In this chapter I look at how 4D fulfils the three requirements for a community of practice. In the next three chapters I discuss the products and processes of 4D as a community of practice. In chapter 8, I discuss identities, identity trajectories and legitimacy within 4D. In chapters 9 and 10, my final two data chapters, I look at reified events and reified objects within 4D.
As I have discussed in chapter 3, a group or community must fulfil three criteria in order to be a community of practice. These are: mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoire (Wenger, 1998). These three criteria can only be decided by interpretation from data, and may be difficult or impossible to determine for someone who is not a community member (Davies, 2005). Different aspects of the three criteria will be more or less significant at different times in the community. Members' engagement will also depend in part on their position in the community. A ‘legitimate peripheral participant’, a new member who is allowed to participate at least partially in the group practice, will engage differently from a longstanding central member. A legitimate peripheral participant will watch or ask questions, while a central member will explain or show aspects of the practice to a less central member. The contents of the mutual engagement, that is those aspects of the practice that the members are motivated to negotiate, indicate the joint enterprise of the community. The shared repertoire is also closely related to the mutual engagement. The shared repertoire is produced through the engagement of the community members but, in turn, facilitates that engagement. Finally, trajectories and identities within a community of practice will depend on the individual’s relationship with these three requirements. For example, a central member will make substantial use of the shared repertoire and show a commitment to central aspects of the joint enterprise. However, this is a circular process: a member who negotiates the joint enterprise will also develop the shared repertoire and this will mean they will be on a trajectory to becoming a central member. Neither the requirements, nor the identity trajectories, are primary in this process; all feed back into each other.
In this chapter I will first discuss the concept of ‘authenticity’ in relation to the establishment of identity as this underpins all the significant processes and products within 4D. I will then establish that 4D was a community of practice. I will look at: mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoire. As I have said, the processes and products in a community of practice are not connected linearly but feed back into each other in a circular way. The joint enterprise influences the participants’ engagement with aspects of the practice. The shared repertoire will be seen in the examples of mutual engagement. Some examples of mutual engagement will also show the legitimation of identities. Individuals’ use of the shared repertoire will link to their identities and trajectories in the group.
As I have discussed in chapter 5, 4D members seek to establish their trans and gender identities as ‘authentic’ through the mobilisation of discourses related to trans and gender identities. In this chapter I look at the processes and resources within 4D that support the establishment of ‘authentic’ trans and gender identities. I will first discuss the concept of ‘authenticity’ in relation to trans and gender identities.
Authenticity
‘Authenticity’ underpins all the processes and products of the community of practice of 4D. The significant processes and products within 4D all supported the establishment of ‘authentic’ identities; they were also produced in the process of establishing identities as ‘authentic’. ‘Authenticity’ was necessary to the full legitimation of identities in 4D: it was part of the shared repertoire and it was also reified. I will discuss reification in detail in chapters 9 and 10.
Authenticity is widely reified in the Western world. Authenticity is reified in relation to, among other things, architecture and merchandise as well as identities. In relation to architecture, houses, for example, may be marketed as ‘period’ houses with ‘original features’ as indicators of authenticity. In terms of merchandise there is a concept of ‘fake’, so a watch is considered differently if it is a ‘genuine’ as opposed to a ‘fake’ Rolex. In both these cases the idea of the authentic has been reified. The value of a house or a watch is not solely based on
the quality of the manufacture and ease of use. There is value that comes from their authenticity. The meaning of authenticity as adding value in these cases is above and beyond the meaning of the house or watch being a ‘true’ example. This meaning of added value associated with authenticity is taken for granted. Authenticity has become reified in these cases.
In this thesis I am concerned with identities. Authenticity in relation to identities is reified in the wider community; it is further reified within 4D. The concept of ‘authentic’ identity is related to the performative process through which identities and discourses surrounding those identities are established. The performative process of establishing identities ‘naturalises’ those identities. They are seen as natural, they become taken-for-granted as ‘true’, ‘real’ or ‘authentic’.
Value of authenticity
The value associated with authentic identity is, in part, related to legitimacy. If one’s identity is not authentic then one may be seen as making claims, to benefits or rights, that are not legitimate. Historically there were serious consequences, and associated legislation in many countries, for example the US and South Africa, for people who ‘passed’ as ‘white’ when they were understood to be ‘black’. There were also consequences historically for people who lived as male who were discovered to have conventionally female bodies (Faderman, 1981; Halberstam, 1998). Rachel Dolezal, in 2012, provoked considerable controversy when she was seen to be claiming to be black when her parents were white. This provoked comparisons between ‘transracial’ and ‘transsexual’ identities which are complex, and I will not consider here (Brubaker, 2016a, 2016b; Tuvel, 2017).
