Open Gates, Broken Promises: Inclusion Policies and Transgender Student Experiences at Gender-Selective Women's Colleges

Nanney, Megan Paige

Open Gates, Broken Promises: Inclusion Policies and Transgender Student Experiences at Gender-Selective Women's Colleges

dc.contributor.author	Nanney, Megan Paige	en
dc.contributor.committeechair	Labuski, Christine	en
dc.contributor.committeechair	Ovink, Sarah	en
dc.contributor.committeemember	Robbins, Claire K.	en
dc.contributor.committeemember	Brunsma, David L.	en
dc.contributor.committeemember	Nicolazzo, Z.	en
dc.contributor.department	Sociology	en
dc.date.accessioned	2021-11-27T07:00:06Z	en
dc.date.available	2021-11-27T07:00:06Z	en
dc.date.issued	2020-06-04	en
dc.description.abstract	Since 2013, over half of all gender-selective women's colleges in the United States have adopted admission policies that outline varying biological, social, and legal criteria for who may apply to their institution. In effect, these policies opened the gates to admission, driven by the goal to be more inclusive to transgender applicants, especially trans* women. This dissertation examines if and how these policies enact missions of social justice, diversity, and inclusion through the informal practices, production, and regulation of gender on campus. How do gender-selective women's colleges go from trans* admitting to trans* serving? Through a nine-month ethnography of trans* admission policies at two gender-selective women's colleges, including 126 interviews with students, alumni, faculty, staff, and administrators; archival document analysis regarding trans* and queer history on campus; and participant observation of events and spaces on campus with trans* students, my objective is to describe the world that takes shape when gender and feminism become institutionalized, routine, and used as descriptions to both include and exclude. I contend that the impact of these admission policies is not limited to the application process, but rather the experiences of matriculated students are shaped by the gendered norms and discourses structured within the policies themselves. Findings suggest that despite the fact that these policies, formally, allow for transgender students to apply and enroll to gender-selective women's colleges, institutionalized commitments to inclusion obscure and even intensify existing gender inequality, particularly for students who do not fit within normative ideals of the "right way to be trans" including those who are low-income, non-white, and trans men. Because the feminist missions of these colleges continue to reaffirm an ideal of cisgender womanhood on campus, the extent to which these inclusion policies were able to make fundamental structural changes in how gendered power, resources, and opportunities are distributed was limited at best. As such, this dissertation is a call to think about gender as an institutional product; not simply in terms of the politics that are attached to the experiences, bodies, and identities, but in the very constitution of gender as a social category. As an ethnography of how these categories become comprehensible, admissible, and livable, this dissertation complicates our understanding of how policies work, how gender is reinforced in the women's college setting, and how to transform institutional practices through a trans* justice framework.	en
dc.description.abstractgeneral	Since my graduation from Smith College in 2013, over half of all gender-selective women's colleges in the United States have publicly adopted admission policies outlining up to fourteen different combinations of biomedical, social, and legal criteria for who may apply to their institutions. In effect, these policies define fourteen different ways to be a "woman" that honor both the experiences and identities of students as well as the histories, traditions, and missions of gender-selective women's colleges. While I am proud of my alma mater for adopting such a policy, I have been struck by the ensuing tensions and debates that occurred among students and my fellow alumni about who belonged within our community. My time at Smith equipped me with new concepts, identities, and possibilities of what community means by being with people of other sexes, genders, races, sexualities, abilities, socio-economic statuses, and mindsets. Gender in this feminist space, in other words, was about so much more than a singular common experience of biology. Hence, the trans* policy raised more questions than answers for me: How do my trans* peers experience the woman-centered atmosphere of gender-selective women's colleges? In what ways do these policies and other institutional practices support these students? Through this dissertation, I sought to understand the experiences of trans* students enrolled in two gender-selective women's colleges by mapping the implementation and impact of trans* inclusion on campus. I wanted to know how these policies—and gender-selective women's colleges more broadly—shape institutionalized feminist missions of social justice. Over the span of nine-months, I spent time at two gender-selective women's colleges, one with a policy that admits trans* women, men, and non-binary students and another that limits trans* admission to trans* women, and conducted 126 interviews with students, alumni, faculty, staff, and administrators; archival document analysis regarding trans* and queer history on campus; and participant observation of events and spaces on campus with trans* students. I found that despite the fact that these policies, formally, allow for transgender students to apply and enroll to gender-selective colleges, the institutional commitments to inclusion obscured and even intensified existing gender inequality particularly for students who do not fit within normative ideals of the "right way to be trans" including those who are low-income, non-white, and trans men. Because the feminist missions of these colleges continue to reaffirm an ideal of cisgender womanhood on campus, the extent to which these inclusion policies were able to make fundamental changes to support transgender students was limited at best, and violent at worst. This does not suggest that there was no hope. Rather, students found ways to navigate these formal policies, resources, and spaces to create safer environments for their community, surviving and thriving in environments that were antithetic-to-hostile to their inclusion. As a result, I conclude that the implementation of a singular policy is not an adequate solution to full inclusion. Rather, we must consider how policy and practice may limit inclusion through intersections of race, class, sexuality, ability, and other axes of identity. As such, this dissertation is a call to think about how gender-selective women's colleges can go from trans* admitting to trans* serving.	en
dc.description.degree	Doctor of Philosophy	en
dc.format.medium	ETD	en
dc.identifier.other	vt_gsexam:25819	en
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10919/106746	en
dc.publisher	Virginia Tech	en
dc.rights	In Copyright	en
dc.rights.uri	http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/	en
dc.subject	transgender students	en
dc.subject	women's college	en
dc.subject	single-sex education	en
dc.subject	diversity and inclusion	en
dc.subject	transfeminism	en
dc.title	Open Gates, Broken Promises: Inclusion Policies and Transgender Student Experiences at Gender-Selective Women's Colleges	en
dc.type	Dissertation	en
thesis.degree.discipline	Sociology	en
thesis.degree.grantor	Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University	en
thesis.degree.level	doctoral	en
thesis.degree.name	Doctor of Philosophy	en