ABSTRACT

Current research indicates transgender women of color are experiencing what is being referred to as an “epidemic of violence.” Law enforcement personnel are in a unique position to mitigate this violence among transgender women of color, however past research shows that law enforcement may in some instances perpetuate already existing violence with this population instead of preventing and intervening in these situations. This study aimed to add to the limited research by using an intersectional theoretical framework to better understand these interactions. Research questions were answered using a phenomenological research design. Data from 36 semi-structured interviews with Black transgender women in the Midwest (as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.) about their experiences with law enforcement and what they take away from these experiences were analyzed using an inductive interpretive analysis. Regardless of treatment, transgender women of color wanted to be given fair, humane, and equal treatment as others who identify as cisgender, White, and/or men, and wanted to be shown respect, listened to, felt taken care of, felt tended to, and be taken seriously. The results from this study can be used to inform culturally-responsive police training and policies in working with this population, accountability and reporting of violation of rights, and enhance understanding of health implications of transgender women of color in interacting with police. Keywords: Transgender, women, Black, law enforcement, Midwest

Lethal violence perpetrated against transgender women is increasing, as 85% of transgender individuals murdered in 2022 were identified as transgender women (The National Center for Transgender Equality, 2023). The Bureau of Justice Statistics speculates that deaths among the transgender population are likely 40 times higher than the totals reported by the FBI (Wareham, 2021). This “epidemic of violence” against trans women is most prevalent for Black and Latinx transgender women, and death is usually caused by a firearm (The National Center for Transgender Equality, 2023). Law enforcement can play a key role in buffering or reducing this violence, however the experiences of women of color with law enforcement, specifically transgender women of color, sit within a deep historical context of oppression and bias that is still perpetuated today in modern-day policing policies including stop and frisk policies, excessive force and police brutality, and mass incarceration (Alexander, 2020; Baker & Garcia, 2019; Barlow & Barlow, 2018; Davis, 1981; Irvine, 2015; Lugones, 2007; Lee et al., 2022; Lenning et al., 2020; New York Civil Liberties Union, 2019).

Prevalence of Violence

According to the United States Transgender Survey, Black and Latina transgender women and non-binary persons who had “male” on their birth certificates experience heightened prevalence of sexual assault, verbal harassment, and physical assault than any other gender among respondents, and reported the second-highest prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) behind transgender Black and Latino men (James et al., 2017a; James & Salcedo, 2017). Transgender communities categorized as “American Indian, Alaskan Native, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native Hawaiian” also face high prevalence rates of abuse, victimization, and instances of IPV similar to those of other transgender racial minority communities (James et al., 2017b; James & Magpantay, 2017). While the national data depicting rates of violence are helpful, national estimates of violence among the transgender population consist of small sample sizes of transgender people by race and gender, limiting statistical power and likely underestimating the disproportionate risk of violence transgender face by race or gender (Westbrook, 2022). More research exploring prevalence rates of transgender violence in the United States with larger sample sizes and best practices in survey design is needed to fully understand this larger issue.

Although there are limitations with national estimates, understanding the experiences of violence among transgender women can be strengthened by the small but growing body of regional research. For example, Winiker et al. (2022) conducted a qualitative study interviewing 16 racially diverse Black, Latina, Asian, Native American, and White transgender women in the Los Angeles area about their experiences of violence. Participants reported regular physical and sexual violence that came from cisgender male strangers, acquaintances, other transgender women, family members, and intimate partners. Similarly, Jackson et al. (2022) measured the prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence among 201 transgender women in San Francisco, finding housing insecurity, substance use, young age, and being misgendered as risk factors for violence. They found that 36.8% of the sample experienced violence, including sexual violence (16.9%), intimate partner violence (14.9), and other physical violence (25.4%). Studies that are more localized to different parts of the country can provide rich accounts of specific instances of violence towards the transgender population and corroborate national data. Currently, the majority of regional studies are clustered in well-known urban centers with larger LGBTQ+ populations like New York City and San Francisco. While these data are important, less is known about violence experienced by the transgender population in more rural midwestern parts of the United States.

