Cybertrans:Online Spaces and Places, Isolation, and Unclaimed Activism in the Transgender Movement

CYBERTRANS:ONLINE SPACES AND PLACES, ISOLATION, AND UNCLAIMED ACTIVISM IN THE TRANSGENDER MOVEMENT

PETTA-GAY GEANETTE HANNAH

A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2016

To my Mother for all of her sacrifices

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my Mother, Andrea Rhoden, my Grandmother, Panchetta

Rhoden, my Cousin, Carol Rhoden, and all the other women in my family before them who dedicated their lives to seek a way for their children. You all were the first feminists in my life. You all have inspired me to want more, and have taught me that I could be more.

To my sisters, and brothers thank you for listening to my complaints. I want to also thank you all for constantly asking me about the time frame in which I would finish my degree; your inquisitions kept me motivated to complete my research. I would also like to thank Mamey and Pops for their continued support of my goals from the very moment they met me.

I would like to thank my participants for volunteering their time to tell me their stories, without them, none of what I know about my topic would be possible. Moreover,

I would not be able to achieve my goal of finally earning a Ph.D. without their stories.

To my committee members, Dr. Kendal Broad-Wright; Dr. Barbara Zsembik; Dr.

Constance Shehan; and Dr. Bonnie Moradi, thank you. Though my journey to this point has been rough, I appreciate the constant support. Thank you for never giving up on me, I needed someone to believe in me, before I could have learned to believe in myself. I am forever grateful for your support. Kendal, I am forever grateful for the kind and constant feedback over the years and especially during the writing process, it has made me stronger and more open to critique, and I know it also made my analysis better. Dr. Zsembik, I do not know if I would still be in this program if it were not for your constant support and mentoring. You have always been there for me through the good and the bad, thank you.

To my friends and colleagues, thank you for the kind words of encouragement, the shared resources, the mentoring, and for demonstrating that it was possible to achieve your degrees; it gave me motivation to continue when I thought I could not go on any longer. A special thank you to Amanda Ragnauth for her careful review of the final iteration of this dissertation.

I would also like to thank the Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law and the Office of Graduate Minority Programs for their support throughout my tenure as a graduate student.

To Andrew Riera, my partner, thank you for your patience; yet much needed expressed frustrations; it kept me honest with my goals, my path, and myself. You are my rock and my confidant; and you constantly challenge me to stay in the moment. I love you.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 4

LIST OF TABLES ...... 8

LIST OF FIGURES ...... 9

ABSTRACT ...... 10

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 12

Qualitative Approach and Research Goals: Grounded Theory ...... 13 Literature Review ...... 14 Sensitizing Concepts ...... 16 Space ...... 17 Collective identity and identity politics ...... 20 Infighting ...... 22 Online Support Group: The Internet, Support Groups and Social Movements . 25

2 DATA AND METHODS ...... 27

Sampling Strategies ...... 27 Data Collection ...... 32 Semi-Structured Interviews ...... 32 Active Mobile Online Ethnography (Field Research) ...... 33 Textual (Data) Analysis ...... 38 Coding and Analysis ...... 39 Pilot Study ...... 44 Adjustments to Methods and Methodologies ...... 46 Sampling Adjustments ...... 46 Interview Guide Adjustments ...... 47 Recruiting Adjustments...... 48

3 ONLINE SPACE AS PLACE ...... 50

Gender, Space, and Place ...... 50 Finding Spaces of Acceptance ...... 52 “I Googled it” ...... 53 Using Online Spaces Of Acceptance to Find Other Spaces of Acceptance ..... 56 “Trace Back” Method ...... 57 Doing is Believing ...... 59 Doing (Trans)Gender ...... 59 “Who I am DOES exist and is real”: coming out of the closet...... 62

Finally, acceptance ...... 64 Collective Identity ...... 65 Space and Place-Making ...... 76 Networks ...... 77 Space Becomes Place ...... 81

4 ISOLATION: THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ME UNDER YOUR UMBRELLA ...... 85

Collective Identity and Identity Politics ...... 86 Still just a BIG Closet ...... 97 Trolling ...... 101

5 DOING TRANSGENDER ACTIVISM: COLLECTIVE ACTION IN ONLINE PLACES ...... 110

(Trans)gender Activism ...... 110 (Trans)gender Identity, Activism and Space ...... 116 Activism is Acceptance Work ...... 129

6 FINDING THE TRANSGENDER MOVEMENT ONLINE: SPACEMAKING, UNMAKING, COLLECTIVE IDENTITIES AND ACTIVISM ...... 132

Collective Identities and Identity Politics ...... 133 Collective Identities ...... 134 Identity Politics ...... 135 Space and Place ...... 137 Isolation: Making & Unmaking of Online Spaces and Places ...... 143 Activism ...... 147 Activism in the Transgender Movement ...... 148 Inclusion and Exclusion: Gender and Sexuality Politics ...... 150 Reflection and Limitations ...... 153

APPENDIX

A INTERVIEW GUIDE...... 157

B IRB PROTOCOL ...... 159

C CONSENT FORM ...... 162

D RECRUITMENT MATERIALS ...... 164

E TABLE OF INTERVIEW PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS ...... 167

REFERENCES ...... 168

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...... 173

LIST OF TABLES

Table page

E-1 Interview participant demographics ...... 167

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure page

5-1 Carla Helps an Old Lady Cross the Street ...... 124

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

CYBERTRANS:ONLINE SPACES AND PLACES, ISOLATION, AND UNCLAIMED ACTIVISM IN THE TRANSGENDER MOVEMENT

Petta-Gay Geanette Hannah

August 2016

Chair: Kendal Broad-Wright Major: Sociology

The little research that exists about transgender social movements suggests that a transgender movement exists online, however, scholars know little about the movement with sparse evidence to indicate the current state of online groups, their activities and their levels of activism. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to understand the processes by which transgender and gender non-conforming (TAGN) people form identities, communities, and spaces online.

Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, I collected both elicited and extant data while paying attention to three sensitizing concepts:(1) Space; (2) Collective

Identity and Identity Politics; and (3) Infighting. Elicited data were collected using two methods: (1) Semi-structured in-depth interviews, and (2) Active Mobile Online

Ethnographies (AMOE). The interviews ranged from one hour to more than four and a half hours. Extant data were collected via textual analyses from ten sites (5 personal blogs and 5 non-blog). There were twenty-one participants, eighteen of whom identified as Male-to-Female TAGN. Most of the participants are white and were employed. Data were coded using open coding and then focused coding.

My analysis of the data outlines a grounded theory of transgender social movement activism online, thereby offering three important contributions to the social movements literature. First, my analysis shows that online spaces foster individual, gender, and collective identity development, enabling the acceptance of authentic selves for TAGN individuals. My data show that these online spaces over time are transformed into more tangible spaces or places of acceptance. Second, my analysis illustrates that even though online spaces can become places of acceptance, TAGN individuals sometimes still feel isolated. Thus, when isolation occurs, these online places can revert back, simply, just to spaces and can lose their value and their meaning. At heart, my analysis shows that isolation is an important tool for solidifying collective transgender identities. Third, my analysis highlights that the ways in which these individuals perform gender and sexuality online, results in activism work, indicating that their online activism is an outcome of their identity development and politics. Therefore, these online places create room for collective identities and collective action to flourish.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

The Internet has become an important space for people who identify as transgender and gender non-conforming (TAGN1) individuals, they are able to come out of the closet online and they are able to learn about others who are like them (Shapiro

2004). In addition, some scholars have suggested that the transgender movement has moved online (Shapiro 2004; Stryker 2004). Shapiro (2004) notes that the use of the

Internet in the development and growth of the transgender movement created both a tool for activists and a space within which activism can happen. Specifically, Shapiro

(2004) argues that major waves of impact on the transgender community spurred the development of a transgender movement online; yet, scholars know little about the transgender movement online today. Particularly, one core question is still unanswered: what does this movement online look like, and why and for what purposes do members use these spaces?

As a result, I argue that to gain a better understanding of how the transgender movement has progressed, research should address and assess the state of transgender movement online. The purpose of this grounded theory research, then, is to understand the processes by which TAGN individuals form identities, communities, and spaces online. Here, the transgender movement online is defined as places online where TAGN people engage in interaction with each other (including websites, online chat groups, blogs, vlogs (video blogs), and other social media sites).

1 The abbreviation TAGN will be used throughout this dissertation to represent the phrase transgender and gender non-conforming individuals.

Qualitative Approach and Research Goals: Grounded Theory

The primary goal of this project has been achieved by using grounded theory to trace the processes by which transgender movement work is done in online spaces. A grounded theory approach can be used to develop a theoretical explanation of a phenomenon. That is, it can generate a theory that moves beyond a descriptive account of the phenomenon. In general, the data collection and data analysis are linked and are occurring simultaneously (Creswell 2013; Corbin and Strauss 2007; Strauss and Corbin

1998). Moreover, the theory emerges from, or is “grounded” in, the data (Corbin and

Strauss 2007; Strauss and Corbin 2008). According to Creswell (2013), a grounded theory approach is best because it is a good design to use when there is not a theory available to explain or understand a process. Therefore, a grounded theory approach enabled me to develop a theory that is not yet available to explain the process of the transgender movement online (cf: Corbin and Strauss 2007). Though there are emerging theories and studies available pertaining to movement activism online, in general, these theories do not address online spaces and transgender people.

More specifically, I believe that a constructivist grounded theory approach is most appropriate (Charmaz 2006). This approach assumes that the researcher is a part of the world that he/she studies and the data he/she collects, thus data and theories are not discovered. Instead “[a]nalytic directions arise from how researchers interact with and interpret their comparisons and emerging analyses rather than from external prescriptions” (Charmaz 2006:178). As a result, the theories that emerge are seen as an interpretation of the research and thus it is not an exact picture of the world. In the case of interviews, the interpretations are co-constructed between the interviewee and the interviewer. In addition, due to the fluidity of identities in transgender communities, a

constructivist approach is helpful because it allows the researcher to be as reflexive as possible and make decisions about categories, the process and the data as the research proceeds and develops.

The purpose of this grounded theory research at the outset was to understand the processes by which TAGN Individuals form identities and communities online and do movement work. Therefore, I began this research with this research question: what are the processes through which transgender and gender non-conforming people online do movement work? I began with the following sub questions:

1. How do transgender people and gender non-conforming individuals form transgender and gender non-conforming specific spaces online? 2. What do space/site members do in these spaces? 3. What other spaces/sites do they visit? 4. Why do they visit these sites, what is their reasoning? 5. How do they do movement work? 6. Do members in these sites share a collective identity?

Literature Review

Grounded theorists use literature reviews but they do not use them in the same way that other researchers do. Instead, they do so once they have collected and developed an independent analysis. So, they delay the literature review until the theoretical findings of the project has been developed. Delaying literature reviews, according to many grounded theory scholars is a mechanism for researchers to avoid seeing the world through extant data and pre-existing theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967;

Glaser 1978; see Charmaz 2006 and 2014). Delaying the literature review does not mean that the researcher has no preconceived notions or any epistemological framings in mind when he/she/ze begins grounded theory work; in fact, it is quite the contrary.

For example, constructivist grounded theorists in particular, rely on previous literature and teachings to help frame their knowledge about a topic as well as their emerging

interests about those topics. Constructivist grounded theorists assume it would be difficult to completely separate one’s perspectives, his/her knowledge and training from the current research interests. Constructed grounded theorists discuss the literature after the analysis is developed and as such, I plan to situate my arguments and findings from the research in the final chapter of this document.

Furthermore, constructivist grounded theorists often begin with certain research interests and a set of general concepts (sensitizing concepts) (Charmaz 2006 and

2014). Similarly, constructivist grounded theorists think it is best to draft the literature review and theoretical frame in relation to your grounded theory (Charmaz 2006 and

2014). Charmaz (2006, 2014) believes that the literature review—which is written after data is collected and analyzed—can become a great source for comparison

(comparative methods) and analysis. When we compare our findings to other relevant and extant data, we are able to demonstrate “where and how previous ideas illuminate

[my] theoretical categories and how [my] theory extends, transcends, or challenges dominant ideas [within] the field” (Charmaz 2006:165). That is, with extant data we are better able to make connections between previous ideas and our overall findings.

Additionally, we are better able scrutinize, recognize and evaluate how extant data shape analysis, theory and knowledge. As a result, I began this research by acknowledging the influence of previous knowledge on my findings and I embraced how previous knowledge was likely to shape my findings via comparative methods.

As a constructivist grounded theorist, I began this project with the belief that it is best to draft the literature review and theoretical frame in relation to my grounded theory. I acknowledged that my preconceived notions and my previous knowledge have

shaped my research agenda. Therefore, I began by illustrating how these extant data have helped framed my knowledge about social movements and transgender and gender non-conforming people. Specifically, I began this project with the following sensitizing concepts: space; collective identity and identity politics; and infighting. I entered this project with these sensitizing concepts from my knowledge about the previous literature on these topics.

Sensitizing Concepts

According to Charmaz (2006 and 2014), sensitizing “concepts give you initial ideas to pursue and sensitize you to ask particular kinds of questions about your topic”

(2006:16). Therefore, sensitizing concepts help the researcher ask perceptive questions, and these concepts provide and alert the researcher to specific ideas that may be relevant to his/her project. These concepts serve as a loose and flexible frame to guide research interests. Specifically, a sensitizing concept gives the researcher a point from which to start. Researchers can use sensitizing concepts to help make research questions, guide and listen to interviews, and analyze data. Therefore, sensitizing concepts help develop ideas which further helps the researcher to

(re)develop the data and simultaneously analyze the data (Charmaz 2006).

In particular, sensitizing concepts can be used to develop a starting point to help with defining the processes that I seek to understand, but it does not necessarily provide an ending point. Instead, they enable the research to be reflexive, in that the researcher can adjust and disregard concepts as the data collection and analyses proceed. Sensitizing concepts, in short, help the researcher to avoid applying preconceived theories and ideas to our data; instead, we can “follow leads that we define in the data or design another way of collecting data to pursue our initial interests”

(Charmaz 2006:17). As I discuss my results in the coming chapters, I will discuss where and how these sensitizing concepts earned their way into or became irrelevant to my analysis.

Space

There is an increasing trend by scholars who do transgender research to look at geographical spaces and places. Particularly, Phibbs (2008) suggests that transgender- specific research in Perth and Sydney Australia reveals that gender, space, and place illustrate the ways that inter-personal interactions are shaped by the contexts in which they occur. She contends that we are better able to “map the complex and the contradictory means by which social relations are organized, made meaningful and maintained through inter-linkages within networks of relations which shift over time and space” (2008:607). Place and space then are significant elements in the “construction of relational identities on different personal, local and global scales” (2008:607). Here

Phibbs (2008), drawing from Massey (1992) and Fincher and Panelli (2001), describes space as “relational in the sense that it is constituted by and constitutive of social processes.” She also indicates that the social dynamics of space include a gendered

(Massey 1994:2; Namaste 1996:225) and sexualized dimension (Namaste 1996).

Place, on the other hand, she argues, refers to another aspect of relational identify, which occur on different personal, local and global scales. Place tends to be viewed as more bounded or more localized than space (Massey 1994:5), and the meanings attached to place are constructed in relation to broader social configurations that transcend place such as nation, sex, gender and family (Massey 1994: 5; Jacobs and

Fincher, 1998: 21) (also see Phibbs 2008).

As place and space relate to gender then, transgender people are better able to construct narratives about themselves as people who have ‘chosen’ their gender in certain spaces. Therefore, these construction narratives are not only ontological narratives but, explicitly; transgender narratives are public, local and or global. As illustrated by Phibbs (2008), space is central to a transgender construction. In addition,

Enke (2007) illuminates the importance of space to social movements.

In particular, Enke’s (2007) analysis of commercial, civic and institutional spaces demonstrates the cohesion of the women’s movement through geographical and contested spaces. These spaces were contested and created because of the need for women-only spaces. Some women who occupied or helped to create such spaces adopted the identities of feminists. Yet, other women who contributed to feminist activism and to the creation of such spaces did not always take on these feminist identities. Thus women’s spaces often became feminist spaces and constructed identities of womanhood to include those who are different from men and reject normative gender roles. These spaces were also organized around the multiplicities of race, class, gender, and sexualities.

Typically, race, class and gender took the foreground in these spaces as women of color, and various classes contested the spaces that marginalized them (those that were typically central to white, middle-class men). Furthermore, Enke (2007) argues that sexuality played a most important role in the construction of these spaces.

Moreover, she suggests that women’s space was often conflated with lesbians’ spaces

(i.e. sexuality). As a result, many women in the movement did want to be known as lesbians, especially in the beginning stages of the movement when the movement was

less established. The argument for detaching sexuality initially from the feminist movement was to ensure that a lesbian identity did not cause the movement (the group) to lose credibility. As a result, many lesbians got frustrated with being marginalized within their “own spaces” and began to create new spaces which recognized and catered to their sexualities.

Activists took over some of these contested spaces and or transformed others into a place and space that they could call their own. As a result, they demonstrate how different types of activism in these different kinds and types of spaces (situational, geographical and civic versus commercial) contribute to the construction of the movement. Hence, the organization of a movement occurs at different points in time, in different spaces, by different people who carve out space, a little at a time. Enke (2007) contributes to the body of movements’ literature, a new frame from which to observe movements, which she illustrates through tracing feminist activism through the lens and pathways of space. Spaces create room for identities and interactions to develop and evolve. They promote inclusivity for some, but they can also exclude others, as they did with lesbian feminists.

Based on this literature, I began this project with the creation/maintenance of space as a sensitizing concept. As a result, I observed changes in participants’ activities in the online spaces that they visited and or created and then paid attention to details, such as how often they went to these spaces, which spaces they visited (where) and when they went to these online spaces. I also tried to determine what kinds of information were posted in these spaces as they may have alerted me to any changes in in-group identities (see collective identity below). In addition, since spaces are and

can be intertwined with the intersectionality of gender, race, class, health and sexuality and so forth, I also paid attention to the sensitizing concepts that not only related to space, but also to other sensitizing concepts that may have been related to gender, race, class, health and or sexuality.

Collective identity and identity politics

According to Polletta and Jasper (2001), collective identity is “an individual’s cognitive, moral, and emotional connection with a broader community, category, practice, or institution” (285). Consequently, collective identity can be seen and perceived as a shared status or relation. And though collective identity is different from

‘personal identity,’ it is not mutually exclusive and can impact parts of ‘personal identity.’

Moreover, Polletta and Jasper (2001) illustrate that collective identities can take the form of and be (re)presented in cultural materials such as names, narratives, symbols, verbal styles, rituals, clothing and so forth, though this not always the case. Likewise, they argue that you can distinguish collective identity from ideology because collective identity imparts positive feelings to the people in its group (also see Taylor and Whittier

1999).

According to Bernstein and Taylor (2013), “identity politics” is mutually exclusive and distinct from class-based movements. In general, the authors describe identity politics as occurring from any mobilization related to politics, culture, and identity.

Therefore, identity politics emerges out of activism and is organized around categories like gender, race/ethnicity, and sexuality.

Thus, collective identities and identity politics are sensitizing concepts for the reason that early transgender activism and transgender politics were framed in terms of a notion of “transgender identity” as a category of gender. That is, movement strategies

were often ones, which were either focused on, and or were organized around, collective identities. When movement members where fighting for equality for transgender persons, they enacted an ethnic identity that was organized around their gendered one. The transgender movement positioned itself as encompassing an ethnic identity, one that was inclusive of everyone, an umbrella movement, used to mobilize all of those who fall into a gender variant category. Thus, the “umbrella term” framed by the movement and its’ organizations are seen as inclusive (collective identity) (Gamson

1995; Broad 2002; Davidson 2007; Ghaziani 2008). A movement framed as having an inclusive collective identity served as a point from which to organize and achieve equal rights for all of those under the umbrella. Thus, collective identity and identity politics are relevant sensitizing concepts.

Furthermore, identity politics and collective identity are important sensitizing concepts in relation to the notions of queer work in sex and gender movements. For instance, Gamson (1997) investigated queer identity politics within the gay and lesbian movements from 1991-1993 by analyzing the use of the word “queer.” Here Gamson

(1997) argues that the distinctions apparent in sex and gender movements (the transgender movement) are demonstrated by collective identity and identity work, and it is through these processes where members decide who is excluded but also who is the outsider within. Accordingly Gamson states that (1997):

the [m]aintenance of group boundaries involves movements in bitter disputes not only with those everyone agrees is not a member (that is, with antagonists) but also in often uglier conflicts with those who might reasonably be considered members or protagonists. The us is solidified not just against an external them but also against thems inside” (179-180).

In general, Gamson (1995) notes that the implication for use of the term queer, and the inclusion of bisexual and transgender, questions the viability and usefulness of

sexuality-based political identities. It disrupts sex and gender identity boundaries and deconstructs identity categories, which is problematic because fixed identity categories are both the basis for oppression (fluid and unstable experiences become fixed due to the social construction of categories, especially binary ones) and the basis for political power. In particular, some scholars suggest that while some identity politics do serve to self-destruct the transgender movement, identity politics also provides a space where transgender activists can enact and negotiate their appropriate identities (Gamson

1995, 1997; Broad 2002; Schrock, Holden and Reid 2004; Ghaziani 2008). As sensitizing concepts, collective identity and identity politics will serve to help me “follow leads that [are] defined in the data.” To do so, I was sensitive to phrases or discussions about boundaries, belonging, and group identities (in/exclusion) (Charmaz 2006:17).

Infighting

The transgender movement is known for having internal disagreement and infighting (Gamson 1995: Ghaziani 2008; Ghaziani and Fine 2008). Thus, I used the notion of “infighting” as another sensitizing concept. In particular, Amin Ghaziani (2008) offers an important argument that dissent is necessary and inevitable for movement development. More specifically, Ghaziani (2008) views dissent as “infighting”2— disagreement between members within the group, especially among those members with different worldviews—which is distinct from general conflict within the movement and precedes the breakup of the group. Infighting, then, can occur when members are trying to make decisions about organizing and organize tasks within a movement.

These tasks can take the form of things like deciding whether and when to march or

2 Infighting is also understood as a sub-type of conflict (Ghaziani and Fine 2008)

what the overall movement goals are. That is, members may decide when and how often, if at all, certain tasks occur within a group. These kinds of decision-making that occur within groups and among group members often allow for a more tangible occurrence of identity and strategy. Therefore, through the exploration, discussion, decision-making and the doing (action-based) of movement tasks, the issues of identity and strategy (the state of the movement) often emerge.

For example, as Ghaziani (2008) indicates and ultimately argues in his work, which explores how conflict and culture work in Lesbian and Gay Marches in

Washington, infighting provides the promotion of a cultural template that will dictate how future marches will proceed from one march to the next. The conflict and discussion on when and where to march in Ghaziani’s (2008) study is imbued with cultural components, which often emerged out of a convergence of assumptions, meanings, and agreements among activists. Thus, it is through this discourse of dissent that activists engage in identity work because they also address questions that pertain to their identities and the meanings that are associated with them. In particular, Ghaziani

(2008) contends that “rampant infighting” is a mechanism that activists use to facilitate

“meta-meanings” through the task of practical organizing.

Dissent creates a space for cultural and identity development in a democratic way. It creates a space for people to air their grievances and have them addressed. For instance, Ghaziani (2008) explains how the visibility of transgender people within the

Millennium march also spawned acceptance into other organizations across the country

(inclusion of the term transgender in their organization name). Dissent demonstrates how infighting is often imbued with identity politics and we see good examples of the

relationship between dissent and sexuality politics in general and movements and sexuality politics in particular. To grasp a better understanding of the complex relationship between identity politics and dissent, we must be sensitive to infighting. In particular, dissent over who should be included and whether the term transgender should be all encompassing, may serve as indicators of the sensitizing concept of infighting.

By identifying these three sensitizing concepts from previous literature, I am striving to avoid simplistically applying preconceived theories and ideas to my data. The above mentioned sensitizing concepts will help me “follow leads that [are] defined in the data” and if I am unable to follow leads that I have defined using these sensitizing concepts, I can then drop these sensitizing concepts and look for other relevant categories to emerge from the data (Charmaz 2006:17). In short, at the very least, I had a primary point from which I began to follow initial interests. Additionally, some of my starting points yielded little to no data, but it did not mean that I failed. Failure simply meant that other concepts emerged from the data as more relevant to the particular circumstance of my study–online transgender movement work.

To reiterate, though I used the existing literature to help give me initial ideas, which also helped ‘sensitize’ me to ask perceptive questions that may have been relevant to my project. As a result, these (sensitizing) concepts served only as a flexible frame that guided my research interests; they did not shape my theory. Instead, careful coding and step-by-step analyses shaped my theory. For instant, constant comparative methods (discussed below) where used to carefully attend to the sensitizing concepts during this entire process of data collection and analysis to determine if these

sensitizing concepts were relevant. Correspondingly, since I had to begin my research from somewhere (point), these sensitizing concepts obtained from the literature served as my point of departure. That is, these sensitizing concepts were used as a starting point from which to guide the research and begin the project.

Online Support Group: The Internet, Support Groups and Social Movements

In addition to identifying the three sensitizing concepts from the literature above, I also defined online support groups and explained how they are relevant to understanding and conceptualizing the research. As it pertains to online space, some scholars are still skeptical of using data in relation to online space as a way to understand how people make meaning, although there is an increasing legitimatization in observing these spaces (Comstock and Joanne 1997; Obrien 1999; Gubrium and

Holstein 2001; Broad and Joos (2004); Shapiro 2004). In particular, scholars such as

Broad and Joos (2004; see Shapiro 2004) add to the legitimation of these spaces by arguing that online spaces provide access to the production of “deprivatized selves”, that is, selves that are produced in public spaces (See Comstock and Joanne 1997).

Broad and Joos (2004) employed O’Brien’s arguments, which suggest that the Internet is a cultured space where gender scripts are enacted and produced (1999). They also pulled from Gubrium and Holstein (2001) to explain that today our subjective selves are increasingly produced in a variety of public circumstances, such as support groups.

Thus, Broad and Joos argue that “the internet is a space where “real selves” can be produced, in terms of cultural contingencies” and it enables the production of

“deprivatized” selves “publicly” (2004:925).

Following these arguments, I classify online support groups as necessary sites of interest because our subjective selves are increasingly produced in a variety of public circumstances, such as support groups. Broad and Joos (2004) argue that though previous debates suggest that people are deceptive online because of the disembodiment process, that is, people create their sense of selves because they do not have a body in cyberspace (detached from their body), this is not necessarily the case. Instead, they assume that when persons enter cyberspace, they bring with them constructed notions of cultural scripts, which they use to map the new territory (Broad and Joos 2004). That being said, online support groups then, are important places to explore in order to understand how transgender and gender non-conforming identities are developed, sustained, and managed over time.

In addition, I also classify support groups as important sites of interrogation for movement work. Though support groups can be seen as informal networks, they are held together by strong bonds and therefore are the basic building blocks of social movements (Taylor and Whittier 1999; also see McAdam, McCarty and Zald 1988).

Likewise, though these support groups are influenced and shaped by shifting forms of resistance, support groups then can also be seen as comprising social movements, structurally (Taylor and Whittier 1999). While the support groups that Taylor and Whittier

(1999) explored are not online-based, their findings are important for understanding the value of support networks for and to movement work. More importantly, support networks can help us understand why online support groups are important spaces of interrogation for transgender people in particular, as they spend a more substantial amount of their time both online and in online support groups.

