When reflecting on the flaws of the legal protection of transgender people, Spade uses Alan Freeman’s term, “perpetrator perspective,” which seeks to address the lack of consideration for systems of oppression when the perpetrator is identified as an individual. While discrimination law bans inequality on the basis of identity, it prevents the factor of acknowledging if that identity has been subject to historical exclusion. Spade gives the example of the dismantling of affirmative action and desegregation programs, which were gutted because of the threat of “inequality” they posed to white people despite their goal of providing equal access to those who are marginalized.
As a result of its singular focus on the perpetrator as an individual, hate crime law possesses similar weaknesses. Spade notes that hate crime laws neither deter perpetrators from committing crimes of hate nor ensure the safety of the people they are intended to protect. Hate crime law has no actual effect on whether or not someone will commit a crime of this nature because it does not attempt to confront the perpetrator’s bias. Spade also asks the question “what does it mean to use criminal punishment—enhancing laws to purportedly address violence against these groups?” (Spade 45-46). The nature of hate crime law is solely punitive and targets groups of people who these laws are supposed to protect.
Spade, Dean. Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics, and the Limits of Law. Durham & London: Duke University Press. 2015.