Justice System Response to Violence

It’s important to also examine the ways in which the justice system is responding to increased violence faced by transgender women. Despite the elevated prevalence of violence among transgender women of color of all races, almost half of homicide cases go unsolved (44% compared to the general public at 37%) (Momen & Dilks, 2020; Talusan, 2016). When suspects are found, the outcomes of cases are complicated by an arduous and imperfect judicial process where rates of convictions are substantially lower and sentences tend to be less severe in cases where Black and Latinx transgender women of color are victims (Momen & Dilks, 2020; Talusan, 2016).

Transgender Women of Color & Police

Law enforcement agencies are in a position to prevent, intervene, and hold people accountable for what the Human Rights Campaign (2018) calls the “current epidemic of fatal anti-transgender violence.” Police officers have a duty to serve and protect their community and keep the peace for residents. The United States Transgender Survey (James et al., 2017a) reports 61% of Black transgender people reported experiencing some form of mistreatment by police officers (e.g., police brutality, profiling, abuse, inadequate response to a hate crime). The next section explores recent advances made in empirical research on different kinds of police misconduct with the LGBTQ+ population.

Profiling

Profiling is when police target a person based on their membership in a specific group due to assumptions that the individual is likely involved in illegal activity (Walker, 2011). Individuals who identify as a sexual or gender minority are profiled due to their identities being outside of stereotypical gender norms (Calhoun, 2017). Scholars assert that “walking while trans” is a phenomenon where law enforcement stop, harass, and sometimes arrest transgender women because law enforcement agents believe these women to be engaged with sex work (Amnesty International, 2005; Carpenter & Marshall, 2017; Griffin, 2016). This happens even when transgender women can be observed doing something else (e.g., out walking with their dog or coming home from the grocery store). In one survey, 60% of transgender women perceived they were stopped by police for no reason other than being transgender (Galvan & Bazargan, 2012). It is well established in research that some transgender and nonconforming individuals do engage in survival sex to secure access to basic needs as a result of family rejection and workplace and housing discrimination, yet only 11% of the transgender population reportedly engages in survival sex (Dank et al., 2015; Fitzgerald et al., 2015; Kattari & Begun, 2016).

Additionally, the degree to which a transgender individual is perceived to adhere to strict gender presentations has a direct correlation to the quality of the interaction with police, which can be dependent on and indicative of socioeconomic status (SES, Amnesty International USA, 2005). Because cosmetic methods to change your appearance are costly, homeless transgender persons or transgender individuals with few resources are more vulnerable to police violence and harassment (Amnesty International USA, 2005; Ritchie, 2016b). However, a transgender person’s appearance may not always be indicative of their SES status as some transgender individuals choose to reflect their appearance independent of their perception of others.

Identification

Scholars found police officers use inappropriate pronouns, use an individual’s dead name found on government-issued identification, and ignore gender presentation of transgender individuals are nuanced ways law enforcement mistreat transgender women despite formal policies surrounding this topic (Amnesty International USA, 2005; Avalos & Carrillo, 2024; Shields, 2021). Seely (2021) discusses how these deadnaming behaviors, when transgender individuals are referred to by previous names and pronouns, could be a result of beliefs that transgender individuals are purposely trying to deceive or trick others, a theme that has become more popular in the news media. Again, it’s important to consider transgender individuals living in or near poverty, including unhoused transgender individuals, who may not have the means to legally change their name and pronouns, which leads to an increase in use of deadnaming.

Abuse

Transgender women of color are at risk of experiencing all forms of abuse in police encounters including sexual, physical, and verbal abuse (Amnesty International, 2005; Ritche, 2016b; Tromadore, 2016). Sexual violence includes reports of rape, sexual assault, threatened sexual assault, sexual contact, and sexually explicit gestures or language. In their study, Lambda Legal (2015) states 16% of transgender women of color claimed they were sexually harassed by police. Galvan and Bazargan (2012) found 24% of Latina transgender women in the Los Angeles area reported sexual assault by law enforcement. Stereotypes of Black transgender women as oversexualized, intravenous drug users, and neglectful mothers contribute to transgender women of color experiencing sexual abuse perpetuated by law enforcement (Amnesty International, 2005; Hill Collins, 2005; Ritchie, 2016a; Tromadore, 2016; Williams, 2016).

