Transgender People on University Campuses: a Policy Discourse Analysis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 1-2011 Transgender People on University Campuses: A Policy Discourse Analysis Doris Andrea Dirks Western Michigan University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations Part of the Higher Education Commons, and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Studies Commons Recommended Citation Dirks, Doris Andrea, "Transgender People on University Campuses: A Policy Discourse Analysis" (2011). Dissertations. 398. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/398 This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES: A POLICY DISCOURSE ANALYSIS by Doris Andrea Dirks A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Educational Leadership, Research, and Technology Advisor: Andrea Beach, Ph.D. Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan December 2011 TRANSGENDER PEOPLE ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUSES: A POLICY DISCOURSE ANALYSIS Doris Andrea Dirks, Ph.D. Western Michigan University The goal of this study is to examine the language used to discuss transgender people on university campuses. My main research question was: What do university reports describe as problems and solutions for transgender people in universities? The primary data for this study consists of 16 reports issued at four Big Ten schools from 1992-2010. These reports address the inclusion of gender identity and expression in non- discrimination policies, the status of transgender people on university campuses, or both. This study employs policy discourse analysis, a hybrid methodology that analyzes written documents using feminist, critical, and poststructural theories in order to identify the subject positions generated through policy discourse. These reports should be viewed in the context of primary sources that illustrate a long history of LGBTQ civil rights battles. My aim is to understand how these reports framed discussions about transgender people, and what this in turn tells us about the reality produced by the reports. The resulting study therefore reveals significant discrepancies between objectives sought, means used, and outcomes achieved. For example, a university’s report on the status of transgender people may use language depicting them as “vulnerable” or as “victims,” even as it strives to make the university more welcoming to transgender individuals. The predominant images of transgender people are those of victims of harassment inspired by ignorance, and supplicants for protection to university decision makers. The discourses used to shape these problems, solutions, and images are those of facilities, education/training, and support. The role of LGBT resource centers is central to the provision of services for transgender people and these centers form a significant part of the support discourse. The predominant protection discourse is one that presents itself as offering safety to transgender people through isolation and segregation – a solution that operates, among other things, to relieve cisgender people’s discomfort around gender variance though transgender “accommodation,” but at the cost of reinforcing the marginalization of trans people. This study shows the need to reframe the discourse on university campuses about transgender people and offers concrete ideas about how to do so in order to make campuses truly gender-friendly. UMI Number: 3496355 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent on the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI 3496355 Copyright 2012 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 Copyright by Doris Andrea Dirks 2011 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My dissertation was supported by research awards from the College of Education at Western Michigan University and the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators GLBT Knowledge Community. In addition, I gratefully acknowledge the following: My dissertation Committee: Andrea Beach, Donna Talbot, Jim Croteau, whose perspectives and feedback were invaluable. Dr. Beach’s tenacious support of my work has sustained this research over many years. Supportive Colleagues, Friends, and Family: Dr. Elizabeth Allan, whose work on policy discourse analysis enables the research frame of this dissertation. Dr. Allan kindly read and provided feedback via email that helped make the arguments clearer. Dr. Genny Beemyn, whose work inspired my own and made this dissertation possible by pioneering research on transgender people on college campuses. Genny read my dissertation proposal and made helpful comments. Dr. Brent Bilodeau, whose dissertation provided inspiration for my own. Friends/colleagues who provided significant encouragement: Shane Whalley, Sue Rankin, Morton Schapiro, Jessie Grant, Mike DeVivo, Mary Desler, EJ Basa, Michelle Gere, Sunny Gibson, Tim Sanker, Mary Valentich, Suzie Nagel-Bennett, Marie Lee, William Weiner, Steve Veldkamp, Jessica Leirer ii Acknowledgments – Continued (and all the staff at The Runner’s Edge). My Kalamazoo running gang, most especially: Sheila Clothier, Sandy Barry-Loken, Andrea Burke, Gayle Mejeske, Shelbi Cummings, and Tessa Emmenheiser. Jen Reinking-Coyle, who ran with me many mornings in Chicago before the crack of dawn and helped me focus on my dissertation work through our shared time. Members of the NU LGBTQA Campus Advisory Network; my colleagues in the Consortium of Higher Education LGBT Resource Professionals; my Ph.D. cohort; and the Northwestern University Norris Center for Student Involvement/LGBT Resource Center staff and students. Special thanks to Cara LaLumia-Barnes, Jen Wendling Holm, Stacey Doxtater in graduation audit, and Diane Bourgeois in Educational Leadership, Research and Technology. My partner and our families, in Calgary, Kalamazoo, and Chicago: Pat Hanavan and her family; my mother Hildegard Dirks, and brother Doug Dirks and his family; Elisabeth and Becca Lindsay-Ryan and their extended family (especially during the 200 mile relay run from Madison to Chicago). And most especially Scott Murray, who read endless drafts and supported me emotionally as well as intellectually, from Calgary and while in Chicago. It is his support that made me believe that I could finish this dissertation. Transgender students, staff, faculty and community members: All of the trans people whose voices contributed to many of the cited reports, as well as those scholars and activists upon whose work I relied. iii Acknowledgements – Continued The students and staff at WMU and NU who advocated for their own equality and inclusion on those campuses while I worked at their resource centers. The stories of institutional inertia and trans and gender variant peoples’ battles (with the solidarity of their LGBQ, cisgender, and straight allies) to make the campuses more gender-friendly inspired both my work in those centers and this research: Eric, Mykell, Joe, Evan, Cat, Mugsie, Mym, and AJ. Doris Andrea Dirks iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER I. FRAMING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS................................................. 1 The Problem........................................................................................ 4 Research Questions, Methods, and Case Institutions.......................... 7 The University of Wisconsin...................................................... 8 The University of Michigan....................................................... 9 Michigan State University.......................................................... 9 The University of Minnesota...................................................... 10 Conceptual Framework........................................................................ 11 Placement............................................................................................ 12 Delimitations and Limitations............................................................. 13 Summary.............................................................................................. 14 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE........................................................................ 15 Transgender Civil Rights Movement.................................................. 15 Transgender Inclusion in Non-Discrimination Policies............. 22 Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Development............................. 28 Transgender Identity Development..................................................... 31 Policy Analysis.................................................................................... 36 GIE Inclusion in Non-Discrimination Policy Development........ 36 v Table of Contents