Rhetorical Violence Against Gender Diversity: 1965-2015

Background and Purpose: Social workers have an ethical responsibility to engage with transgender/gender diverse (TGD) folk and issues across micro-, mezzo-, and macro-level practice in ways that do not perpetuate harm. While the social work profession tends to incorporate a queer-affirming approach, this has not always been the case, and contemporary queer-affirming standards of social work often fail to meet the needs of TGD clients. Without a deep understanding of how anti-affirming rhetoric is, and has historically been used to perpetuate transphobia, social work researchers, educators, and practitioners may end up perpetuating harm. To better understand anti-affirming rhetoric, a historical analysis of the development of rhetorical violence against TGD folk over the half-century between the Stonewall Riots and the de facto legalization of gay marriage following the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court Decision (1965-2015) was conducted.

Methods: Using the Gerber/Hart Library and Archives in Chicago, IL, a historical analysis of archival materials was conducted including six sources: one gay rights organization, three lesbian-feminist separatist organizations, one notable TGD activist, and one collection of related newspaper clippings. Data were extracted through picture recordings of the archival materials (e.g., newspaper clippings, written essays). Pictures were reviewed and pertinent information was transcribed into a word processing software. Transcriptions were then analyzed and common themes were identified. Secondary sources (e.g., articles about the events and people described in the archival sources) were used when appropriate to provide additional context to the historical analysis. Focusing mainly on urban Chicago, IL, the sources also included perspectives from both rural and Southern settings improving generalizability.

Results: The following themes were identified: (1) the widespread adoption of the colonial sex and gender hegemony, (2) policing (both from external forces and within queer communities), (3) the strategic use of media as a form of mass-mediated rhetorical contact with the dominant culture, (4) the exclusion of TGD folk from lesbian-feminist separatist spaces, and (5) the use/appropriation of Indigenous rhetoric within lesbian-feminist separatist spaces without allowing for Indigenous ways of understanding gender.

Conclusions and Implications: Drawing upon queer, postcolonial, and postmodern feminist literature, TGD folk arguably remained largely invisible during the broader queer rights movement due to diminished power and privilege. This marginalization of TGD folk occurred both by dominant society and within queer communities themselves which continues to have consequences for TGD folk today. Based on the results, the following suggestions are offered for social workers: (1) The scope of micro-level practice should be expanded to include the provision of gender socialization services for children, adolescents, and adults who wish to be socialized into the constructs typically associated with another gender; (2) Mezzo-level practice should include efforts to establish and maintain gender-affirming cultures within organizations and communities; and (3) Macro-level practice seeking to combat anti-TGD legislation, executive policy, and judicial overreach must include an intentional disruption of widespread rhetorical narratives that perpetuate the pathologization of TGD folk.