In addition to sexual violence, LGBTQ+ individuals reported police officers verbal harassment and physical violence (Amnesty International USA, 2005; Ritchie, 2016a). Although rates of physical and verbal abuse are dated, Reback et al. (2001) found 14% and 37% of surveyed transgender women reported physical and verbal abuse, respectively, perpetrated by law enforcement at least once in their lifetime. More than one study done in the Los Angeles area with Latina transgender women found 67% of women reported instances of verbal harassment and 27% reported instances of physical assault (Galzan & Bazargan, 2012; Woods et al., 2013). Ritchie (2016a) argues this abuse is particularly prevalent among “masculinized” transgender or queer/non-conforming women who are perceived to be dangerous and predatory based on patriarchal stereotypes. These abuse encounters typically take place in areas where there are no video cameras or witnesses like the back of a patrol car, alleys, or even places in police stations where law enforcement turn cameras off, which decreases evidence (Ritchie, 2016a).

Searches/Detainment

LGBTQ+ individuals reported law enforcement officers using invasive strip, pat, or body cavity searches to determine their genitalia either in public places or in view of other detainees, specifically when government-issued identification did not match the individual’s gender expression during initial interactions. This also occurred when police officers had to make housing determinations in jail (Amnesty International, 2005; Carpenter & Marshall, 2017; Lambda Legal, 2015; Ritchie, 2016a). These invasive searches provide more opportunity for law enforcement officers to engage in further sexual abuse and leads to higher prevlance of victimization from other incarcerated persons (Amnesty International, 2005; Galvan & Barzagan, 2012; Hillman, 2023). This is especially pertinent when transgender individuals are placed in cells according to their genitalia (Galvan & Barzagan, 2012). When transgender individuals brought up concerns of abuse or victimization from other persons incarcerated with them, 70% of respondents perceived correctional officers did not respond or responded negatively (Hillman, 2023).

Responding to Domestic Violence or Hate Crimes

Transgender women of color may experience domestic violence in upwards of 50% of their romantic relationships, yet they often choose not to report these instances (Carpenter & Marshall, 2017; Greenberg, 2012) as they are more likely to be arrested than believed to be a victim, at risk of police misconduct during the response, and at risk of not receiving help at all (Carpenter & Marshall, 2017). Calhoun (2017) suggests that police are slow to respond to calls of violence against transgender individuals due to both their own personal bias and bias about the area in which the transgender person lives.

Seeking Help & Police Officers

Based on the history of discrimination between communities of color and gender nonconforming populations and law enforcement, many groups of historically oppressed people feel uncomfortable asking for or seeking help from police. Several studies identify that transgender communities, and women of color specifically, do not perceive the police as a resource or protective which leads to underreporting victimization (Canan et al., 2023; Gyamerah et al., 2021; Owen et al., 2017; Serpe & Nadal, 2017; Shields, 2021; Xavier et al., 2012). When surveying transgender women of color, Shields (2021) found one third of respondents indicated they would never contact police, and two thirds would only contact police under dire circumstances. Lee and Santiago (2022) argue having multiple intersecting minority identities can hinder one’s comfort level reaching out to the police. Furthermore, having a past negative experience with police was found to be negatively associated with reporting in the future (Lee & Santiago, 2022). Transgender women of color may also fear reporting to police due to their fear of their gender identity being revealed to their family members, friends, landlords, or employers (Amnesty International USA, 2005).

Significance of Current Study

Law enforcement can play a key role in mitigating violence transgender women experience in their own communities. Empirical data about experiences with and perceptions of police create a striking portrait of the current relationship between law enforcement agencies and transgender communities of color, especially women, riddled with mistrust and desperately in need of repair. Because the relationship between the police and communities of color are challenged, intentional action from law enforcement to rebuild trust is crucial for transgender communities of color to feel safe. Action, however, needs to be informed by research that fully recognizes the experiences of transgender women of color’s interactions with police. The current study helps to fill in the gaps in the current research by providing more detailed perceptions and experiences that transgender women of color have during interactions with law enforcement. These experiences can be used to inform policy changes and interventions that will be instrumental in healing the relationship between law enforcement and transgender women of color.

