Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore an alternative strategy to decrease disadvantaging gender binarism and cis-normativity in an organisational context by including trans* and gender diverse (TGD) employee voices through the development of a safe and brave space (S&BS).

This conceptual paper discusses the potential construction of S&BS and the possible integration as well as requirements of it into an organisational environment. The elaborated theoretical underpinning of a queering approach is used to build the foundation and the design of a potential successful implementation.

Current diversity management strategies are repeatedly reported as inadequate to tackle the issue of gender binarism and cis-normativity or even to reinforce them via various strategies. The integration of S&BS could offer cis as well as TGD people an opportunity to participate in the development of organisational structures and managerial decision-making within a democratic and empowering environment. Managing gender with the support of TGD employees may increase inclusion, equity and diversity of gender in management and organisation.

Although much of the management and organisational literature accepts the concept of gender binarism and cis-normativity, the integration of TGD employee voices through the adaptation of S&BS from an educational context into organisational management has not been explored.

This study aims to examine how gender variation in trans identities shape exposure to bias and discrimination. The authors then examine how trans identities intersect with race/ethnicity, education and social class to shape exposure risk to bias, discrimination and harassment in the workplace.

The authors use data from the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey with 24,391 trans-identified respondents. To account for the nested nature of trans people in state contexts, the authors use two-level logistic multilevel models. The authors are guided by Puwar’s bodies out of place as the theoretical grounding for this study.

The authors find significant differences in how trans women and men experience discrimination. The authors also find differences in race, education and social class. Finally, the presence of anti-discrimination policies presents mixed results.

The authors’ analysis reveals important differences in trans workers’ exposure to discrimination based on gender identity, social class, race/ethnicity and policy context, and draws upon a rich and large data set.

This qualitative study explores how discursive power shapes South Carolina lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and asexual (LGBTQIA+) communities' health information practices and how participants resist this power.

In total, 28 LGBTQIA+ community leaders from South Carolina engaged in semi-structured interviews and information world mapping–a participatory arts-based elicitation technique–to capture the context underlying how they and their communities create, seek, use and share health information. We focus on the information world maps for this paper, employing situational analysis–a discourse analytic method for visual data–to analyze them.

Six themes emerged describing how discursive power operates both within and outside of LGBTQIA+ communities: (1) producing absence, (2) providing unwanted information, (3) commoditizing LGBTQIA+ communities, (4) condensing LGBTQIA+ people into monoliths; (5) establishing the community's normative role in information practices; (6) applying assimilationist and metronormative discourses to information sources. This power negates people's information practices with less dominant LGBTQIA+ identities and marginalized intersectional identities across locations such as race and class. Participants resisted discursive power within their maps via the following tactics: (1) (re)appropriating discourses and (2) imagining new information worlds.

This study captures the perspectives of an understudied population–LGBTQIA+ persons from the American South–about a critical topic–their health–and frames these perspectives and topics within an informational context. Our use of information world mapping and situational analysis offers a unique and still underutilized set of qualitative methods within information science research.

This paper aims to challenge the cisnormative and binary assumptions that underpin the management and gender scholarship. Introducing and contextualising the contributions that comprise this special issue, this paper critically reflects on some of the principal developments in management research on trans* and intersex people in the workplace and anticipates what future scholarship in this area might entail.

A critical approach is adopted to interrogate the prevailing cisnormative and binary approach adopted by management and gender scholars.

The key finding is the persistence of cisnormativity and normative gender and sex binarism in academic knowledge production and in society more widely, which appear to have hindered how management and gender scholars have routinely failed to conceptualise and foreground the array of diverse genders and sexes.

This paper foregrounds the workplace experiences of trans* and intersex people, which have been neglected by management researchers. By positioning intersexuality as an important topic of management research, this paper breaks the silence that has enwrapped intersex issues in gender and management scholarship. There are still unanswered questions and issues that demand future research from academics who are interested in addressing cisnormativity in the workplace and problematising the sex and gender binaries that sustain it.

This chapter grapples with the relationship between dis/ability and narrative inquiry through the authors’ personal stories that push back at the cultural-historical, policy, and professional master narratives of dis/ability in order to contribute to efforts that theorize critical emotion praxis. We ask: what is the relationship between dis/ability and narrative inquiry? What are the lived experiences of those living within a variety of intersectional and emotional dis/ability narratives that resist and navigate the cultural-historical, policy, and professional master narratives of dis/ability at the intersections?

We use a Disability Studies in Education (DSE) paradigm to construct a collective autoethnography that challenges socially circulating cultural narratives of disability.

Our individual and collaborative narratives illuminate: (1) how master narratives impact self, (2) the ways that dis/abled women of color elevate human dignity and spiritual practices in ways that subvert and speak-back to master narratives, (3) the emotional impact of Learning Disability labeling, (4) forms of epistemic and personal experiences at various institutions of higher education, and (5) the liberatory practices manifest from co-created narratives with DSE students concerning disability identity within higher education.

This collaboration contributes to efforts that theorize critical emotion praxis with diverse positionalities of DSE scholars, teacher educators, and professionals within educational contexts. The chapter also suggests ways in which construction of collaborative narratives of resistance can point to paths for positive organizational change.

Using queer/crip theory as a frame, I examine the narratives of 17 mothers raising children with disabilities.

Results show that the mothers’ narratives of an imagined future for their children often involve the idea of success in terms of production and reproduction. However, some mothers do question this idea of normalcy, challenge deeply seated ideas about neoliberal inclusion, and reframe disability as a different way of existing as opposed to a deficient way of being.

