesis is an exploratory study of the Kitchener John School Diversion Program. As a primarily community-based initiative, this program has been developed in response to a particular social problem, street prostitution. The primary focus of the program is to address the problem by targeting the clients of prostitutes. Using a contextual constructionist framework, eight qualitative, semi-structured interviews and three participant observation sessions were conducted to explore and understand how the John School works within the context of its objectives and mandate. Four research questions have been developed to achieve this and focus on (1) how program objectives are implemented within the operation of the diversion program, (2) how stakeholders problematize prostitution and its social actors, (3) what the social conditions and characteristics related to the social construction of prostitution are, as perceived by the social actors, and finally, (4) how the diversion program addresses the problem of prostitution. Through analysis of the data collected, key findings emerge that help to contextualize the diversion program within a broader understanding of its mandates and operations. Specifically, four objectives are identified as the primary goals of the school, being knowledge dissemination, accountability, diversion and change. There are notable discrepancies, however, in terms of how program staff interpret these objectives within the context of their program lectures and materials. Additionally, while strong themes and typifications emerge with respect to how prostitution and its social actors are problematized by the program staff, these themes and typifications have a tendency to conflict with one another when presented to the participants. For example, where prostitution is understood to be a social problem with a number of victims and perpetrators, the participants are frequently typified simultaneously as both victim and villain. In light of these discrepancies, however, it appears that the intended objectives and the actual operation of the diversion program both work towards the same, ultimate goal: change.

This thesis is an exploratory study of the Kitchener John School Diversion Program. As a primarily community-based initiative, this program has been developed in response to a particular social problem, street prostitution. The primary focus of the program is to address the problem by targeting the clients of prostitutes. Using a contextual constructionist framework, eight qualitative, semi-structured interviews and three participant observation sessions were conducted to explore and understand how the John School works within the context of its objectives and mandate. Four research questions have been developed to achieve this and focus on (1) how program objectives are implemented within the operation of the diversion program, (2) how stakeholders problematize prostitution and its social actors, (3) what the social conditions and characteristics related to the social construction of prostitution are, as perceived by the social actors, and finally, (4) how the diversion program addresses the problem of prostitution. Through analysis of the data collected, key findings emerge that help to contextualize the diversion program within a broader understanding of its mandates and operations. Specifically, four objectives are identified as the primary goals of the school, being knowledge dissemination, accountability, diversion and change. There are notable discrepancies, however, in terms of how program staff interpret these objectives within the context of their program lectures and materials. Additionally, while strong themes and typifications emerge with respect to how prostitution and its social actors are problematized by the program staff, these themes and typifications have a tendency to conflict with one another when presented to the participants. For example, where prostitution is understood to be a social problem with a number of victims and perpetrators, the participants are frequently typified simultaneously as both victim and villain. In light of these discrepancies, however, it appears that the intended objectives and the actual operation of the diversion program both work towards the same, ultimate goal: change.

Feminist activism has a rich history in Canada, but mobilization on the issue of violence against women specifically gained considerable momentum during what is often referred to as the “second wave” of the feminist movement. Since this time, the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec have seen a proliferation of both grassroots and public policy responses to intimate partner violence and sexual violence. This study is an effort to construct a feminist history of the activism that occurred between 1970 and 2010, as well as to make sense of feminist claims-making strategies using a social constructionist approach to social problems and to make sense of feminist activism as a social movement using social movement impact theory. In constructing a feminist history, documents from the Canadian Women’s Movement Archives were consulted and interviews with current and former feminist activists were conducted. The historical component of this study focuses on how feminist activists first recognized and responded to the problem of violence against women. This analysis suggests that throughout the last forty years, feminist activists have engaged in a multi-pronged project of providing feminist services for victims of intimate partner and sexual violence, advocating for social and legal change as the “official” response to violence against women, and conducting their own research on the extent and nature of violence against women. Various strategies were used in this process, including forming partnerships and coalitions, but activists also faced challenges from within and outside the movement, including internal debates, struggles to fit in, and backlash from counter movements. The final chapter discusses how the history of feminist activism on violence against woman cannot easily fit into strict constructionist approach to understanding social problems and, as a social movement, is difficult to evaluate given the myriad goals, mechanisms for reaching those goals, and interpretations of success associated with the movement. Future research directions are also suggested, including looking at evidence of claims-making from other sources; bridging the gap, theoretically and pragmatically, between the “mainstream” feminist movement and other streams of women’s activism; and, more conceptual work on feminist movements and the separation between intimate partner and sexual violence.

Feminist activism has a rich history in Canada, but mobilization on the issue of violence against women specifically gained considerable momentum during what is often referred to as the “second wave” of the feminist movement. Since this time, the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec have seen a proliferation of both grassroots and public policy responses to intimate partner violence and sexual violence. This study is an effort to construct a feminist history of the activism that occurred between 1970 and 2010, as well as to make sense of feminist claims-making strategies using a social constructionist approach to social problems and to make sense of feminist activism as a social movement using social movement impact theory. In constructing a feminist history, documents from the Canadian Women’s Movement Archives were consulted and interviews with current and former feminist activists were conducted. The historical component of this study focuses on how feminist activists first recognized and responded to the problem of violence against women. This analysis suggests that throughout the last forty years, feminist activists have engaged in a multi-pronged project of providing feminist services for victims of intimate partner and sexual violence, advocating for social and legal change as the “official” response to violence against women, and conducting their own research on the extent and nature of violence against women. Various strategies were used in this process, including forming partnerships and coalitions, but activists also faced challenges from within and outside the movement, including internal debates, struggles to fit in, and backlash from counter movements. The final chapter discusses how the history of feminist activism on violence against woman cannot easily fit into strict constructionist approach to understanding social problems and, as a social movement, is difficult to evaluate given the myriad goals, mechanisms for reaching those goals, and interpretations of success associated with the movement. Future research directions are also suggested, including looking at evidence of claims-making from other sources; bridging the gap, theoretically and pragmatically, between the “mainstream” feminist movement and other streams of women’s activism; and, more conceptual work on feminist movements and the separation between intimate partner and sexual violence.

No description available.