In the exploration of the relationship between social inequalities and public transport, the gendered perspective is often limited to examining the dichotomy of male and female travel experiences. As such, mobility research often overlooks the spectrum nature of gender, and the according gendered travel experiences that do not fit into the binary gender categorisations.
This text is based on the article published in the Journal of Transport Geography: Mobility of non-binary and gender nonconforming individuals: A systematic literature review (2024) by Oxana Ivanova and Steve O’Hern; and on the conference presentation Mobility of Non-Binary and Gender Nonconforming Individuals: Methodological Approaches and Best Practice Recommendations presented at CARIN-PT: Towards Inclusive Public Transport in Urban Regions Conference in Brussels.
How does the experience of non-binary people differ and why does it matter?
To create an equitable and just transportation system it is necessary to understand and evaluate the complex gendered experiences of mobility and public transit. Gender is one of the major intersecting marginalised identities that creates unique barriers to accessibility for transit riders (Loukaitou-Sideris, 2016). Cresswell and Priya Uteng (2008, p. 7) argue that if a person’s “gender is not male, they are mobility-poor”, highlighting the significant gender bias that exists in the transportation system. Moreover, non-binary transit riders often experience intersectional forms of discrimination based on their presented gender expression, sexualtiy, race or class. There is a greater threshold for overcoming transport poverty and immobility barriers for gender minorities due to historical marginalisation and socio-economic discrimination of vulnerable groups (Luibheid, 2008). The aforementioned barriers have resulted in gender minorities depending more on public transportation (He et al., 2022). Transitioning towards a more sustainable transportation system requires a significant proportion of the population to shift their preferred transport mode. Whereas high levels of harassment and violence on public transport tend to push people towards the use of private vehicles, obstructing green transition (García et al., 2022).
What are common behaviours that non-binary transit riders use in order to ensure their personal security? Everyday violence and discrimination on public transport were often associated with participants’ visible appearance as non-binary (Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022; Weintrob et al., 2021). The “diversion” from the social norm of gender presentation led to higher levels of perceived harassment (Lubitow et al., 2017; Weintrob et al., 2021). Therefore, to decrease the number of negative encounters, non-binary transit riders indicated that they often had to conceal their gender identity or fit into binary normative gender presentation.
Constant awareness and hypervigilance of the surroundings to prevent acts of violence were mentioned as a way of protecting oneself; however, continuous stress from these routines causes negative health outcomes for gender minorities (Lubitow et al., 2017; Scandurra et al., 2019; Weintrob et al., 2021). Nonbinary and gender-diverse persons often changed their commuting schedule or altered their trips according to the times or routes they found safer and less problematic (Abelson et al., 2023; Lubitow et al., 2017; Weintrob et al., 2021).
How can public transport infrastructure be improved to increase safety and accommodate the needs of the targeted groups?
A proposed way to reduce harassment at bus stations was ensuring “the visibility of the security officers, reliability of schedules and shorter waiting time” (Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022, p. 10). However, it must be noted that an increase in law enforcement would only work in countries with higher trust societies and rare instances of police brutality.
The use of diverse and proactive advertisements and messaging that includes gender minorities is another way to enhance the perception of safety for gender-diverse riders (Lubitow et al., 2017; Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022).
Hiring a diverse transit workforce that comes from different underprivileged backgrounds can facilitate the creation of a “welcoming environment (…) and compassionate policy” that encourages safe and comfortable use of public transport for vulnerable riders (Abelson et al., 2023, p. 25). Transit workforce should be able to “de-escalate problematic situations” and ensure the safety of the journeys (Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022, p. 14). Due to higher dependency on public transportation, cuts in the transit budget disproportionately affect non-binary and gender non conforming people, as well as other marginalised groups. There is an evident lack of verbiage and explicit language to address marginalised populations in transport policy (Elliott et al., 2022). It is especially problematic, as it negatively affects the possibility to acquire targeted funding and resources that would benefit non-binary and gender non conforming riders.
How can the research practices be improved to include non-binary experience better?
Being invisible in research is often intertwined with “becoming invisible in culture more broadly” (Jaroszewski et al., 2018, p. 2); to understand the world with non-binary people in it, research must refrain from using gender binary methods. A common practice across different fields is “othering” nonbinary participants, putting them in the same “other” gender box; yet, not only it assumes the similarity in behaviours of a diverse community, but it also separates them from the general demographic (Cameron and Stinson, 2019; Jaroszewski et al., 2018). Cameron & Stinson (2019, p. 6) argue that giving “other” as an only option outside of male/female dichotomy in research surveys implies that “genders beyond the binary are abnormal”. Therefore, researchers must consider how the differences in gendered travel behaviours can be acknowledged without becoming a dividing and alienating factor.
Qualitative analysis of lived experiences of the targeted underrepresented groups can be helpful in bringing in the overlooked perspective. Some of the proposed methods for inclusive survey design are offering gender options beyond male/female dichotomy or allowing the choice of multiple genders rather than just one (Jaroszewski et al., 2018). Cameron and Stinson (2019) argue that the most inclusive way to collect gender data is by asking an open-ended question, and then if necessary, coding into categorical data for further statistical analysis in SPSS or R within existing guidelines. Additionally, a crucial step for creating reproducible research and fostering inclusive research practices is reporting in detail the way demographics data is collected and measured (Cameron and Stinson, 2019).