CHAPTER 2 DATA AND METHODS

In this dissertation extant data and elicited data are used to assess the research questions. Extant data were gathered via textual analysis of transgender specific websites, blogs, vlogs and forums. In addition, elicited data was collected via semi- structured interviews from individuals who participate in these transgender specific online spaces.

Sampling Strategies

Like most qualitative research, this project started off with a purposive sampling strategy to purposefully inform an understanding of the transgender movement online. I sampled at the process (online groups) and at the participants (individuals) level. After pilot data was collected, I determined that snowball sampling was a more effective sampling approach to collecting interview data (see re-examination of methods section below); but purposive sampling still proved very effective for obtaining data from websites, vlogs, blogs and forums. A grounded theory approach to sampling can involve a purposive sampling and snowball sampling (Creswell 2013). While sample size is often important, in grounded theory, there is no specific sampling size. Instead, sampling is driven by obtaining a sample big enough to generate saturated theory.

According to Charmaz (2006), the number needed to reach saturation is usually about

20 to 30 individuals, but it can much larger, if necessary.

To begin sampling, I used alexia ranking and the page rank algorithm to determine the top-ranked spaces (websites, forums, vlogs, and blogs) by using Google search terms such as “transgender support” and “transgender” in order to find the top- ranked groups. Google search engine uses the Eigenvector centrality (Rodgers)

measures to rank webpages, it rates websites based upon the amount of requests it gets from clicks. Therefore, Eigenvector centralization, shows the connect-ability of a website (organization) based upon how connected it is to its neighboring networks. The most highly connected vertices are the ones that are considered most important and are the top results displayed in Google searchers. This purposeful way of initial sampling helped me address my research agenda and assessed the spaces (sites) that were the most visited. It is important to assess the most visited sites as I surmise that if there is activism occurring online in these spaces, then the most visited sites are some of the first places to begin (Creswell 2013).

Also, to obtain participants for the interview portion of the study, I used a snowball sampling strategy. Snowball sampling enables me to identify people of interest from other people who were interviewed. These interviewees may know which individuals are information rich (Creswell 2013). Based upon the result from my pilot research (below), snowball sampling proved the best way to locate the participants who frequent online spaces and who also identify as transgender. These people are difficult to find in general because they identify as a marginalized group and they often go online to find spaces for refuge. Although some of these spaces are open, these individuals do not necessarily trust others who do not identify as them. As a result, a snowball sampling strategy was the best approach to find these hidden people.

I used a grounded theory approach that enables reflexivity based on the results obtained during data collection and analysis, because I knew that the sampling strategies could change. A grounded theory approach, made it possible to be open to sampling outside of the groups in this parameter, if the need ever arose. To reiterate,

Alexia rankings through purposive sampling were used to gather data from the blogs, vlogs, forums and websites. Snowballing sampling methods were used to gather interview data and find vlogs, blogs, forums and websites.

For the interview portion of the study, twenty-one participants who identified as transgender and or gender non-conforming, who visited transgender specific websites frequently, were interviewed over the phone, face-to-face (if they were regional), and through email or through video interviews, using software such as Skype. The interviews ranged from one hour to more than four and a half hours in length. In addition to having a transgender and or gender non-conforming identity, all of the participants claimed another identity besides a transgender one. Some participants identified as a crossdressers, others identified as transsexuals (only three female-to-male), transvestites, genderqueers, bigenders, queer, transwomen, transmen, and simply transgender. Participant’s ages ranged from 18 to 87 and most participants identified as white except for two participants, one of whom identified as Hispanic and the other whom identified as a Native American. Participants’ socio-demographic descriptors such as class, income and education suggest that most participants came from middle- class backgrounds, with few participants reporting working class backgrounds and high school educational attainment. Some participants also reported unemployment struggles related to their transgender and gender non-conforming identity, which may be more indicative of current financial stability than just education and class alone

(please see the demographic Appendix E for more information).

Each participant was asked the same set of questions initially, but as the interviews progressed, probing questions were tailored to each participant depending on

their responses to the answers. This type of flexibility interviewing is appropriate in grounded theory. According to Charmaz 2014, flexibility in constructivist grounded theory interviewing is essential because it enables the researcher to access the topics in a way that is relevant to participants and enables reflection and development of ideas. Therefore, researchers may find that they have to soften a question or change the wording based upon prior knowledge gained about these lines/types of questions from earlier participants.

Generally, the researcher may have questions or hunches about topics that were addressed earlier and they can tailor, revisit, and vary the interview process for each participant accordingly. Charmaz indicates that “[i]ntensive interviewing does mean improvising (2014:69).” Therefore, as the interview proceeds the researcher is encouraged to ask the participants questions that enable and facilitate reflection, expression and the development of their thoughts. The researcher, in this case, is expected to be reflexive, and also be mindful of interview tactics such as change of tone, (un)emphasize, shift conversation to follow and or explore hunches (Charmaz

2014). Overall, these strategies are appropriate and necessary with grounded theory because without them, the researcher may disrupt the flow of the interview or worse, they may structure questions so rigidly and or provide so little feedback to participants that they fail to encourage participants to express their meanings.

I learned quickly that unlike conversations, I needed to provide more feedback during interviews to participants than just, “that sounds good.” This was especially true for interviews that were over the phone or through other technological spaces. However,

I found that when I talked to participants, I needed to ask them to explain what they

meant by simple things such as “I like to help others, it makes me feel good.” I learned to say, “that's great, can you tell me more about that?” Sometimes, I would follow up with more specific questions, such as who, how and why, depending on how well the initial probes worked. This way of interviewing enabled me to follow hunches that I had about the identity making processes for veteran participants who had been participating in online spaces for years. I thought that by helping others come to terms with who they are as well, these veteran participants were learning more about their identities. As a grounded theorist researcher, I was able to use these tactics to explore and follow the data and co-construct meaning with participants so that I could understand their meanings more simply.

Moreover, though I attempted to keep interview questions in the same order for each participant, when I asked participants to tell their stories about their experiences and how they came to identify as transgender and or gender non-conforming, they often addressed some of the later questions I wanted to ask in my interview guide. As a result, though my interviews are semi-structured, I adjusted future interviews that retained the semi-structured frame, but still allowed flexibility in terms of question order.

That is, I was able to ask questions out of order when needed. This type of structuring and flexibility made the interviewing process more fluid and organic. Correspondingly, while I addressed all of the questions I wanted to ask, not all questions in the interview guide were relevant to every participant. Most participants began addressing some of the topics on their own as well, since our conversations and the line of questioning related to the research may have led participants to address and discuss other relevant

topics to fully share their stories. In these cases, I often pursued and addressed topics based upon when and how each topic arose, naturally, in our discussions.

Ostensibly, this method and process allowed me to use the organic development of interviewing process to follow the data. Accordingly, Charmaz (2014) emphasizes that when following the data, we must be both entrenched in flexibility and be reflexive all at once. I agree with Charmaz (2014), and have experienced that these ways of doing research and collecting data helps us to adhere to the standards of constructive grounded theories and are in fact systematic. These practices result in data that reveal the experiences of the participants, co-constructed between the researcher and the participants, and emergent theories that are grounded in the data.

Data Collection

According to Charmaz (2006), rich grounded theory data can be collected in the form of interviews, focus groups, journaling, and memoing, but most importantly any kind of data that will help develop theory can be used. As a result, I have a collected data via: (1) 21 semi-structured interviews; (2) 6 active mobile online ethnographic interviews (Active Mobile Online Ethnographies-AMOE); and (3) online field research, which included focused textual analyses of 10 key online texts.

Semi-Structured Interviews

As stated above, I conducted 21 semi-structured interviews as part of the active interview process (Holstein and Gubrium 1995) with individuals who identify as

Transgender and or Gender Non-Conforming and who also participated in online spaces. Some of these interviews occurred in person, while others were done over the phone.

Interviews were structured to address questions such as the reasons why participants go to these sites and what they do on these sites. Some of the open-ended interview questions that participants were asked are as follows: (1) Imagine you are going online, what are you thinking about as your primary interest in going to the groups you visit?; (2) What do you hope to do online?; (3) And now, imagine you are online in

[insert name of website here] group, what will you post or read? Additionally, some intermediate questions were: Could you describe the most important lessons you learned when you come online (Charmaz 2006: 30-31; also see Holstein and Gubrium

1995)? These questions are relevant because they provide an in-depth look at what is occurring in these spaces, from the participant’s perspectives.

Active Mobile Online Ethnography (Field Research)

I also conducted 6 active mobile online ethnographies (AMOE). According to

Holstein and Gubrium (1995), active interviewing, a constructionist approach to interviewing, views interviews as a collective process that results in “social productions”.

That is, the interviewer and the participant work together, actively, to make meaning.

The active mobile online ethnographies interviews were only given to participants who felt comfortable sharing and showing me their online presence. Of the twenty-one participants, six of them participated in the AMOE. Specifically, the AMOE portion of the interview involved asking participants to show me, and take me on and within the websites that they visited daily or occasionally, and explain their day-to-day activities on these sites.

To gain alternate access to these online spaces, I amended the IRB forms to include these interviews so participants could take me to the websites that they visit and explain their day-to-day activities, in the spirit of mobile ethnographies, online. This is

not an established method but one I have devised based on other methods. I refer to them as active mobile online ethnographic interviews or active mobile online ethnographies (AMOE). This approach to assessing daily activities online is adopted and modified from previous qualitative methods literature. Variations of the method online are often referred to as online ethnographic research or ethnographic research online. For example, Beneito-Montagut (2011), uses expanded ethnography, a variation of online ethnography, which the author suggests, offers user-centered methodology to study interpersonal communications on the internet. Here the author emphasizes that the method moves away from a virtual or offline dichotomy and instead focuses on using three main strategies online: multi-situated, online and offline, and flexible and multimedia data collection methods. In these three main strategies, some version of an online approach to using the Internet to understand interpersonal communication is explored (Beneito-Montagut 2011).

In addition, there are similar methods used offline and are referred to by scholars as mobile ethnographies or mobile methods (Buscher and Urry 2009; Kusenbach 2011).

According to Kusenbach (2011), mobile methods include elements of ethnographic observations and in-depth interviewing. Generally, mobile methods are “qualitative techniques of data collection during which researchers move alongside participants in their familiar spatial contexts” (2011:1).

I have chosen to refer to my particular approach as active mobile online ethnographies (AMOE) because I asked participants, in the context of their interview, to move around with me watching from Website to Website. That is, they become mobile while online, and I accessed their mobility, secondhand. I wanted to emphasize the

movement from Website to Website, here also, because it indicates another aspect of action being performed by the participant. Here, I argue that mobility online is useful to emphasize and explore how participants, through their movements from space to space or site to site online, actively construct meaning and at times create different kinds of spaces, some that are unique to the individual, for (their) identity development. In addition, paying attention to this type of movement afforded me the lens from which to make assessments about the overall terrain of transgender online spaces. For me, doing active mobile online ethnographies, then, is an approach to active interviewing that draws on ideas of mobile ethnographies.

I did active interviews in the spirit of these mobile ethnographies while online, that is, while participants were entering these virtual spaces. I decided to modify mobile ethnographies and online ethnography, because I wanted to do an interview similar to how others who have done mobile ethnographies do one, but I also wanted participants to go online and take me on a journey through their world. So, I wanted to sit in a room with, talk over the phone (Facetime), or Skype with participants and ask them to take me on a journey into their online world and show me what they were doing and where they were going and explain as we went from website to the website what they were thinking and experiencing in these spaces at that moment in time. Active mobile online ethnographic interviewing, then, I argue, also falls within the type of active interviewing style that Gubrium and Holstein (1995) discuss. To recap, Gubrium and Holstein (1995) posit that active interviewing occurs when the interviewer attempts and or encourages the participant to actively construct meaning in the interview. The construction of meaning by the participant is often achieved by asking the participant to, literally, step

into the role of being and doing the identity work they normally do. That is, participants are encouraged to recreate and or demonstrate what they ‘normally’ do, which is often based upon the activity that is of interest to the researcher. Therefore, active mobile online ethnographies (virtually1) fit within the active interviewing methodology I discussed above.

This kind of exploration helps us understand the importance of embodied experiences, and participants’ interpretation of their actions. By doing active interviews in the spirit of mobile ethnographies, I was able to see, firsthand, and coax participants into recounting in real time, the type and kind of websites that they visited and I was better able to understand why they visited them. Moreover, when I asked participants about their daily online activities, their answers typically were one sentence responses such as” “not much, I don’t really go to many sites”, or, “I just go here and a may look at few posts there, but otherwise I don’t do much”. Therefore active mobile online ethnographies assisted with and were used as probes into participants’ online worlds.

Once I was able to see what was happening in their online worlds, I could ask specific questions about why they did what they did, such as: why their Facebook had a female cover photo with a male’s name or why their female and male counterparts do not share

Facebook page (they are separated on purpose), but on every occasion either counterpart both appeared in bit strip images on the other one’s Facebook page.

1 The term virtually here does not refer to online ethnographic research as an alternate term/word for ethnography as in virtual ethnography, instead, virtually is used to indicate online spaces. Moreover scholars such as Beneito-Montagut (2011) do not favor the term virtual ethnography either, as she contends that it “seems to assume that ethnography is conducted in the location of the Internet only. Ultimately in this logic, virtual ethnographies consider that the virtual realm is something different to the real word and propose a virtual-real dichotomy that contradicts my theoretical position” (718).

Additionally, I found that some transgender folks were shy when discussing what they did online because they felt they were sharing their online activity that pertained to their transgender and gender non-conforming identity, which was something they have never discussed with someone before. Due to this revelation, it was helpful for participants to show me as well as explain to me what they were doing as this action elicited some of the memories they had forgotten or some of the things they once thought useful, but had now become a fading memory. This type elicitation was most useful because web surfing is not very static, and every (inter)action demands some type of movement so it may be difficult for participants to recall and easier for them to show and tell. Moreover, transgender people may tell a story through their narratives that focuses on and emphasizes doing identity work over how movement work is done in these spaces, I believe that by eliciting how, when and why identity work is done, I was also able to assess issues of contestation and understand more systematically how identity work becomes movement work. Overall, the active mobile online ethnographies approach helped me gain a better understanding of the processes involved in visiting these sites and doing gender and activism in these spaces.

This method also facilitated a more situated understanding of the daily-embodied mobility for transgender people, virtually. It also enabled a better understanding of alternative ‘time‐space politics’ that groups may use to make meaning (Kusenbach

2011). In addition, when entering some forums, I noticed that they required registration to gain full access. Though I did not account for registering to gain access to some of these websites and or forums initially, I also found that doing this type of ethnography could and did circumvent the need to gain access from a site moderator, altogether.

This eliminated the need for me to gain direct access from site moderators to these spaces as the participants were willing to take me into these spaces, which gave me a more than a visitor’s perspective to space; instead, I was afforded access to the site through the user’s lens.

Textual (Data) Analysis

Textual analysis is a technique that enables the researcher to gather and analyze the information (data) found in these spaces—via extant data (texts that the researcher did not have a part in shaping). I believe that by examining these extant texts on these websites, forums, blogs, and vlogs, I was able to see the processes by which participants do transgender identity work and movement work. Textual analysis, then, served as a way to gain a more textured and dense understanding of a particular phenomenon. As a result, textual analysis further contextualized elicited data. Extant data, in this case, is an independent source of data that provided richness to the study via direct observation of online movement work (Creswell 2013; Charmaz 2006). Extant data via textual analysis also provided a way to scrutinize data analyses (not corroborate it) in this project. I attended to these processes by looking for central discussion topics on the selected websites, forums, blogs, and vlogs. I selected websites, forums, blogs, and vlogs by asking participants about some of the relevant websites, forums, and blogs/vlogs that they visited, and or host on their own. Roughly a third of participants have or had blogs of their own. For these participants, I asked them if they would have objections if I visited their blogs and collected data to which everyone consented. I compiled all of the suggestions and then strategically decided to visit five of the blogs—some with vlogging—and five websites, I chose five of each of these two forms of sites because I realized that these suggestions were plentiful, and wanted to

narrow the information in a way that would still provide variety in sampling, but still enabled me to achieve the main objective for using textual data. That is, I wanted to gain a more textured and dense understanding of a particular phenomenon, the transgender movement, online. As a result, since textual analysis was not my only data source and textual analysis was used to further contextualize elicited data, I did not need to sample many sources, but just enough sources to aid in the contextualization of the interviews. Moreover, I could not get past the initial/first page of forums so I depended on AMOE to collect textual data from forums. Likewise, I was able to gather some textual data when I conducted AMOE with participants as they showed me around these sites. After the ten, I then visited these sites/venues and explored them to see how they were organized, such as what was located there and how the information was structured. Some of the key discussion topics appeared in the form of the various types of transgender identities discussed, and the different ways in which participants talked about activism.

Coding and Analysis

During data collection, analysis was conducted on the three sources of data: (1) interviews; (2) field research /ethnography; and (3) textual data (from websites). These data were treated systematically. That is, these data were coded, and analyzed simultaneously; this method of analysis enabled me to make comparisons so that I could see the areas where more data were needed. This process of constant comparisons and simultaneous analysis of extant and elicited data also helped me to weave through and make sense of data that may have seemed commonplace.

Interview data were coded using an open coding process to a focus coding process around main concepts and categories that stick closely to the data. After initial

codes were developed, a focused coding was done to develop categories from the data.

Concurrently, website extant data—that is, textual material from websites, blogs, vlogs

(which may include comments, photographs and other materials available in these online spaces) were also used to help make analytical comparisons with interview data, both in the initial and focused coding phases.

As mentioned earlier, a grounded theory approach allowed for the simultaneous use of interview data, field research and textual analysis data–not to assume that this data is objective, but this comparison method was a source that furthered and enhanced analytical development. Like Charmaz (2006), I opted to use three sources of data and analyzed them simultaneously, because I saw the value which she emphasized; that is, this process of analysis helped me gain a better understanding of the categories and, later, theoretical concepts that were emerging, and became the overall theoretical explanation of the project. Moreover, I had a clearer sense of the findings. Therefore, these data served as an independent source to each other, furthering the richness of the study.

My grounded theory analysis of interviews followed specific analytic steps. First, each interview was transcribed and analyzed after it was completed. After transcription,

I went through the data line-by-line to create initial codes. This process helped me to create codes that defined what I saw in the data (Charmaz 2006). To do so, I went through each line of each interview and used gerunds as codes to show actions as nouns. For example, the following excerpt, which is used as a block quote in chapter three, is used to demonstrate how initial codes were applied using gerunds.

Excerpt 1 David MTF crossdresser: I used the internet to find other people like me, I Googled it…it helped me understand who I was...I saw other people’s stories and it helped me to feel better about who I was.

The initial codes that I applied this excerpt are “searching for transgender people,” “Googling to find trans spaces,” “understanding self through Googling,” “finding trans spaces to find self.” At this phase of analysis, Charmaz (2006) suggests that it is important for the researcher to reflect upon and ask the following questions: what do I want to know; specifically, what are the important issues; how can I define them; how do they develop (Charmaz 2006:46)? She argues that this process enables initial codes to become illuminated in the data. Charmaz (2006) also suggests that when the researcher uses these questions, they will caution and curtail the researcher from making “conceptual leaps.” Therefore, I asked these questions of myself and constantly reflected upon them throughout the coding process, as I believed that this process made it permissible to uncover initial codes, the first step toward conceptualizing thematic categories (see focused coding) (Charmaz 2006).

Second, memos were used in the data collection and also in this early process of coding to help me to explore and create the initial codes. At this stage of the analysis process, I used memos to document my thoughts, my interpretations and the potential codes that I saw emerging from the data at the time. I also used memos to pay particular attention to things such as my feelings and my interactions with participations, as well as my preconceptions. This was important because I realized that being a member of society and also being a social scientist shaped how I interpreted and experienced the data. As a result, I remained open to what the data suggested and I stayed close to it by keeping my codes “short, simple, active, and analytic” (Charmaz

2006:50).

Simultaneously, following Charmaz (2006 and 2014), from this process onward, and through all other treatments of analysis, I practiced the constant comparison process to continue to make sense of the data. Specifically, I relied on comparative methods and the analytical treatment of comparisons to move beyond coding phrases.

When using comparative methods, I made comparisons at each level of the analytical process to establish analytic distinction especially in data that appeared routine, pedestrian and or familiar. According to Charmaz (2006), it is difficult to make sense of commonplace data. Using Charmaz’s suggestion on how to make sense of commonplace data, I coded and compared similar events such as interviews or descriptors using en vivo codes (participant’s special terms), to define patterns and processes that emerged, and compared dissimilar events to help provide original conceptual analyses for these data. Therefore, an example of constant comparison with my interviews using David’s excerpt above was to compare his discussions of Googling to other participants’ discussions of Googling to see if Googling an en vivo code was simply commonplace or more significant to the analysis. Finally, constant comparison also helped me make associations at each level of analytical work (Charmaz 2006:54), which is important because during coding and analysis, I can impose my perspectives on the data. Constant comparative methods helped me make analytical sense of the data while subsequently challenging my own perspectives.

After some strong analytic directions were reached through initial coding, I began focused coding. I used focused coding to help explain and synthesize larger portions of data developed through initial coding. At this point, initial codes from the data were already subjected to comparative and analytical analysis.

During focused coding, I used the most significant and or frequent codes to sift through the data. This process helped me determine if these codes were useful categorizations of the data. This process also aided in determining which initial codes were best fits analytically. Likewise, focused coding assisted in drawing conceptualized conclusions that are more directed and selective. At this point in the coding process, I also used memos again to advance my thinking about how to condense/modify and create conceptual categories. Memoing helped me trace and categorize data, so that I could describe how a category emerged, and changed, which in turn helped me place that category in an argument and compare it with existing data. As categories emerged,

I applied any new themes to subsequent interviews. When new topics and themes emerged, I asked about them in the remaining interviews and selected more participants to examine new theories through theoretical sampling (Charmaz 2006: 96).

To demonstrate some focus codes, I use the same excerpt used in the initial coding, and constant comparison examples to illustrate some of my focus codes. Some of focused codes that emerged from this excerpt were “Googling it,” “spaces of and for acceptance,” and “finding spaces of acceptance.” These focus codes emerged most frequently in the interviews, AMOE, and through constant comparisons of these data with the extant data sources.

While developing focused codes, I also began analyzing the extant data simultaneously, most of which I used to do constant comparisons. Extant data are constructed without the participation of the researcher. This data included, but is not limited to, Internet discussions, comments on postings, and organizational documents, such as bylaws. Specifically, these data were used to develop ideas about the research

and or served as evidence to support existing claims. Though these data seem purely objective, I am cautioned by Charmaz (2006) that these data still contained some level of subjective interpretation, so, analytically I treated these data as just another source of data. Extant data can be rich data when it is contextualized (Charmaz 2006). Thus, I contextualized these data by providing the time, actors and issues surrounding the texts. In addition, photos, forums or thread categories may also serve as a method to conceptualize texts in these online spaces. As suggested by Charmaz (2006), I paid attention to things such as: (1) How and by whom were these texts produced? and (2)

What is the structure of it and what is its purpose?

Finally, I moved to theoretical coding. At this stage of the coding process, I specified possible relationships between categories that developed during focused coding. I also relied on memoing to create conceptual categories for my framework.

This enabled me to define categories more clearly and specify the conditions and changes that happened within those categories (Charmaz 2006:93). At this point of the analysis, I continued to look at how these categories were related by memoing to find developed initial models. While I still collected data at this phase, each interview and the analysis of texts contributed to developing the emerging theory. I stopped the interviewing and textual analysis process once I reached theoretical saturation, that is, there were no new, significant, or meaningful categories or relationships among the categories that emerged from the data (Charmaz 2006:113).

Pilot Study

Before I began the full-scale data collection and analysis upon which this dissertation is based, I conducted a pilot study. Initially, two online groups were chosen using the sampling techniques described above. The two websites are Lynn’s Place

(http://tglynnsplace.com/simplemachinesforum/index.php?board=55.0) and Laura’s

Playground (http://www.lauras-playground.com/forums/index.php?act=idx). I chose these sites because they were the top results in the Google search I performed and upon inspection of these sites, it was visible that group members use these sites to communicate and interact with each other. Therefore, these sites are both highly ranked in the Google search algorithm and site members appear to be fairly active on these sites. Lynn’s Place and Laura’s Playground are multipurpose websites that cater to people who identify as transgender, particularly, Male-to-Female transgender people.

These two websites contain self-help information, links to other transgender related news and other transgender videos, blogs, and forums where members can post and interact with each other and other transgender websites. The pilot study was conducted using the same data collection, coding, and analysis plans detailed above.

There were no major problems identified. While there were no major problems identified, after completing the pilot, some modifications to sampling and interview guides were identified as necessary. These modifications are detailed below, under the adjustment of methods section.

Initially, I sent out emails to the site moderators from the two websites Lynn’s

Place and Laura’s Playground asking them to participate in my study. Unfortunately, none of the site moderators responded. Based upon approved IRB protocol, I was still able to visit these sites and cataloged the information that was available to site members via the textual analysis strategy detailed above. Consequently, instead of visiting these sites to talk to site participants about their activities online, I decided to use a snowball sampling strategy (see above for more details).

The results from the pilot data indicated that the three suggested sensitizing concepts were relevant for exploration. In addition, another sensitizing concept emerged, advocacy/activism. Overall, the pilot data findings suggest that these concepts were a primary point from which to begin to follow initial interests that are important for understanding online transgender movement work. Moreover, pilot data were also very important in practicing reflexivity via the constructive grounded theory approach as I was able to assess which techniques were working and which ones needed adjustments. Below are detailed explanations which illustrate how some techniques and processes were modified, became inappropriate, and/or became more important as data collection and analysis progressed.

Adjustments to Methods and Methodologies

After completing pilot interviews, I re-examined the methods and methodologies and made some adjustments. These modifications illustrate how pilot research furthers the reflexivity of the project and speak to the importance of pilot data in grounded theory research.

Sampling Adjustments

After reflecting on the pilot research, I decided to keep the Alexia ranking strategies discussed above to find websites for extant data. The Alexia ranking strategies were the original plan for the entire data collection in the earlier part of the proposal; however, I discovered that these strategies were not effective for the interviewing portion of the study. Therefore, I made some modifications, particularly when it came to sampling, I found other strategies that worked and are best for reaching this group. As a result, I incorporated snowball sampling as a modification to my sampling strategies.

My snowball sampling modifications are as follows. I began reaching out to my contacts in existing transgender networks (these networks are both friendship and organization networks) and asked them to share the project information. Emails were also sent to local organizations and their LGBTQ listervs to recruit participants. The most effective recruitment strategy seemed to be when participants were referred to the study through informal social networks with either people who were transgender allies or from other people who identified as transgender themselves. Though sampling was most effective through direct snowball sampling, indirect snowball sampling also yielded some participants. For interviews beyond the pilot interviews, I continued to reach out these networks as I continued to receive emails from potential participants.

Interview Guide Adjustments

In my initial coding of the data, I noticed a new category. Therefore, I made adjustments to the interview guide, (see appendix I) as well. I also made an adjustment to my sensitizing concepts and began to look for the new category activism and or advocacy, more generally, as an additional sensitizing concept. This change was due, in part, to how participants began to discuss how they use the sites they visited to share information with other people so that they can have access to them. Sometimes, the information they are sharing were resources such as information about a transgender friendly bar or “how to guides.” So, I also added two important follow up questions to the question, “what do you do online or why do you visit these sites?” The two follow-up questions are: 1) Why do you share this information on these sites, 2) Why do you think other people will find this information useful? In addition, two other questions that were added to the interview guide are: (1) Why do you go online, and or Why do you blog/make YouTube videos? (2) How do you navigate these sites? These questions

were relevant to add to the interview guide because during the pilot interviews, participants began to reflect on the meanings behind why they blogged and what it had added to their lives.

