Some cisgender women oppose policies granting transgender women access to women-only bathrooms. We examined whether this opposition stems from perceiving that transgender women threaten the distinctiveness of the social category “women” (gender distinctiveness threat). Cisgender women (N = 520) read about a state bill enabling transgender women to use women’s bathrooms. Participants further read that enacting the bill would mean their state officially believes that “transgender women are real women” or “transgender rights are human rights”; in the control condition, this information was omitted. Participants reported their support for the bill and level of gender distinctiveness threat. Cisgender women who read that the bill would imply their state believes transgender women are real women (vs. transgender rights are human rights) reported lower bill support, and this effect was mediated by distinctiveness threat. Perceived threat to the distinctiveness of womanhood may help explain cisgender women’s reluctance to include transgender women in women-only spaces.
BarnettB. S.NesbitA. E.SorrentinoR. M. (2018). The transgender bathroom debate at the intersection of politics, law, ethics, and science. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 46, 232–241. https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.003761-18
2.
BillardT. J. (2018). Attitudes toward transgender men and women: Development and validation of a new measure. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 387. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00387
3.
BovensL.MarcociA. (2020). The gender-neutral bathroom: A new frame and some nudges. Behavioural Public Policy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.23
BranscombeN. R.EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 35–58). Blackwell.
BrewerM. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167291175001
8.
BroussardK. A.WarnerR. H. (2019). Gender nonconformity is perceived differently for cisgender and transgender targets. Sex Roles, 80, 409–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0947-z
9.
BuckD. M.ObzudT. (2018). Context-dependent transprejudice: Attitudes toward transgender individuals in gender-integrated and gender-segregated settings. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 5, 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000251
10.
BurkeS. E.DovidioJ. F.LaFranceM.PrzedworskiJ. M.PerryS. P.PhelanS. M.BurgessD. J.HardemanR. R.YeazelM. W.van RynM. (2017). Beyond generalized sexual prejudice: Need for closure predicts negative attitudes toward bisexual people relative to gay/lesbian people. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 71, 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.02.003
11.
CameronJ. J.StinsonD. A. (2019). Gender (mis)measurement: Guidelines for respecting gender diversity in psychological research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13, Article e12506. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12506
12.
CharlesworthT. E.BanajiM. R. (2019). Patterns of implicit and explicit attitudes: I. Long-term change and stability from 2007 to 2016. Psychological Science, 30, 174–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618813087
13.
CooleyE.Brown-IannuzziJ. L.BrownC. S.PolikoffJ. (2018). Black groups accentuate hypodescent by activating threats to the racial hierarchy. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 411–418. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617708014
14.
CortlandC. I.CraigM. A.ShapiroJ. R.RichesonJ. A.NeelR.GoldsteinN. J. (2017). Solidarity through shared disadvantage: Highlighting shared experiences of discrimination improves relations between stigmatized groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 547–567. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000100
15.
CoxJ.StanzianiM.CoffeyC. A.BownesE.HollidayS. B.MeauxL. T. (2021). “Your rights end where mine begin”: A mixed-methods study of moral foundations theory and support for bathroom bills. Sexuality Research and Social Policy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-021-00559-w
16.
CragunR. T.SumerauJ. E. (2015). The last bastion of sexual and gender prejudice? Sexualities, race, gender, religiosity, and spirituality in the examination of prejudice toward sexual and gender minorities. The Journal of Sex Research, 52, 821–834. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2014.925534
17.
FloresA. R.Haider-MarkelD. P.LewisD. C.MillerP. R.TadlockB. L.TaylorJ. K. (2020). Public attitudes about transgender participation in sports: The roles of gender, gender identity conformity, and sports fandom. Sex Roles, 83, 382–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01114-z
18.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F.AnastasioP. A.BachmanB. A.RustM. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. In StroebeW.HewstoneM. (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 1–26). Wiley.
19.
GivenL. M. (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. SAGE Publications.
20.
HasenbushA.FloresA. R.HermanJ. L. (2019). Gender identity nondiscrimination laws in public accommodations: A review of evidence regarding safety and privacy in public restrooms, locker rooms, and changing rooms. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 16, 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z
21.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
22.
HerekG. M. (2002a). Gender gaps in public opinion about lesbians and gay men. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 40–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/338409
23.
HerekG. M. (2002b). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward bisexual men and women in the United States. The Journal of Sex Research, 39, 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552150
HoA. K.KteilyN. S.ChenJ. M. (2020). Introducing the Sociopolitical Motive × Intergroup Threat model to understand how monoracial perceivers’ sociopolitical motives influence their categorization of multiracial people. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24, 260–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320917051
26.
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.LevinD. T.BanajiM. R. (2011). Evidence for hypodescent and racial hierarchy in the categorization and perception of biracial individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 492–506. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021562
27.
HornseyM. J.HoggM. A. (2000). Assimilation and diversity: An integrative model of subgroup relations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_03
28.
HydeJ. S.BiglerR. S.JoelD.TateC. C.van AndersS. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74, 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307
29.
JamesS. E.HermanJ. L.RankinS.KeislingM.MottetL.AnafiM. (2016). The report of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey. National Center for Transgender Equality. http://www.ustranssurvey.org/
30.
