Intersectionality and Social Welfare: Avoidance and Equal Treatment among Transgender Women of Color

Adam M. Butz

Graduate Center for Public Policy & Administration

California State University, Long Beach

Adam.Butz@csulb.edu

​

Tia Sherèe Gaynor

Department of Political Science

University of Cincinnati

tiasheree.gaynor@uc.edu

​

​

​

Intersectionality

Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) asserts that examining issues from a single-axis framework (e.g., gender or race alone) ignores multiple, intersecting identities & the compounded ways in which individuals experience oppression

Importance of Intersectionality

A framework that:

• Recognizes the impact of gender, race, class, sexual orientation, etc., and how different confluence of identities shape the experiences of marginalized populations

​

• Combines multiple identities to unveil compounded manifestations of oppression

​

• Contextualizes marginalization within an “imperialist white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” (bell hooks, 2013)

​

Implications:

• Allows to more sufficiently address the particular and intersectional manner in which for instance, Black women, are uniquely subordinated in society

​

• Framework to translate intersectional perspectives and experiences into concrete policy demands and administrative improvements toward social equity

​

​

​

Crenshaw (1989): Importance of Intersectional Lens

“Because the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of racism and sexism, any analysis that does not take intersectionality into account cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women are subordinated. Thus, for feminist theory  and antiracist policy discourse to embrace the experiences and, the concerns of Black women entire framework that has been used as a basis for translating "women's experience” or "the Black experience" into concrete policy demands must be rethought and recast” (140).

​

Intersectionality, Social Equity, & Social Welfare

• Issues of intersectionality and gender & racial equity remain underdeveloped and oftentimes ignored entirely in public affairs literatures.

​

• Minimal research exists on transgender or intersectional experiences in the area of U.S. social welfare administration in particular.

​

• How are individuals with intersecting marginalized identities – for instance, when marginalized racial identity intersects with gender non-conformity or transgender identity – experiencing and engaging with the U.S. social welfare system?

​

• Our research focuses on the intersectional social welfare experiences of transgender women of color (trans WOC) relative to other transgender identifying individuals, in particular white transgender women

Theory: Intersectionality and the �Avoidance of Public Social Welfare Offices

• The lived experiences of compounded oppression derived from society’s mistreatment along multiple, intersecting marginalized identities (i.e., marginalized gender and racial identities) predicts heightened barriers to engaging with ameliorative public assistance and heightened avoidance of public social welfare offices.

​

• Due to historic and contemporary oppression and entrenched negative social constructions (Gilens 1999; Mogul et al. 2011; Gaynor 2018) associated with identifying as both a transgender woman and a person of color – should lead to heightened avoidance of social welfare services among trans WOC than for other trans identifying individuals.

​

​

Theory: Intersectionality and �Unequal Treatment in Public Social Welfare Offices

• Theories of street-level bureaucracy in the public administration literature emphasize the role of “discretion” in frontline practices that induces differential client treatment (Lipsky 1980; Tummers and Bekkers 2014)

​

• Clients who are negatively constructed in society should be more likely to experience unfavorable and discriminatory treatment in social welfare offices (Maynard-Moody and Musheno 2003; Watkins-Hayes 2009; Soss, Fording, and Schram 2011; Floyd-Thomas 2016; Hardy, Samudra, and Davis 2019)

​

• Trans WOC face compounded negative constructions around deviance and welfare dependency that likely shape frontline perceptions and practices, with greater emphasis on punitiveness and benefit/service denial

Data and Methods

• 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey (National Center for Transgender Equality)

​

• 27,715 transgender respondents

​

• Dependent Variables (coded as 0-1 event variables):
• Avoidance of public assistance office or Social Security office
• Denied equal treatment or service in public assistance office or Social Security office

​

• Chi-square analysis
• T-testing
• Multivariate logistic regression analysis

​

Survey Questions: Dependent Variables

Avoidance Question: “In the past year, did you NOT visit or use services at these places because you thought you would be mistreated as a trans person?”

1. Public assistance/government benefits office (such as SNAP, WIC)
2. Social Security office (such as for name or gender change, Social Security card, public benefits)

​

​

Equal Treatment Question: “In the past year, when you visited or used services at these places [1. public assistance/government benefits office; 2. Social Security office], did any of these things happen to you because you are trans?”

1. Denied equal treatment or service

Independent Variables

• Primary Independent Variable
• Identify as transgender woman of color

​

• Control Variables
• Age
• Poverty status
• Homelessness
• Partner status
• Employed
• Household income
• Differently abled
• Sexual orientation
• Education
• Citizenship status

​

Findings

• Trans WOC are more likely to report avoiding public social welfare offices than other trans identifying respondents.

​

• For instance, approximately 1 in 12 trans WOC report avoiding public assistance offices compared with 1 in 20 white trans women.

​

• Trans WOC are more likely to report experiencing unequal treatment or being denied service within public social welfare offices than other trans identifying respondents.

​

• For instance, approximately 1 in 11 trans WOC report experiencing discrimination in a public assistance office, while that figure drops to approximately 1 in 18 white trans women.

​

Lessons for Policymakers, Practitioners, & Researchers

1. Need to be thinking more structurally and intersectionally with public policy development and administrative approaches

​

• Enhance inclusiveness-attractiveness of public benefit outreach efforts and public benefits offices for marginalized populations

​

• Managers and frontline personnel: Prioritize inclusive practices and org. culture

​

• Incorporate more e-government approaches to social welfare administration

​

• Incorporate more qualitative methodological approaches – interviews, focus groups, storytelling, and center the voices of trans WOC

​

• Gain greater understanding of the impact social welfare avoidance and unequal treatment on material hardship experienced among trans WOC

• Collins, Patricia H. 2009. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. New York: Routledge.

​

• Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1989. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. u. Chi. Legal f. 139.

​

• Gaynor, Tia S. 2018. Social Construction and the Criminalization of Identity: State-Sanctioned Oppression and an Unethical Administration. Public Integrity 20(4): 358–69.

​

• Herman, Jody L. 2013. Gendered Restrooms and Minority Stress: The Public Regulation of Gender and its Impact on Transgender People’s Lives. Journal of Public Management and Social Policy 19(1): 65–80.

​

• Hooks, Bell. 2013. Writing Beyond Race: Living Theory and Practice, London, England: Routledge.

​

• James, Sandy E., Jody L. Herman, Susan Rankin, Mara Keisling, Lisa Mottet, and Ma’ayan Anafi. 2016. The Report of the 2015 U.S.Transgender Survey, Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality.

​

• Mogul, Joey L., Andrea J. Ritchie, and Kay Whitlock. 2011. Queer (In) Justice: The Criminalization of LGBT People in the United States, Vol 5. Boston: Beacon Press.

​

• Soss, Joe, Richard C. Fording, and Sanford F. Schram. 2011. Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism and the Persistent Power of Race. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

​

• Taylor, Jami K. 2007. Transgender Identities and Public Policy in the United States: The Relevance for Public Administration. Administration & Society 39(7): 833–56.

​

• Tummers, Lars, and Victor Bekkers. 2014. Policy Implementation, Street-Level Bureaucracy, and the Importance of Discretion. Public Management Review 16(4): 527–47.

​

​

Comments & Questions

• Feel free to email me for a copy of our article in Public Administration Review!