Recruiting Adjustments

In addition, I amended the recruitment tactics to include support groups offline, as well. I made this decision because it was so difficult to recruit through online spaces such as websites and blogs. I thought it was better to begin recruiting offline via social support groups such as TriEss—a national crossdressing (transgender) support group that has local chapters throughout the country. Recruiting offline, at the beginning, also helped me gain more trust with website and forum moderators. Initially, I had hoped this would help me gain direct access to online spaces such as private forums, but I found that even when I was referred to moderators by trusted and respected site members, I was still not granted access. Though participants who participate in these online spaces were able to vouch for me on these online spaces, especially forums that are heavily gated. I have never moved past that level of gatekeeping. The gatekeepers are the only ones who can help me gain that level of access, and/or provide me with more information about what site members do in these spaces. My plan was to reach out to national transgender organizations, their website moderators, and other members of their executive boards, such as the president, not just as a way to gain access to these gatekeepers, but also to have a better understanding of what their websites provided for transgender people and also to understand how they thought about how transgender people use the information available on their websites. However, since I could never get passed the high level of gatekeeping in these organizations, I decided to forgo this initial

plan and sought to gain access in a different way, through the perspective of the participant using AMOE.

CHAPTER 3 ONLINE SPACE AS PLACE

Gender, Space, and Place

My research suggests that when transgender and gender non-conforming individuals do gender and develop collective identities in online spaces, these online spaces become tangible spaces or places. I found that online space becomes place; that is, space is transformed into tangible places for exploring, learning about, doing, and understanding (trans)gender1 identity and identity work. Based on the data, I refer to this process of doing gender and identity work for transgender individuals as “doing

(trans)gender.”

In this chapter, I explain how place-making occurs. Place-making occurs when an online space establishes and or maintains spatial arenas that facilitates and enables the construction of collective identities, trans(gender) identity development, and activism, through contentious politics, and self-acceptance both in online and offline spaces. Using the data from my research, I show how online spaces, via the Internet, serve as a space first, and then over time, can become more tangible spaces or what I call places for groups that are often marginalized elsewhere. Therefore, based upon the data from this research, I differentiate between space and place. To be clear, my use of the terms space and place come from my analysis of the data, and thus, should be read as concepts grounded in the data, not references to a pre-existing use of these concepts in the literature. Based on my close analysis of the data, I conceptualize space as the online spatial arenas and platforms available for use to TAGN Individuals. Again

1 Here and throughout the remainder of this document I will use the term (trans)gender with the parenthesis around trans (trans) to indicate the unique form of gender identity, gender identity politics, and gender identity development for transgender and gender non-conforming individuals.

relying on analysis grounded in data, I conceptualize place as the more meaningful or tangible version of space that becomes transformed when transgender and gender non- conforming individuals use these online spaces to develop individual and collective identities and continue to make spaces for acceptance.

Based on my grounded theory analysis, I also argue that online support and interactive spatial arenas on the Internet are even more tangible for transgender and gender non-conforming individuals because, for these various groups under the proverbial transgender umbrella, the Internet as a space becomes one of the only few places for them to make sense of who they are. Thus, online spaces that become tangible spaces or places online are not only used to create a space where transgender and gender non-conforming individuals can feel like they are a part of a community, but these tangible spaces that become places also enable these individuals to actually do

(trans)gender, together. My data suggests that to do (trans)gender in this online context, is to gather and use information and other spatial resources in these online spaces that are related to these individual’s (trans)gender identities. In addition, spatial resources can be threads for posting and requesting feedback about one’s (trans)gender presentations, or forums organized around a specific topic which enables them to learn and receive validation in order to become their real and authentic selves. I have learned from my participants that doing (trans)gender via tangible spaces and places empowers the reality of (trans)gender identities, both on and offline.

In this chapter, I show how there are four ways in which individuals who identify as transgender and or gender non-conforming use the Internet to help make sense of their identities, which I argue inevitably facilitates the form of (trans)gender identity work

that transforms online spaces into online places. My research reveals that transgender individuals and gender non-conforming individuals use the Internet in four ways to transform online spaces into online places (i.e. place-making). In general, the data reveals that TAGN individuals use the internet to: (1) find spaces of acceptance; (2) do

(trans)gender; (3) develop collective identities; and (4) make spaces for acceptance

(space making).

Finding Spaces of Acceptance

Most participants indicate that finding online spaces of acceptance are crucial, as it is most important for them to find others like them. According to these participants, online spaces are the only spaces available to them to feel accepted, and or interact with others who are like them, as there are not other readily accessible spaces available to them in their geographical locations. For example, Nathalie a male-to-female crossdresser says,

“I live in the country and we/they are very conservative…and we don’t have any support groups here; so I can’t just go and find people like me…I have to go online to find them.”

Likewise, Sam a transman, says, “I go online to learn about myself…and find people like me.” Therefore, finding spaces of acceptance are an important step because transgender and gender non-conforming individuals can find others who are like them, feel connected, and make sense of self online, even if they are unable to find them offline. More importantly for some transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, like Nathalie, who are unable to find spaces of acceptance offline, online spaces of acceptance may become the most tangible. Since finding online spaces of acceptance are so important for transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, how do they find these spaces of acceptance? Generally, participants report that several techniques

are useful for finding spaces of acceptance: (1) Googling; (2) using others spaces of acceptance to find more spaces; and (3) the “trace-back” method.

“I Googled it”

Participants use the Internet to find spaces of acceptance that exist both online and offline. When I asked participants how they found these spaces online all of them said that, “I Googled it,” even if they found those spaces earlier in their journey before

Google was popular. One participant, in particular, actually admitted that in hindsight after saying that they had goggled it, that Google was not in fact a feature available for use when she found those spaces, but suggests that she probably said it because they used other search engines, like Yahoo, to find them.

Therefore, “I goggled it” is an en vivo code; that is, it is a code used to capture and reflect the actual terms participants use to tell their stories. They Googled terms such as “transgender,” ”crossdressing,” and “transsexual,” often in conjunction with the phrase ‘support group’ or forums to find spaces of acceptance online. Participants report that, initially, they start off by searching terms like “transgender” or “crossdresser” alone on Google to learn more about the topic generally and then they move on to try to find supportive and interactive spaces. For example, Ronald, a transman in his forties said,

I used the internet to find other people like me, I Googled it… [the term transgender] it helped me understand who I was...I saw other people’s stories and it helped me to feel better about who I was.

As indicated by Ronald, he used the Google feature to find other people who identified with him similarly. He also suggested that if he was not able to Google, he would not be able to find other people like him. More importantly, if he was unable to

Google these terms and learn more about them, he would not be able to find acceptance and feel self-acceptance, simultaneously.

Like Ronald, Sam and Nathalie other participants reported that they used the

Internet as a tool to find spaces of, and for, acceptance. All participants said that to find these spaces online they had to start with a Google search, and even still those results were few, often resulting in only a few relevant leads pertaining to transgender and gender non-conforming supportive and interactive spaces. The Googling feature is used as an initial step or at least a starting point from which to find spaces of and for acceptance. Participants were definitely aware of the power of the search engine and how easy it made it for them to locate these marginalized spaces, both online and offline.

5 or so years ago, I was just mainly just using GOOGLE and just typing in things that I could think of. And then I happen to cross a blog called “T- Central.” And at T-Central, they go ahead and, they list a whole lot of transgender blogs…And then maybe about a year ago, I typed in cross dressers into GOOGLE, just to see what comes up, and I see a bit more of a mix of GOOGLE results, not just like the sexual cross dressers or the fetish cross dressers, that I saw earlier, but more people that might be identifying as transgender. I feel that maybe within the last 5 years there’s a little bit more evidence of that. And probably about a year ago, I found another site, it was a chat board called “Cross Dresser.com” and I, and it’s so funny because I find these things and I’m like, what? I laugh at myself and go, well how come I never found it. And that place is really, really interesting. I decided to join there, just because of the immediacy of the interaction, and the large number of people that are interacting there and large variety that were there. Probably before that time, it never really occurred to me, just the vast variety that there is out there that are transgender.—Nathalie

They acknowledge how search engines, especially years ago when the media would not discuss transgender nor gender non-conforming issues as much as it discussed them today, have become useful in their quest for finding spaces online.

Specifically for Nathalie she argues that she was able to find a new space over time that

she did not even know existed, no matter how connected or how active she was online.

Eventually, goggling the right term at the right time led her to find this new and important space.

Participants explained that search engines such as Yahoo, Google, AltaVista, and AOL were all useful tools to find these spaces of acceptance. What is most important is that even though participants talk of how helpful the Internet is, on the

Internet, these spaces are still so hard to find. For instance, the Google feature uses an algorithm that ranks pages based upon the amount of traffic that those sites receive

(Walters, 2016), which may preferentially rank news articles and other non-transgender spaces ahead of, or before, transgender and gender non-conforming supportive and interactive spaces. This may occur due to features of the algorithm simply because those pages that offer support may not be visited as much as an article published by a large newspaper, like the New York Times. As a result, transgender and gender non- conforming spaces may be subverted and marginalized still, even online, and even in a period where transgender issues have become more at the forefront. Transgender individuals report how difficult it is to find some of these spaces and how the process of finding an appropriate space that can meet their needs and where they feel comfortable and welcome may take a while to refine. For instance, when Nathalie says that she found only sexually explicit results when she first Googled the term crossdresser or when Suzie says, “I spent a year on that site, and then I realized it wasn’t for me, everyone was always so negative.” So, participants’ search may usually start with

Google hits and then work their ways from there, filtering fastidiously through until they find both supportive and interactive spaces.

Using Online Spaces Of Acceptance to Find Other Spaces of Acceptance

Participants said they found other spaces of acceptance by talking to people in some of the online spaces that they had found initially through their Google search.

Participants also found some of these spaces by asking other site participants where they were finding pertinent information such as which places to visit that were transgender friendly. For example, Darby a MTF crossdresser in her sixties, says:

I go online to meet others who are like me…I also go online to find out information, like is this bar safe, are you from this area, or what was your experience when you went out dress in en femme?

In general, participants who use the Internet, do so to find spaces that exist both offline and online. While these spaces become a main resource, participants also use these spaces as ways to find other resources, such as other social groups off-line to interact in a social way. Therefore, they may use online spaces to find others like them—this occurs either when they ask other site participants to suggest safe spaces offline that they can visit, and or they may chat with site participants to see if they make a connection—so that they can potentially meet up and interact with these people in person to reduce the fragmented interactions that often occur using technology.

Participants used these online spaces to search for other transgender and or gender non-conforming spaces in order to learn which spaces were the ones where they could get more information regarding certain needs such as make-up tip, and clothing’s options, as well as other relevant suggestions about which informational and educational sites are good resources. At times, they may use these spaces to find different types of support that is more specific to them. Since the transgender umbrella houses so many different groups, it may be difficult for one group to fit all the needs of

everyone who share the transgender and or gender non-conforming identity or label.

For example, Nancy reveals that:

I looked around for a while and didn't find groups I felt comfortable with...until I found CD.com, it never really occurred to me, just the vast variety groups that there is out there for transgender itself. And it’s really through the interaction of that board that I’ve been able to really kind of narrow down and define maybe more who I am…this is like the never ending search for, try to find my label to describe who I am. But through interactions on that site, through readings, that was where I was able to discover, oh, here’s who I am. Here is the accurate label if people were to ask, you know, what are you or who are you. This is what I can say.

As a result, some people may search for other spaces of acceptance because they may feel marginalized or not as welcomed in all of the spaces that offer support.

Often staunch site members may not be willing to adapt to all of the needs of members, or as members’ identities become clearer, they may want to move on to other spaces that they feel are more suitable to their needs. Whatever the reason, many participants reported using online spaces of acceptance to find other spaces of acceptance.

“Trace Back” Method

Moreover, participants also reported using the “trace-back” method to find spaces of acceptance. The “trace-back” method is a process of finding a site, then following the links on that site to trace back to or find other suggested spaces or sites and or more relevant sites of interest. For example, Suzie explained how she found a website by tracing back through links from a blog she frequents. Likewise, if there was a comment or discussion section on the site, participants said that they would use those sites’ features to interact with other people on that particular site to find out more information about safe spaces to visit offline and online, as well as, other relevant topics based upon their needs. For example, when I observed Jane and Sam they both checked out the comments and or visited interactive sections where they either said

they occasionally posted questions or answered questions that others asked. Usually, websites such as personal blogs will link to other sites that are suggested for the intended audience to view, although these are mostly blogs and other supportive network sites such as personal vlogs, and other organizational networks that are considered worthy, worthwhile, admired and or useful.

According to my research, finding spaces of acceptance then online for transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, are not only crucial for online interaction, and self-revelation but these spaces also help site participants find important spaces offline as well. In addition, these online spaces allow site participants to find people with whom they share similarities. When people are able to find others like them and learn that they are not alone, they are able to begin to explore and understand their identities more fully. As a result, I argue that they may feel empowered to gather more information about who they are and learn to understand their selves, better. This process of self-validation will begin to create room internally for these individuals so that they can learn to understand and feel more confident about their transgender and gender non-conforming identities. The processes of finding online spaces of acceptance are usually one of the first steps to initiate the necessary process for online spaces to become more tangible spaces for transgender and gender non- conforming individuals. Generally, these individuals need to find spaces of acceptance in order to begin and or continue their identity work as these spaces afford them with the ability to feel better about who they are.

Doing is Believing

Doing (Trans)Gender

Doing is believing for many transgender and gender non-conforming individuals.

Multiple participants said that they used online spaces of acceptance to do trans(gender) in order to make sense of who they are and learn more about their

(trans)gender selves. In particular, participants used online spaces to validate their

(trans)gender identity, and to do (trans)gender identity work. The sites are often set up to facilitate such transgender work. For example, some sites have spaces for posting resources such as current events or spaces to ask other site members to rate their gendered presentations. Some of these sites also have spaces to seek guidance on how to do a particular task such as the types of makeup to use to cover facial hair or spaces where members can post their pictures and ask other members to give them advice on how they look. Here, they can use these designated spaces to learn how to pass, express their gender identity, and get feedback on how to do (trans)gender more appropriately. In these sites, they are legitimized and they feel like they are not hidden.

To illustrate this point, Ronald suggests that, “crossdressers use forums like CD.com to post photos and make comments to see if we pass, or ask for comments to see if we are doing it right.” Kathy, on the other hand says, “I use sites like word place to follow people’s stories, and learn more about myself.”

Ronald is suggesting that participants on CD.com use the site as a place where they can talk about gender presentation and get feedback from other site members/participants to see if they are presenting their preferred (trans)gender identity, correctly, while Kathy is saying she uses other people’s journey to reflect on her own.

More specifically, they use the site as a space to figure out if they are doing

(trans)gender correctly. The research participants also reported that they used the feedback they receive in these spaces to untangle the appropriate identity politics that they should practice in these spaces and places.

Overall, when participants can practice their (trans)gender identity, whether that action is related to gathering pertinent information needed to make sense of who they are, it is more related to gathering information on how to dress, behave, feel, or even to connect with other people who are like them. This can help them to feel like, at this stage, they are equipped to be successful. Therefore, they are not only gathering information to learn how to align to their (trans)gender identities, but they are learning to validate their identities, experience, and navigate and negotiate self-revelation and acceptance. For example, Patrick a genderqueer, Female-to-Male (FTM) transgender person in his twenties recognizes Tumblr, the online social network, as a space that eventually became a place that provided an educational outlet for him. He sees Tumblr and equality-themed blogs as places for support that helped facilitate his process of self-discovery. He suggests that Tumblr and these blogs provided educational tools that helped him to identify concepts and terms like genderqueer, which he ultimately sees as most relevant to understanding and making sense of his gender identity:

Tumblr was the biggest and main resource that I used to connect to others first for self-discovery and later for support. When I first found Tumblr, I believed I was the straight female that I'd always been told I was. I started following some equality themed blogs, which is where I discovered the concept of being genderqueer, being able to identify as genderqueer changed my life forever….[I met others like me where I was able to make a connection with them and over time our relationship help us both come out to each other]…Through this process, Tumblr was a support and educational community…[having a place to get information and support is what led me] to how I identify today, as transgender, specifically Female to Male--Patrick

According to Patrick, he was able to learn about himself through identifying and adopting new terms about his identity. He particularly credits finding the term genderqueer as forever changing his life, as he was able to find a legitimate way to define himself. In fact, others also used the term to connect to and locate their gender identity. For Patrick, the term genderqueer also gave him an ideological space to explore his gender identity more fully to the point where he suggests that he was able to come out to his friend and himself about being transgender, specifically. More importantly, he suggested that having someone with whom who he could relate not only provided support for self-discovery but he also said that the relationship they developed helped them both to facilitate a better understanding of whom they both were to each other. Patrick not only suggested that exposure to this type of educational information was the main cause for self-discovery and gender identity development, but he also indicated that before finding these spaces of and for acceptance, he thought and believed that he was a straight female. Moreover, Patrick argues that through networking in these spaces and developing supportive bonds with others with whom he identified, both he and his friend were able to work through the process of self-discovery and ultimately, self-acceptance.

When transgender individuals participate in these spaces online and do

(trans)gender to make sense of who they are, they are in essence transforming mere online spaces to places of and for acceptance, which enables the individuals in these spaces to understand each other more cogently, and more importantly, understand their self in relation to others. These practices, that is, gathering information and doing

(trans)gender, engage the participant in self-revelation, that is, it enables the participant

to become more aware of the self how they see it (the self), which is a necessary component for self-acceptance.

Doing trans(gender) online also enables these individuals to come out of the closet to themselves and others in their networks at varying levels, with the desired amount of attention required. For example, Kathy, a MTF crossdresser who is married, told me she was able to come out on her blog to the Internet and over time, she said “I was able to come out to my wife.” Similarly, Suzie says, “I came out to friends online, and then to my wife…and then some family…and finally I came out on Facebook to my friends.” As a result, participants can come out at varying levels based upon their needs and their goals in online spaces more easily and with less fear. Overall, I argue that because online spaces can facilitate the coming out process both to the self and others so readily, TAGN individuals are able to experience self-acceptance and feel validated more readily.

“Who I am DOES exist and is real”: coming out of the closet

I met someone on a genderqueer networking blog that I became quite close to, we both were FAAB (Female Assigned At Birth), in the closet as far as gender identity went. I ended up moving across the country to be with this person, and through this process we came out to each other as FTM, transgender.

Reading the posts, experiences and getting to know people around the world that aren't gender conforming through the blogs of various LGBTQ people online helped me become more self-aware of my gender and sexuality variances from the norm…The most important lessons I've learned are that who I am DOES exist and is real, no matter what others say, and that no two people's experiences are exactly the same.--Patrick.

For Patrick, living with someone who also was in the closet about their gender identity helped him come out of the closet through the relationship and friendship. This case reminds us that self-acceptance is vital for (trans)gender identity development and

ultimately (trans)gender identity work. The coming out process is also seen as an important component of (trans)gender and gender non-conforming identity work. My participants stressed that for transgender individuals and gender non-conforming individuals, identity work and the stages of acceptance—such as coming out to oneself and others in their network—work together, and the two are often intertwined, both in the online and offline spaces.

Most participants, like Patrick, talked about coming out to others in these spaces or coming out to others they have met in these spaces both in their offline and online interactions as self-discovery processes that solidify the gender work needed in the progression of (trans)gender identity making or doing (trans)gender. Therefore coming out to others who are like them in any arena, online or offline, makes their identities more real, and more tangible.

According to participants, site members can be out, or come out at varying levels online, which is different from how they manage and negotiate the coming out processes in offline spaces. Michelle illustrates when she says:

If I want to come out to all my non trans friends, I can post on Facebook and see how they react, and just de-friend someone on there, if they are…not accepting, but I cannot do that as easily when I tell someone face to face…its just harder to block out.

Therefore, in online spaces, they can assume different levels of safeness; that is, they can come out partially to some or just to the self, or come out to cyberspace only

(once they enter online spaces with their new identity, it is out there, it is catalogued and stored somewhere even if one knows or notices). For example, one participant who identifies as a Male-to-Female (MTF) crossdresser said that he used a female avatar when he plays video games such as Halo online. Halo is a first person military shooter

video game with multiple series. Players can engage in online platform or play offline

(https://www.halowaypoint.com). He feels that when he uses a female avatar to interact within the Halo platform he is coming out to cyberspace, but still being stealth. For him, it makes him feel great to be able to enjoy one of his favorite hobbies while ‘en femme.’

He can essentially cross dress virtually with no one ever being the wiser, except for him.

He feels validated because others interact with him and treat him like a woman. He suggests that these acts of performing (trans)gender online make him feel more comfortable about himself and his identity, although most people will never know that he is crossdressing while he is interacting with them virtually. Moreover, he is able to come out, even if it is partially, and if even just through cyber interactions, in a way that is meaningful, yet safe for him.

The variability of being out online suggests that online spaces provide these individuals with the tools to come out to everyone and or to just come out to oneself.

Therefore, online spaces give users the tools to be as “stealth” as they would like to be and reveal their identities in limited, protected spaces. Patrick said it best: the most important thing he learned online, “is that [who he is] does exist and is real.” Therefore,

Patrick feels validated and real, and now knows that his identity and who he is through doing transgender and coming out to others in this network, online and offline, made him feel valid and real.

Finally, acceptance

Online spaces of acceptance, then, not only provide spaces of acceptance for transgender and gender non-conforming people to do transgender, they also enable participants to find and discover self-acceptance through the coming out process of being and doing transgender. Therefore, online spaces are not just spaces of

acceptance, but they are also spaces for being accepted. These spaces of acceptance can enable and provide a space for self-acceptance and receiving support and knowledge. When TAGN individuals are able to come out and feel accepted by others, perhaps they can also create a space where they can learn to accept themselves.

Consequently, the Internet affords participants with the ease of finding others like them, finding support, and making sense of self through doing (trans)gender and experiencing varying degrees of self-discovery, and self-acceptance, online.

Online spaces becomes places when transgender and gender non-conforming individuals can do (trans)gender online in these spaces of acceptance that can also become spaces of being accepted. As TAGN individuals do (trans)gender online, these online spatial arenas are transformed into more tangible spaces for acceptance. When spaces become tangible, in this case through becoming spaces of where people are accepted, then these online spaces are transformed into places as they become more meaningful for these individuals.

Collective Identity

Whether online or offline, collective identity is important for community building and for those in that community to feel connected. Mutual identity, and support (group affiliation and association), facilitates a space online for collective identity development or a sense of community. Collective identity in online spaces then, according to my research, enables the disentanglement of contentious politics better than offline spaces, which ultimately enables participants to do the identity work needed to transform their identities. The need to learn about self, survive, and come out creates a similar goal for a group to work towards that may aid in the construction and maintenance of collective identities. Once people feel a connection, space can start to transform into place, that is

once online spaces become meaningful it becomes more tangible and people start to incorporate these online locations into their sense of selves and use them to mold who they are and to envision who they want to become.

Participants argue that for some groups, online and offline spaces are not mutually exclusive. Instead, they suggest that these spaces operate in conjunction with each other. Some participants suggest that offline spaces are more legitimate, and/or emphasize that offline spaces provide more tangible support through collective identity, infighting and gender & sexuality activism. Others argue that not only is there a benefit in using both spaces, but that in fact, online support spaces also provide support in a similar way through the creation of collective identities and spaces, which often house tangible spaces for infighting and gender & sexuality activism. To illustrate why some participants credit online spaces as better facilitators for the collective identities needed to feel connected and supported, I will compare and contrast support and community between online and offline spaces. In general, some participants argue that online support spaces, through archival and the storage of information, makes online spaces more accessible as long as the user is able to surf the web. To illustrate this, Jessica says:

I can just go online at any time of the day and find what I want…all of the information is there for me… It is just written there and I don't have to listen to someone say at meeting and jot notes to remember it, it is just there…for me to use whenever I want.

Here, Jessica and other participants argue that online spaces are a better way to build community. As a result, I also argue that the crystallization of space occurs more apparently in online spaces because when everyone in the online space participates, the information they leave behind does not disappear, it is recorded as a function, if

even for mere communication. The byproduct of this communication becomes accessible empirical evidence for others to use, and the information is archived for others to use in the future, as it is needed. In this sense, it becomes even more tangible, less of an abstract space, and more clearly an occupied place.

I will use TRI-ESS, a national support organization with many regional chapters throughout the United States that operates mostly offline, as an example to demonstrate how collective identity and the processes of infighting enable online spaces to become places. The TRI-ESS organization initially emerged as a space for crossdressers

(mostly MTF) and their spouses, mostly wives, to gain support and increase their understanding of transgender and gender non-conforming issues.

They (TRI ESS) want to be number one again so that people can find them when they do a Google search. Trans/homophobic members don’t come to meetings anymore. 120 in 2010/ meet ups gave such as big incentive to attend…(meeting format)/ part timers don’t want to go the meetings, they really want to go out but TG friendly spaces, the group takes them out to bigger non Tg spaces so that they can be out more, be out of the closet more…. (part-timers still more closeted). Helping them to be more confident—Darby

For TRI-ESS and its members, it is important that TRI-ESS be number one or close to the top of the Google hits results when anyone searches for transgender and gender non-conforming spaces. Current TRI-ESS members think that their organization has such a low Google hits result because the organization has not evolved. Moreover, members in this particular regional chapter, have suggested that the organization has become antiquated because it has: (1) failed to adapt to technological changes; (2) failed to include most transgender and gender non-conforming groups; as well as displayed (3) reluctance to be associated with sexuality politics or sexual identities.

TRI-ESS members suggest that the group has failed to adapt with technological changes because, while they want to reach a wider audience, their presence online is outdated. In addition, they feel like their online presence in general, especially in reference to their website, is outdated. If the website were updated to have a more modern feel and look, they feel like this would impact the amount of traffic they receive to their online space. More importantly they feel like this would the make the information on the site more accessible so that people could find them more easily online and offline.

It is important for people to find these online spaces, because without them, the support that people receive offline, becomes hidden as well. Darby and other TRI-ESS members argue that without an online presence, they are afraid that the offline support groups will die, or at least become less important. For this regional support chapter, the offline support group is the most important space because they help people come out a little in public spaces, albeit transgender friendly spaces. They argue that the group facilitates this important aspect of doing (trans)gender in ways that transgender and gender non-conforming individuals would never be able to do in online spaces. That is, through mutual support and coaching while out in public, veteran members are able to help new members negotiate public spaces and their interactions in those public spaces so that they can better do (trans)gender. This particular act, of doing (trans)gender in their opinion is more difficult to experience online. TRI-ESS members are able to attend group meetings, dress and present their selves in a gendered way— there is a very descriptive politics/narrative in the group by-laws on how this is done—with the support of other group members, in a group with others who are doing transgender, and go to

public spaces with other transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. So this group provides a way and the means for group members to come out a little, collectively, in public.

TRI-ESS online does not provide participants with all the tools they may need to feel supported online, as it does offline. There are things that are missing in their online space. In particular, they feel like the group could offer evidence about where to find information and perhaps even have a chat component so that members could feel like they interact more on their online space. Tri-ESS members argue that if their online space provided some of these components, then perhaps they could reach more people and increase their status online, which would also increase their presence offline.