Method

The overall aim of this project was to explore the lived experiences transgender women of color have with law enforcement and how these experiences impact transgender women of color. A non-experimental social constructivist qualitative phenomenological research design was used to capture participant subjective experiences through in depth interviews. This approach was most appropriate as it assumes truth can be found in participants’ lived experiences and aligns best with the project’s research questions. The specific research questions guiding this study include: 1) what kinds of interactions do transgender women of color have with law enforcement in the Midwestern region of the United States; 2) how do transgender women of color perceive these interactions; 3) how do these experiences affect them in the short and long term; and 4) what meaning is taken away from these interactions and how do they contribute to proximal and distal factors?

Theoretical Orientation

Theory can aid us in understanding the interactions between transgender women of color and law enforcement. The authors used three theories to guide the study: intersectionality, social exclusion, and gender minority theories. Intersectionality theory is helpful in understanding the many different overlapping identities that drive transgender women of color’s experiences of discrimination, harassment, and oppression (Crenshaw, 1989; Crenshaw, 1991). Since its inception, intersectionality has been expanded to theoretical paradigms that can describe heterogeneity within and between identity groups, as well as examine power-exerting systems wherein individuals operate (Cho et al., 2013; Hancock, 2007; Howard & Renfrow, 2015; McCall, 2005). Social Exclusion theory can be used to understand how certain groups (i.e. transgender women of color) are excluded from societal spaces and resources (Taket et al., 2009). Gender Minority Stress theory helps us to understand the aftermath of oppression in terms of mental and physical health detriments and social isolation. Originally designed to only be applicable to gay, lesbian, and bisexual populations, gender minority stress theory has since been expanded to understand experiences of transgender and nonbinary individuals and how their treatment from others may negatively impact their health (Meyer, 2003; Breslow et al., 2015; Timmins et al., 2017; Testa et al., 2015; Lefevor et al., 2019; Hendricks & Testa, 2012).

Sampling & Recruitment

In order to explore experiences from a diverse sample of transgender women of color, snowball and homogenous purposive non-random probability sampling strategies were used to recruit a desired goal of 30 to 40 participants for this project. After obtaining IRB approval to conduct the study in December 2022, respondents were recruited from the Midwestern United States as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau (n.d.) including North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio. Recruitment for participants took place between January 2023 and August 2023.

Eligible participants in this study included individuals who self-identified as transgender women of color, were 18 years of age or older at the time of recruitment, were able to communicate in English with researchers, resided in one of the Midwestern states below, and had at least one interaction with law enforcement personnel in the past two years. Interactions between transgender women of color and law enforcement could have been initiated through police profiling, traffic stops, transgender women of color calling for help, and people calling the police on them. All types of interactions were included; the scope of the interaction was left broad purposefully in an effort to not limit participant experiences or perceptions gathered during the interviewing process. While previous research indicates interactions between transgender women of color can be negative, this will also provide the possibility of positive interactions and perceptions by transgender women of color to be collected. Interested individuals were excluded from the current project if they identified as gender-nonconforming, genderqueer, a trans man, cisgender, and were White. Transgender women who identified as any other racial or ethnic group were eligible.

Because this study involved recruiting participants that are harder to access, participants were recruited in several ways. First, the researcher contacted 370 regional social service and support agencies via phone call or email to distribute fliers to their clients. Identified agencies provided physical, mental health, and sexual health services; legal services; case management services; support services, or social justice or advocacy organizations to transgender women of color. Agencies were located in the midwestern states as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau (n.d.) previously mentioned. This list of agencies was compiled using Google to search for agencies, and a Microsoft Excel sheet to keep track of agencies, contact information (e.g., agency name, address, agency phone number, agency email, contact people, and website links), and their location. Some national agencies were also considered if they provided services to multiple Midwestern states. Once agencies confirmed providing services to transgender women of color and they were open to advertising the study, the researcher sent recruitment materials, a copy of the informed consent form, and the IRB approval letter to verify the study. Interested individuals were instructed by agency staff or via the flier to contact the researcher by phone (i.e., voice or text) or email to be screened for eligibility of the study.

