He set up a court martial with the officers of his two ships, and one of the scoundrels, convicted of the murder of the chaplain, had his hand cut off, and was then hanged and burned on a raft, in full view of Quebec. AN, Col. General Bibliography. The citation above shows the format for footnotes and endnotes according to the Chicago manual of style 16th edition. On the one hand, there is the crime of indecent assault, which distinguishes assaults on women article from those on men article 9. While an indecent assault on a woman is punishable by five years in prison and requires the corroboration of a witness, the latter condition is unecessary in the case of an assault on a man, subject in this case to ten years of imprisonment and flogging, which is an exceptional punishment in Canadian law This suggests that the penal law focusses a special attention upon homoerotic behaviours.
The statistical surveys of Hurteau , 47 show the impact of the coming into force of this law upon the penal repression of homosexuals by demonstrating that, from that point on, sexual practices, other than sodomy or attempted sodomy, constitute grounds for condemnation. More globally, the medical discourse warns society against a possible depravity in the mores of the young, that jeopardizes the family and national values. Moreover, all medical research on the invert or homosexual at the beginning of the century went further than a simple understanding of this character and his impulses. As Bonello indicates , 72, 78 , medicine tried more and more to take its place as a social control to avoid any sort of spread of this contagious condition.
In French Canada, the emerging medical science presented itself as above all the defender of the traditional values promoted by the Church. The illness was also defined more as a problem of a religious nature than a biological one Corriveau, , The medical discourse is, so to speak, in the service of religious doctrine.
At the very least, it is intertwined with the theology. For example, the religious and medical discourses together took over the morality of the young and demanded a return to family values.
According to Hurteau , that encouraged the family to pay special attention to homoerotic behaviours likely to happen in the family environment, and a collective sense of insecurity developed regarding homosexuality, which provoked police entrapment of homosexuals through various strategies. From an annual average of seven convictions in Canada at the beginning of the century, the provincial annual average oscillates around 40 convictions for the s in Quebec. Even if these statistics do not distinguish between accusations of sodomy between two men and between a man and woman, they turn out to be indirectly useful because they underline the increase in convictions for sodomy, a crime generally associated with homoerotic behaviours.
Is it not surprising to observe that it seemed to be easier to prove an often private act of sodomy, than a murder or rape? This situation is partially explained by the socio-economic crisis which raged at the time.
J'ai eu la chance de rencontrer l'agent spécial Christophe Durocher. Cette année -là, j'ai laissé ma place à Marie Bookman pour une mission très spéciale. Le pire pour le meilleur - Récits de voyages intérieurs (French Edition). by Joe BikerFly Les aventures de Durocher (French Edition). by Joe BikerFly.
As noted by Linteau et al. In this context, it is less surprising to see homosexuals strongly repressed because they defied the divine order and their sexual behaviours were non-reproductive. Duplessis indeed saw himself as the defender of religious values in Quebec and began a new wave of repression upon non-conforming minorities he considered subversive, especially homosexuals.
In order to promote traditional, religious and ruralQuebecois society, Duplessis did not hesitate to fight these non-conforming elements by using judicial, police and legislative measures. In this socio-political context, the Church sought to increase its control of sexuality in order to protect the Quebecois family and the institution of marriage from any sort of depravity Linteau et al.
The Church saw the rural exodus and the separation between the family and the work place as dangers posed by industrial capital to the institution of marriage, which allowed for the control of male sexuality. By the same token, it is not surprising to note that Quebecois society judged homosexuality more severely than adultery, homosexuality being based only on a hedonism that shattered the sacrosanct rigidity of sexual roles. In this regard, the clergy distrusted the freedom of the urban young who, they thought, might favor the emergence of a homosexual sub-culture, the city being perceived by the clergy as a veritable den of iniquity Lemieux, Montminy, , The Church opposed the distribution of the Kinsey report , which outlined the extent and frequency of homoerotic relations in American society The protection of children became one of the principal arguments of the Church in the legitimization of its fight for the maintenance of good mores.