The tactics for increasing online presence may be interpreted as framing strategies to maintain group survival. That is, the organizational goals may trump member’s needs. Being number one or close to the top of a Google search may seem problematic when we consider members’ needs; however, we know that since most groups are finding these spaces of and for acceptance online, mostly through Google searches, it is no accident that group members, especially veteran members want to increase their online presence in ways that will make them more visible online, and thus more accessible offline.

Another way in which the group has become antiquated is because it failed to include most or all identities/individuals who adopt a transgender and or gender non- conforming identity. Transgender and gender non-conforming groups feel like some groups in general tend to have a limiting collective identity narrative that often results in marginalizing other people who do not exactly fit within the group narrative. Generally,

most support groups online and offline such as the TRI-ESS organization have some type of inclusivity narrative or script which states who belong, how to dress and behave.

Sometimes these narratives may help the group and group members to define who they are, and make sense of self, better. Other times, it can become so narrowing that some people who follow a different set of practices on how to do (trans)gender, may feel marginalized to the point where they will leave the group, or they may feel compelled to follow the prescriptive way of doing (trans)gender in order to remain a part of the group.

As a result, these infighting practices excluded those who do not initially fit the script of the collective group.

TRI-ESS’ by-laws and its organizational narrative suggest that there is a reluctance to which the group has to be associated with sexuality politics or sexual identities. One of the reasons for taking this position is that wives were generally afraid that they would lose their husbands who joined the group because they initially identified as crossdressers if they began to talk about transitioning and if they associated with transsexuals, and or observed other members experience the transition process in the group. Another reason for taking this position is that there is often a sexuality stigma via perversion. That is, some support groups as well some transgender and gender non-conforming individuals do not want the world to see them as perverted or associate their transgender identity with being a fetish or being related to a sexual identity. Therefore, these groups will take on a ‘we are not perverts’ frame to their transgender and gender non-conforming narratives. In general, TRI-ESS veteran members suggest that this reluctance to associate with sexuality politics and have resulted in a decline in membership in their regional chapter. They also hinted that the

homophobes have left, which may indicate the resistance with the group to adopt more inclusive politics for all groups and individuals under the transgender and gender non- conforming umbrella.

Offline organizations like TRI-ESS help members who attend support meetings in person say they feel more confident. In particular, group members, especially the ones who are scared to go out in public alone, or come out of the closet more, feel like they are able to do so with the help of these offline networks, like TRI-ESS. In a way, some offline groups still feel linked to online spaces though, in some way, shape or form, with the least connection being associated with the online space so that people can find these offline spaces for support. Therefore, TAGN individuals feel like there is an incentive to visit these online spaces to find support offline. And while these offline spaces provide support through negotiating collective identities, (re)constructing collective identity narratives through infighting and the use of gender and sexuality political frames, I will further argue that online spaces not only provide support in a similar format, they are also seen or interpreted by the users of these spaces as more tangible than offline support spaces because they serve to crystalize and transform transgender and gender non-conforming individual identities more readily.

While offline spaces facilitate group identity development that enables members to come out collectively in public, participants who use online spaces more in their transgender identity development process suggest that online spaces also provide room for coming out collectively as well, perhaps in a similar format. When participants join or visit a group regularly online, they often choose to stay with the group with which they share a similar identity and which the group identity is recognized and feel like they

share something in common. Generally, the recognition and development of collective identity occurs via a shared gender and or sexuality identity, that is, according to Patrick, identifying as ”not straight.” Patrick explains:

I think everyone identifies as what I call "not-straight" but everyone has very different identities in these online spaces. Queer, bi-gender, genderqueer, butch, femme, trans, transsexual, transgender, FTM, MTF, FAAB, MAAB, male, female, etc. We all identify similarly in the sense that we identify as "not straight" or "not cisgender." I've made a lot of good friends through these spaces, most of the support that has kept me surviving is from these people.

Having a similar identity, that is being not ‘cis gender’ or ‘not straight,’ created a space for collective identity development. Therefore, these spaces are crystalized on the similarities of those identities, and consequently these spaces become organized around a collective identity. For Patrick, the collective identity that some of these spaces were crystalized around were not being straight or not being cisgender. Participants and site members say that they can bond and receive support based on the similarities that they share with each other in these collective spaces online.

Moreover, participants can assess, recognize and participate in (re)constructing collective identities in these online spaces more readily than offline spaces simply when they post things like personal pictures so that others can see them or create new threads for their topic of interests so that they can either receive feedback (I suggest this is a more passive process) or gain approval. Some TAGN individuals may also publish their transgender and or gender conforming narratives on personal blogs, which

I argue is another method of the coming out process in online spaces. The ease of readily using these online spaces to do (trans)gender, to gain and seek approval, and to gain knowledge also makes it easier for TAGN individuals to (re)construct collective identities in these online spaces.

Age, gender and space. Even when support groups operate mostly offline they still have an online presence and the ways in which people use these spaces may differ by other factors, such as age. Though off-line and online are different at times, often times they can also be similar or they may serve as a transitional placeholder for the other. For older participants, those who are in their 60’s or older, my study argues, that there are some things that you just cannot experience online. That is, online spaces are placeholders that can often translate to partial experiences. Online spaces never help them fully realize the experiences they crave. For them, there are things they cannot do online that have to occur in and translated off-line in the support groups. So, for some, especially older participants, online spaces are limiting, in that it does not provide all that they need to foster their transgender identities constantly.

On the contrary, the younger participants, except for one older participant, Jane, use online spaces synonymously with offline spaces. That is, these younger participants go to the support groups offline, such as organizational meetings, and or they go out in public with their organizational friends and members. In addition, these participants say that they go out in public either living fully as the gender with which they identify, or presenting partially in some way and thus they use online spaces almost in the same way as they use the offline spaces. That is, these participants use online spaces to connect and find meaningful relationships and make friends. For example, Nathalie a younger participant in her thirties, says, “I make friends online, we check on each other, we chat from time to time…when they are in town, we meet up for dinner or something fun.” On the other hand, Darby, an older participant who is in her sixties, says:

I don’t go online at lot…I will search for a term to understand it more…I will look for transgender support groups so that I can visit them and meet up with people in my area.

There are some discrepancies/ differences between age groups and how they use the Internet. Some of these differences are based upon the frequency to which they use the Internet. Other differences are based upon how and why they use the Internet.

For instance, younger participants not only tend to use the Internet more frequently, but they also may use the Internet to discover more places online in which to find friends and network. Older participants may also use the Internet in similar ways, but the key difference is that older participants tend to use the Internet as a resource for finding spaces offline. To older participants, the Internet mediates their interaction with offline spaces such as support groups. Younger participants, on the other hand, use the

Internet as place and space.

Of course, younger participants probably feel more comfortable with the Internet and computers. They tend to use the Internet almost in the same way as they use online support spaces and off-line support groups, as Sam and Nathalie indicated earlier. Older participants though, mostly seem to use online support spaces to find these off-line spaces. Older participants report that they may find off-line spaces to attend and interact with others or go to blogs, or even go to some of these forums, but they tend to say that they do not use the online spaces as much or even in the same way that younger people do. For instance, younger people are more likely to have blogs while older people are the ones who are more likely to be consumers than to be creators. Also, younger participants seem to use online spaces in the same way as they would off-line spaces. Nevertheless, the collective identity and transgender identity work that is done online and offline can be one in the same for some groups, as one space

may serve as a facilitator for the other space. So, some use online spaces alone, while others use online spaces in conjunction with offline spaces, to facilitate doing

(trans)gender. This is usually the case even if, initially, the only way in which they use online spaces is to find spaces of acceptance offline.

The data suggest that even organizations and support groups offline use online platforms as a way to reach a larger audience. So, online spaces or the presence of offline platforms does not necessarily indicate that there is always a collective space to share, feel supported and to feel like a community. However, participants suggest that online spaces can provide different techniques for navigating stagnant environments, especially environments that tend to marginalize their developing identities. As a result, participants argue that online platforms make it is much easier for them to participate in

(re)constructing collective identities online. More importantly, they argue that online spaces afford them the ability to move easily between the online spatial networks so that they readily leave marginalizing spaces without much effort.

The crystallization of space occurs more apparently in online spaces because when everyone in the online space participates, the information they leave behind does not disappear; it is recorded as a function, if even for mere communication. The crystallization of space as I define it, occurs when online space is used as a tool that archives, stores and further solidifies knowledge about a topic. This makes the space more accessible and data or information transgender identity development more retrievable. In addition, while it can be argued that there are benefits in using both online spaces, online support spaces not only provide support in a similar way as offline spaces (through the use of creating collective identities and spaces which often house

tangible spaces for infighting and gender & sexuality activism), but it does so in more convenient ways. As such, some participants indicate that there might be more value in online spaces, as they seal (crystalize) and bound the pertinent and relevant information to a space more readily available than offline spaces.

Space and Place-Making

Space making creates tangible spaces of and for acceptance. Many participants create online content via writing original blogs, vlogs, comments, original posts on forums and replies to both thread posts or comments on thread posts, maintaining a dedicated transgender and gender non-conforming social media presence and creating transgender networks through linking to other sites, articles, vlogs, and transgender support spaces. Roughly half of the participants I interviewed reported that they currently have a personal blog or have blogged in the past. For example, Khole, Sam,

Nathalie, Jane, Nancy and Jessica, to name a few, say that they all blog about their stories; they share their life experiences, they give advice, they talk about fashion, what to wear, how to wear it, and try to break down barriers. Specifically, Kathy says:

You know people have blogs, have stories they can share that other people can find useful. So I think that's always the reason I write something that's meaningful, you know, someone might read it and find a story that that I've experienced and touch them in a certain way. One story I had, one of the first times I went out to a drag show, and instantly was being hit on, so I wrote about that. And some people had comments about that and how they would deal if something would happen to them. And the idea of me as me, normally a guy, dressed as a woman, being hit on is a very bizarre situation to be in. It's not something that all men have to deal with, but, it's someone who dresses up as their feminine self, that story might be interesting to read about, 'cuz it can happen. So I think I would see meaningful for some people that are looking for information, something interesting where people, or other blogs might file.

As participants post more information, the content they post becomes more visible, even through Google searches, and the Ipage rank feature (recall the algorithm and ranking system discussed earlier in the methods chapter). Therefore, the content creates new spaces for acceptance and the more visible these spaces become, the more legitimate people feel. For example, Nancy says:

When I first started blogging, I was afraid of the rest of the transgender community, just because that was, like fear out of ignorance. But I just didn’t know, you know what there was, what the transgender community was. And I wasn’t really necessarily interested, like when I first started doing it, I was kind of maybe trying to target fashion minded people. When I tried searching for other blogs like mine, I really struggled to find some, I found 2 sets of blogs, that considered themselves to be transgender…one sexual and other had poor me rants. I found no personal connection with that and so I started doing my own thing and was happy with it for the most part. But then after blogging as long as I did, 2 or 3 years, and not having very much interaction with anybody else, I was lonely.

Finding spaces of acceptance, doing (trans)gender, and constructing collective identities online contribute to making spaces online. In addition, I argue that when transgender and gender non-conforming individuals engage in the process of self- validation, self-acceptance and self-understanding, in online spaces, it ultimately leads to creation of more spaces and places for acceptance.

Networks

I will read through the recent posts of blogs I regularly follow, catch up on their lives, may or may not leave supportive comments. From there, I'll often jump to other blogs or articles linked by blogs I frequent. Sometimes I may be searching out a specific topic for education, but not often.--Patrick

There are networks of transgender blogs, these blogs are often connected to other blogs, which may lead site participants from one blog to the next. My participants explain that people find each other that way--they find a website or blog that they like and then they click on the sites and or blogs that directly embedded into the site that

they have visited initially. The direct click method or the trace back method is usually used to find other people who are different and or connected to transgender issues and or gender and sexuality issues, so individuals who visit these online spaces feel compelled to follow these links because they feel that these links will most likely lead to relevant information. Moreover, they feel like they can trust these links because the creator of the blog or the creator of whatever online material they are currently consuming gave some thought to them and have decided to connect their material to these other sources. As Patrick indicates above, the network of spaces that were created are powerful. By creating a network, he and other participants say that they can jump from site to site, and consume materials more readily and easily. For example,

Nancy says:

There’s a group of bloggers that I regularly check in with. What I think is interesting is the interconnectivity of it all, and that I can see someone leaving a comment on my site that I’ve never seen before. And then sometimes their name will be a link, because I allow anonymous comments and sometimes it just comes up as an anonymous comment on my blog. And it doesn’t lead to anywhere else, but sometimes, say you leave a comment on my blog and they are a Google plus member. I can click on their name and it will take me to their profile, and then in reading their profile or reading their site, it can be that somebody else that has left a comment on their blog or their Google plus page of something like that, and I can click on that, and then I can see what’s up with that person or a lot of times I’ll visit blogs and other bloggers will have blog lists of blogs that they follow, blogs that they like, things like that. So then I can click on that person. I’ll just click through and just read a little piece of something and then maybe something else will catch my attention and then I’ll read that. And then sometimes I’ll find myself 5,6,7,8, blogs or clicks or links into something. I don’t think too much about it and then the next day, I’m like, ‘that was a really interesting article that I read...because of that inter- connectiveness that happens where I can just click on one person. And what I find that’s so fascinating is that I can read stuff from people that are all around the world.

Often when sites link to other online spaces that provide information such as educational materials, et cetera, most site participants will at least take a look at the

other spaces that are connected to the source that they are currently visiting. They are all connected and people use these blogs and their networks to find each other, stay connected and attain their gender needs.

Similarly, they can stay connected more with current events, the relevant information pertaining to their identities and the issues they deem important, and even interact with people on these spaces more easily through these networks that are created. For example, Khole says: I blog…and I link to other blogs and bloggers that I like. Therefore, when participants create spaces by posting their own personal stories online, creating their blogs, leaving original comments, creating discussion threads, or even creating vlogs, they are creating spaces for and of acceptance. When these spaces are created, they may help transgender and gender non-conforming individuals who use online spaces to feel more legitimate because they have access to more arenas in which to interact and participate, and they have more self-narratives to consume. More importantly, when a network or multiple networks of spaces are created, they increase the ease of accessing information that pertains to transgender people. In addition, these networks may increase how well information is disseminated. For instance, participants suggest that they have seen petitions for certain issues circulating in these networks, and they often find that they are reposted from site to site based upon how they are connected. Furthermore, considering the way that sites are ranked, information posted in one space that has a higher ranking or that has more connections may be easier for site participants to find because they are more connected even if they are just doing Google searches. These lower ranked sites, through their connections to larger more highly ranked sites become better ranked over time, first from just getting

more visits from these network connections, and then through these increased visits.

And so, networks not only create larger spaces of and for acceptance, but they may also make it easier to find more obscure spaces such as personal blogs that are tied to larger spaces, forums or national support organizations.

Participants also argue that there are too many differences in offline groups, and because offline groups are more static, they suggest that you cannot just leave an offline group as easily and readily as you can navigate from a limiting/marginalizing space online to a space that is perceived to be more accepting. While there are a multitude of offline and online spaces for and of acceptance, online technologies and the networks of transgender spaces that are created online by transgender and gender conforming users give TAGN individuals the ability to find the types of support they need quickly and efficiently, without ever leaving the comfort of their home. Though the online and offline groups are sometimes connected, and shape each other, as noted above, participants argue that online spaces provides more agency to the actor, who are able to leave and navigate spaces online with more ease than they would with offline spaces. For instance, if the participant finds that an online space is becoming marginalizing to their identity or they feel uncomfortable in that space, they can easily navigate and leave that space behind, but if they feel that an offline space is marginalizing, they feel that they have to be more tactful in their interactions. The difference is that leaving an online space involves clicking a few buttons, while leaving an offline space might mean getting up and walking out of a room.

Transgender and gender non-conforming individuals make spaces for acceptance, which helps them facilitate a sense of self and understand who they are.

These new spaces are meaningful because they create more room to do (trans)gender and construct collective identities online. As a result, when new spaces are created with the intention to promote acceptance, and or these spaces get linked to existing spaces of acceptance, they become tangible. These new spaces for acceptance construct multiple new networks, also seen as new and larger spaces, which increase the tangibility of the online space platforms or spatial arenas for transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, thereby transforming new spaces into places. Stated differently, when spaces are created and are used to do (trans)gender and construct collective identities, they become more meaningful spaces and thus, more tangible.

Space Becomes Place

Therefore, when transgender and gender non-conforming individuals find spaces of acceptance, form collective identities and create spaces for acceptance, they are able to do (trans)gender online in these spaces, in ways that they are unable to do

(trans)gender anywhere else. Online spaces, then, are made more tangible to these individuals because it helps them facilitate their authentic selves and better understand who are; as a result, these spaces become places.

The processes of finding online spaces of acceptance are usually one of the first steps. This step then initiates other necessary steps for online spaces to become more tangible spaces for transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. Generally, these individuals need to find spaces of acceptance in order to begin and or continue their identity work as these online spaces afford them with the ability to feel better about who they are. Online space becomes place when transgender and gender non- conforming individuals can develop identities online, construct collective identities, and

continue to make spaces for acceptance – when they become places of “doing

(trans)gender.”

“Doing transgender”, creating real and authentic selves and doing (trans)gender identity development, is facilitated by the transformation of these online spaces into tangible places. Moreover, these tangible spaces are also linked/incorporated into that individual’s identity. Overall, TAGN individuals perceive these spaces as more legitimate, and important, for self-discovery. Collective online spaces can provide different techniques for navigating stagnant environments, and environments that tend to marginalize their developing identities. TAGN individuals argue that online spaces make it much easier for them to participate in (re)constructing collective identities online. As a result, online spaces also facilitate a collective transgender identity development, which in turn, fosters the transformation of online spaces into places. It is a dynamic process, much like a gender feedback loop (Crawley, Shehan and Foley

2008). More importantly, they argue that online spaces afford them with the ability to move easily between the online spatial networks so that they can readily leave marginalizing spaces without much effort.

Space-making creates tangible spaces for collective identity development in online and offline spaces. When spacing-making results in creating spaces of acceptance, these online spaces that are created are transformed into places via doing

(trans)gender (transgender identity development in online spaces), and collective identity development in these online spaces, overtime. In general, online spaces are useful because participants can get support, find others like them, come out online variably, do (tans)gender identity work, and gather related and relevant information in

real time to facilitate the transformation of an authentic self and their (trans)gender identity. Put another way, the way in which people do transgender online (especially younger people) is a means of making online space into place, which allows for more transgender work.

Online spaces and places are even more tangible for TAGN individuals, as they are the only spaces and places for some individuals to make sense of who they are, as there no other spatial locations available for them in their areas. Using the example of

Nathalie from earlier in the chapter, notice how she speaks of using online spaces to feel supported and mingle with others who are like her. Therefore, the online space replaces the offline space, because she does not have accessible offline spaces to visit.

This highlights how some TAGN individuals use online spaces because they do not have these types of support groups, offline, making online spaces the most tangible spaces for them. The lack of accessible offline support groups and spaces creates a feeling of isolation. So TAGN individuals use online spaces to foster and facilitate support, which creates a space where they can have/experience a feeling of inclusion.

In addition, there may be some participants who are not comfortable going to offline spaces even if these spaces existed. As a result, these participants may forgo using online spaces, and if they have other aspects of support offline, they may use online spaces in conjunction with their offline support spaces to supplement their networks. Individuals who wish that they had accessible offline support groups, often lament the lack of experience and interactions that they are missing; this often makes them appreciate their online support groups even more. They feel online spaces are tangible, but they say they are intertwined with their (trans)gender identity. As result, I

argue that (trans)gender identity and online spaces impact each other; they are interdependent and intertwined.

For many TAGN individuals, doing is truly believing. Most of the ways in which transgender people do (trans)gender identity work and practice (trans)gender identity politics lead not only to acceptance and support from others, but these practices also encourage self-discovery. For individuals who rely on online spaces as their primary spaces to facilitate this process of doing (trans)gender, especially those who also identify as generation X or Y, my research suggests that through doing (trans)gender identity work in these online spaces, these online spaces become more tangible and more meaningful. As these spaces become tangible, put another way, as these spaces are solidified for these individuals as spaces for and of acceptance, to do (trans)gender identity work, TAGN individuals’ identities become more real. As a result, these spaces are made more real. That is, space becomes place. When online spaces facilitate the transformation of transgender identities, through doing (trans)gender identity work and constructing collective TAGN identities online, this process manifests the reality of their

TAGN identities, transforming online spaces into online places for social change.

CHAPTER 4 ISOLATION: THERE IS NO ROOM FOR ME UNDER YOUR UMBRELLA

Although transgender and gender non-conforming (TAGN) individuals describe the many benefits of supportive online spaces and places such as (trans)gender online arenas, TAGN individuals also discuss how these online places can become marginalizing and isolating. Therefore, while the Internet offers, on the one hand, tangible places for acceptance where transgender and gender non-conforming people construct their gendered selves, on the other hand, according to my grounded theory analysis the Internet can also marginalize and isolate these individuals. So, while these online places are ideal for helping TAGN individuals develop collective identities, do

(trans)gender expression, and receive and offer support online, TAGN individuals also express how they can also experience feelings of alienation in these places, simultaneously and or subsequently.

In this chapter, I will illustrate how online places, which aim to offer support to help TAGN individuals learn to better understand who they are, can also isolate the same people they seek to support. After I illustrate how isolation occurs, I conclude with two points. First, I argue that once these online places can no longer give participants what they need, especially for that participant who experiences isolation, these online places become (revert back to) simply online spaces, once more. And so, the process of space and place-making often begin anew—TAGN individuals will seek new spaces to once more make into supportive spaces or places as they continue to seek meaningful connections and make sense of their gendered selves. Second, based on my close analysis of the data, I argue that while isolation occurs, and may seem to splinter group identity, instead my read is that isolation—via the process of infighting is

an outcome of dissent—is a necessary process of (trans)gender identity development on one’s journey to self-acceptance. Thus, isolation may even be an important component for collective identities, gender politics, and movement work, and ultimately space and place-making.

In what follows, I explain how my research identified how online spaces and places marginalize and isolate transgender and gender non-conforming people in three ways: (1) Collective identity politics, which results in either the participant outgrowing the space or place (transforming identities), and or the participant disagreeing with the group’s prescriptive identity politics (infighting); (2) Online platforms are a “big closet” because they operate within the fringes in order to provide support, and participants can only come out online to the extent to which others are willing to accept them; (3) Online networking and an online presence results in trolling and sexual harassment. After I discuss how isolation occurs, I also suggest that it is a necessary building-block for

(trans)gender identity development online. To conclude, I offer explanations informing future movement literature to consider isolation as a new component for collective identity politics. Moreover, I suggest that isolation can shape, maintain, and create new online spaces and places thus, it may be important for better understanding the transgender social movement, in particular, and online social movements, in general.

Collective Identity and Identity Politics

Collective identity and identity politics are important components for coalescing a group identity (Snow 2001; Ghaziani 2008; also see Gamson 1995). Isolation, as described by participants in this research, on the other hand, may seem to splinter group identities, but my research indicates that isolation, just like infighting (Ghaziani

2008), is a vital component for individual and group identity politics. My research

revealed that isolation occurs online for TAGN individuals via infighting. As discussed in the sensitizing concepts portion of the literature review, examples of infighting may be an indicator of collective identities. Due to its unique relationship with dissent, infighting as indicated by Ghaziani (2008) often demonstrates aspects of group politics to group members; that is, as people fight about what is important, they learn more about their collective and individual identities. Thus infighting may act as a vessel to coalesce collective identities. As such, I argued that infighting as a sensitizing concept may take the form of dissent among members over who should be included in the group and whether the term transgender should be all encompassing. These patterns of infighting emerged as important in my research. For example, transgender group members and group leaders told me that their groups discussed, dictated and or indicated to other group members what it meant to be transgender and how one should go about doing

(trans)gender. In what follows, I will introduce collective identities and then show examples of infighting. After, I will demonstrate briefly how infighting is connected to collective identities and then illustrate how they both can create and or signify temporary or permanent moments of isolation.

As illustrated in the previous chapter, collective identities are useful in these online spaces because members of a group feel that they share something in common, which creates feelings of a sense of community in that space. Common interests drive group members to visit these online spaces (which can become places over time) and it is that commonality in identity, which is the key component that led group members to seek out these online spaces in the first place. Common interests, then, helped to create a collective identity, which enabled group members to develop collective places.

To reiterate from chapter three, once spaces become places, then the online arena becomes more meaningful to those group members. As a result, group members usually tout collective identity politics in the group’s online place as a way to demonstrate the collective goal and culture of that group (see chapter 3). Therefore, due to the common interests and collective identities that transgender groups share online, TAGN individuals are willing to fight to protect and maintain the integrity and constructed meaning of these online places.

Transforming identities. My research shows that isolation occurs when an individual goes through a significant gender and or sexuality identity transformation that may lead them to feel lost or disconnected from the group(s) with which they are affiliated, as they may feel like the group does not add much value to their lives anymore. Some participants say that at some point, they outgrow the site that once offered them support.

I just don’t go to those online groups anymore; I don't really get anything from them anymore. In the beginning I used to visit some of those sites a lot, but I outgrew them-Carla

Carla is indicating that online spaces can become temporally based and can even be transitional for some. That is, when TAGN individuals first find these spaces, they may find value in them in the beginning, but that value may decrease over time.

For instance, Carla says that she used to visit some online spaces at lot, but after a while she felt like they did not add much to her experience and so, she moved on.

Similarly, Jane says,

I used to go to a lot of online groups … I just don’t get anything from them anymore…after a time, I just stopped going to most of them. I guess I just didn’t find them useful, anymore.

Here, I am using Carla and Jane as just a couple of examples to show the trend I saw emerge from the data. Based on my analysis, I argue that online spaces, even if they become a place over time, may either be outgrown as the participant changes, or some TAGN individuals may find it necessary to disconnect from that space or place as it changes.

Participants also say that even when they decide to move on, they miss their friends, and mourn a loss of the group once they decide that they have outgrown these online spaces and places. However, they also speak to how they feel like they need to find new supportive spaces to match their new concept of identity. David says:

I had to leave CD.com because they did not give me what I needed. I needed fetish experiences. They did not have that, and they were not gonna talk to me about it…they told me that I was in the wrong place…I learned overtime through talking to everyone on the site that I should not talk about my fetish. I don't talk to them anymore…and you know I had some friends that I miss a lot.

For example, David, a male-to-female (MTF) crossdresser started out at crossdreser.com, and moved on after three years. He has now moved on to

FethLife.com. According to David, he feels like Fethlife offers more for adults with fetish needs. He says that he could not get what he needed on crossdresser.com. That is, there were no spaces within crossdresser.com for talking about fetishes because it is the belief among group members that fetishes are perversions that will erode the work and support of crossdressers who want to be seen as normal human beings.

Crossdressers have often encountered issues and scrutiny from mainstream society, and for a long time, many people have seen crossdressing as a perversion and have often labeled it negatively as an etiology called transvestism (Boyd, 2003). Moreover, group members worry that if they are seen as practicing and enabling fetish identities,

they are less likely to gain legitimacy. David did not see his fetish needs as different enough from other crossdressers to make his needs less than or different from others who cross dress. He wanted to be a part of the group, but found that he was an outsider and though he had formed bonds with members of the group and was apart of the group for a while, he felt he needed to move on. David learned over time that the

CD.com was not the group for him after all. He says:

I was told that I am transvestite and this was a space for crossdressers. They told me in not so many words that this place was not for me…eventually I left and found fethlife. Fethlife is like a family; it provides support and gives me a space to have fetish experiences. I left [CD.com] because I didn’t feel comfortable there anymore.