JettenJ.SpearsR.MansteadA. S. (1997). Distinctiveness threat and prototypicality: Combined effects on intergroup discrimination and collective self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 635–657. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199711/12)27:6<635::AID-EJSP835>3.0.CO;2-%23
31.
JettenJ.SpearsR.PostmesT. (2004). Intergroup distinctiveness and differentiation: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 862–879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.6.862
LeeI. C.PrattoF.JohnsonB. T. (2011). Intergroup consensus/disagreement in support of group-based hierarchy: An examination of socio-structural and psycho-cultural factors. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 1029–1064. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025410
34.
LitmanL.RobinsonJ.AbberbockT. (2017). TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 433–442. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0727-z
35.
LuhtanenR.CrockerJ. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167292183006
McFarlandS.WebbM.BrownD. (2012). All humanity is my ingroup: A measure and studies of identification with all humanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 830–853. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028724
38.
MorgenrothT.RyanM. K. (2020). The effects of gender trouble: An integrative theoretical framework of the perpetuation and disruption of the gender/sex binary. Perspectives on Psychological Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620902442
39.
MorgenrothT.SendénM. G.LindqvistA.RenströmE. A.RyanM. K.MortonT. A. (2021). Defending the sex/gender binary: The role of gender identification and need for closure. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12, 731–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620937188
40.
NagoshiC. T.CloudJ. R.LindleyL. M.NagoshiJ. L.LothamerL. J. (2019). A test of the three-component model of gender-based prejudices: Homophobia and transphobia are affected by raters’ and targets’ assigned sex at birth. Sex Roles, 80, 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0919-3
41.
NanneyM. (2017). “I’m part of the community, too”: Women’s college alumnae responses to transgender admittance policies. In DemosV.SegalM. T. (Eds.), Gender panic, gender policy: Advances in gender research (Vol. 24, pp. 133–154). Emerald Publishing.
42.
NortonA. T.HerekG. M. (2013). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward transgender people: Findings from a national probability sample of US adults. Sex Roles, 6, 738–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0110-6
43.
OuttenH. R.LawrenceM. E. (2020). Intergroup threat and heterosexual cisgender women’s support for policies regarding the admittance of trans women at a women’s college. Social Sciences, 9, Article 208. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9110208
44.
OuttenH. R.LeeT.LawrenceM. E. (2019). Heterosexual women’s support for trans-inclusive bathroom legislation depends on the degree to which they perceive trans women as a threat. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22, 1094–1108. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218812660
45.
PlanteC. N.RobertsS. E.SniderJ. S.SchroyC.ReysenS.GerbasiK. (2015). “More than skin-deep”: Biological essentialism in response to a distinctiveness threat in a stigmatized fan community. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12079
RiekB. M.ManiaE. W.GaertnerS. L.McDonaldS. A.LamoreauxM. J. (2010). Does a common ingroup identity reduce intergroup threat?Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209346701
48.
RobertsS. O.HoA. K.RhodesM.GelmanS. A. (2017). Making boundaries great again: Essentialism and support for boundary-enhancing initiatives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 1643–1658. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217724801
49.
RoccasS.SchwartzS. H. (1993). Effects of intergroup similarity on intergroup relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 581–595. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420230604
SchmidK.HewstoneM.TauschN.CairnsE.HughesJ. (2009). Antecedents and consequences of social identity complexity: Intergroup contact, distinctiveness threat, and outgroup attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1085–1098. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209337037
SpearsR.DoosjeB.EllemersN. (1997). Self-stereotyping in the face of threats to group status and distinctiveness: The role of group identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 538–553. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297235009
54.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
55.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson.
56.
TateC. C.LedbetterJ. N.YoussefC. P. (2013). A two-question method for assessing gender categories in the social and medical sciences. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 767–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.690110
57.
TvinnereimE.FløttumK.GjerstadØ.JohannessonM. P.NordøÅ. D. (2017). Citizens’ preferences for tackling climate change. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of their freely formulated solutions. Global Environmental Change, 46, 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.06.005
58.
Vieira de FigueiredoC.PereiraC. R. (2021). The effect of gender and male distinctiveness threat on prejudice against homosexuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000269
59.
WeissJ. T. (2003). GL vs. BT: The archaeology of biphobia and transphobia within the US gay and lesbian community. Journal of Bisexuality, 3, 25–55. https://doi.org/10.1300/J159v03n03_02
60.
WestbrookL.SchiltK. (2014). Doing gender, determining gender: Transgender people, gender panics, and the maintenance of the sex/gender/sexuality system. Gender & Society, 28, 32–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213503203
61.
WhiteJ. B.LangerE. J. (1999). Horizontal hostility: Relations between similar minority groups. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 537–559. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00132
62.
WilsonA. J.BonevskiB.DunlopA.ShakeshaftA.TzelepisF.WalsbergerS.FarrellM.KellyP. J.GuillaumierA. (2016). “The lesser of two evils”: A qualitative study of staff and client experiences and beliefs about addressing tobacco in addiction treatment settings. Drug and Alcohol Review, 35, 92–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12322
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