At the same time, it monopolized the task of providing sex education for the young and their families. This did not prevent certain tribunals from using the pathologizing medical discourse in order to declare homosexuals as being insane For example, from , homosexuality was classified as a sociopathic personality disorder by the American Psychiatric Association and Spencer , mentions an article published in the Journal of Social Hygiene in that recommended therapeutic castration of homosexuals.
The medical discourse rarely legitimized homosexuality. As pointed out by Migneault , 5 , the media mainly relayed the scientific discourse that reinforced the image of the homosexual as sick, even as sexually perverted. Hence, between and , homosexuals were described mainly as a menace to children, often as pedophiles Higgins,, As early as , Hurteau , shows that the courts referred some homosexuals to social workers in Montreal and that the Social Welfare Court sent young delinquents claiming to be homosexual to centers in order to be rehabilitated. A quick analysis of Article of the Criminal Code dealing with sexual psychopaths , which sentences the convicted person to an indeterminate prison term, shows that only an indecent assault upon a male article 13 was initially included, not such an assault upon a woman, thus suggesting that it was above all homoerotic behaviors that the justice system associated with sexual psychopathy.
The crimes of gross indecency article and sodomy article , also associated with homosexuality, would be added to this list in According to Kinsman , this showed that the legislature considered homoerotic behavior as a danger in itself for the community. Judges would interpret the will of Parliament accordingly in the case of Everett George Klippert v. According to Ryan , more than 8, gays and lesbians were investigated by the RCMP during the s. On the other hand, homosexuals were added to a list of undesirable persons in the immigration statutes Sawatsky, ; Kinsman, Keeping this in mind, we note that the number of convictions in Montreal rose from 65 in to in American psychiatrists in particular considered homosexuality to be a pathology properly characterized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Diseases DSM-II , some insisting that it was possible to cure homosexuals through psychological treatment And consequently we note that it is not only an issue of homoerotic acts punishable before the law, but more a particular type of individuality that must be controlled, cured for the dangers attributed to it, particularly with regard to the young.
In this way, the medical discourse occupied a prominant place during the debates surrounding the decriminalization of homoerotic practices between consenting adults in the Omnibus Bill of Hurteau, Some Canadian MPs and Senators even feared that such a legislative initiative would compromise the protection of youth. The dominant medical discourse, which presented homosexuality as some kind of anomaly, was thus transmitted by the mass media to Canadian and Quebecois society in the late s.
Indeed, the publications relating to homosexuality remained, until , framed in terms of crime.
Moreover, as indicated by Hocquenghem , 61 , the medical discourse did not completely replace the religious discourse in the legitimization of penal repression, it only accompanied it, or could supplement it. In other words, the rise of the medical discourse in the domain of human sexuality and penal justice coincided with the distancing of penal legitimization from the religious discourse. An interesting paradox emerges here. It was when the medical discourse pathologizing homosexuality was progressing throughout North America-homosexuality being considered as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association APA until and by the World Health Organization until , that the Canadian penal law system in initiated its decriminalization of homoerotic practices with the adoption of the Omnibus Bill We might thus consider that the emergence of a medical discourse, even if it was mainly pathologizing, initially helped the penal law system to free itself from the influence of the religious discourse to then favor its emancipation from it.
And it was this autonomy of penal law in relation to religion and medecine that finally allowed it to initiate the decriminalization and legal protection of homosexuals in the name of human rights. It is not surprising then that the penal control of homoerotic behavior was largely legitimized by the religious discourse. For that which relates to the penal repression of homoerotic behaviors, we note that it is no longer so much the sexual act in itself that disturbs sodomy, for example , but rather the associated risks, especially as they relate to young people.
The pathologizing medical discourse ensures that homosexuality is no longer condemned as behaviour that is against Nature a crime against religion. For Canadians, such a victory had little value. Above all, Bourassa remained a Canadian trying to understand the Great War. The inability of the belligerent nations to end the war would have a terrible cost for Canada, whoever was to blame for its origins.
Fighting the Great War meant the death of tens of thousands of Canadians; ending the war would mean tens of thousands saved. His simplest observation was perhaps the most valid. If the war was solely about saving lives, then it would be over within a day.