Here, David’s narrative indicates how the transformation of his sexual identity resulted in isolation from his original group of three years, because members of the collective group identity, crossdresser, no longer matched his current identity; he was told that crossdressers do have those fetishes, and that he is in fact a transvestite, not a crossdresser. Through describing the group narrative, the members of CD.com were not only suggesting who was a part of their group, but also who was not a part of the group, and thus, did not belong in that space and place. So, my analysis indicates that isolated participants may move on to different kinds of support spaces in order to meet their needs.

When participants are first using online spaces (which may become places over time), my analysis suggests that they are often unable to recognize the temporality of these spaces. That is, in the moment when they are using these spaces or places, they recognize its value and they may even see the space as very useful and tangible.

However, when participants reach a certain point in their identity formation

(transformation), or when they feel like they cannot gain anything else useful from the

space or place, they abandon it (if it was considered a tangible resource/place, it may not be seen as tangible anymore). Moreover, as Carla argues above, this is the point at which some feel that offline support groups may offer more tangible resources. As a result, my interpretation is that my research illustrates that online spaces and places are often used as a transitional (temporary) space or place for some. And the transitory nature of the online space or place happens when the participant has received all they can from the online space or place. As a transitional place, it reverts back to just an online space. Moreover, isolation can be seen as component of gender identity development and even a sexuality identity development, a point I discussed above when David outgrew his online space.

Infighting. According to my analysis, participants may also link outgrowing a space to infighting. In my data, I observed how they often they talked of “outgrowing” as a process of transforming their views toward their gender identity and perhaps even their sexuality. Generally, participants say that if their views about gender and sexuality are not in alignment with their current group to which they feel connected, then they are more likely to feel alienated in that group. Here, my interpretation from the findings is that isolation occurs because some site members strive to maintain the collective identity of that group, as they may feel threatened by other people’s gender and identity politics. Consequently, as the participants with whom I spoke told me, other site members may not feel supportive of these new and emerging identity politics. They feel like they cannot support these changes as they fear if they do support them, it will threaten the culture and collective identity politics of the group, or they may feel like they

do not want to be lumped in with others whose identities are different from the ones with which they currently identify.

To a certain degree, the person doing the isolating/marginalizing is fighting to maintain the place that they have created, as it helps to sustain their identities and has significant meaning to them. For example, when I visited these sites during AMOE and collected textual data, I got the sense that the members who were participating in dissent were doing it because they felt it was necessary to preserve their space; it was valuable, it was like an extension of who they are. So, they did not want those who were different to change it, alter it, or defile it. Recalling David’s story about CD.com, it was like the members who told him that he’s a transvestite were saying, this space is for us to figure out who we are, go find your own space. While my analysis highlights how these places of acceptance online are created, and sustained for identity development, the literature suggest that individuals must also do identity work in a group context

(Snow 2001), and thus, there is always some aspect of group politics that are involved.

Another example I collected from textual data comes from a subreddit, a Reddit subgroup, called crossdressing. This group has a clear set of rules posted on how to behave appropriately in the online space. Below are just a few examples.

No nudity, lingerie, or sexually explicit material allowed. If your underwear (or less than that) is showing, it belongs in /r/GoneWildCD. Mod[erator]s have final say in gray areas.

Be respectful of others! We do not tolerate inappropriate language or sexual harassment.

No hookup requests, no outside chat services. Requests for kik / snapchat / other forms of solicitation will result in a ban.

Most of the groups I visited through AMOE had a set of rules posted and these groups highly encouraged following them unless participants wanted to be thrown out or

blocked from the group altogether. For example, in the case of the rules above, moderators do not want members to post sexualized photos that is, photos with their underwear showing, or even use the site as a dating website. I surmise that these rules are also indicators of what the group wants to be associated with, how they want the world to see them, as well as an attempt to create a safe space for those who identify in the same ways that they do.

My analysis also suggests that unless a group/space was being created when the TAGN individual first discovered the space, then it may be difficult for them to change and adjust standard group practices and politics to match their own preferences. Hence, according to my analysis, groups often use and develop standard practices so that the group can feel and experience the similarities they share with each other. The things group members share in common aim to sustain the longevity of the group, but commonality also motivates individuals to infer a sense of belonging, togetherness and community to these online places.

For example, according to my analysis, isolation via infighting occurs because some groups have prescriptive ways of doing (trans)gender and they encourage members that if they want to adopt this particular transgender identity, then they need to behave in ‘these’ prescriptive ways. As such, these prescriptions of doing transgender helps to preserve collective identities, and further solidify group politics. For instance, some participants, like Nancy, Jessica, Kathy, Jane, Carla, and Sam, to name a few, say that they have noticed that some members in these online places may suggest or tell them which ways are the appropriate ways to dress or speak, though these prescriptive ways of doing does not always mean the same thing for everyone in the

group. So, for instance, if someone enters a space which has a crossdresser collective identity such as CD.com, as was the case with David, they may find that some members of that group may say, “crossdressers don’t change their voices when they talk,” or “crossdressers don’t take hormones, honey,” or “crossdressers don’t have fetish experiences,” or “if you take hormones, then you are not a crossdresser, you’re a transsexual.” If that group has a transsexual collective identity, they may say, “you either have surgery or you don’t, and if you don’t, you are not a transsexual” or “if you’re a transman or transwoman you are not a transsexual.” If the group does not identify or understand a term used such as translesbian, they may say: “there is no such thing as a translesbian.” Therefore, groups that share a collective transgender identity have prescriptive ways of demonstrating how site participants and members should do

(trans)gender. More importantly, site participants/members are also policed and held accountable in these spaces to do (trans)gender in the ways that are seen and viewed as acceptable and in alignment with the scripts of the collective politics of that specific online place and group.

On the other hand, my analysis shows that the prescriptive ways of doing

(trans)gender does not always mean the same thing for everyone in the group that prescribes it. For example, while some people on CD.com may advocate for some members to refrain from altering their voices when they speak and are dressed ‘en femme,’ others in the same group/online place may suggest that it is necessary to change one’s voice to match the gender identity they are presenting. In my analysis, I labeled these prescriptive tactics as infighting because they represent differences among group members, which may elicit internal debates and even result in conflict.

Therefore, within just one online place/space, participants say that they may receive contradictory information on how to do (trans)gender expression and identity—which are often tied to a specific transgender and gender non-conforming identities such as crossdresser versus transsexual.

My research supports the understanding that contentious politics, then, are usually demonstrated in the infighting that occurs in these groups in efforts to maintain a collective identity (Ghaziani 2008). In addition, my research shows that some TAGN individuals may feel that they do not belong in these spaces or places or feel like an outsider because the methods of policing and prescribing how to do (trans)gender, as described above, create tensions. For example, Nancy says:

We often talk about whether or not we should tell our spouses or other family members and I believe that we should, we should be honest, but others don’t see it that way. One day I made a comment and I said that I think it is wrong for you to hide that from the people in your life, especially the person you are married to...everyone got mad at me. I did not comment for a while.

Likewise, Jane, who identifies as a translesbian, says:

[O]ne day when online and this really charming person, at least I thought he [a transman] was charming, well he got offended when I told him I was not interested in him, because I was a translesbian. He started telling the moderators and everyone on the forum that I did not belong there, they were asking “what is a translesbian?” I was so embarrassed. The moderator of course did not listen to him, but I didn't feel like dealing with that again…it was too exhausting.

The tensions caused by infighting, then, may make some feel marginalized and alienated—especially newer members/participants who do not yet see these places as spaces. In other words, for some, these online spaces have not taken on the same meaning as it already has for invested members who are more incorporated in the group (those to whom the space is place) and feel invested in maintaining these online

places. As a result, as demonstrated by the stories of the individuals in this research, I argue that isolation emerges as a by-product of infighting.

Thus far in this chapter, I have illustrated that my research suggests that isolation in online spaces and places as it pertains to collective identity and identity politics develops when identities are transformed or infighting occurs. I also showed that isolation can be short-lived or permanent as the stigmas and consequences of being isolated from the group may force some group members to conform, and others to resist, the group politics. Yet, other types of isolation through the transformation of identities can become permanent, as it was with David and Carla. In such cases, by moving on to find more supportive spaces, the isolation from the space becomes permanent. However, isolation can be temporary, as it was with Nancy. These results are different from previous literature in that they expand the stages/components of collective identity politics by naming and detailing the process of isolation in relation to infighting. In addition, these findings provide a critical new stage /new component from which to understand how gender identity online is coalesced (permanence), and transformed (temporality) over time.

Earlier in this chapter, I suggested that isolation, as described by participants in this research, might be seen as having a splintering effect on group identities. Here, I offer a different perspective. I suggest instead, that isolation is a component of collective politics (like infighting/dissent), which serves to further coalesce group identities. When infighting occurs and isolation results, groups do not fall apart; instead, group identities are further defined. As Amin Ghaziani suggests (2008), “people fight,” and to further his argument, I say [when] people fight, lines are sometimes drawn, which isolates some

individuals and solidifies a sense of collectivity for others. In other words, collective identities are not just solidified by dissent. According to my analysis, isolation tactics can also solidify group boundaries, defining the in-group more definitively from the out- group, and thereby further bolstering collective identities and politics.

Still just a BIG Closet

The second way isolation occurs in online spaces and places is that while TAGN individuals are able to come out online and thus are more visible, but my research shows that TAGN individuals also argue that online spaces and places are “still just a big closet,” at times. For them, online platforms are “still just a big closet” because they operate in spaces and places that are on the fringe. In other words, they see these spaces and places as isolated from the outset. My analysis shows that even when most

TAGN individuals come out in online spaces or participate in TAGN spaces, they still feel marginalized and isolated. For instance, when TAGN individuals participate in

TAGN online spaces and places, they say they still feel limited in their interactions in the real world. For example, Carla states, “I am tired of being online, I just want to out, go out to theater, go shopping!” For Carla, she feels limited by her online interactions and she has said that she does not go online much anymore, because she is tired of having just these online experiences. She wants to go out in public, and have interactions with people face-to-face. For her, there is only so much you can do online; there is only so much these interactions can provide. She wants more.

For TAGN people who come out in TAGN and or none TAGN spaces say they are still not recognized as legitimate transgender and gender-non-conforming individuals, thus further isolating them. My research shows that these participants say that people with whom they interact in gender conforming spaces, or even people with

whom they interact in their own social networks, still ignore their TAGN presentations.

For example, Sarah explains: “People can still ignore you, even if you want to be out and you put it out there online.” Moreover, looking closer at both Carla and Sarah’s stories, like others that I have interviewed, they argue that while online, people still interpret their outness online as something else.

Sarah is 72-years-old and identifies as gender-fluid or bigender, presents mostly as a male and as a female in social situations. Sarah has been married to a woman for

48 years. Sarah says that though she has photos presenting as a female on Facebook, people interpret her gender presentation as something other than transgender and gender non-conforming. Sarah argues that people, especially those in her network, may explain away her disruption to the gender norms more readily. She argues that because these people know her, they can easily draw upon something they know about ‘him’1 to explain away her non-conformatory gender behavior. For instance, one of Sarah’s friends commented on one of her Facebook photos which indicated to Sarah that she thought Sarah was doing drag simply because she performs in a theater troupe.

These subtle acts of denial, refusal, failure or even the inability of others in their network to recognize an actualized or authentic representation of one’s self can further subvert or de-legitimize the work a lot of TAGN individuals achieve by coming out online. In a sense, if TAGN individuals value the coming out process as an important step in gender identity formation and (trans)gender politics, subversion of these actions may suggest to them that they are, in fact, disempowered and it does not make a difference (or have an impact) even when they come out. That is, if people fail to

1 Him is indicative of one’s social networks refusal to accept her gender presentation, and thus they draw upon his experiences or roles to explain away her non-conformatory gender behavior.

recognize or validate who they are, they feel even more robbed in their identity-making processes and further marginalized and cast out farther on the fringe. Instead of thinking that Sarah’s performances are trans or have non-conforming gender components, her network and strangers alike are more likely to explain it away as non- trans and gender conforming. For Sarah, this behavior and attitude leads her to believe that these groups just see her as a man in a dress. Consequently, my analysis is that even if a TAGN individual wants to be out and put their non-dichotomous identity out there, online, they are still forced into the dichotomous categories of gender performance. For instance, Mort and Sarah’s profiles and online presence are merged, but those identities are still ignored. So, people in Mort’s life can only believe that Mort only dresses that way because Mort participates in theater.

Consequently, if people in these networks are likely to explain her non- masculine/male presentations away, do transgender and gender non-conforming individuals always need a coming out story because trans is not normalized? My research suggests that trans voices are marginalized and further subverted online, especially in non-trans specific spaces. The variability of being out online, and the lack of control over the perception of others (that is how others will see them and interpret their gender identities and performances) suggest that online places and spaces provide these individuals with the tools to come out to everyone and no one all at once.

My research suggests that the variety of ways that people can use online tools to come out to people are vast: one can tell their online group, they can tell their Facebook friends, they can blog or vlog about it and they can post photos of themselves in transgender and gender non-conforming spaces or non transgender and gender

conforming spaces. The combinations are many. The variable ways in which one can be out online suggest that online spaces provide these individuals with the tools to come out, but a person can only really come out, online when they feel acknowledged.

Participants also state that even the offline supportive spaces/places have a closeted, marginalizing, and often isolating component/disadvantage. That is, being a part of a support group that caters to the marginalized can still yield feelings of marginalization. From AMOE, I surmise that this occurs as a result of having to operate within the margins from the outset, so, even when members are able to come out online. Because they get to come out in these same spaces/places that are carved out and protected by their support group online, their coming out stories are limited to and only validated in the margins of these spaces. For instance, in these support groups,

Carla argues that both in online and offline you can come out to an extent, that is you are out, but you are not truly out:

Tri-Ess/offline support is still a big closet, and online can be a big closet too, you’re out in a way, but you are still not out. I just want to be out, I just want to go to the plays and grocery shopping and not care about anyone.

Carla suggests that there are still limitations on how out one can become, both in online and offline support groups. For online support groups, she suggests that to a point, your level of outness is validated not just by those in your networks, but it is also connected to how much others, that is everyone in your world, is willing to accept you— accept the self that you are willing to put out there.

Based on Carla’s logic, online spaces and places may take the place of offline spaces for people who cannot get access to offline support groups. However, even if these online spaces/places are not a placeholder for offline spaces/places, when a participant wants to go out, he/she may find that accessibility makes it difficult for

100

him/her to come out. For Carla, she is not coming out because her life and her circumstances do not always allow for her to be out in public, but she is adamant that she wants to be out. She does want to come out and she has that need to be out, but she does not feel completely out online because she is still limited in what she does in her offline life. Carla talks about wanting to go out, but not feeling like she is totally out because she spends most of her time online and she says at times she feels like she is doing well, because she is coming out a little, but in reality, she is starting to realize she is not really coming out at all. So, in a sense, Carla discusses the differences between

“being out” in limited ways versus “feeling totally out.”

My analysis suggests that Carla is indicating that her world is limited to the online spaces and places, which can still be marginalizing, because while she is able to do these things online, she has yet to do them offline. That is, her online and offline lives are not yet connected in the way that she wants them to be. Most people’s entire world or life are not just connected to the Internet (the online spaces and places that the

Internet houses); that is, they still have a life and networks that are not online, so, in a way, it is possible to be out in online space or place, but not feel totally out in the rest of your life or world. So, even when you are “being out” online, some people may not “feel totally out” because to be totally out means that all those in your life and network know.

Trolling

My analysis also points to how isolation also occurs for TAGN people through the negative interactions that many say they experienced and encountered online. Many

TAGN people with whom I spoke say that they receive a lot of negative feedback, especially on non-trans or gender conforming spaces, which often result in negative consequences, such as feelings of being abused. Like general online language for

101

harassment, TAGN individuals refer to people who harass them as “trolls,” and they call the act of harassing “trolling.” According to my data, TAGN individuals often try to avoid these spaces where they have had a negative interaction, especially if they are non- trans specific spaces. But, according to my participants, trolls often seek out TAGN individuals. According to the TAGN people in this study, trolls can be divided into two groups—those who are sexual admirers or those who are merely looking to have an interaction in order to insult them.

Trolls who are sexual admirers can still cause feelings of isolation for many

TAGN individuals. For instance, most TAGN individuals say that when they are online, they wanted to be treated like everyone else, and they argue that feelings of being harassed, whether it is intended as a compliment or not, makes them feel like an object, a perversion and even less than human. Kathy says:

Some positives and negatives, and early on it was very, it filled me a lot with anxiety and because I found very quickly that there’s a lot of pretty mean people on Facebook, and when I first started out with my account, I remember the first weeks I got, on average day I would get 20 to 30 friend requests from random people. That was pretty overwhelming. My wife helped me calm down and I pretty much stopped and pretty much restarted again. I wanted to start fresh because sometimes requests, I would get messages from random people, from men with messages, things that were out there, caused me too much anxiety, it was so sexual. I found that what a lot of people on Facebook do is they don’t accept friend requests from men. Or if the account seems suspicious, like they don’t have a profile picture, they don’t accept friend requests, but after a time those kind of standards, things got better to where I was able to meet some people off Facebook that were similar, I was able to connect and comment back and forth. I started Instagram about the same time, and that also has been kind of a tricky situation, where if I haven’t typically opened an account, you know I would get really, some vulgar messages, you know people just don’t have filters anymore. And get some friend requests from people I kind of know and kind of have some similar things in common with. There’s positive and negative.

102

MTF TAGN individuals (crossdressers, and transsexuals), more than any other

TAGN individuals group, say that they will encounter these blatant acts and feelings of objectification for the first time and they are often ill equipped on how to deal with them.

Many advances will lead them to feel like they are doing something wrong, or that they must be asking for these types of attention from Trolls. While women in general, get disproportionately harassment online, my data also suggests that to be trans and woman invites this particular type of harassment.

Moreover, TAGN individuals say that this type of trolling has isolated them to an ideological space that locates them in the stereotypical category of a “pervert.” They argue that these types of interactions continue to perpetuate, tarnish and even undo the work activists and others have put forth to try disassociate their identities from these negative images that society has of TAGN individuals. Moreover, my analysis highlights how this type of trolling is not only marginalizing in that these individuals feel harassed, but it may also continue to bolster claims that transgender identity is an etiology as explained earlier in this chapter. Group members believe that the practicing and enabling of fetish identities may negatively impact society’s understanding, tolerance and even acceptance of TAGN individuals. For example, while doing the AMOE and collecting textual data, I came across this quote from one of the participant’s blogs, this blogger identifies as straight crossdresser who is married. In this blog quote, the participant writes about crossdressing clichés and she suggests that “referring to crossdressers as perverts is a big cliché.

Although not the number 1 cliché... crossdressers are perverts. This idiotic cliché is probably the most damaging to crossdressers than any of the other clichés combined. This one alone plays a significant role in society’s general unacceptance of us. Fact: Most crossdressers are certainly NOT

103

perverts, but rather regular guys who have a strong feminine side. Only a small percentage of crossdressers are perverts. It is probably proportionate to the number of non-crossdressers who are perverts. I think some people throw the word “pervert” out there to shame a crossdressers into not being a crossdresser anymore.

As this quote explains, they cannot claim a gender identity if they are being categorized as freaks or perverts. If we recall David’s interaction with the group from which he became estranged, they told him that by wanting these fetish experiences he was enabling these negatives images of crossdressers to be the dominant and prevailing images of TAGN individuals online.

Participants in this research describe how they are categorized as sexual perverts, especially MTF transgender and transsexuals say that they are the targets of sexual harassment from male trolls who often assume that they are there looking for sex or a date. These are all echoed in participants’ narratives like Kathy, Jessica, and

Sarah, Carla, and Khole. These actions online are limiting to participants because they push TAGN people farther out on the fringe. They will deliberately avoid certain spaces that are known for having trolls and, because of the sexual harassment, they may avoid posting photos of themselves or take on certain gender pronouns.

Some TAGN people, especially crossdressers or male-to-female transgender individuals who are in committed relationships and who go online to seek support, find that some interactions, such as posting photos of themselves dressed in a short skirt often result in a non-intentioned sexual interpretation. That is, they find that some people who visit those spaces are looking for sex or want sexual attention. These participants find that these sexual advances can be very detrimental to their supportive partners and or spouses. That is, my analysis reveals that they feel like they are hurting their spouses or partners, and they feel they may be even be cheating on their partners,

104

because strangers try to put forth these sexual advances. It can also make them feel embarrassed, due to a certain homophobic component. Because they are not attracted to males, they feel embarrassed or wonder why they are targets of sexual advances by men. Jessica, a MTF crossdresser in her thirties says:

[When] I first started posting my photos online, I was getting sexually explicit comments from guys, they wanted dates…I felt bad…because I am married, and I don’t want my wife to see them and get hurt. I felt bad about that, I thought it was my fault, so I stopped wearing short skirts and stopped posting sexy photos. I just wanted the comments to stop.

For some participants, who saw the demonstration of TAGN identity online as an act of empowerment or as part of the coming out process, or even a component of doing (trans)gender, these acts of online harassment and sexual pursuit can have many consequences, especially if these spaces are not TAGN spaces.

To mitigate trolling, participants say that they have to block some people on sites such as Facebook and keep a very limited/private Facebook profile, even if they do not want to privatize their Facebook and or online presence. I have also observed this dynamic in the AMOE research I conducted. As I entered the online arena with Carla and Sarah, they described how they would either de-friend people or just not accept certain friend requests at all. My analysis also illustrates how, if TAGN people have a personal blog, they will usually block some users from commenting or restrict commenting on their blog altogether. My analysis suggests that some participants assumed that once they were able to come out online in these safe spaces and places, then they would be able to come out elsewhere, online and perhaps even offline, with ease wherever and whenever they wanted. For example, let us recall Kathy’s excerpt on navigating online spaces.

105

[O]n an average day I would get 20 to 30 friend requests from random people. That was pretty overwhelming. I pretty much stopped [closed her account] and pretty much restarted again. I wanted to start fresh because sometimes the requests…I would get messages from random people, from men with messages, things that were out there, caused me too much anxiety, it was so sexual. I found that what a lot of people on Facebook [and Instagram] do is they don’t accept friend requests [or to be followed] from men. Or if the account seems suspicious, like they don’t have a profile picture, they don’t accept friend requests [or followers].

However, many participants like Kathy realized that this perceived unlimited control, especially over online platforms, was a myth. They recounted how they feel they have to be careful who they become friends with and how they use these spaces.

According to my participants, if they do not navigate them well then, at the worst, they find that they are harassed by trolls, often in a sexual way, which to them and other members of the TAGN community is embarrassing and a mere conflation of their gender identity with sexuality.

Isolation, gender identity and collective identity politics. As illustrated in this chapter, online spaces can still isolate the same people they seek to support, and as a result TAGN individuals may leave these places. The type of isolation that group participants experience may cause them to feel temporarily isolated or permanently isolated from the group. For individuals who feel temporarily isolated, they may feel more compelled to adhere to group politics as a social consequence of isolation and that can lead to conformity practices. For those who feel permanently isolated, they may move from these now non-supportive online spaces/places and find new ones that meet their needs better. Even if TAGN individuals have spent years as members of those online spaces, these once supportive online places can transform into non-supportive online spaces. Since online places are defined as meaningful, and thus tangible, once supportive places shed their supportive layer, they revert back to just (a) transgender

106

space(s) for that individual. Therefore, my analysis reveals that if supportive online places become isolating and members feel marginalized, these online places can revert to online spaces. According to my research and analysis, tangible online-spaces

(online-places) can become intangible when they fail to instill feelings of a collective space for the participant’s identity development.

Moreover, the tangibility of the Internet’s online platform may change with the individual’s transitional life span—as in the case of Carla and Jane—as they outgrew certain online spaces due to that TAGN individual’s socialization. So, each TAGN individual’s needs, wants, and changes in attitude/behavior can be fluid as their gender identity. Therefore, the tangibility (ness) of an online space or online place can change over time and can be seen as related to a process of gender identity development.

Thus, according to my analysis, when isolation occurs, the tangibility of online spaces and places may change with the individual’s transforming gender identity.

According to my research, transgender collective identity politics online, specifically infighting and identity transformation, can also sometimes lead to isolation.

My analysis points to how isolation is interrelated with infighting, as those who fight will inevitably disagree, thus dissent can lead to isolation. Moreover, my research shows how isolation and tangibility or place-ness are further linked to gender identity, as one’s transforming gender identity can impact the tangibility of a space through the process of gender transformation, thus TAGN individuals can become isolated via the fluidity of their gender identity.

Furthermore, my analysis illustrates how being “stuck in a big online closet” and harassment via trolling can also lead to isolation, as those who seek to come out online,

107

and/or be out online, realize that the Internet is not as free as they thought. In fact, my analysis shows that they recount how the Internet can be just as restrictive, or even more restrictive, as the offline world. My analysis shows how these types of isolation continue to push transgender and gender non-conforming individuals further to the margins, making the process of isolation as much a part of the online experience and interrelated with (trans)gender identity development.

While online spaces and places provide TAGN individuals with the tools to develop their (transgender) selves, become empowered and have their transgender voices and (trans)gender presentations supported, these spaces and places can also separate TAGN individuals from these supportive tools which results in isolation.

Though isolation occurs, I argue that social movements scholars, especially those who do online research, should note that these stories suggest that isolation is an outcome of dissent and a by-product of infighting; that is, isolation happens due to dissent and is necessary for gender identity development online. Specifically, isolation in online spaces and places is necessary for TAGN individuals’ journey to self-acceptance.

Moreover, my analysis shows that while isolation may seem to splinter group identity, on the contrary, isolation is a necessary process of (trans)gender identity development and an even more important component for collective identity and perhaps future movement work. When people fight (infighting, see Ghaziani 2008), it further demarcates where they stand, and isolation demonstrates people’s perception, subsequent interpretation, and understanding of who is in and who is out, and if they are in or out, it further solidifies collective identities.

108

Most importantly, I suggest that social movements scholars should note that isolation might have implications for understanding collective gender identity work and politics. Specifically, isolation is important for creating, shaping and solidifying group boundaries and thus, it is also important for understanding collective politics, and identity work. In addition, isolation in online spaces and places not only create, maintain, and shape online boundaries, but when isolation occurs, it can also create, maintain, shape or dismantle online spaces and online places.

109

CHAPTER 5 DOING TRANSGENDER ACTIVISM: COLLECTIVE ACTION IN ONLINE PLACES

It has been argued that the transgender movement has moved online (Shapiro

2004), which would lead one to believe that transgender activism has also moved online. Much of this research journey has been aimed at not just understanding transgender identity development online, but also to understand the transgender movement online. To better understand the transgender movement online, the research aimed to answer questions such as, “what does the transgender movement look like?”

To answer this question, I assessed who was in the movement and who was out of it, what they were in it for, how were people using the online platforms, and if these people who used these online platforms were doing movement work. In my search for the movement online, I found transgender activism. In this research, I classify transgender activism as movement work observed in the subtle and sometimes not so subtle gendered performances, gendered discourse, sexuality discourse or lack thereof sexuality (?) (sexuality(?)1), in online spaces and places that inspire and or result in change. As a result, change can include, but is not limited to, change in identities, the space and or place, the group, and any other type of change, whether positive, neutral or negative is a prime candidate for activism.