Secondly, the researcher used Facebook and Reddit as additional ways to circulate the study details and recruitment materials. On Facebook, the researcher posted in professional and clinical networking groups for counselors, clinical social workers, and psychologists identifying as clinical service providers in Midwestern states with permission from group administrators. The researcher created a neutral Reddit account for the purposes of advertising for the study. The researcher made posts on various Reddit subreddits/threads specifically made for LGBTQ+ research and/or threads specifically for transgender women of color with permission from group administrators again. Recruitment materials, informed consent forms, and IRB approval letters were provided with all social media posts in order to ensure validity of the study and to promote transparency between the researcher and potential participants. A total of 36 people consented to take part in the study and all participants identified as African-American or Black.

Procedures

Interested participants contacted the researcher for eligibility screening. Once an eligible participant agreed to take part in the study, the researcher scheduled an interview with them as soon as possible to avoid attrition, or loss of participants over time. A time, date, and confidential Zoom link were sent to participants in a confirmation email or text. Two days before the participant’s interview date/time, the researcher sent the respective participant an interview reminder email with their date and time on it. Individual semi-structured interviews took place on Zoom between March 2023 and August 2023. While in-person interviews are preferred to build rapport and maximize engagement, interviews took place via Zoom in order to accommodate interviewing participants living in different states.

Interviews occurred at a single point in time, and lasted approximately 45-90 minutes. Initially, interviews were only audio recorded and participants did not have to turn their Zoom camera on, however after the first nine participants completed interviews, the IRB and study procedures were changed in order to accommodate video recordings. In an effort to reduce the risk of participants completing the interview multiple times and using up project funds, the protocol was changed after the researcher was contacted more than once by individuals whose experiences sounded eerily similar, with the same background, similar google email accounts, and with the same accent and dialect. Participants were offered incentives to participate in the study in the amount of a $25 Target gift card. Once participants ended the interview, they were emailed a document with resources for mental health services. Only one participant stopped the interview prematurely during the interview, citing discomfort as the main reason for stopping.

Transcription of interviews took place between May 2023 and February 2024. The first six participant interviews and the last seven participant interviews were transcribed using Ubiqus On Demand. The other 23 participant interviews were transcribed by the researcher. During transcription, all interviews were de-identified. After transcription was completed, the researcher sent participants their de-identified transcript in an effort to promote engagement from participants and to ensure accuracy of communicated experiences. Participants were encouraged to correct transcripts if they perceived an incongruence between communication during the interviews and their experiences, however this was completely optional for participants, and none of the participants reached out to correct their transcript.

Participant Data

At the beginning of the interview, the researcher collected demographic information including age, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, city and state of residence, income level, and housing type (i.e., apartment, house, experiencing homelessness). Criminal justice history (i.e., number of previous arrests, convictions, instances of probation and parole, and time spent in jail/prison) was also collected at the same time as demographic information. Participant demographic information was used to describe the sample and examine participant intersecting identities.

An in-depth semi-structured interview was used to explore transgender women of color’s experiences with law enforcement. Hesse-Biber and Leavy (2011) state that using this approach is ethical when working with marginalized populations, and allows study participants more flexibility and freedom to talk through the parts of their experience that are most important to them. Although an interview guide was used, interviews were conversational with questions used to guide but not dictate what is discussed in the interviews. Questions explored participant experiences with law enforcement, what led to the contact, what meaning participants derive from the experiences, and any contextual factors that are perceived to be important including their perceptions of how their gender, race, and ethnicity influenced the interactions.

