The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 41, No. 2 & Volume 42, No. 1 - 163

"It Will Change if People Keep Talking."

Gaining access to gender-inclusive
ﬂoors, wings, or even buildings
often requires trans* students
to "out" themselves and/or go
through an interview process,
oftentimes with people they do
not know or with whom they
do not feel comfortable. Such
processes subject trans* students to
evaluation relative to criteria that
are seldom articulated and which
most residence life professionals are
poorly equipped to conduct.

data management software that uses birth
names and legal sex markers). Subset analyses
of national studies examining LGBT student
experiences on college campuses revealed that
trans* students are signiﬁcantly more likely to
experience their campuses as hostile environments and to feel fear for their personal safety
(Dugan, Kusel, & Simounet, 2012; Rankin,
Weber, Blumenfeld, & Frazer, 2010).
Many of the barriers faced by trans* students are genderist (Hill, 2003) in nature,
such as the ubiquity of male/female separation
in classroom activities, athletics, and residence
hall assignments (Bilodeau, 2005). These obstacles can be effectively addressed through
closer attention to the developmental pathways
and needs of trans* students (Bilodeau, 2005).

Despite such pervasive genderism, many
trans* students continue to persevere, motivating several scholars to call for increased
research on trans* student resilience (e.g.,
Marine, 2011; Marine & Catalano, 2014; Nicolazzo, 2015).
Though limited in size and scope, there are
several studies that provide important clues to
the experiences of trans* students; however,
most of the literature addressing this population is non-empirical. Moreover, the current
research has focused primarily on directives
about how campus services and programs can
become more trans*-inclusive. This includes
advocacy for campus-wide educational programming about trans* individuals' identities
and histories (Beemyn, 2003, 2005; Beemyn,
Domingue, Pettitt, & Smith, 2005; Bilodeau,
2005, 2009; Nakamura, 1998), training of
faculty and staff to empower trans* students
(Beemyn, 2005; Beemyn, Domingue, et al.,
2005; Bilodeau, 2005; Henning-Stout, James,
& Macintosh, 2000; Wyss, 2004), and creation
of trans*-focused student support programs
(Beemyn, 2005; Beemyn, Curtis, Davis, &
Tubbs, 2005; Beemyn, Domingue, et al., 2005;
Bilodeau, 2005, 2009; Henning-Stout et al.,
2000; Rankin, 2003; Renn, 2007). It is with
the last of these recommendations in mind that
the following critical questions emerge related
to supporting trans* students in residence.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH
In order to analyze the case study used for
this article and elucidate its various implications for practice, we used a Critical Discourse
Analysis (CDA) methodology (van Dijk, 2003).
CDA is one tool to uncover and interrogate
how power and privilege operate in subtle and
tacit ways to shape our organizations (includ163

The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 41, No. 2 & Volume 42, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 41, No. 2 & Volume 42, No. 1