(Trans)gender Activism

(Trans)gender activism occurs when TAGN individuals perform tasks such as blogging, providing advice, and or telling or posting their own stories or their own vlogs.

I view these actions as activism because they provide support to other TAGN

1 Here, and throughout this chapter, I will use the punctuation symbol, the question mark in parenthesis next to the word sexuality—sexuality (?)—to call attention to the lack of sexuality discourse within certain group narratives.

110

individuals; even though those participants who performed these tasks were reluctant to accept the activist label. Transgender activism, then, is done through supporting others’ actions, giving advice about what to do to be a TAGN individual, how to do it, when to do it and so forth. Activism is also represented in posting information on these sites.

Some participants also report that they go to town hall meetings, write their state legislators etc. Generally, then, transgender activism can be defined as actions taken by individuals that result in creating change, which can be as simple as how to challenge gender restrictions to how to dress nicely. All of the participants I spoke to do some sort of mentoring/advising to others in the community that can be seen as creating room for change or growth. Yet, none of them saw these actions as activism. I contend that these actions are, in fact, activism, or at the very least, activism work. Generally, then, transgender activism online can be seen as encompassing all or some of these activities, in transgender and gender non-conforming spaces and in non-transgender and gender conforming spaces. In what follows, I demonstrate how the individuals in my research performed blogging and other types of support work that I classify as transgender activism online. I then explain how and why these activities/actions are transgender activism.

From support work for self to support work for others. Many TAGN individuals I interviewed maintain blogs or say they blogged at one point in their lives.

Other participants say that they give advice to others online who ask for help or they may provide positive statements of support to those who post a photo, or they may say some kind words to someone who seems to be having a bad day. All these activities or actions of advice or support I have coded as “support work” and refer to them as such in

111

the discussion that follows. As I discuss below, those who blog usually reflect on their personal experiences in hopes to understand who they are better, but also in hopes of sharing with others. In my research, I argue that blogging and other types of support work (like giving advice) occur originally though self-motivated identity work, which can become more geared towards support work. In the end, I suggest that both forms are acts of activism.

As I will discuss below, at first, those who blog and do other types of support work initially say that they do it to share their experiences. As I elaborate in what follows, I argue that these initial stages of blogging and the acts of providing support work can be seen as a way to “come out of the closet.” That is, TAGN individuals who share their stories online feel like they are exposing their identities and their true selves for the first time to the public. Yet, I also illustrate that those who blog and provide support work seem to do it more over time as a service or a task that they perform for their community. In sum, what I outline below is that, though participants say blogging and support starts out as part of their personal journey towards self-acceptance, blogging and support work also become entangled with community activism.

Participants suggest that blogging and support work (activism work) becomes something more; that is, these actions and activities become more useful for others over time as they indicate that it may help themselves and others, simultaneously.

To illustrate how blogging and support work occurs initially for individual motivations, I will review a few examples of participants explaining their original purpose in blogging. For example, Kathy tells me: “At first, I blogged so that I could tell my story, and just put it out there, that really helped me a lot to share.” Jessica says:

112

I started out by sharing my story, and giving advice to people who made comments, but then I deleted everything because I purged, and then I started again just as a way to write down what I was going through.

In the two quotes from Kathy and Jessica, they suggest that their initial accounts for blogging were to share their experiences and feelings. As they explained, they feel like blogging, giving advice and sharing their experiences make them matter. I argue that these early stages of blogging serve as a coming out story of sorts to the world, because they are able to put their stories out there (on the Internet) and they feel more exposed. For instance, Jessica a MTF crossdresser tells me that when she first posted a photo of just a partial part of her face that she felt liberated and exposed. Though, when I visited her blog and looked at the photo she referenced in our interview, I saw a photo of just one eye with makeup. I asked her why she felt so exposed and she assured me that at the time it felt like she had posted her entire face on the Internet and that everyone would actually know who she was, but that at the same time, she also felt like she had to take a leap of faith. She did not want to stay hidden anymore.

To illustrate that blogging and support work develop into more than just individual self-work, I will discuss examples where participants discussed the meaning of their blogging and how it changed. Sam says: “I blog because I am trying to find my space among others, publicly. I want to push myself to expose my identity. It’s a way to hold myself and others accountable.”

Here, Sam is indicating that blogging not only holds him accountable, but it also holds others who identify similarly accountable, as well. In addition, Darby also says: “I try to help those in need when they ask for help because I am just paying it forward.”

Darby’s experience seems to indicate that she believes that giving advice and performing support work is just a way to give back to others what she has received.

113

Blogging and other types of support work, then, can provide not just support for the individual who performs the task, but over time, as evidenced by Sam and Darby’s narratives, that blogging and support work can become more oriented towards helping others and not just about helping themselves.

For instance, at the time of these interviews, when I was gathering textual data, I noticed on all the sites I visited, that members would leave comments on other people’s photos specifically saying that they were passing, or they provided other types of feedback like, “Use this beard cover, because that is the one that worked for me.” Or members said things like, “This is what I experienced when I went to this doctor’s office seeking hormones and therapy for sexual reassignment surgery (SRS).” I also noticed that there were a lot of posts circulating on these sites that were concerned with the state government’s initiative to adopt a bathroom policy that would discriminate against those who identified as TAGN individuals. Some people talked about writing letters to the governor to express their concerns, others circulated the stories on these sites in an effort to get more members aware of the issue. TAGN individuals appear to be sharing and providing support (or doing support work) to help others. Additionally, for others like

Darby, it was a way to give back. According to Darby, it makes her feel good, and helps her make more sense of who she is when she sees others go through the same things she did. For Darby and others like her, it helps them to grow to see others grow, and it can validate them and their own experiences to hear others with stories like their own.

Blogging can be seen as activism since the earlier stages of blogging for those who blog long-term could be compared to early stages of the coming out process, which is often referred to as taking baby steps. Because TAGN individuals can come out

114

without judgment via their early blogging, here, I liken these early stages of blogging to the early steps of coming out in an offline world where people tell only a small number of trusted people. Online, using their blogs at tools, ‘they can come out a little,’ they can share the parts that they want to share with others (Hannah, forthcoming). They can come out gradually and negotiate how they depict/enact/portray their gender identities.

This gives TAGN individuals more control as they can come out to people they do not know and then, once they have done their due diligence (i.e. they put in the proper amount of identity work where they feel comfortable), they may even be able to come out to friends and family in person.

In addition, blogging and support work also creates a network, which I argue can also be seen as activism. For example, by blogging, bloggers are usually linking to other

TAGN individuals who also blog, and so they create a network. That is, they are linked to other bloggers and vloggers, and other relevant people who they consider worthy of being linked to and or following so that when people come to their sites, they can easily navigate to those sites as well. This network serves as an approval list. Essentially when your blog or site is linked to someone, you are saying, “I think this person has something worthwhile to say.” In this online network, they give advice, they share their knowledge, and they even pass around petitions. For instance, Kathy blogs about her weight loss journey and how it really helped her to feel more comfortable in her clothes and Jessica talks about the words and terms that are hurtful to TAGN individuals.

Additionally, Nathalie gives advice on how to dress when you have really big arms. In addition, sharing one’s stories and experiences online also creates a space where

115

others can find the information left online as a valuable tool to their journey of identity work.

Due to the way TAGN individuals use blogging and support work in online spaces, I argue they are striving to create change. And because actions such as blogging and other types of support work yield or inspire some type of change, I classify them as activism even when participants were reluctant to classify it in the same way.

Put another way, short-term blogging and support work and or long-term blogging and support work can grow into activism. By telling their stories and sharing their experiences, these individuals start to inspire change not just in themselves, but in others.

(Trans)gender Identity, Activism and Space

Gender as activism is tied into trans(gender) identity and activism (work) and gender identities are intertwined. In essence, my analysis shows that gender and activism are synonymous for TAGN individuals. Furthermore, they are not only tied to each other, but they are also intertwined with a sexuality narrative. As I will illustrate below, these connections are evident in the answers given about questions about who participants were. In addition, when I analyzed the textual data, I saw arguments and identities that were framed around narratives of a third gender and also around sexuality and fetish identities, or the lack thereof. In this section, I discuss how gender and activism are intertwined, and then I address how sexuality plays a role in the transgender and gender non-conforming identity narrative. Finally, I end this section by discussing the connection between identities, activism and space.

Specifically for trans(gender) identities, narratives like the ones discussed in earlier chapters that indicate that in online spaces there is a prescriptive way of doing

116

gender show how connected gender and activism can become. Members and occupants of these online spaces sometimes dictated how occupants should do trans(gender). To illustrate, recall David’s online experiences in regards to these prescriptive ways of doing gender. David says:

In chapter four, I used David’s experience to demonstrate infighting. Here, I again mention it to show how participants talked of gender and activism in online spaces.

David was told how crossdressers are to behave and that his behavior did not resemble a crossdresser, but instead, his behavior resembled that of a transvestite. I see this as activism because current members of the group are fighting to maintain the space they have created to foster their growth and their change, even if it is restrictive to other groups of people. Subsequently, doing activism is a mechanism of trying to keep existing online spaces as places.

Also, looking at Active Mobile Online Ethnography (AMOE) and textual analyses,

I observed that doing gender via blogging and support work are connected with activism. In these online spaces, I saw the interaction between gender and activism everywhere, as everyone seemed to be helping someone by sharing their trans(gender) and or gender non-conforming experience with those who seemed confused, or to those who sought advice. For instance, on our AMOE, Jane showed me a post that she had responded to where someone was concerned with all the steps she had to go through to transition. She showed me that she replied by saying (here I paraphrase), “don’t worry about all of them at once, and just take it day by day. If you worry about all of the

117

things you have to do, your health will suffer, etc. Just take it slowly, so that you are sure that is the right thing for you.” So, when participants go online to do (trans)gender, it also becomes an act of doing activism work, that is, they may help others grow or change.

Gender activism as inclusivity can be observed if we take an even closer look at the discourse surrounding infighting. Specifically, infighting if you recall from chapter three, results in prescriptive ways that suggest how members of a group should behave to preserve collective identities (Ghaziani 2008). Though infighting occurs, still many

TAGN individuals try to recognize diversity and accept individual politics. Those who dismiss or try to subvert infighting politics do so via their blogging and other acts of support work. For instance, instead of using the term crossdresser to refer to a particular gender behavior and or a particular sexuality, some may use the term crossdresser as a tool of inclusivity. There has also been contestation around the term transgender, though others work towards creating inclusivity. For example, Darby says,

We use to say we are a crossdressing organization…but we want to be more inclusive…we need to be more inclusive, we cannot keep ignoring so many people…so we are trying to change and include more people…we kept ourselves hidden, and now we have freedom and we want to use this freedom and get out and use what we have, we need to help each other.

A similar rhetoric can be seen in Carla’s experiences with an offline group that she attends sometimes for meetings and social functions. For instance, Carla says,

We keep the meetings the lite; when you look at history and stuff the meetings have stayed the same; we need to change, we are too narrow in our definition. We are rewriting everything now to define that group more appropriately and make sure we include more people. We can’t keep turning away people just because they are not a crossdresser. They are still a transgender person. We can’t keep turning them away. Also, society has changed some too, so we need to change.

118

Though infighting occurs, not all members will adhere to these infighting narratives. Instead, members in both on and offline spaces will resist the infighting discourse to create a more inclusive narrative for all. As such, I argue that these types of inclusivity tactics are not only counter narratives to thwart infighting, but they also represent gender activism.

Gender activism, via this inclusivity tactic of broadening the definition of crossdresser or transgender, can occur in groups with already established collective identities if older members are willing to adjust and or change their group politics. As such, some of these group members justify adjusting collective identities as they suggest these changes will make it more inviting for new members who are more progressive or who may have needs that are different from the original goals of the group. Recall Darby and Carla’s examples above. Through adjusting and modifying how

(trans)gender is done, the group then creates more room for gender activism, through modifying the ways in which they define transgender identities and how transgender people are expected to behave and feel. This may lead other members who see and use the room or space for further change and growth within their other group(s) and so I argue that these types of gender activism within a group can inspire and encourage future change as well. When groups are more open to multiplicities within (trans)gender identity politics, then perhaps more groups under the transgender and gender non- conforming umbrella will feel more welcomed and included. As a result, the group appears to have created room and more spaces for acceptance.

Often, TAGN individuals who do what I call activism or do activism work, do not consider themselves activists. Instead, they are reluctant to accept the activist label.

119

These participants often define activism as protesting. But, as I have shown above,

TAGN individuals mentor people like them, talk to others like them, meet with them, share their stories via blogging or other types of storytelling, and fight for inclusivity.

They do all of these things to maintain, create room or space for growth, and or to foster change, so I call these actions activism. This theme is similar to that noted by scholars such as Enke (2007)—a theme I discuss more later in this chapter—which suggests that some women who were seen as doing feminist work and whom Enke (2007) identified as feminists did not see themselves that way, and did not want to be categorized with or identify with the term feminism. Here, I argue that my finding is similar to Enke’s (2007) because, while I see and classify participants’ actions as activism because they create or maintain spaces of doing (trans)gender or create other types of room for future change or growth, they are adamant that these actions are not activism. I must note that this theme of activism can be seen as a result of selection bias, as the participants who are more likely to want to give back to the community may also be those who are more willing to volunteer and participate in the research projects like mine (see Taylor et.al 2009).

One participant who does not see herself as an activist, but does gender activism work or does what I call activism, is Carla. Carla identifies as a male-to-female (MTF) crossdresser and she created a Facebook page for her female side and posts about her day-to-day activities. Carla tells me how she (Carla) frequently interacts with her male side, Juan through Facebook. Below, I captured an image from Carla’s Facebook page

120

(Figure 1), shared during our AMOE. On Facebook, Carla uses bitstrips2 to talk about her life. In her bitstrip image below, I see and recognize her actions as powerful moments of activism that can disrupt gendered spaces and conforming gendered notions. And even though she would not categorize her posts as political or as activism,

I argue that in the post below Carla, challenges the gender binary by indicating that

Juan, her male counterpart who presents as a male in the bitstrip, is in fact an old lady who needs helps crossing the street (see figure 1). Carla, the “young” female in this bitstrip helps Juan the “old” lady cross the street, while Carla plays the youth role, and

Juan plays the old person, they both still seem to have a jovial exchange. Yet, Carla’s bitstrip seems to suggest more. After careful observation, it seems that Carla and Juan, despite their individual perceptions of age, all share a unified gendered identity, which can come together and interact “publicly” with each other. That is, though they must exist in separate spaces at times, they disrupt these limitations that they face in parts of their lives when the two parts become one. That is, when Carla displays (these gendered disruptions) her interactions with Juan, her male side, to her Facebook network, both identities are able to interlace and interact with the other, and come out to their world together. As a side note, recall from Carla’s narratives throughout this dissertation that she has always expressed her need to fully come out in public, but never got the opportunity to do so. Even if it is online through bitstrips where Carla and

Juan are happy, they need each other and they help each other. I consider Carla’s bitstrip posts activism, even though she is adamant that she is not an activist, because

2 Bitstrips are customizable instant cartoon comic strips that people can use on platforms like Facebook. Each person has an avatar, so anyone can star in Bitstrips, making these comics a tool for self- expression for all.

121

her posts demonstrate disruptions of gendered norms, which can incite or encourage change and or growth, not just for Carla and Juan, but also perhaps for those who are a part of her network.

Gender and sexuality activism also emerged in the narratives of participants in online spaces as well as via the conversations. Specifically, I observed not only from interviews but also from the AMOE and textual analysis that the sexuality discourse was very limited. In fact, at times, I would describe it as missing. Though, I realized that the discussions about sexuality were limited or almost missing, I also found out that the narratives about sexuality that were present for some were scripted. This indicated to me that sexuality-activism is also a big part of transgender and gender non-conforming identities. That is, when members and groups have to work to subvert and frame both their (trans)gender and sexuality politics appropriately in their transgender and gender non-conforming discourse—while it may appear missing or limited—it is still a big part of their narrative.

Discussion of sexuality is purposely limited in that when participants and group members talk about sexuality, what is said is often tied to trying to avoid appearances of deviance or fetishes. That is, most TAGN individuals seem to take issue with their gender identity being equated to a sexual identity, and thus, tend to avoid discussing it all together. If you recall, David’s experiences with CD.com, where he suggests he was told that he should not talk about his fetish as crossdressers do not have fetish experiences, can be understood also as an example of how some groups and members instruct each other to disassociate their sexuality narratives from their gendered ones.

To further solidify this point, Darby’s statement is another example. She says, “Google

122

searches better not yield anything about fetish, especially searches that are associated with [our organization]…we try to keep a clean image, I don’t want others to see us as freaks.” In the same accord, Kathy says: “I don’t want unsolicited friends online…men who sexualize or try to eroticize me”. Generally, then, from the observations I have made and the stories I have heard, transgender and gender non-conforming narratives are framed around avoiding and disassociating one’s identities from a sexual narrative that would lead to assumptions of a fetish identity.

I want to note that disassociating one’s gender identity from their sexual identity is not ubiquitous for all groups under the TAGN umbrella. Some people like David (a

MTF crossdresser) and Karen, Stella, Rita, Khloe and Mary (all MTF transsexuals), do have both a more pervasively intertwined sexual and gendered narrative. All of these individuals talk more openly about their sexuality. For instance, David told me that he sought out sexual fetish experiences. My sense is that David’s narrative is more on the margins, when compared to how transsexual narratives about sexuality are framed. For instance, Karen explained that she identified as straight, as she enjoys having sex with men and she truly just felt trapped in the wrong body, and so all she needed was a sex change. Transsexuals seem to be more open in talking about their sexual preferences, but when they talk about it, they frame it in relation to a gender and sex mismatch. A sexuality narrative that is framed around a gender-sex mismatch indicates the limited/pre-constructed sexuality discourse that aims to emphasize disconnect or realign their sexuality from or with society’s conflation of gender and sexuality. Generally, when looking at those under the transgender umbrella, these (trans)gender narratives about sexuality are framed this way to avoid (trans)gender identity disruptions. That is, TAGN

123

individuals avoid or limit sexuality narratives because they do not want their sexuality to be conflated with their gender identity.

Figure 5-1. Carla Helps an Old Lady Cross the Street. Taken from Carla’s Facebook page and was created using Bitstrips (see https://www.bitstrips.com/)

As a side note, my research shows that TAGN sexual identities run the gamut, and do not simply align with societal standards that conflate sex, gender and sexuality. I suppose that the limited, structured, and at times, even missing sexuality narrative I find in my research, may be reflective of the historically complicated and often contradictory ways in which TAGN individuals have been treated, taught to organize, mobilize and construct identities. Specifically, I wonder how influential the framing strategies that the lesbian and gay (LG) movement of the 90’s used to both include and exclude TAGN from their agenda may have impacted the framing of these current (trans)gender and sexuality narratives. At the time, the LG movement used arguments of sexual inclusion

124

to exclude transgender people. In particular, they argued that transgender issues were focused around gender and that it was problematic to lesbians’ and gays’ political agendas to include them. Yet, later the lesbian, gay and bisexual movement3 shifted their stance and included transgender (T) officially in their name and their cause. This is also indicative of how the transgender experience has been central to gender and sexuality. That is, in so far as the transgender movement is gendered, it is also sexualized. And so, a historical account of transgender movement seems relevant to consider as impactful on these current TAGN narratives. Sexuality is imbued in transgender politics from how it is enacted in their collective and complicated identities ( that is, who can be called transgender, crossdresser, a transsexual, bigender, gender queer, or even transvestite).

Gender identity, sexuality and activism in online spaces and places perpetuate each other. They are intertwined, in that a TAGN individual cannot separate their gendered identities from their sexuality, nor their activist work when they go online.

Doing (trans)gender in these spaces and places online require that they must disrupt both standard gender and sexuality norms. Moreover, when these disruptions occur, they can create space and room for growth and change. As a result, I argue that doing

(trans)gender requires activism. For instance, I observed similar narratives to that of

Carla’s example in my textual data analysis and AMOE research. Generally, most participants in this research did not identify as activist. They never called themselves activists, and when I saw images or comments that seemed to disrupt gender and sexuality norms, I would try to ask them about it and suggest that their posts were

3 Please see the conclusion for a historical account of how this shift happened

125

bringing awareness to TAGN individuals issues. However, they seemed reluctant to claim their actions as activism. To them, they just did not see it that way; they did not intend to be activists and they did not set out to do activist work. They were simply making a statement about who they are. Hence, many of the things that I see them do and that I have classified and interpreted as activism, they interpret as just helping out, or as just part of the process (a default) of being a member of the transgender community. If you recall earlier, when I said they were adamant that they are not activists, it would make sense in light of how they see their disruptions as necessary components of their gender work.

Recall, earlier I suggested that participants’ refusal to call themselves activists can be likened to Enke’s work. In fact, Anne Enke (2007) detailed similar statements during her research of women in the feminist movement. Though, I will discuss these anti-activist narrative identities more in the conclusion chapter, I want to reiterate Enke’s arguments here to make the point that the data from my research revealed something else in addition to what it revealed that was similar to Enke’s (2007) findings. What my research indicates here, that is different from Enke’s work and the movement literature, is that occupying transgender and gender non-conforming identities does not an activist make, but activist work, an activist it creates. Consequently, (trans)gender and gender non-conforming identities are intertwined not just with gender, but simultaneously with gender, sexuality, space/place, and online activism. In other words, these individuals are not activists per se by choice, but they become activists because their expressions of gender and sexuality online create and maintain spaces and places for growth and change.

126

In sum, according to Enke (2007), many women who were doing what she described as movement work and feminist activism were unwilling to accept the label of feminists. My research findings are similar, in that transgender and gender non- conforming individuals do not often define their interaction with their community as activism. Yet, my research findings are different in that I also argue that these individuals’ activist work/identities are tied to their transgender activities in online spaces and online places. Moreover, these individuals fail to recognize their actions as activism because they feel they are often thrusted into or compelled to participate because it is the right thing to do, and it is a part of who they are, as illustrated by Darby’s earlier comment, “I am paying it forward.” Therefore, their actions indicate that TAGN individuals do not often consciously choose to take on the title activism/activist even if they have consciously chosen to do activist work. For these individuals, they are simply giving back to the community or doing their part, as these tasks are almost a prerequisite for being a member in the community. That is, they feel compelled to participate and share in actions or activities, which can lead to or incur change. By doing transgender in online spaces, they may do activism work, but they can never separate these actions from their gender and sexuality narratives, nor the gender and sexuality discourse in these online arenas. As a result, activism or activism work is both transgender work and sexuality work, and both transgender and sexuality work are activism work. This is, they are all intertwined because to be a TAGN individual in these online spaces means to offer support and give back, so it is a way of being a TAGN individual.

127

So, in spaces where gender and sexuality (?) work is done, activism is also done.

As a result, online spaces are not just about gender, or about gender and sexuality; instead they are spaces where the intersection of gender, sexuality and activism occur.

So, the people who participate are more likely to be seen as activists and do activism work, and so, activism work is an outcome or byproduct of the (trans)gender identity work and politics that must occur in these spaces. Thus, those who participate, do so because they want to tell their stories and sometimes make a difference. That is, they feel compelled or experience a call to action that they can rarely dismiss or deny. As a result, they come out of those online spaces making sense of their gender and their sexuality in ways that attempt to resist the gender and sexuality binary narratives that they carry with them into these online spaces and or that they know already exists in other parts of society. These existing ideologies may serve to further marginalize TAGN individuals while they try to resist. So, for this group, when they try to make sense of who they are, they are not only trying to make sense of their gender and sexuality politics and identities in these spaces, but anything that they do will always have to serve to resist the societal norms that restrict them. That is, doing transgender is inherently resistant and perhaps radical when compared to traditional gender and sexuality norms. Thus, when TAGN individuals enact gender and sexuality politics and do identity work, due to how contrary their narratives are to the norm, their

(trans)gender identity work is resistive in nature, and so, they automatically become activist or at the very least, do activist work. These gender and sexuality acts/actions then, can easily be interpreted by those on the outside, such as myself, as activism, but

128

for them this is everyday life, this is who they are. In part, only their acts of resistance can lead them to acceptance.

Activism is Acceptance Work

Blogging can start as personal identity work that grows into activism. Over time, even if it is not intentional, blogging can start to also encourage others to grow, too.

Recall Sam’s account as why he blogs, and the benefits he says he receives from blogging. This would suggest that there is still a pay-off, in that the blogger can get acceptance, though it is clear that he also blogs because he believes that it has a larger impact or reach. Through activism, people learn how to accept who they are and they get to help others through their journeys of acceptance also. For some TAGN individuals, even when they do what I call activism work, they do not want to be considered as activists, nor do they want to be called activists. Recall Carla’s example.

For these people, blogging and or doing support work has a different meaning for them.

Specifically, my research indicates that blogging and support work are coded in gender and sexuality discourse and politics. Gender and sexuality politics in online spaces via blogging and support work are intertwined and activism may result as a by-product through their own practices to resist and perhaps conform to conventional gender and sexuality norms. Consequently, activism is acceptance work that is entangled with gender and sexuality politics and it enables the creation and or maintenance of spaces that create room for growth, so gender and sexuality (?) activism work results in acceptance work for the actor and the actor’s community. As illustrated from my research, these types of activism can be seen as either gender activism or gender and sexuality (?) activism.

129

In addition, because participants see these types of identity work as part of their everyday actions, it is pedestrian to them. Activism generally becomes entangled in their gender and sexuality identities and perhaps even in aspects of their other identities. Thus, through making sense of who they are, participants become activists or do activism, which leads to their acceptance of self, community, and perhaps acceptance from others. As a result, participants who do activism work do so because they see it as a part of their lives. For them activism work is not activism but self- acceptance work. It is (trans)gender work and it is overall community acceptance.

I began this research with this research question: what are the processes through which transgender and gender non-conforming people online do movement work? As a result, I found that TAGN people do movement work by doing activism, that is, gendered and individualized activist work that may not necessarily be contextualized as collective action or movement work, initially. I argue, however, that in fact TAGN people are doing unique online social movement work, which is collective action. So, in online places, activism occurs through gendered and individualized performance-based change. Therefore, social movements in these places may not be necessarily seen as collective action; instead, it can be individual activism work in the context of an embodied collective that is created in online places.

Online tangible spaces are embodied, as they carry the group's perceived collective identity when they become online places. That is, members share a collective identity, and thus, in these online places, members are able to mobilize independently and do movement work towards or for the collective, apart. Moreover, online places can become crystalized with the information and knowledge of the group politics and

130

collective identities. Thus, online places house the institutional knowledge of the group to inform group politics. So, when TAGN individuals go online, they assume a collective exists and that they are participating in it. Accordingly, although participants are participating in acts separately, they see their individual acts as one part of the collective. Similarly, even when they are not doing movement together at once (offline, or online such as signing a petition or mass posting of pertinent articles in other spaces), they take turns participating in activities in these online places, such as participating in forum threads to give advice about a specific topic, and this information is stored and catalogued in one place. Similarly, when multiple members tell, say or share the same group rhetoric, such as, “there will be no discussion of fetishes,” or

“dress this way not this way,” we can argue for collective action, apart, given the disjointedness (i.e. it is more difficult to talk face to face in these spaces) of online arenas. Consequently, I argue that though members may not participate all at once, online places may operate differently to carry out movement work because members must find ways to circumvent the disjunction that online platforms create between offline selves, online selves, and group identities in online places.