Clearly this was not the case. In time, he hoped, Canadians would understand that the prolongation of the conflict carried with it far more disastrous consequences than a compromised peace. The article struck at the centre of the myth of the Allied war effort, and the hearts of many patriotic Canadians. Portraying the war as a political and economic manoeuvre was especially challenging to the most zealous of patriots who claimed moral superiority over their enemies.
If Britain fought for wealth and power, and not for civilization and liberty, then it was perhaps not worth the increasing cost. This view of the international system differed from that described in the rest of the Canadian press. Drawing on earlier articles he had written,  Bourassa depicted the war for a scrap of paper and Belgian security as a means to an end, a solution to the problem of rising German dominance that had threatened the British Empire for the last two decades.
Bourassa inferred the system which had once assured the continuance of European peace now assured the continuance of war.
The small powers of Europe were to be pushed to one side as the Germans were intent on seeing the scales tip in their favour, while the British were determined to see the opposite. Though the United States was still nominally neutral, the German U-boat campaign had claimed American lives. Equally, the issue of the war had dominated the recent American election between Wilson and Republican Charles Hughes, with Wilson maintaining his policy of neutrality.
It suggested that the powers involved in the conflict declare their war aims. He proposed that this would allow neutral nations to understand better when and how the war would end. The American president did not compromise his neutrality, rather he asked both the Allies and Central Powers to present their goals for the war and let the world judge them impartially.
He believed that this proximity granted them both the moral influence and opportunity to mediate the conflict. Bourassa had previously set out the logic behind the self-interest of governments and their reasons for wanting the war to continue.
Now, he argued, it was in the best interests of the neutral nations that it ended. While those at war sought an end through victory, the neutral powers alone sought an end through negotiation. With so much at stake, Bourassa wondered how the Allies could think of continuing to fight; as even a major defeat was better than total annihilation. Bourassa ended his article on a religious note that belied his aggressive tone.
The views Bourassa defended were reflections of those coming from the Vatican, or at least his own take on them. This moral superiority translated into a ferocious writing style, with evocative imagery and unshakeable conviction that he spoke the truth. His deeply held beliefs left little room for compromise. It is little wonder that English Canada vilified him.
After all, he called the most devoted of war supporters hate mongers possessing short-sighted minds who, if they could, would have God himself in their armies. These are his fellow Canadians.
Neither side was willing to admit the other could be correct. The legitimacy of his analyses of these peace proposals, as insightful as they may have been, often suffered from the anger they revealed. For a man supposedly trying to bring about peace, his tone was decidedly belligerent. Lansdowne, former Governor-General of Canada, as well as the former leader of the Conservative Party in the House of Lords, had an illustrious career in the service of Britain.
Even before the letter had been released, it had an impact on British politics. For the most part, the letter and Lansdowne himself were widely condemned, though it did influence those already deliberating over peace negotiations. The first portion of his article reminded his readers of this intention and linked it to arguments the Pope had already expressed. Peace to Bourassa meant the immediate cessation of hostilities and killing by both sides and did not include any other considerations. Lansdowne presented five points that would encourage Germany to accept a peace.
He believed that reassuring Germany that defeat did not mean destruction, politically or economically, would make them more amenable to negotiations. Just as the Allies had rejected losing the war through the peace terms of , Germany now refused to consider a peace that amounted to an Allied victory. Nevertheless, whether he was a knowing prophet or an unwilling instigator, his words did not endear him to English Canadians.
As a devout Catholic thinker, Bourassa continued to rely heavily on Papal discourse regarding the war. His religion was a crucial component of all his ideas and judgements on the peace proposals. For a dedicated Roman Catholic such as Bourassa, Pope Benedict XV was not only the inspiration for his ideas, but the spiritual and intellectual leader who shepherded his religious beliefs. Della Chiesa had only been a cardinal for six months, after serving as Bishop of Bologna for seven years, though he had had a long career of diplomatic posts within the Vatican.
Few outside of Rome had heard of him, but as his biographer writes, of all the papal candidates in the Conclave, it was Della Chiesa who was the most papabile. The publication of the Treaty of London by the Russians after the fall of the tsar in certainly encouraged this view. His failure to bring about a resolution to World War I was not through lack of trying.