The researcher took notes during and after interviews pertaining to participant body language, emotional mood and affect, verbal and non-verbal behaviors, and researcher perceptions of rapport. In order to practice intersectional and feminist ethical research practices, Hamilton (2020) urges researchers to engage in their own reflection of potentially oppressive research strategies, one’s positionality as a researcher, and how power inherently operates in research interactions, which is especially pertinent working with marginalized or exploited groups (Hamilton, 2020). The first author journaled about his own reflections about power, privilege, and oppression during and after interviews (Hamilton, 2020). The first author conducted all interviews and made concerted efforts during interviewing to bracket his own experiences, as well as to assume a reflective listening role. The researcher started interviews with a reminder that he is not affiliated with law enforcement and that none of the research data will be directly sent to law enforcement agencies. After the close-ended demographic questions, the researcher also made a point to remind participants that interviews would be de-identified during transcription if any identifying information was disclosed or shared.

Analysis of Participant Demographics and In-Depth Interviews

Participant Demographic Information

Participant demographic information was collected electronically via Microsoft Word and Excel during interviews. Descriptive statistics including measures of central tendency were used to analyze demographic information and participant criminal justice history.

In-Depth Interview Data

Following transcription of audio files, the main author reviewed all transcripts by listening to the audio recording and reading the transcript for accuracy. Once transcripts were ready for analysis, data were analyzed through NVivo using inductive interpretive analysis, which Starks and Trinidad (2007) refers to as a process of decontextualization and recontextualization. Contrary to other qualitative methods of analysis, phenomenological analysis is termed as explication as Alhazmi and Kaufmann (2022) outline how participant experiences are not necessarily broken down. The data analysis process took place between February 2024 and March 2024 and followed the nine steps laid out by Alhazmi and Kaufmann (2022; see detailed description of steps in supplemental file). In short, the analysis consisted of transcription, reading and listening to interviews, horizontalization, clustering of relevant meaning units into groups, translating meaning units into the researcher’s native language, developing textural descriptions for each participant, searching for essential structures from textual descriptions, evaluating textural and structural themes to ensure congruence, and synthesizing structural units to form a universal essence (Alhazmi & Kaufmann, 2022).

Starks and Trinidad (2007) state phenomenologists are the “instrument for analysis” where analysis is dependent on how the researcher decontextualizes and recontextualizes participant experiences; however, the goal is for the analysts to remain faithful to how participants construct their perceptions (p. 1376). As the main author largely analyzed participant interviews independently, the main author did have consultation with co-authors. The main author made decisions about coding and created the description of participant experiences, which can seem to be inherently subjective. To separate the main author’s own experiences and subjective experiences as much as possible from the data analysis process, the main author engaged in a process of bracketing. Bracketing was used by the main author when engaging with participants before interviewing, during the transcription process, and before engaging in explication. This ensured rigor to the analytic process (Starks & Trinidad, 2007). The main author also continued to reflect on participant interviews through feminist and intersectional ethics and reflexivity as described by Hamilton (2020) to aid the researcher in thinking about ways oppression, power, and privilege comes into play during the analytic process. Memos were used during analysis to reflect on how ideas, personal reactions, and coding themes evolves throughout the analytical process.

Reflexivity

The main author identifies as a White, cisgender gay man, and borrows from Black feminist and queer epistemologies to analyze and interpret data. As a self-identified queer and feminist researcher, the researcher has worked on previous research projects in correctional and mental health spheres including a training on transgender awareness/knowledge of correctional staff, explorations of structural and individual violence, examining access to health services within correctional settings for individuals who have health comorbidities, and explorations of race influencing correctional experiences within prison from the perspective of individuals who were previously incarcerated. The researcher also worked as a fully-licensed clinical social worker, working with clients from varying identities and backgrounds in individual and couples therapy.

Results

Participants ranged in age from 20 to 35 and were 28.2 years old, on average (SD = 3.5). All 36 participants identified as Black/African American. 26 participants (72%) self-identified as bisexual, seven participants (19%) identified as heterosexual or being attracted to men, and three participants (8%) identified as a lesbian or being attracted to women. Most participants reported living in Michigan (12; 33%), Kansas (8; 22%), and Nebraska (7; 19%). 29 participants (81%) reported having a Bachelor’s degree. A majority of participants endorsed being single (23; 63%); or being in a relationship but not married (9; 25%). 28 participants (78%) reported renting property. Regarding physical and mental health conditions, 23 participants (64%) reported having no mental/physical health conditions.