Therefore, in my search for the transgender movement in online spaces, I found spaces that are filled with transgender activism, but not necessarily transgender activists, at least not from their point of view. Movement work in these online spaces, encompasses actions that result in the subtle and sometimes not subtle disruptions of and maintenance of space, place, gender and sexuality that enable TAGN individuals to explore their identities, push boundaries and continue to grow in the margins and in the fore, online and offline.

131

CHAPTER 6 FINDING THE TRANSGENDER MOVEMENT ONLINE: SPACEMAKING, UNMAKING, COLLECTIVE IDENTITIES AND ACTIVISM

As a constructivist grounded theorist, I rely on the previous social movements literature and teachings from them to help me frame my knowledge about the topic of transgender social movements. I began my discussion and consideration of social movements literature in the methods chapter of the dissertation by using sensitizing concepts to guide this project. To reiterate, the constructivist grounded theorist assumes it would be difficult to completely separate one’s perspectives, his/her knowledge and training from the current research interests. Moreover, as a constructed grounded theorist, now that I have discussed the findings from this project, I will use this chapter to situate my arguments and findings from the research within the transgender social movements literature (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Glaser 1978; see Charmaz 2006 and

2014).

Based on my knowledge from the previous literature, I began this project by paying attention to three sensitizing concepts: (1) collective identity and identity politics;

(2) space; and (3) infighting. In what follows, I first discuss how each sensitizing concept earned their way into my analysis (I will also discuss how another important concept, activism, also emerged and earned its way into my analysis). Next, I summarize my main points from the previous chapters (chapters 3-5) to illuminate what my grounded theory suggests about these relationships. Finally, I situate my grounded theory within the social movements literature to demonstrate what my research contributes to our understanding of transgender movements online.

132

Collective Identities and Identity Politics

Collective identities and identity politics were sensitizing concepts at the beginning of the study that earned their way into the research. Though I did not write them up as an organizing chapter, they were the commonality between each chapter that helped to create a coherent continuous discussion throughout all of the data chapters. I paid attention to collective identity and identity politics by being sensitive to phrases or discussions about boundaries, belonging and group identities (in/exclusion)

(Charmaz 2006:17). As a result, collective identity and identity politics became a sub theme within each results chapter. The continuous presence of collective identity and identity politics within each chapter demonstrates the overlap between identities and movement work. After all, my research is about individuals who are engaging in collective work in some form or another. Explicitly, the data reveal the connection between space and collective identities and identity politics, isolation and collective identities, and activism and collective identity and identity politics. While, one could argue for collective identity and identity politics as its own chapter, I see collective identity and identity politics as the major organizer of all of the data chapters. That being said, it would make sense, then, that collective identity and identity politics are at the fore of any group(s) that is (are) organized around gender and sexuality, and practices gendered and at times sexuality performances to achieve authentic selves, as demonstrated from the data in this research. As reiterated earlier, since my research is about individuals who are doing collective work, it is no surprise that collective identity and identity politics emerge to the fore of this research.

In what follows, I review the collective identity literature briefly to demonstrate the importance of movement work, collective identity and (trans)gender identity politics.

133

After I review the literature, I address collective identity and identity politics more in depth in each of the following sections to emphasize how each chapter contributed to the discussion of collective identity and identity politics as it pertains to transgender identities and movement work.

Collective Identities

In the literature there are many definitions of collective identities. For instance, it is defined as: “common interests, experiences, and solidarity” (Taylor 1989);

“perceptions of group distinctiveness” that specifies “something closer to a community than a category” (Jasper 1997:86). Poletta and Jasper (2001) in a review of the collective identities literature, suggests that the themes of collective identity are:

an individual’s cognitive, moral, and emotional connection with a broader community, category, practice, or institution. It is a perception of a shared status or relation, which may be imagined rather than experienced directly (285).

Likewise, Verta Taylor and Nancy Whittier (1992:105, 110–111) recognize it as “the shared definition of a group” that allows members to assert “who we are.” According to

Taylor and Whittier (1992), boundaries “mark social territories of group relations by highlighting differences” (111) and “frame interaction between members of the in-group and the out-group” (113). Drawing from their research on how lesbian feminists created separate institutions such as health care and rape crisis centers, bookstores, record companies, newspapers, and poetry and writing clubs, Taylor and Whitter (1992) also indicated how these feminists created and adopted a culture that valorized traits such as egalitarianism, collectivism, and cooperation and rejected traits such as hierarchy, oppressive individualism, and competition. Boundary making then is an important component of any collective identity research.

134

Taylor and Whittier (1992) inspired researchers like Gamson (1997) to question the stability of the in-group in addition to the stability of the already marginalized out- group. To make this point, Gamson (1997) focused on two intra-movement debates between North American Man/Boy Love Association and the International Lesbian and

Gay Association. What he found was that the boundary construction and its constructors not only take note of the outsiders (“us versus them”), but they also take note of those who claim some degree of insider membership status (“us versus thems- inside”) (see Gamson 1995). Therefore, boundaries are not just separate as they serve to categorize the in-group from the out-group, but the out-group inside. So, while collective identity has a myriad of meanings in the literature, I see it as shaping and creating group boundaries, and individuals who share a collective identity organize around (a) common interests to achieve a shared goal for their community.

Identity Politics

Transgender activism in the period prior to the 1990’s was framed around messages of inclusion. Due to the cultural contexts, the movement strategies were often those that focused on, and organized around, collective identity. When movement members were fighting for equality for transgender persons, they enacted an ethnic identity that was organized around their gendered one. The transgender movement positioned itself as possessing an encompassing ethnic identity, one that was inclusive of everyone and was thought of as an umbrella, used to mobilize all of those who fall into a gender variant category. Thus, the “umbrella term” transgender was often framed by the movement and its organizations as being inclusive (collective identity) (Davidson,

2007; Ghaziani, 2008). Hence, transgender collective identities served as a point from which to organize and achieve equal rights for all of those under the umbrella.

135

However, the new movement of the 1990’s, was juxtaposed with queer identity politics, promoting both the constructions and complications of the transgender identity simultaneously (Gamson, 1995; Broad 2002). Thus, the new transgender activism seemed to be one that shifted its framings from just a collective identity politics to include an inclusive yet complicated (queer) perspective in enacting transgender identities. Similar to the gay and lesbian movement, the transgender movement of the

1990’s also struggled with messages of inclusion and exclusion (Gamson 1995, 1997;

Broad 2002; Davidson 2007). Dissent over who should be included, and whether the term should be as inclusive or not, were constantly up for debate. Particularly, intersexed and other groups under the umbrella constantly struggled with whether or not they too should be included under the umbrella. They felt like such an inclusive term can only obscure their difference and marginalize them even further (Davidson 2007).

Essentially, identity politics were rampant.

Must identity politics, then, self-destruct as Gamson (1995) posits? This question has been asked and answered in some contexts throughout the literature by movement scholars as it pertains to the transgender movement (Gamson 1995; 1997; Broad 2002;

Schrock, Holden and Reid 2004; Ghaziani 2008). In general, Gamson (1995) argues that the implication for use of the term queer and the inclusion of bisexual and transgender, questions the viability and usefulness of sexuality based political identities.

It disrupts sex and gender identity boundaries and deconstructs identity categories, which is problematic because fixed identity categories are both the basis for oppression

(fluid and unstable experiences become fixed due to the social construction of categories, especially binary ones) and the basis for political power. In particular, all the

136

scholars who have addressed this question suggest that some identity politics does serve to self-destruct the transgender movement but it can also provide a space where transgender activists can enact and negotiate their appropriate identities (Gamson

1995; 1997; Broad 2002; Schrock, Holden and Reid 2004; Ghaziani 2008).

Davidson (2007) for example, contends that transgender activists often used the umbrella term—neither singular nor fixed, but representative of all sex and gender variant people—as a tool for political organizing outside current understandings of binary sex and gender divisions.

A growing trans movement…is making important legal, legislative, policy, and social gains for gender-nonconforming people, but the movement is not without ideological differences, internal contestations, and deep ambiguities about inclusion, exclusion, and the processes of creating social change (Davidson 2007:78).

The inclusivity of the term transgender is effective, then, when activists organize to include all the different groups under the umbrella, though differences can lead to confusion about how to achieve change.

Above, I provided a brief overview of collective identities, and identity politics. In the next three sections, I will incorporate them to emphasize how each chapter contributed to the discussion of collective identity and identity politics as it pertains to transgender identities and movement work.

Space and Place

I paid attention to spaces, specifically the creation/maintenance of space as a sensitizing concept. To do so, in interviews, AMOE, textual analysis, and data analysis,

I observed changes in participants’ activities in the online spaces they visited and or created. I also paid attention to details such as how often they went to these spaces, which spaces they visited (where) and when they went to these online spaces. I also

137

tried to determine what kinds of information were posted in these spaces as they may have alerted me to any changes in in-group identities (see collective identity below). In addition, since spaces are and can be intertwined with the intersectionality of gender, race, class, health and sexuality and so forth, I also paid attention to the sensitizing concepts that not only related just to space, but also to other sensitizing concepts that may have also been related to gender, race, class, health and or sexuality. In the end, space earned its way into my analysis because it was central for understanding patterns in the data related to gender, and individual and collective identity.

Now that I have demonstrated how space became important to my analysis, I will discuss what my grounded theory suggests about the relationships between transgender identities and space. Online space became a core focus of analysis because participants’ stories emphasized the importance of online spaces to them and they talked about the value of these spaces. Based on my grounded theory analysis, the data suggests that online spaces become online places when transgender and gender non-conforming individuals find spaces of acceptance, form collective identities in these spaces, create new spaces for acceptance and maintain old spaces of acceptance.

My research shows how online spaces, then, are made more tangible to these individuals because it helps them facilitate their authentic selves to better understand who are. Furthermore, since these online spaces enable TAGN individuals to do transgender it creates a tangible, real place for gender identity development and self- acceptance.

138

My research demonstrated that collective identity politics in online spaces played an important role in constructing (trans)gender identities. TAGN individuals argue that online spaces make it much easier (than offline spaces) for them to participate in

(re)constructing collective identities. These individuals argue that online spaces afford them with the ability to move easily between the online spatial networks so that they can readily leave marginalizing spaces without much effort. Collective online spaces can provide different techniques for navigating stagnant environments that tend to marginalize their developing identities. Online spaces also facilitate a collective transgender identity development, which in turn fosters the transformation of online spaces into places.

Space becomes place when transgender and gender non-conforming individuals can develop identities online, construct collective identities, and continue to make spaces for acceptance – when they become places of “doing transgender.” Space- making creates tangible spaces for collective identity development in online and offline spaces. When TAGN individuals make spaces online, space-making results in creating spaces of acceptance and these spaces that are created online are transformed into places via doing transgender (transgender identity development in online spaces) and collective identity development in these online spaces, overtime.

Therefore, this research contributes to our understanding of transgender movements literature by illustrating how (trans)gender identities and online space are connected. Moreover, it highlights the importance collective identities for space and place-making (discussed in-depth under collective identities), and illustrates how online place embodies collective identities and enables collective action (discussed in-depth in

139

chapter 5). Space-making and place-making are vital for identity transformation, and for creating authentic selves. As a result, when online spaces become online places, the spatial atmosphere shifts to carry a more tangible and valuable meaning to these individuals. TAGN individuals are better able to do (trans)gender online in these places, in ways that they are unable to do (trans)gender anywhere else.

Now that I have demonstrated what my grounded theory suggests about the relationships between transgender identities and space, I will situate my findings in relation to the social movements literature to demonstrate how I contributed to our understanding of online spaces and the transgender social movement online. In general, my research makes two contributions to the discussion of space in the movement literature. One, online spaces can be transformed into tangible places for self-acceptance. Two, the crystallization of space happens more readily in online spaces and places.

Sallie Marston (2003) in a special issue of Mobilization, aimed to centralize spatial social theory within the social movements literature to emphasize a richer understanding of resistance, contention, and collective action. Marston bemoans the lack of presence and location of spatial theory within American social movement theory.

She argues that the discussion of space has been lacking for some time even though sociologists, other social scientists, and cultural theorists alike such as Stuart Hall,

Michael Foucault and Donna Haraway have identified space as important for grasping the interdependent relationship between society and space. These scholars and disciplines have also cited space as significant to gaining thoughtful understanding of the political, cultural, economic and political pressures of globalization. Marston does

140

acknowledge that only in the last few years has space become an important part of the theorizing of the sociology of social movements from research from scholars such as

Arturo Escobar, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, John Urry and Bob Jessop.

Moreover, I add to Marston’s (2003) recognition of the lack of space in the movements’ literature generally and to the transgender movement literature, in particular. Even though we see some discussions particular to space from scholars such as Anne Enke (2004) (“Finding the Movement”), Gamson’s (1995; 1997)

(discussion of boundaries in the queer movement) or even Ghaziani’s (2008)

(discussions of the March on Washington), there is little discussion of space in movement theory and even less specifically regarding the transgender movement. What my research offers is a discussion of space, in the movement literature generally, and transgender movement literature specifically, which aims to centralize, preserve and recognize the connection between the discursive space and the material space in the cyber world (online place), thus demonstrating the connection of the making of meaning and individual and collective identity, and the spaces and places that such acts require.

Therefore, if online arenas are divorced from their discursive spaces, we will fail to see the spatial impacts of material space online (online place). Moreover, I argue that by recognizing the existence of a material space in the cyber world, that is an online place, we are better able to see that online place embodies collective identities, and thus, enables collective action.

Marston (2003), also cites the importance of a spatial perspective in comprehending the relationship between civil society and the state, as well as in recognizing openings for social and political change. Using the contentious politics

141

surrounding the attempts of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered groups (LGBT) to participate in the St. Patrick’s Day parades of cities like Boston, New York, and

Chicago, she cites space―or rather the ignoring of the centrality of space to social practice--at the center of the conflict over who gets to be Irish on St. Patrick’s Day.

Though Marston (2003), does not discuss online space, I use her ideas and expand on them to include online space as also relevant to spatial theorizing. Therefore, the push to connect spatial theory with social movements not only emphasizes how the finding, creating or transforming of online spaces are important for identity development and collective action, but it also emphasizes the relationality of space online and place online, where online space provides room for growth and transformation and online place provides a collective voice. So, online places enable an embodied collective that is created in online places. When online space becomes place, it provides family, togetherness, group identity and a symbolically more tangible platform for TAGN to learn and grow. Moreover, online place can be even more real than any offline space for continued support, individual identity development, and of course, movement work for

TANG individuals and other marginalized groups who seek online arenas for refugee.

Additionally, Martin and Miller (2003) who published in the same issue of

Mobilization argue that spatial processes cannot be removed from, but are made of, social processes. They indicate that when we use a spatial perspective, we can produce a more illuminating understanding of how people perceive, shape, and act upon grievances and opportunities. Drawing on their arguments, I too contend that spatial processes are, in fact, inseparable from online arenas, which is my second point. To emphasize this point, my research also illustrates how the crystallization of space

142

occurs more apparently, in online spaces. That is, when everyone in the online space participates, the information they leave behind does not disappear, it is recorded, archived and becomes a permanent structure in that space. As a result, the information is stored in that space and that space serves to crystalize the knowledge about a topic in space and time. Online spaces seal (crystalize) and bound the pertinent and relevant information to a space more readily than offline spaces and is thus, considered a valuable contribution to spatial theory literature. The crystallization of the space may make the data or information about transgender identity development more retrievable or accessible in more convenient ways.

Online spaces can be transformed into tangible places for self-acceptance. A spatial theory connection with social movements literature illustrates that this finding not only emphasizes the relationality of space online and place online, where online space provides room for growth and transformation and online place provides an embodied collective voice for creating or transforming identity development and collective action.

Moreover, spatial processes are inseparable from online arenas, so spaces become crystalized and produce information that is more readily available for achieving self- acceptance.

Isolation: Making & Unmaking of Online Spaces and Places

From the outset, I paid attention to infighting as a sensitizing concept.

Specifically, I relied on a few social movement scholars [Gamson (1995), Ghaziani

(2008), Ghaziani and Fine (2008)] who spoke explicitly on the transgender movement offline to outline as sensitizing concepts about my presuppositions about dissent, particularly infighting. For them, the transgender movement had always had internal disagreement and infighting (Gamson 1995: Ghaziani 2008; Ghaziani and Fine 2008).

143

For instance, Ghaziani (2008) indicates that dissent, more specifically infighting, is necessary and inevitable for movement development. Therefore, he defined infighting as a disagreement between members within the group, especially those members with different worldviews—which is distinct from general conflict within the movement and precedes the breakup of the group. Infighting, then, can occur when members are trying to make decisions about the organizing tasks within a movement, which can allow for a more tangible occurrence of identity and strategy. Therefore, through the exploration, discussion, decision-making processes and the doing of action-based movement tasks, the issues of identity and strategy often emerge, and thus, we can judge the state of the movement.

In interviews, AMOE, textual analysis, and data analysis, I paid attention to indicators of the sensitizing concept “infighting’ such as if there was dissent present over whom should be included and whether the term transgender should be all- encompassing. By paying attention to infighting in this particular way, I was able to observe how dissent shaped identity politics, and I was also able to see a larger theme, isolation, emerge. Here, I argue that the sensitizing concept infighting made me sensitive to other aspects of isolation that occurred, as it gave a point from which to start scrutinizing the data. My research illustrated that isolation, and the marginalization participants face from being isolated in online spaces and online places, can also occur in a few ways when: (1) collective identity politics emerge and the participant outgrows the space or place (transforming identities), and the participant disagrees with the group’s prescriptive identity politics (infighting); (2) participants can only come out online to the extent to which others are willing to accept them (online platforms are a “still a big

144

closet”) because they operate within the fringes in order to provide support; (3) trolling and sexual harassment occurs due to a TAGN online presence/networking.

The discussion of isolation in my research contributes to the argument of what the transgender movement looks like online. Essentially, doing (trans)gender online, while ubiquitous via creating and maintaining certain spaces, and the construction collective identities, still has a marginalizing component, isolation.

My main argument from my research is that while isolation occurs and seems to splinter group identities and politics and marginalize those it seeks to support, isolation tactics are necessary building-blocks for (trans)gender identity development online. That is, isolation occurs as an outcome of identity development and collective politics; when people define who they are, limits are set and lines are drawn. As a result, when isolation occurs, people are more aware of which boundaries serve to define them, separate them, and include them.

To conclude, I will make two points that I consider the important contributions from my research, which I believe future movement literature should consider. First, isolation is a component of dissent that fosters collective identity politics. Second, a space/place (re)creation occurs through the processes of isolation. To illustrate my first point, though the social movements literature suggests that infighting and other acts of dissent are important for solidifying collective identities, I argue that isolation is also a component of dissent that should be seen not just as resulting from the marginalization of groups, but solidifying group boundaries. When isolation occurs, the “us versus them dynamic” that Gamson discusses (1997) emerges and the isolators and the isolatees are clear on where they belong, and how they identify. Isolation may seem to splinter

145

group identity, but the research indicates that this is a vital component for individual and group identity. [When] “people fight” (Ghaziani 2008:1), they learn who they are, isolation occurs, and boundaries are solidified.

Isolation occurs in supportive spaces and isolation is a process of gender identity development that fosters collective identity. In reference to current literature, while I argue that isolation is an outcome of dissent, the previous literature suggests that dissent is important for collective identity development (Taylor and Whitter 1992;

Gamson 1995; 1997; Ghaziani 2008; Ghaziani and Fine 2008). Yet, dissent has never been linked to the isolation that occurs within or outside of group boundaries. When dissent happens among group members, isolation, like other collective identity tactics, serve to harden and delineate group boundaries.

The second important contribution from my research is the space/place creation and recreation that occurs through the processes of isolation. Specifically, I see isolation as an important component of gender identity, collective identity and movement work. Here, I argue that when isolation occurs and once these online places can no longer give participants what they need, these places become (revert back to) simply spaces, once more. And so, when the process of space and place-making online often begin anew, TAGN individuals will seek new spaces to once more make into supportive spaces or places as they continue to seek meaningful connections and make sense of their gendered selves. Here, I suggest that as quickly as spaces can be made meaningful and tangible and become places, those places can be unmade. As such, the making and unmaking of place is also important to contextualize within spatial theory.

This will help us understand the relevance of making and unmaking places for

146

constructing identities and making meaning via the discursive process needed for those in any identity based movement.

Activism

In my initial coding of the first few interviews from the pilot interviews and other data gathered, I noticed a new category, activism. Therefore, I made adjustments to the interview guide (see appendix I). As is appropriate and expected in a constructivist grounded theory project, I began to look for activism and or advocacy more generally when I continued to code and collect the data. This change was due, in part, to how participants began to discuss how they used the sites they visited to share information with other people so that others who were seeking this information can have access to them. Also, in the interviews, participants began to reflect on the meanings behind why they blogged and shared certain information and what the experience added to their lives. So, I wanted to know “why were they sharing the information they shared on these sites, why did they think other people would find the information useful, why did they go online, and or why did they blog/make YouTube videos, or provide advice.” Now that I have demonstrated how activism earned its way into my research, I will discuss the main points of my research and situate these findings into the social movements literature to demonstrate what this research contributes to the social movements literature.

The two main points from the activism discussions that my research contributes to the literature is that (1) activism (work) is acceptance work, and (2) activism, gender and sexuality identity, and collective identities shape each other. According to my research, although TAGN individuals do not consider themselves activists, based on the observations and conversations in the research, I chose to call them activists, and I

147

classify their actions as activism work. To make the first contribution clear, blogging, one of the things I classify as activism work, can start as personal identity work that grows into activism work. Over time, even if blogging is not intentional activism work, a blogger’s posts can start to also encourage others to grow. Therefore, through activism and activism work, people learn how to accept who they are, and they have the opportunity to help others through their journey of acceptance.

Now that I have summarized the main points from my research pertaining to activism, I will situate these findings in the social movements literature. According to

Enke (2007), many women who were doing what she described as movement work were unwilling to accept the label of activist and or feminist. My research findings are similar, in that transgender and gender non-conforming individuals do not often define their interaction with their community as activism and do not willingly call themselves activists. However, what is salient in my research and what it offers that is different is the idea that activism work is acceptance work. Therefore, when participants do gender

(make meaning in these discursive spaces), they enact activism work; that is, they resist and push the boundaries of gender conformation. As such, I argue that activism work, is simply acceptance. These actors are not activists because they choose to become them, but they do activism work because they disrupt contemporary gender norms when they choose to be their true selves.

Activism in the Transgender Movement

Drawing from the social movements literature, I discuss my first point that activism is acceptance work. Since the origins of the transgender movement, the struggle for equal rights has always been at the forefront. Many of the organizations that emerged were often militant and at times considered radical, but regardless of how it

148

was framed, they ultimately sought equal rights. Transgender people and the movement in general had to fight for rights through achieving recognition and through the promotion of cultural and political change not just at the societal level, but also within the lesbian, gay and bisexual movement.

Within the LGB movement particularly, transgender activists fought to be included for many years in the movement. Subsequent events in the years to follow demonstrated a clear lack of inclusion of transgender rights into the LGB movement.

For instance, according to the Transgender Tapestry (2007), on the fifth anniversary of the stonewall riots Abzug and Koch introduced the first gay rights bill that would add sexual orientation to the 1964 U.S. Civil Rights Act, but it did not grant the same rights to transgender people. These similarities are seen again in 1996 when the Employment

Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) was first introduced into the Senate, but failed to include those who identify as transgender. Additionally, around the time when the first bout of activism waned, the effects of AIDS activism in the 1980’s and 1990’s also played an important role in reshaping sexual orientation to be inclusive of other social groups due to the need for their alliance to be seen culturally as a social issue (Stryker 2004).

These examples from the literature suggest that (trans)gender individuals had to fight at every turn to be included, and treated equally, all of which seems to suggest that if you want to be transgender then, you have to fight to be transgender. Thus, the previous literature supports the merits of my research finding (though the pervious literature never actually demonstrated these findings) that suggests that TAGN individuals do activism work in a sense to be themselves. They must fight, resist and push against the

149

boundaries to be transgender and as such, those on the outside see them as activists or radicals. For them though, it is a normal part of occupying a TAGN identity.

Inclusion and Exclusion: Gender and Sexuality Politics

To illustrate the second contribution, that is, activism, gender identity, sexuality and collective identities shape each other, I argue that TAGN movement work in online spaces/places require actions that result in the subtle and sometimes not so subtle disruptions of and maintenance of online space/place, gender and sexuality. That is, these spaces and places provided the means to do (trans)gender that enabled TAGN individuals to explore their identities, push boundaries and continue to grow in the margins and in the fore, online and offline. Below, I offer some support from the transgender social movement literature to demonstrate how activism, gender and sexuality are connected for my participants. I show how inclusion and exclusion tactics at the societal level, and specifically within the gay and lesbian movement, demonstrate the complicated and often intertwined relationship of activism, and gender and sexuality, and transgender movement politics for TAGN individuals.

Though the Compton Cafeteria—a coffee shop in the tenderloin, in San

Francisco—riot of 1966 marked a period of transgender radicalism in the United States, as the riot contributed to the crest of transgender militancy and organization throughout the early 1970’s (GLQ archives1998; Stryker 2004), it was the removal/forcing out of

Sylvia Rivera and Beth Elliot—two salient activists for transsexual and transgender rights who fought alongside gays and lesbians—from the gay and lesbian movement that led to the decline of the movement over a period (at this point transgender activism was incorporated with gay and lesbian activism) (GLQ 1998; Stryker 2004; Gan 2007).

As a result, transgender activism was dormant from the mid 1960’s to the early- to mid-

150

1970’s. Subsequently, from the mid 1970’s to the latter part of the 1980’s, the transgender movement was subverted and activism via transgender equality was carried out in isolation and without the alliance of other movements. Consequently, for over a decade, the transgender movement sought reintegration into the gay liberation movement (Frye, 2002).

The period of dormancy when the transgender activism waned had some achievements, such as the passage of the trans inclusive legislation in the city of

Minnesota in 1975 and the formation of FTM international (FTM organization) in 1986.

Around the same time however, some gays, lesbians and feminists came to see transsexuals as too reactionary in their cultural politics and chose to separate themselves from transgender issues. Others such as feminist Janice Raymond went a step further and propagated anti-transsexual discourse (Stryker 2004). The explosion of queer politics in the early 1990’s re-invigorated the movement and its activism (GLQ

1998; also see Gamson 1995; and Broad 2002). Until this point, the transgender movement was still seen as more of a transsexual movement.

Simultaneously, the LG movement incorporated bisexuality into the title of the movement march in 1990’s and in the 2000 March on Washington. Though transgender people were already included in the LGB movement, they were finally added to title of the movement and it became LGBT. The effects were resounding as other LBG organizations began to add “transgender “(T) to their organization names and their mission statements (Devor and Matte 2004; Ghaziani 2008; Stone 2009).

As much as the transgender movement is rooted in the LG (+B+T) movement, it is arguably equally linked to the queer movement. The subversion of nearly a decade

151

and a half of transgendered politics was awakened by debates in queer politics. It is here during the early 1990’s where the movement shifted from a transsexual oriented one to towards a more inclusive transgender identity, centered around the debates of its

(re)conceptualization, in addition to the exact constitutions of transgender politics. Yet, despite its inclusiveness, this nascent transgender movement as informed by queer framing (politics) aimed to complicate and disrupt the meaning of what it means to be transgender, shifting from a collective identity to a more deconstructive one. Similarly, the emergent movement of the 1990’s also served not just as the way in which to complicate boundaries, but also as a way in which to construct group identities (Broad,

2002; Gamson 1995). Thus, according to Broad (2002), the transgender movement of the 1990’s served both as a site of disruption and construction of collective identities while at the same time spurring constant (re) negotiations.

