Abstract: Civic Engagement for Transgender and Gender Diverse Justice: Mutual Aid in a Time of Political Crisis (Society for Social Work and Research 28th Annual Conference - Recentering & Democratizing Knowledge: The Next 30 Years of Social Work Science)

Schedule:

Sunday, January 14, 2024

Independence BR G, ML 4 (Marriott Marquis Washington DC)

* noted as presenting author

Leonardo Kattari, MSW, PhD Candidate, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI

Brittanie Atteberry-Ash, PhD, Assistant Professor, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX

Brendon Holloway, MSW, Doctoral Candidate, University of Denver, Denver, CO

Sterling Bentley, MSW Student, Michigan State University

Background and Purpose: The current political climate requires many transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals to explore non-political methods of community support such as mutual aid. Mutual aid is the delivery of direct service or funds to individuals or communities that often circumvents formal structures that exist within the non-profit industrial complex. This study examines the relationship between participation in TGD mutual aid practices and sociodemographics, TGD advocacy motivators (community connectedness, political salience, political efficacy, social movement organization involvement), TGD activism and policy action.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in November 2022 with a sample of cisgender and TGD adults (n=954) from the United States. Participants were recruited through social media (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) and emails to national and local LGBTQ+ organizations. Most of the sample is cisgender (62%), under a quarter are nonbinary (23%), and 16% are transgender. Among cisgender participants, 59.12% know someone who is TGD. In terms of sexual orientation 29% identify with multiple sexual orientations. Most participants are White (82%) and 42% have an income higher than $100,000. 46% of participants identify as disabled. About half of participants live in a city (49%) and most participants have a graduate degree (59%), are agnostic/atheist/believe in nothing in particular (59%), have low religiosity (M = 1.94, SD = 1.15) and have progressive political views (95%).

Results: Three multiple logistic regressions were conducted to explore associations with TGD mutual aid. The first model exploring sociodemographics found that nonbinary individuals (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR]= 2.79, 95% CI [1.74, 4.45]) and transgender individuals (AOR = 2.03, 95% CI [1.28, 3.24] had higher odds of participating in mutual aid practices compared to cisgender individuals. Those with one or more disabilities (AOR = 1.5, 95% CI [1.09, 2.03]) had higher odds compared to those without a disability to participate in mutual aid. Those who are queer (AOR = 4.02, 95% CI [2.24, 7.22]), bisexual or pansexual (AOR = 2.17, 95% CI [1.39, 3.41]), gay or lesbian (OR = 1.79, 95% CI [1.03-3.10]), or have multiple sexual orientations (AOR =2.52, 95% CI [1.66, 3.83]) had higher odds of participating in mutual aid compared to straight individuals.

The second model including TGD advocacy motivators found that individuals with more social movement organization involvement (AOR = 1.20, 95% CI [1.13, 1.28]) and those with higher community connectedness (AOR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.05, 1.19]) had higher odds of participating in mutual aid, while those with higher external political efficacy (AOR = 0.84, 95% CI [0.72, 0.99]) lower odds of participating in mutual aid compared to those with lower external political efficacy.

The third model including TGD activism and policy action, found that those with higher frequency of activism (AOR = 1.30, 95% CI [ 1.20, 1.40]) had higher odds of participating in mutual aid compared to those with less frequency of activism.

Conclusion: The findings from this study suggest that as the formal political system diminishes the rights of TGD individuals, social workers must understand, pursue, and promote alternative methods of civic engagement.