Table 1. Demographic Information

Regarding criminal legal history, 16 participants (44%) reported having been arrested before. Of those arrested, three participants (19%) have been arrested once before the age of 18 and 15 participants (94%) reported being arrested at or after the age of 18 on average 1.93 times. Of those arrested, all but three participants have spent time in jail for less than a month, and all 16 participants have only ever spent time in jail, not prison. None of the participants were awaiting charges, sentencing, or trial. Seven of the 36 participants (19%) have had a warrant out for their arrest, and eight of the total participants (22%) have had a restraining order out against them.

Essence of Interactions with Law Enforcement

Participants in this study report contact with police via initiating interactions themselves, being approached in public by law enforcement, and/or others in their environment calling the police on them. Study participants recalled responding police officers with varying identities ranging from White men to Black or other non-White officers, and some women officers. Once contact was made, trans women of color experienced these interactions in vastly different ways. Regardless of treatment, transgender women of color wanted to be given fair, humane, and equal treatment as others who identify as cisgender, White, and/or men. No matter the quality of their interaction, trans women of color wanted to be shown respect and wanted their rights to be respected, including their freedom of speech. Trans women of color wanted to be listened to, felt taken care of, felt tended to, and be taken seriously. They wanted to be treated with integrity, kindness, and dignity. They wanted to be accepted for who they are, not judged or mistreated verbally or physically for their compounding identities and treated well despite negative biases/perceptions that officers may have held. Even if they may not have gotten a positive outcome from law enforcement intervention, participants still wanted to feel safe and secure afterwards. Participants wanted to feel open to contacting law enforcement again should they need help because that is what they are there for–to help those in need.

Themes Interacting with Law Enforcement

Invariant meaning units were clustered into common themes and descriptors. 29 cluster groups were used in order to group invariant meaning clusters together, with five main core themes: Description of treatment (from police), Interaction Logistics, Identities of Police/Participants, Thoughts/Emotions, and Future Interactions. These five core themes and clusters can be seen below in Figure 1. Descriptions of themes and clusters can be found below.

Figure 1. Participant Interactions w/ Law Enforcement Clusters (Note: Numbers in parentheses indicate frequency of responses)

Description of Treatment (From Police)

This first main theme consists of clusters the researcher interpreted as describing participants experiences with law enforcement. Clusters include a mix of negative and positive descriptions from participants including how participants did not feel listened to or responded to by law enforcement; how law enforcement did not take them seriously, didn’t care, or blamed them; and how law enforcement mistreated participants verbally or physically, as well as participants’ perceptions that they were treated adequately or even positively during their interactions to participants’ perceptions that there were no positive interactions or qualities they enjoyed from law enforcement. Each cluster is described in detail below.

Wasn’t being responded to/wasn’t being listened to or being attended to

Meaning units placed in this cluster describe how participants did not feel listened to from law enforcement, didn’t feel like law enforcement officers were truly trying to respond to what participants were trying to communicate to them, or felt like they were not responded to adequately. Participants discussed how they felt like they were being silenced, weren’t given a chance to voice their side of the situation, law enforcement had already made up their mind about them, and how they were not being allotted the freedom of speech. One participant captured this in their report throughout their experience:

“I didn’t have a voice like. Only thing I said at the scene was, we weren’t there. We just came, but they didn’t listen to us. The judge didn’t listen to us.”

Three participants were detained because their ID and documents did not match their physical appearance, and perceived police not listening to them that they were in the process of transitioning. Participant 24 remembers:

“They said I stole my passports, and I said I did not steal a passport. This is my–this is my person. I was–I’m a transgender woman and the um officers was arguing with me that I stole a passport from someone else. And I said I did not steal a passport…[they] did not believe me. I felt bad.”