The transgender movement supports and challenges the social organization of sexuality simultaneously with gender by transforming and employing new meanings of transgender, ones that complicate both gender and sexuality politics. The transgender movement influences transgender sexuality because though the term transgender refers to gender identity, sexuality and gender are intertwined; thus, sexuality issues

(identities) often are present with gender issues (identities). That is, in the way that movements are gendered they are also sexualized. Therefore, sexuality is imbued in transgender politics from how TAGN people enact their collective identities (who can be called transgender as well as who could be a part of a larger lesbian and gay movement). As discussed above, the shift of the LGB movement to first exclude transgender from their group due to gender politics and their shift back to include the

152

name transgender into the title is also indicative of the transgender experience being central to both TAGN people’s gender and sexuality (Ghaziani 2008; Gamson 1995; also see Stryker 2004). Thus, transgender politics has shaped and has often challenged the organization of sexuality. Conversely, since sexuality and (trans)gender are so intertwined, it seems that one cannot just make the claim that one simply affects the other, but instead, recognize that they affect each other simultaneously. Transgender politics is both sexuality, and gender politics and sexuality politics and gender politics are transgender politics all at the same time.

To conclude my second point, activism, gender and sexuality identity, and collective identities are connected, simultaneously. Previous literature illustrates that while there is discussion about the interconnection of sexuality and gender for transgender people, in that it is difficult to talk about gender without sexuality (or as we say in this research the subversion of sexuality), there is no consideration of these linkages. That is, there is no discussion about how online space enables actions and actors that must disrupt and maintain spatial boundaries via the performance of their gender and sexuality identities. That is, these spaces and places provided the means by which to do (trans)gender so effectively. They have enabled TAGN individuals to form collective identities that demand activism work in order to do (trans)gender identity work.

Reflection and Limitations

There are so many valuable lessons that I have learned from doing research online and about online arenas. First, I was optimistic about how easy it would be to gain access to some of these online platforms, but I soon realized that gatekeepers guard some of these spaces and places. Therefore, I did not have direct access to

153

some forums, as some are private and can only be accessed through the permission of the moderator. As such, I may have been limited in the amount of information gained from these sites. On the other hand, I was excited to test a new method, active mobile online ethnographies (AMOE), to see how it could circumvent some of these restrictions. Using AMOE, I was taken into and onto some of these sites by participants and given a user’s perspective to the site instead of a first time visitor. As a result, I may have had more of an advantage in understanding how the space functioned, making this more a strength of the research than a weakness.

A methodological limitation in this study was undertaking the task of using three types of data sources, which produced rich data, but was very time-consuming. It took me several months to sort through blogs, vlogs, make decisions about their relevance, and make sense of how some sites were linked. I even became inundated with comments left by visitors on blogs and vlogs as I realized that they, too, are data.

Correspondingly, there are so many vlogs, forums, social media sites and blogs about transgender and or gender non-conforming individuals (websites) available on the

Internet, it was difficult to categorize which ones were most important, so I depended on

Alexia rankings and used it in conjunction with participants’ suggestions as to which sites were most important. My advice to anyone who seeks to undertake online data analysis is to reduce the multiple methods I used. I think a combination of semi- structured interviews and AMOE would have sufficed, as I was able to gather textual data from these ethnographic entry points, as well. In addition, while textual data proved to be a valuable tool for constant comparisons as a way to scrutinize my emerging

154

categories, I think it would have been easier had I selected a limited amount of sources to visit and analyze from the beginning (I narrowed these later).

Another methodological limitation in this study is that the ethical implications are still not very defined for doing research online. I am aware that these data are public

(especially online videos, personal vlogs (video blogs), and blogs), but because I used a different lens from which to analyze these websites, I felt compelled to ask site owner’s

(participants) permission on whether or not I can look at their websites to gather information for this study.

A methodological lesson for future grounded theory analysts to note, is that what is not being discussed can be more indicative of how the information is being perceived, transformed and used for identity work and collective identity politics. Specifically, the discussions of sexuality were mostly missing in these narratives, even when I tried to probe. I believe that if I did not make memos referencing what discussions were limited or missing (race, health, sexuality, class etc), I would have missed the connection between sexuality, gender and activism altogether.

A final methodological note is that these data mostly capture the stories and experiences of MTF, white, and middle class TAGN individuals. As such, while some of these experiences can be applied to identity movements and TAGN groups, they do not claim to capture the experiences of all groups under the transgender and gender non- conforming umbrella.

I argue that a significant contribution of this study is to help gain a better understanding of how the transgender movement online has progressed and I see its findings as an important step in understanding the transgender movement online. Thus,

155

by using a constructivist grounded theory approach, I have provided a theoretical explanation of the phenomenon (the processes through which transgender movement work is done in online spaces), and generated a theory that moves us beyond a descriptive account of the transgender movement and community online (Strauss and

Corbin 1998; Corbin and Strauss 2007; Creswell 2013). Moreover, active mobile online ethnographies elicited how, when, and why identity work is done while assessing issues of contestation. For a group of people who often through their narratives tell a story that focuses on and emphasizes doing identity work over all else, this methodological shift helped us to better understand, more systematically, how online places imbue collective action, and how identity work becomes movement work for trans(gender) people.

156

APPENDIX A INTERVIEW GUIDE

The overall research question is, what is the theory that explains the processes through which transgender people online do movement work?

My sub questions are:

(1) How do transgender people form transgender specific spaces online?

a. Where do they go, what they do go for, how long have they been going,

how long do they stay, how often?

b. What role do you play on these sites, who do they interact with each other,

c. Why do they go to these sites?

d. Does it add to your life or your understanding of who you are?

(2) How/ when did you start going online to explore ideas about who you are?

(3) What do space/site members do in these spaces?

(4) What other spaces/sites do you visit?

a. What other sites do other site members visit that you know about?

(5) What do the sites offer, (these are online communities) so what other features

do they use? What could be improved, what do you like and or dislike,

(6) On regular/average day, how do you navigate these sites, walk me through it.

(7) Why do they visit these sites, what is their reasoning?

(8) Why do you go to these sites and what they do on these sites?

(9) Imagine you are going online, what are you thinking about as your primary

interest in going to the groups you visit?

(10) What do you hope to do online? And now imagine you are online in [insert

name of website here] group, what will you post or read?

157

(11) In addition, some potential intermediate questions are: Could you describe

the most important lessons you learned when you go online

(12) How do they do movement work?

a. What kind of resources are available, do you use them, do other them, do

people/you ever use these sites for gaining awareness/ empowerment? If

so, how?

(13) Do members in these sites share a collective identity?

a. Do you make friends, colleagues

(14) Do you ever communicate/ hangout with these people separate

space/medium?

(15) Why do you blog/ provide resources and or information for others?

158

APPENDIX B IRB PROTOCOL

UFIRB 02 – Social & Behavioral Research Protocol Submission Form

This form must be typed. Send this form and the supporting documents to IRB02, PO Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611. Should you have questions about completing this form, call 352-392-0433.

Title of Protocol: The Transgender Movement Online

Principal Investigator: Petta-Gay Hannah UFID #: M.A./ Graduate Student Degree / Mailing Address: (If on Email:[email protected] Title: campus include PO Box address):

3219 Turlington Hall Department: Sociology and P.O. Box 117330 Telephone #:352-256-7168 Criminology & Law Gainesville, FL 32611

Co-Investigator(s): UFID#: Email:

Supervisor (If PI is Kendal Broad-Wright UFID#: 2670-3800 student): Degree / PhD/ Associate Mailing Address: (If on Email : Title: Professor campus include PO Box [email protected] address): PO Box 117352 Department: Joint Appointment: Telephone #: 301 Ustler Hall Sociology and 352-273-0389 Criminology & Law; Gainesville, FL 32611- Women’s Studies 7352

Date of Proposed August 1st 2013 to August 31st 2015 Research:

Source of Funding (A copy of the grant proposal must be submitted with this protocol if funding is involved):

None

159

Scientific Purpose of the Study:

In the social movements literature there is limited exploration of activism of movements online; moreover there is no exploration of the Transgender movement online. Particularly, existing research fails to explore the processes by which transgender movement work is done in online spaces. This study is designed to examine those processes of online transgender movement work.

Describe the Research Methodology in Non-Technical Language: (Explain what will be done with or to the research participant.) Participants will be asked to participate in one semi-structured phone or Skype interview (whichever one the participant prefers) for period of about 1-2 hours (depends on interviewee’s speed). Questions will address demographics, (trans)gender identity, how they use online space and the dynamics of transgender group online. I will obtain data from websites as well to compare it with data gathered from interviews.

Describe Potential Benefits: The results from this study may help us gain a better understanding of the transgender movement both online and offline. It will benefit the transgender community as a whole and enable society to gain a clearer idea of the processes by which transgender movement work is done in online spaces.

Describe Potential Risks: (If risk of physical, psychological or economic harm may be involved, describe the steps taken to protect participant.) All interviews and concurrent data will be confidential. Therefore, any potential risks to participants will be minimized by keeping their identities confidential. Data will be kept on a password protected computer. Taped interviews will be stored in a locked compartment; interviews will be deleted after they are transcribed. All interviews, once transcribed, will be organized using pseudonyms to protect participants’ identities. In addition, participants may feel uncomfortable or embarrassed about answering certain questions or when recalling past experiences. However, these feelings are no greater than those they would normally experience in daily life. To protect the participants, the principal investigator will remind those who seem saddened, uncomfortable, or embarrassed that they can stop the interview. Participants will also be informed that at any time they have the right to discontinue the interview and that they have the right to refuse to answer any questions without penalty. The investigator will occasionally pause and ask participants if they still wish to continue the study. The investigator will also provide participants with a list of organizations they can contact for support.

Describe How Participant(s) Will Be Recruited: All participants will be recruited by a passive snowballing technique. I will visit transgender websites (blogs, vlogs and support groups on the internet and I will contact the website leaders and request an interview with them. I will also ask them to tell members and or visitors on their sites about the study, and ask to contact me if they would like to participate.

160

I will also ask site leaders if I can post information about the study on their site. Here, I will notify participants on these websites about the research and ask if anyone would like to volunteer to participate. I will post information about the purpose of the study, potential risks and benefits, the consent form, what to expect if they agree to participate in the study, the age requirement and that participants must be a member or visitor to organization that provides support to transgendered people, and my contact information for potential participants to review at their leisure and use to make decisions about whether or not they would like to participate in the study. If site leaders are willing/able, I will also ask if they can create a separate thread or space for me to post the information referenced above about the study.

Maximum 100 Age Range of 18+ Amount of None Number of Participants: Compensation/ course Participants (to credit: be approached with consent)

Describe the Informed Consent Process. (Attach a Copy of the Informed Consent Document. See http://irb.ufl.edu/irb02/samples.html for examples of consent.) Participants will be informed about the purpose of the study, the length of the interview and that the data are confidential, the taped recording of the interview(s), and their right to refuse to participate before and or during the interview process. Informed consent forms (see attached) will be sent to participants by email; participants can either send the signed consent forms back to me through email or verbally agree at the beginning of an interview to participate in the study. Participants will also be informed that the study does not provide monetary compensation for their time. (See attached).

(SIGNATURE SECTION)

Principal Investigator(s) Signature: Date: 06/30/13

Co-Investigator(s) Signature(s): Date:

Supervisor’s Signature (if PI is a Date:06/30/13 student):

Department Chair Signature: Date:

161

APPENDIX C CONSENT FORM

CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH The Transgender Movement Online

What is the purpose of this research? I am asking you to be in this research study because I am trying to learn more about the transgender movement online. You are invited to participate in this study because you are a member of an organization that provides support to transgendered people. I will be interviewing approximately 100 people who identify as transgendered and participate on transgender specific websites. This study is being conducted by PETTA-GAY HANNAH at University Of Florida, Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law.

How much time will this take? This study will require one to two phone conversations taking about two hours or less of your time, depending on your pace in the interview.

What will I be asked to do if I agree to participate in this study? If you agree to be in this study, you will be interviewed. In the Interview you will be asked questions about your demographic background, gender identity, the transgender group or website with which you identify most, and people within your social network. Your interview will be audiotaped.

What are the risks involved in participating in this study? Being in this study does not involve any risks other than what you would encounter in daily life. If you discuss experiences or relationships that are of a sensitive nature, you may have feelings that might be uncomfortable or distressing. Throughout the interview, you can choose not to answer any question I ask or to stop the interview at any time. In addition, any other potential risks to you will be minimized by keeping your identity confidential to the extent provided by law.

What are the benefits of my participation in this study? You may not personally benefit from being in this study; furthermore, there is no compensation to you for participating in the study. However, by discussing your experiences you have the opportunity to reflect on relationships, experiences, and feelings with a person who is non-judgmental and a good listener. Moreover, I hope that what I learn will be adding to the body of knowledge about the experiences and needs of transgendered people and the community as a whole.

Can I decide not to participate? If so, are there other options? Yes, you can choose not to participate. Even if you agree to be in the study now, you can change your mind later and leave the study. There will be no negative consequences if you decide not to participate or change your mind later. Furthermore, you may interrupt to ask questions concerning the research or research procedures at any time and you may refuse to answer any questions at any time without penalty.

162

How will my privacy be protected? The records of this study will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. In any report we might publish, I will not include any information that could identify you. Research records will be stored securely and only I, as the researcher will have access to the records. After the research project is completed, all the audiotapes will be erased.

Whom can I contact for more information? If you have questions about this study, please contact Petta-Gay Hannah at 352- 213- 9312 or by email at [email protected] . If you have questions about your rights as a research subject please contact: IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250; phone 352-392-0433.

You will be given a copy of this information to keep for your records. Statement of Consent: I have read the above information. I have all my questions answered. (Please check one:)

 I consent to be in this study.  I DO NOT consent to be in this study.

163

APPENDIX D RECRUITMENT MATERIALS

Recruitment Materials I will visit transgender websites (blogs, vlogs and support groups) on the Internet and I will contact the website leaders and request an interview with them. I will also ask them to tell members and or visitors on their sites about the study by providing an announcement for them to post to their site, if possible. If site leaders are willing/able, I will also ask if they can create a separate thread or space for me to post the information referenced above about the study.

Email to Site Moderator Dear Site Leader/Moderator, I am conducting research on the transgender community online, and I am trying to learn more about this community to better inform the transgender Movement Online. I am sending this email to ask for your help in recruiting your sites participants. If you are able, can you please post the announcement information to your information/announcements page? If you prefer, you may create a separate space for me to post this information about the study on your site? Thank you for your help.

Regards,

Petta-Gay Hannah

164

Announcement Dear Site Participant, My name is Petta-Gay Hannah and I am graduate student at University Of Florida, Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law. I am conducting research for my dissertation about the transgender community online. My overall research goal is to learn more about this community to better inform the transgender Movement Online.

Who can be in this Study, and what is the interview process like? You are invited you to participate in this study because you are a member, visitor or participant of an organization and or website that provides support to transgender people. To participate you should be at least 18 years of age or older. I will be interviewing approximately 100 people who identify as transgender and participate on transgender specific websites. This study will require one to two phone conversations taking about two hours or less of your time, depending on your pace in the interview. If you agree to be in this study, you will be interviewed. In the Interview you will be asked questions about your demographic background, gender identity, the transgender group or website with which you identify most, and people within your social network. Your interview will be audiotaped.

What are the risks and or benefits of my participation in this study? Being in this study does not involve any risks other than what you would encounter in daily life. If you discuss experiences or relationships that are of a sensitive nature, you may have feelings that might be uncomfortable or distressing. Throughout the interview, you can choose not to answer any question I ask or to stop the interview at any time. In addition, keeping your identity confidential to the extent provided by law will minimize any other potential risks to you. You may not personally benefit from being in this study; furthermore, there is no compensation to you for participating in the study. However, by discussing your experiences you have the opportunity to reflect on relationships, experiences, and feelings with a person who is non-judgmental and a good listener. Moreover, I hope that what I learn will be adding to the body of knowledge about the experiences and needs of transgendered people and the community as a whole.

How will my privacy be protected? The records of this study will be kept confidential. In any report we might publish, I will not include any information that could identify you. Research records will be stored securely and only I, as the researcher will have access to the records. After the research project is completed, all the audiotapes will be erased.

165

Whom can I contact for more information? If you have questions about this study, please contact Petta-Gay Hannah at 352- 213- 9312 or by email at [email protected]. If you have questions about your rights as a research subject please contact: IRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250; phone 352-392-0433.

166

APPENDIX E TABLE OF INTERVIEW PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS

Table E-1. Interview participant demographics1 Name Trans/Gender Non-Conforming Identity Age Race/Ethnicity Socioeconomic Status Sexual Identity Range Sam Transman (FTM) 20's White Student Unknown Jane MTF Transsexual, Transgender, Queer, 70's White Retired Clinical Lesbian/ Translesbian (MTF) Psychologist/Middle Class David MTF Transvestite/ Crossdresser (MTF) 40's White Self Employed/ Middle Class Unknown Sarah/M MTF Transsexual/ Crossdresser, Transgender, 70's White Retired Unknown ort bigender (MTF) Juan/Ca MTF crossdresser 50's Hispanic/Puerto Masters Degree/Administrative Heterosexual/Le rla Rican Work sbian Nathalie Crossdresser (MTF) 30's White Employed Heterosexual/Ma rried Stella Transsexual (MTF) 60's White Unknown Jessica Crossdresser (MTF) 30's White Unknown Karen Transsexual (MTF) 50's White Self employed Heterosexual Silvia Crossdresser (MTF) 60's White Married Heterosexual Catherin Crossdresser (MTF) 70's White Retired Married e Patrick Genderqueer, FTM Transgender 20's White Employed Unknown Darby Crossdresser (MTF) 60's White Retired Unknown Rita Transsexual (MTF) 50's White Unknown Ronald Transman (FTM) 40's White Unknown Suzie Crossdresser (MTF) 70's Native American Small property manager Married/ Heterosexual Mary Crossdresser/Transsexual 40's White Unknown Nancy Crossdresser (MTF) 30's White Unknown Michelle Crossdresser (MTF) 30's White Unknown Kathy Crossdresser (MTF) 50's White Employed Married Khole Transsexual (MTF) 50's White Chemist Straight

1 MTF or FTM is in parenthesis to denote the participant’s biological sex though participants did not directly identify this way.

167

REFERENCES

Beneito-Montagut, Roser. 2011. Ethnography goes online: towards a user-centered methodology to research interpersonal communication on the Internet. Qualitative Research 11: 716

Bernstein, Mary and Taylor, Verta. 2013. Identity Politics. The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements DOI: 10.1002/9780470674871.wbespm104

Boyd, Helen. 2003. My Husband Betty: Love, Sex, and Life with a Crossdresser. Thunder Mouth Press. New York, NY.

Broad, K. L. 2002. "GLB+T?: Gender/Sexuality Movements and Transgender Collective Identity (De)Constructions." International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies 7(4):241-264 (www.csa.com).

------. 2002. "Social Movement Selves." Sociological Perspectives 45(3): 317-336 (www.csa.com).

Broad, K.L. and Kristin E. Joos. 2004. “Online Inquiry of Public Selves: Methodological Considerations”. Qualitative Inquiry 10:923

Buscher, Monika and John Urry. 2009. Mobile Methods and the Empirical. The European Journal of Social Theory, Vol. 12 no. 1 99-116

Charmaz, Kathy. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory. London, Sage.

----. 2014. Constructing Grounded Theory. (2nd ed) London, Sage.

Comstock and Joanne. 1997. Virtual complexities: Exploring literacy at the intersections of computer-mediated social formations.

Corbin, J and Strauss, A. 2007. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crawley Sara, Lara Foley, and Constance Shehan. 2008. Gendering Bodies (Gender Lens Series). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Maryland USA.

Currah, Paisley. 2008. Stepping Back, Looking Outward: Situating Transgender Activism and Transgender Studies -- Kris Hayashi, Matt Richardson, and Susan Stryker Frame the Movement. Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC 5(1):93-105 (http://caliber.ucpress.net).

Davidmann, Sara. 2006. Border Trouble: photography, strategies, and transsexual identities. Scan Journal: Vol 3 (3) (http://scan.net.au/scan/journal/print.php?journal_id=85&j_id=9)

168

Davidson, Megan. 2007. "Seeking Refuge Under the Umbrella: Inclusion, Exclusion, and Organizing within the Category Transgender." Sexuality Research and Social Policy: Journal of NSRC 4(4):60-80 (http://caliber.ucpress.net).

Enke, Anne. 2007. Finding the movement: sexuality, contested space, and feminist activism. Duke University Press.

Fincher, R. and R. Panelli (2001). Making Space: women's urban and rural activism and the Australian state [1]. Gender, Place and Culture 8(2) 129-148

Fielding, Nigel G. and Jane L. Fielding.1986. Linking Data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Frye, Phyllis.R. 2002. Transgenders Must be Brave while Forging this New Front on Equality. 5th Annual Georgetown Symposium on Gender & Sexuality, Crossing Boundaries, Redefining Gender: A New front on Equality.

Gamson, William A. 1992. Talking Politics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

------. 1995. "Must Identity Movements Self-Destruct? A Queer Dilemma." Social Problems 42(3):390-407 (www.csa.com).

Gan, Jessi. 2007. Still at the Back of The Bus: Sylvia Riviera’s Struggle. Centro Journal 19 (1):124-139

Ghaziani, Amin and Gary Alan Fine. 2008. Infighting and Ideology: How Conflict Informs the Local Culture of the Chicago Dyke March. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society. Vol. 20, Issue 1-4, pp 51-67

Ghaziani, Amin. 2008. The Dividends of Dissent: How Conflict and Culture work in the Lesbian and Gay Marches on Washington. The University of Chicago Press.

Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss.1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Green, Eli.R. 2006. Debating Trans Inclusion in the Feminist Movement: A Trans- Positive Analysis. Hawthorne Press, Inc.

Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (Eds.). 2001. Institutional selves: Troubled identities in a postmodern world. New York: Oxford University Press.

Halo. Official game website. https://www.halowaypoint.com.

169

Holstein, James. A and Jaber F. Gubrium. 1995. The Active Interview. Thousand Oak, California. Sage. Vol. 37.vii 85 pp.

Jasper, James M. 1997. The Art of Moral Protest: Culture, Biography, and Creativity in Social Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Kusenbach, Maggie. 2011. The struggle to belong, Dealing with diversity in 21st century urban settings. Amsterdam, 7-9 July 2011. Paper presented at the International RC21 conference 2011. Session 21: Ethnographic Interventions

Marston, Sallie. 2003. Mobilizing Geography: Locating Space In Social Movement Theory. Mobilization: An International Quarterly: June 2003, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 227-233.

Martin, Deborah and Byron Miller. 2003. Space And Contentious Politics. Mobilization: An International Quarterly: June 2003, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 143-156

Massey, D., B.1992. “Politics and Space/Time.” New Left Review 196: 65-84.

-----.1994. Space, place, and gender. Cambridge [England], Polity Press. Mckee, Alan. 2003. Textual Analysis: A Beginner’s Guide. Sage Publications Inc. Thousand Oaks, California.

Members of the Gay and Lesbian Historical Society. 1998. MTF Transgender Activism in the Tenderloin and Beyond: Commentary and Interview with Elliot Blackstone. The GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 4 (2): 349-372

Namaste, K. 1996. Genderbashing: sexuality, gender and the regulation of public space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 14: 221-240.

O’Brien, Jodi. 1999. Writing in the Body: Gender (Re)Production in Online Communication. Pp. 77-104 in Communities in Cyberspace, edited by P. Kollock and M. Smith. London: Routledge.

Park, Pauline. 2002. GenderPAC, The Transgender Rights Movement and the Perils of A Post-Identity Politics Paradigm. 5th Annual Georgetown Symposium on Gender & Sexuality, Crossing Boundaries, Redefining Gender: A New front on Equality.

Phibbs, Suzanne. 2008. Four Dimensions of Narrativity: Towards a Narrative Analysis of Gender Identity That Is Simultaneously Personal, Local and Global New Zealand Sociology 23:2

Polletta, Francesca and James M. Jasper. 2001. Collective Identity and Social Movements.”Annual Review of Sociology 27:283–305.

Rogers, Ian. Page Rank Explained: The Google Pagerank Algorithm and How It Works. http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~chazelle/courses/BIB/pagerank.htm

170

Schrock, Douglas P., Emily M. Boyd and Margaret Leaf. 2009. Emotion Work in the Public Performances of Male-to-Female Transsexuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior 38(5):702-712 (www.csa.com).

Schrock, Douglas, Daphne Holden and Lori Reid. 2004. Creating Emotional Resonance: Interpersonal Emotion Work and Motivational Framing in a Transgender Community. Social Problems 51(1):61-81 (www.csa.com).

Shapiro, Eve. 2004. Trans'Cending Barriers: Transgender Organizing on the Internet. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services 16(3-4):165-179 (www.csa.com).

Snow, David 2001. Collective Identity and Expressive Forms. University of California, Irvinee Scholarship Repository. http://repositories.cdlib.org/csd/01-07. Last accessed July 26, 2009.

Somers, M. (1994). The narrative constitution of identity: A relational and network approach. Theory and Society,23, 605-649.

Stone, Amy L. 2009. More than Adding a T: American Lesbian and Gay Activists' Attitudes Towards Transgender Inclusion. Sexualities 12(3): 334-354 (www.csa.com).

Strauss, Anslem and Corbin, J. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory procedures and Techniques (2nd ed). Newbury Park, CA, Sage.

Stryker, Susan. 2004.Transgender Activism. Glbtq inc. www.glbtq.com

Taylor, Verta. 1989. Social Movement Continuity: The Women’s Movement in Abeyance. American Sociological Review 54(5):761–75

Taylor, Verta and Nancy E. Whittier. 1992. Collective Identity in Social Movement Communities. Pp. 104–29 in Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, edited by A. D. Morris and C. McClurg. New Haven: Yale University Press

Taylor, Verta, Katrina Kimport, Nella Van Dyke, and Ellen Ann Anderson.2009. Culture and Mobilization: Tactical Repertoires, Same-Sex Weddings, and the Impact on Gay Activism. American Sociological Review 74 (6): 865-890.

Transgender Tapestry. 2007. Issue113. https://www.digitaltransgenderarchive.net/files/pk02c9813

Walters, Mark. 2016. How does Google rank websites? Retrieved April 2nd 2016. http://www.seomark.co.uk/how-does-Google-rank-websites/

171

Wolkomir, Michelle. 2001. “Emotion Work, Commitment, and the Authentication of the Self: The Case of Gay and Ex-Gay Christian Support Groups.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 30:305–34.

172

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Petta-Gay Hannah received her Bachelor of Arts in sociology from the University of Florida in 2004. In 2006, she began her graduate career at DePaul University and graduated in 2009 with a Master of Arts degree in sociology. Petta-Gay returned to the

University of Florida in the fall of 2009 to pursue her Ph.D. in sociology. She graduated in summer 2016 with a Ph.D. in sociology, a Ph.D. concentration in gender and women’s studies, and certificates in both research methods and public health.

173