Dreaming About Access: The Experiences of Transgender Individuals in Public Recreation

Abstract

There has been little research about transgender individuals and their needs, especially within leisure settings (Grossman, O 'Connell, & D'Augelli, 2005;Lewis & Johnson, 2011). Nevertheless, public recreation agencies are responsible for ensuring that all of the citizens they serve have equitable access to leisure facilities and programming. Additional research is needed to understand the barriers, needs, and wants of the transgender community. The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of transgender adults and their perceptions of public recreation. This study, rooted in transgender theory (Nagoshi & Brzuzy, 2010) and using qualitative research methods (Charmaz, 2006), consisted of semi-structured interviews with adults who self-identified as transgender.Three major themes emerged from the data: managing risk, negotiating privilege, and embodying gender. Participants stated that they felt parks to be safe places, but also described their struggles to keep themselves safe within public recreation spaces. Participants also discussed their changing access to privilege and the effects of cisnormativity, the presumption that everyone's gender matches their assigned gender at birth and is immutable. The cisnormative assumptions participants faced affected their daily interactions with others, including encounters they had within public recreation. Finally, participants related ways in which they embodied gender and were able to express themselves more fully through leisure.Practitioners who wish to translate data from this study into policy should focus on two areas: removing barriers to access, and affirmatively encouraging participation. The barriers discussed most often by participants related to public/ private spaces such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers. Practitioners should ensure that all locker rooms, bathrooms, and showers allow for privacy. As is frequently the case with universal design, this will benefit many users who are not transgender. While the best practice would be to provide gender neutral spaces, at a minimum there should be at least one stall with a door in each bathroom and curtains or other barriers in all showers. Policies and procedures should affirmatively include participants across the gender spectrum and should be aimed at increasing participation.

“I’m Not an Expert, But…”: Perspectives on Aquatic Management for LGBTQ Participants

“…While having these physical spaces in campus recreation facilities is important, the ability for managers to utilize these spaces effectively is also imperative. The presence of gender-inclusive spaces should be clearly communicated to participants and staff, and the regulations regarding their use should be well understood as these spaces do not solely benefit LGBTQ participants (Oakleaf & Richmond, 2017). The presence of gender-inclusive spaces should not inhibit the integration of LGBTQ participants into other normative, gendered spaces.…”

Physiatry and the needs of LGBTQIA+ patients

“…From our perspective, this ignores the impact exclusion from sports and recreation has on transgender people 68‐70 . The much larger “problem” of transgender individuals and sport is the exclusion of transgender people, whether explicitly through legislative bans or through discrimination, bias, and harassment directed toward transgender people.…”

“…From our perspective, this ignores the impact exclusion from sports and recreation has on transgender people. [68][69][70] The much larger "problem" of transgender individuals and sport is the exclusion of transgender people, whether explicitly through legislative bans or through discrimination, bias, and harassment directed toward transgender people. Further, much of the debate remains focused on transgender women participating in women's sports with a notable absence of discussion of transgender men in sports.…”

Transgender and Non-binary Swimming in the UK: Indoor Public Pool Spaces and Un/Safety

“…For example, Jones et al ( 2017a ) found evidence of structural barriers to participation and a lack of inclusion through their critical scrutiny of sport policies ( n = 31), and their review of existing academic research findings ( n = 8). Pérez-Samaniego et al ( 2019 ) provide valuable focus on existing qualitative studies ( n = 12), highlighting shared findings of exclusionary processes such as abjection (Travers and Deri, 2011 ; Lucas-Carr and Krane, 2012 ), use of language (Semerjian and Cohen, 2006 ; Sykes, 2009 ), design of space and facilities (Lewis and Johnson, 2011 ; Van Ingen, 2011 ; Oakleaf and Richmond, 2017 ).…”