The focus of this paper is on how mothers imagine different kinds of social arrangements. Some mothers, instead of embracing success as narrowly defined under neoliberalism, challenge the idea and instead offer queer narratives of parenting. This study illustrates how counternarratives can be constructed to resist prevailing narratives of disability as deficiency.

What relation does the monster figure have to gender? It is widely accepted that monsters in television, cinema and literature commonly stand in for the Other, be that a social, political or racialised Other. To consider monsters and monstrosity through the lens of gender is to investigate the links between the monster figure and the Others that exist under the system of patriarchy – most notably women, gender-diverse people and queer folks. In this collective chapter, Francesca Lopez, Russ Martin and Chloe Olivo explore how the monster figure relates to gender via a conversation that traces the links between three individually written chapters – X-Men: The Normative System Disguised as Mutant, Dragula and the Expansive Queerness of the Drag Supermonster and Femicide on the Frontier: Analysing Motives Behind the Femicide Crisis in Ciudad Juàrez. Each of these chapters investigates social norms relating to gender and those who challenge or defy them. Ultimately, the authors argue, it is those whose gendered and sexual identities are not associated with social power that are made monstrous by the patriarchy. This conversation-based chapter considers both real-life situations in which real people are made monstrous and monsters from fiction films and reality television. Ultimately, the authors suggest that the monster figure can be powerful and transformative for those who exist on the margins of the patriarchy – though, as this chapter documents, such is not always the case.

Drawing on hegemonic masculinity theory, this study provides evidence supporting how gender, race and sexual identity, may shape the rates of sexual misconduct reporting, by keeping those targets who traditionally enjoy positions of power (i.e. white, cisgender men) silent.

Across 3,230 gender harassment, 890 sexual advance harassment and 570 sexual assault incidents that occurred within a traditionally masculine organization, the authors conducted tests of independence and hierarchical regression analyses to examine whether targets' social identity characteristics (i.e. sex, race, sexuality and gender alignment), predicted the reporting of sexual misconduct.

Although reporting rates varied based on the type of incident, white men were less likely than their colleagues to report workplace sexual misconduct. In general, men were approximately half as likely as women to report. Lower rates of reporting were similarly seen among all white (vs BIPOC) targets and all cisgender and heterosexual (vs LGBT) targets, when controlling for other identity characteristics.

Research on sexual misconduct has largely privileged the experiences of (white, heterosexual) women, despite knowledge that men, too, can experience this mistreatment. This research broadens this lens and challenges the notion that sexual misconduct reporting rates are uniform across employee groups. By articulating how the pressures of hegemonic masculinity serve to silence certain targets – including and especially white, cisgender men – the authors provide means of better understanding and addressing workplace sexual misconduct underreporting.

Research on the diffusion and adaptation of LGBT diversity management practices has, until now, rarely considered the role of unions in this process; where it has done, the consideration has largely been cursory or tangential. In order to contribute towards overcoming this research gap, the purpose of this paper is to focus more closely on this issue, within the Italian context.

Theoretically based on the notion of institutional entrepreneurship, the paper analyses the ways in which trade unions contribute to the diffusion of LG-inclusive policies. Empirically this study is based on qualitative interviews with representatives from the unions, LGBT activists and individuals from those companies that have received support from the unions in terms of shaping their initiatives.

Italian unions act as institutional entrepreneurs in the sexual orientation field by framing the issue of the inclusion of LGBT workers as an issue of including minority groups under the broad umbrella of equality in workplaces, and by cooperating with LGBT associations. The latter provides the unions with two different things. First, with more legitimacy, from the viewpoint of LGBT employees; second, with the specific competencies in dealing with these issues. The accomplishments of the unions consist of arranging single agreements concerning the establishment of “punishment systems” for discriminatory behaviours, rather than promoting inclusion-oriented behaviours within the organization.

This paper highlights the role of unions, and in doing so, focusses on a hitherto marginalized actor in the process of adapting LGBT diversity initiatives. In focussing on the Italian context, it adds an important perspective to a discourse that has previously consisted of predominantly Anglo-American views.

This paper aims to test penis panic theory, which predicts that trans women will face more discrimination than trans men in some but not all situations.

Respondents were 262 American college students who were all enrolled in the same undergraduate course. They were presented with a case about coworker resistance to transgender employees' use of the workplace restrooms of their choice. Four versions of a case were randomly distributed as follows: trans woman, restroom with one toilet; trans woman, restroom with three toilets; trans man, restroom with one toilet and trans man, restroom with three toilets.

The authors observed greater discrimination against trans women compared to trans men when there was one toilet but not when there were three toilets. This supports penis panic theory.

The chief limitation was the use of American college students as respondents. The results may not generalize to practicing managers especially in other countries. Future researchers should develop a scale to measure situational discrimination against trans women. This study should be replicated in other contexts to deepen the understanding of discrimination against trans men and trans women with disabilities, as well as discrimination against nonbinary individuals who identify as neither trans men nor trans women.

Employers need to search for situations in which trans women face greater discrimination than trans men, because they can be resolved in ways that protect the rights of transgender employees no matter how transphobic their coworkers may be. Also, employers need a nuanced approach to combat discrimination that recognizes the unique perspectives of trans men, trans women and other members of the transgender community.

This is the first quantitative study of penis panic theory, and it illuminates the understanding of discrimination against transgender individuals.