Drawing on social identity perspectives and theories concerning intergroup threat, we examined if heterosexual women’s support for two types of trans-inclusive bathroom legislation depended on whether they perceived trans women as a threat to women as a whole. Participants read about a hypothetical trans-inclusive bathroom bill that was either described as increasing public gender-neutral bathrooms or allowing trans women to access public women-only bathrooms. Surprisingly, bill support did not significantly differ across conditions. Consistent with predictions, intergroup threat was negatively associated with bill support and moderated the effect of bathroom bill type on bill support. Highly threatened women were significantly more supportive when the legislation was described as increasing gender-neutral bathrooms versus allowing trans women to use women-only bathrooms. Conversely, women who were not particularly threatened were significantly more supportive of the hypothetical legislation when it was described as allowing trans women to use women-only bathrooms.

Although spaces once reserved for cisgender women are becoming increasingly accessible to trans women, few studies have examined cisgender women’s responses to such changes. Informed by social identity perspectives, we examined if heterosexual cisgender women’s reactions to two types of women’s college admissions policies pertaining to trans women depended on their appraisals of intergroup threat—or the degree to which they perceived trans women as a threat to cisgender women. Four-hundred-and-forty heterosexual cisgender women completed a measure of intergroup threat and then read 1 of 2 articles about a women’s college’s admissions policy (accept trans women vs. reject trans women). Following the article, they indicated their support for the policy they read about. Overall, participants were significantly more supportive of the admissions policy when it was framed as being inclusive of trans women. The effect of policy type on policy support was moderated by intergroup threat. Specifically, women who were not particularly threatened by trans women expressed significantly more policy support when the policy was described as being inclusive of trans women, rather than as exclusionary. Alternatively, highly threatened women were significantly more likely to show support when the policy was described in terms of excluding trans women.