Authenticity is often important when people are seeking friendships or relationships with people that are based on shared identities. Having a shared identity is likely to mean that one has shared or similar experiences. It is also associated with legitimacy in a community of practice. This may be related to an understanding of shared experiences and therefore a shared purpose in the
community. People who are discovered not to hold the identity that they claim will be seen as illegitimate in the community of practice. Gender authenticity is understood differently by different people. Within some communities self-identity is accepted irrespective of presentation, as it was, at least initially, in 4D. Other people have, and continue, to refuse to accept people as ‘real’ women if they were assigned male at birth, irrespective of presentation or medical procedures (Greer, 2007; Jeffreys, 2014; Raymond, 1980; Tucker, 2018). This is highly contested; it also fails to recognise identities that have both medical and legal legitimacy (Elliot, 2016; Hines, 2017). The reasons given for this are often related to legitimacy in women only spaces, or lack of shared experiences with other women with fears of potential violence or disenfranchisement (BBC News, 2018; The Peter Tatchell Foundation, 2018). However most people understand a ‘new’ identity as authentic when there has been a process of establishing that identity. For those people who identify as a gender other than that assigned at birth their gender is generally seen to need to be established as authentic. Establishing an ‘authentic’ trans identity, beyond questioning one’s gender, was important to most, if not all, participants in 4D. As I have discussed in chapter 5, it enabled them to have their identity accepted by others beyond 4D. The medical discourse and the transsexual narrative both require ‘authenticity’, as seen through long-standing cross-gender desires or behaviours. As a result being seen as authentic was necessary to access medical interventions as well gain social acceptance of one’s social identity. The concept of innate or fixed gender identity was reified within 4D as, through both the medical discourse and trans narrative, it gave authenticity to an individual’s trans identity, before any changes to their presentation. Establishment of authentic gender identity Consistency and continuity As I have discussed in chapter 2, identity refers to several things. To claim and establish one’s gender identity as different from that assigned at birth depends on several ideas of what constitutes an authentic identity. The first relates to the
broad idea of an authentic identity as consistent and continuous. This is important for individuals to feel authentic to themselves, as well to establish their identity as authentic to others. It is easier for others to accept someone’s identity as different from that assigned at birth if they are consistent in saying how they now identify as well as consistent in how they present, ideally in alignment with the identity they declare. It is easiest for an individual to be seen as authentically gendered in wider society if they conform to gender norms, that is they present conventionally or pass in their ‘new’ identity. As one would expect from this understanding of authenticity, trans people who are seen to conform to binary gender norms have gained more legitimacy in the wider community, while other trans identities remain less legitimate (Roche, 2018). Innateness of identity Another sense in which identity is seen to be authentic is in relation to aspects of identity that have been constructed as innate. These include sex and ‘race’. As I have discussed in chapter 2, the ‘commonsense’ understanding of sex is that it is derived from one’s body at birth. Gender is seen to constructed on ‘natural’ sex, and many gender differences in behaviours or interests are widely held to be ‘hard-wired’ (Fine, 2010). Race is widely understood to be a social construction with scientific findings of greater diversity within ‘races’ than between ‘races’ (Cohen, 2005). However, like gender, some scientists continue to look for scientific support for separate races with innate genetic differences (Sarich & Miele, 2018). In the wider world people are expected to behave authentically in relation to those aspects of identity that are seen to be natural and innate.
Authentic trans identity as ‘innate’
‘Authentic’ trans identity as is based on the idea of gender as innate: if an individual has experienced themselves as their preferred gender since birth or early childhood, their identity can be seen as authentic as it is ‘innate’. This corresponds to the transsexual narrative and the medical discourse, discussed in chapter 5. The ‘wrong body’ discourse includes the idea that one’s ‘true’
gender is innate and determined by how one identifies rather than by one’s sexed body. This identitification must be permanent.
The references by many of the young people to early childhood or ‘subconsciously’ motivated behaviours are also used to establish their trans identity as authentic. To establish their identity as authentic to others they describe their experience of their trans identity as being within them from early childhood, either evident in their early childhood behaviour or in their ‘subconscious’. These young people establish both that they experience their identity as authentic and that their identity is longstanding, if not innate.