Centering transgender consumers in conceptualizations of marketplace marginalization and digital spaces

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to center transgender consumers in the conceptualizations between marketplace marginalization and digital spaces. We examine transgender crowdfunding as a hashtag‐bounded digital space created by and for the transgender community–namely, the #TransCrowdFund digital space on Twitter. We draw on trans digital geographies as a novel analytical lens to focus attention on transgender consumers' unique experiences in and between digital spaces. Through qualitative hashtag mapping, we analyzed a sample of 200 Twitter profiles and accompanying tweets drawn from individuals using the #TransCrowdFund hashtag. Findings suggest transgender consumers utilize crowdfunding as a hashtag‐bounded digital space in three ways: accessing networks, narrativizing needs, and signaling identity. Within each of these functional uses, underlying tensions arise in navigating transphobic marketplace marginalization, unique to transgender consumer well‐being. Our research demonstrates the power of centering transgender consumers–both conceptually and contextually–in consumer research and offers implications for scholars and policy makers.

Troubling genderS and consumer well‐being: Going across, between and beyond the binaries to gender/sex/ual and intersectional diversity

“…However, we also strongly encourage for more scholarship to go beyond the binaries and omit the binaries altogether. Such an approach aligns with what Hansman and Drenten (2024) elude to in their article: Rather than trying to place consumers into buckets of masculine or feminine, or men and women, it necessitates research that can capture how people live their gender/sex/ual diversity, for instance, in being "expressly trans." It encourages scholars to ask: What would the world look like if instead of treating gender/sex/uality as two poles that people either stood at or fluctuated between, people could just be where they were at, who they are, and the definition of gender/sex/uality expanded to include them?…”

“…First, this special issue explores the multiple ways genderS are lived in physical trans and nonbinary bodies and/or expressed due to intersectional dynamics and sexual orientations. Trans, in these articles, encompasses the idea of transitioning (temporarily or permanently) across or between genders, de-gendering or transcending the binaries (Ekins & King, 1999; see Davis & Paramanathan, 2024 in this special issue), as well as just being "expressly trans" (Hansman & Drenten, 2024). For example, expressly trans research is taken up by Duncan-Shepherd and Hamilton (2022) 1 who illuminate the multiple ways symbolic violence is encountered by and affects agender, genderqueer, non-binary and/or transgender consumers, uncovering the presence of symbolic violence in sociocultural systems/practices (media), interpersonal dynamics (family, marketplace/space interactions), and individual actions [self-policing and shapeshifting (presenting as more masculine or feminine or undetectable depending on perceived threats)].…”

“…Additional methodological and theoretical perspectives are also offered in articles that expand ideas on how we might study intersectionality aspects quantitatively (see Preston et al, 2024), and gender/sex/uality dynamics qualitatively. The latter includes poststructuralist feminist queer perspectives (Lopes et al, 2024), a crisscrossing of narrative and ethnography (Davis & Paramanathan, 2024), and trans (digital) geography (Hansman & Drenten, 2024).…”

“…- Drenten, 2024;Rocha et al, 2024). 'Flattening' hierarchies of inquiry (Coffin et al, 2022) to recognize how gender/sex/uality intersect and inform each other, is a key step towards exploring across, between, and beyond the binaries, and overcoming divides (e.g., nature versus nurture) within academia.…”

“…Today, as reproductive rights and gender/sex/ual fluidity become increasingly acknowledged and accepted in some legal, medical, psychological, and media arenas, in large part due to the advocacy of affected groups (Berer & Hoggart, 2019;Stryker, 2006), backlash politics abound (Alter & Zürn, 2020;Elster, 2022;Pearce et al, 2020). The result has been repressive laws and bills (ACLU, 2023;Bhandari, 2023;ILGA-Europe, 2023), restrictions to accessing critical healthcare needs (e.g., reproductive care, gender affirming care) (Costa, 2023;Haines et al, 2023;HRC Foundation, 2023;Steinfield et al, 2023), bans and invasive requirements in athletics for trans people (Barry-Hinton, 2022), gender panics surrounding bathroom access (Schilt & Westbrook, 2015), misrepresentations (Abbott, 2022), policing of education that restricts how teachers talk about gender (Burga, 2023;Mason & Hamilton, 2023), and the proliferation of unsafe spaces (Fischer, 2019;ILGA-Europe, 2023; in this special issue see Duncan-Shepherd & Hamilton, 2022;Hansman & Drenten, 2024, and the panel discussion with Bettany, Burchiellaro, & Venkatraman). These conditions have detrimental impacts on well-being, which are magnified for those who already face other disadvantages (e.g., lower socioeconomic power, racial and/or disability biases, lack of citizenship status).…”