Building rapport between researchers and participants is particularly helpful for gathering accurate and sensitive understanding of gendered experiences (Lubitow et al., 2017, 2020; Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022; Weintrob et al., 2021). One of the commonly proposed methods of collecting demographic details was asking participants to talk freely about their gender and not impose gender categories on them (Lubitow et al., 2017; Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022; Weintrob et al., 2021). Asking respondents to describe their gender identity in their own terms resulted in a much more diverse and fluid gender presentation of identity (Lubitow et al., 2017). Another proposal to building rapport included not having a rigid structure to the interview so that respondents feel more comfortable with the interviewer (Lubitow et al., 2020; Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022). Disclosing personal information about researchers themselves being part of the LGBTQ+ community was seen as beneficial for building rapport (Weintrob et al., 2021).
Mobility justice, intersectionality and advocacy planning are the three main lenses that help to holistically analyse the experiences of non-binary and gender nonconforming travellers.
Mobility justice helps to understand different political, cultural and ethical implications of varying accessibility levels related to uneven distribution of resources and opportunities (Shakibaei and Vorobjovas-Pinta, 2022).
Intersectionality is a theoretical framework that accounts for multifaceted systems of oppression faced by marginalised groups, it investigates the discrimination and privilege through the lens of intersection of social positions, such as race, class, gender and sexuality (Bauer et al., 2021). A large part of problematic experiences on public transportation system stem from discrimination based on the intersecting identities of oppression held by non-binary and gender nonconforming individuals. The approach of advocacy planning is highlighted by Klostermann (1985): “Planners are required to serve as advocates for society’s most needy members who are systematically excluded from the group bargaining process.” The shortcoming of traditional planning stems from the focus on land use and transportation planning over catering the system to the unique needs and lived experiences of people (He et al., 2022).
Contributed by Oxana Ivanova (Tampere University, Finland) and Steve O’Hern (University of Leeds, UK).
References:
Abelson, M., García, I., Khan, S., Lubitow, A., Puczkowskyj, N., Zapata, M., National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), Portland State University, & University of Utah. (2023). Marginalized Populations’ Access to Transit: Journeys from Home and Work to Transit (No. NITC-RR-1419). https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/68933
Bauer, G. R., Churchill, S. M., Mahendran, M., Walwyn, C., Lizotte, D., & Villa-Rueda, A. A. (2021). Intersectionality in quantitative research: A systematic review of its emergence and applications of theory and methods. SSM – Population Health, 14, 100798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2021.100798
Cameron, J. J., & Stinson, D. A. (2019). Gender (mis)measurement: Guidelines for respecting gender diversity in psychological research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(11), e12506. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12506
Cresswell, T., & Priya Uteng, T. (2008). Gendered Mobilities: Towards an Holistic Understanding. Gendered Mobilities.
García, I., Albelson, M., Puczkowskyj, N., Maheruma Khan, S., & Fagundo-Ojeda, K. (2022). Harassment of low-income women on transit: A photovoice project in Oregon and Utah. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 112, 103466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103466
He, Q., Rowangould, D., Karner, A., Palm, M., & LaRue, S. (2022). Covid-19 pandemic impacts on essential transit riders: Findings from a U.S. Survey. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 105, 103217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103217
Jaroszewski, S., Lottridge, D., Haimson, O. L., & Quehl, K. (2018). ‘Genderfluid’ or ‘Attack Helicopter’: Responsible HCI Research Practice with Non-binary Gender Variation in Online Communities. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173881
Klosterman, R. (1985). Arguments for and Against Planning. Town Planning Review, 56, 5–20. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.56.1.e8286q3082111km4
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. (2016). A gendered view of mobility and transport: Next steps and future directions. Town Planning Review, 87, 547–565. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2016.38
Lubitow, A., Abelson, M. J., & Carpenter, E. (2020). Transforming mobility justice: Gendered harassment and violence on transit. Journal of Transport Geography, 82, 102601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102601
Lubitow, A., Carathers, J., Kelly, M., & Abelson, M. (2017). Transmobilities: Mobility, harassment, and violence experienced by transgender and gender nonconforming public transit riders in Portland, Oregon. Gender, Place & Culture, 24(10), 1398–1418. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2017.1382451
Luibheid, E. (2008). Queer/Migration: An unruly body of scholarship. GLQ A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 14. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-2007-029
Scandurra, C., Mezza, F., Maldonato, N. M., Bottone, M., Bochicchio, V., Valerio, P., & Vitelli, R. (2019). Health of Non-binary and Genderqueer People: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01453
Shakibaei, S., & Vorobjovas-Pinta, O. (2022). Access to Urban Leisure: Investigating Mobility Justice for Transgender and Gender Diverse People on Public Transport. Leisure Sciences, 0(0), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2021.2023372
Weintrob, A., Hansell, L., Zebracki, M., Barnard, Y., & Lucas, K. (2021). Queer mobilities: Critical LGBTQ perspectives of public transport spaces. Mobilities, 16(5), 775–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2021.1958249
