I followed BERA (British Educational Research Association, 2011) and BSA (British Sociological Association, 2017) research guidelines, as well as good practice as a volunteer youth worker (National Youth Agency, 2004). BERA requires that in all actions concerning children the best interests of the child must be the primary consideration. This supports the BSA requirement that the
wellbeing of the participants is not adversely affected by the research, and National Youth Agency guidelines that each individual should be valued. BSA and BERA guidelines regard the participants’ right to privacy and confidentiality to be of paramount importance. I was more cautious about privacy and confidentiality than all except one of my participants, which I discuss below. Usual youth work practice applied during youth group sessions: vulnerable or distressed young people would get immediate support and would be referred for appropriate additional support. There was potential in the one-to-one interviews for young people to disclose issues concerning their own or others’ wellbeing, or to become distressed. In my introduction to the interviews I explained that if there were any possible concerns about their or others’ wellbeing, I would have to share my concerns and would not keep confidentiality. I was also aware of the possible need to refer young people experiencing any difficulties for support. Several young people did discuss issues concerning their well-being, however all were already well supported by appropriate services such as CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) or GP services.
BERA guidelines require that children and young people should be facilitated to give informed consent if they are capable of forming their own views. BSA also require consent. National Youth Agency require promotion of young people’s rights to make their own decisions which would include consenting to research participation. My interviewees were 17-23 and all were able to understand and consent to their involvement in my research. I did not interview anyone below the age of 16. The youth group members were aged 13-25 and were able to consent to their, less active, involvement as participants in youth group activities in which I was a semi-participant observer.
At the start of my involvement with 4D I informed the youth group participants about my research. As I was not taking notes during sessions, it was important that I reminded the group regularly about my researcher role. This ensured that new members were aware of my role, as well as reminding others. The youth
group members were always positive about my research focus and keen for me to understand their experiences and views.
All interview and observation quotes have been anonymised, I have also tried to ensure that no participant might feel uncomfortable if they recognise themselves or others in my study. The young people’s feelings about anonymity in the research varied. This seemed related to the young people’s feelings about trans visibility: some were happy to be ‘out’ as trans while others thought that they would be ‘stealth’ in the future. Only one young person expressed any concern about their family or themselves being identified in research. I had email and telephone conversations with this young person to clarify how I could use their interview. As a result I wrote them a personalised consent letter in which I agreed to change details if necessary to ensure they could not be identified in the research whilst not compromising my integrity as researcher1.
Following the interview they asked that I did not use some details to which I agreed. In my discussion of the data I have made every effort to preserve their anonymity, even in relation to other research participants.
All the other interviewees seemed unconcerned about the potential for identification following my explanation of the use of pseudonyms and anonymising the research. Following my detailed conversations with the concerned young person I considered that perhaps the others were too trusting of me as researcher. I also considered that they could feel differently about the possibility of identification in five or ten years time when they had moved on in the world to different jobs and relationships. As a result I considered how the young people were presented in the research and how this might be experienced in the future. I had intended that the participants choose their own pseudonyms. However one young person said their preferred pseudonym would be the name of a fictional character that would identify them to other youth group members and to some members of wider queer communities. This
would possibly also have made other youth group members identifiable. As a result I decided that I would choose the pseudonyms.
I was aware of the power relations in my relationship with the young people as the interviewer and researcher. This was compounded by my ongoing relationship with them outside the interview space as youth group participants. Since the intention of my research was to make their experiences and views visible as much as possible from their perspective and without pathologising I sought to give them as much space as they wanted to share their views and experiences. I also sought to share some of my experiences and views to make the relationship more equal.
As well as their own interest in participating in the research, all the young people understood my intention to improve knowledge of young trans people in the wider community and make trans lives easier. In this way I think they all felt that I was contributing to the wider trans community, if not to them directly.
Reflections
4D was most likely not representative of young people who identified as trans or were questioning their gender identity at that time in the UK. In particular there were few black and even fewer participants of Asian origin (Roen, 2001). It is possible that young people who could not easily travel to London to 4D would either not come out as trans or might come out through a different route, seeking medical support and interventions before social transition. As such my study is representative of young people with access to London and the freedom to come to 4D. I cannot describe my research data as reaching saturation, that all possible themes had been allowed to surface in the data collection and analysis process (Strauss & Corbin, 1997). However it does represent a range of young trans and non-binary people’s experiences, although clearly not the full range of experiences.The observations and interviews were carried out at a specific point in time. Non-binary identities were becoming more visible in trans communities, but many young people understood themselves on a more traditional cross-binary
trans trajectory. Since the data was collected trans, particular trans male, identities have become more visible in mainstream media. Non-binary identities were not visible in mainstream media at all at the time of my data collection. These are now visible and discussed in mainstream media as well as in some communities of young people, particularly university students. As such my research is something of a historic documentation. It illustrates some strategies and resources that people can use to establish new gender identities and identity categories for themselves. The changes in the naming and visibility of gender identities and identity categories in the wider community shows that identities established in marginal communities of practice can become visible and begin to be established in wider communities.
5
Trans/gender/queer: Multiple discourses and identities
Introduction
Most people do not trouble gender and gender does not trouble them. Their gender performance fits with their assigned sex and also fits with how they understand their gender identity. My research participants, on the other hand, regularly had to negotiate different and sometimes conflicting constructions of gender, and these negotiations took place in several areas of their lives. They had to negotiate four main discourses of gender and transgender identity. I have called these: the medical discourse, the transsexual narrative, queer theory and trans politics. These discourses were negotiated: in the wider community; with medical professionals; with family and friends; in 4D; and in wider LGBTQ communities including online communities. I am particularly interested in how new identities, and new discourses of sex/gender can become viable or established. 4D as a community and the young people as individuals used several understandings of sex and gender and through their engagement had effects on wider understandings of sex and gender. In chapter 6 I look at the performative effect of the pronoun declarations in the introductory circle at the start of each youth group session (Austin, 1976; Butler, 1990/1999). In chapters 7 to 10 I look at production and legitimation of identities within the community of practice of 4D. This chapter looks at participants’ engagements with multiple gender and trans discourses to produce, understand, and establish their identities. The effects of the practice within the community, and the effects of the young people’s individual practices that I discuss here were multiple, inconsistent, and unstable.
In the next section I explain each of the discourses: medical discourse, transsexual narrative, queer theory, and trans politics as they were generally used. In the subsequent four sections I look at each discourse in turn. First I look at how the discourse was interpreted or reinterpreted by the young people. I then look at how the young people used the discourse, or elements of the discourse to enable them to understand or establish their identities. Each discourse was used in several ways. As I show, the young people used one or
more elements of a discourse to understand and construct their identity for themselves, and to explain their identity to others including family and friends, other LGBT people, and medical professionals. This had many effects, which I also discuss. These included explaining and establishing their identities as legitimate to themselves; they might also establish, or hope to establish, their identities as legitimate to others. This should have enabled them to be treated as their preferred gender by family and friends, or at work or college. It should also have allowed them access to medical interventions to enable them to transition physically to their preferred gender. The young people benefitted in other ways too; they gained access and acceptance within LGBT groups and organisations, they could take pride in their identities, and pleasure in their bodies and relationships. They might also feel they were supporting other individuals, contributing to the trans community, or challenging gender norms. The medical discourse and the transsexual narrative are closely related, as they are co-constructed. These and the other discourses could be conflicting. However all the young people deployed elements from more than one of the four discourses. Some of the young people managed to synthesise, at least partially, elements from the different discourses that they used. Other young people deployed completely conflicting discourses without any apparent concern.