Multiple participants also talked about having to call someone or bring someone into the interaction as law enforcement for support because they perceived that the officer was not listening to them. Participant 29 noted how they had to call one of their relatives because law enforcement did not believe they were not a sex worker:

“Yes they didn’t listen to me. I wasn’t given freedom to speak out and I need to call. I had to call one of my relatives to come speak on my behalf, and then I was being released…They thought I didn’t have someone to call on at that moment, but when someone came up and speak on my behalf, they’re listening to that person.”

Participant 9 noted that when they called police for a domestic violence incident, the police did not show up.

“Yeah, when I first called the police, um, like the first time I first called the police, the police did not come. I have um one of my colleagues whose friend is a police. Then I told my colleague everything I’ve been passing through um, the domestic violence and everything. Then my colleague said she’s going to help me.”

They didn’t take me seriously/didn’t care/blamed me

Units of data in this cluster discussed participant perceptions that they were not being taken seriously, that their problems were being minimized, and their perceptions that law enforcement did not care about them, and perceiving law enforcement blaming them for their situation.

Police mistreated me verbally/physically

Meaning units in this cluster described their experiences with law enforcement as being on a spectrum of feeling disrespected to being verbally harassed, being mocked or made fun of due to their gender expression, and being physically assaulted (e.g., being beat up during encounters). Participants described interviewing procedures with police as being intense and “torturous” and in extreme examples, being starved while detained and made to strip-search in order to confirm gender identity. Participants believed that this mistreatment was usually due to their identities being Black and being transgender, or the police officers being White men. Participant 21, who reported an overall positive experience and outcome in interactions with police, discussed how despite her positive outcome and collaboration with police during a doxxing incident, she was mocked and not respected during her interactions with law enforcement personnel:

“...But I was just, it was just a little caricature, I mean making a caricature of me, my outfit, the way I dressed, the way I talk, so, but it was no issue to me at all so long as you’re willing to help me.”

Another participant discussed how after disclosing they were transgender to law enforcement who responded to them, that an officer questioned them about their transition and told them they would go to hell for who they are.

“I was in jail, so he called me. Say, why did I do that? I said, I love being a woman. I love it. He said that there will be an after–when, when I die I’ll go and meet God. And I said, I love who I am. You cannot change it. Why are you attaching me to God? I can be who I am as I want. The man insulted me. He said I’m going to hell for who I am.”

One participant remembered that while she was detained, 10 or so officers did not object to starving her, saying she did not “need food because she was Black.”

I wasn’t being responded to

Data units in this cluster describe experiences ranging from participants perceiving police to act quickly in response to their complaint, carrying out an investigation, attempts to build rapport via humor, and taking their concerns seriously, participants being listened to, participants feeling supported and justified in their reporting, participants being treated with respect, being treated equally to others, and feeling safe during their interactions. The researcher also interpreted these positive experiences being made possible due to police attempts to establish rapport between them and participants, showing concern and empathy, regardless of the outcome. Participant 11 captured this well:

“Why I said they treated me well, when I called them, they came. They attended to me. They asked me some few questions, and asked me to narrate what happened, everything that happened, I told them everything. So I felt like they treated me well, yeah. I felt listened to. They took my concerns seriously. The outcome left me satisfied.”

Similarly, Participant 2 discussed how their positive perception of police is due to being treated fairly despite her identities.

“It actually gave me a positive, you know, impression, you know ‘cause I’m being treated fairly. You know, um, it’s a good thing and it would–would make you really happy, you know, that, um you’re being listened to and paid attention to, despite being a [transgender] and woman of color, yeah. It made me feel good.”

Participant 4 discussed how one experience with law enforcement was particularly memorable:

“...He was concerned about how society treats me. He said something about, um, taking the role of a transgender woman and who was like complaining about big harassment from officers. So he was actually concerned about how people treated me and he was like I should just be strong.”

Initially feeling depressed when this officer initiated interaction with her, she walked away from that experience feeling encouraged and empowered.

Interactions with police in jail

When participants disclosed being detained, taken down to the station for questioning, or their time in jail, their descriptions would go into this cluster. Units of data here also consist of whether they were housed with men or other women and their treatment by police or other individuals incarcerated. Ultimately, these units of data are interpreted by the researcher as transgender women of color not being respected or mistreated while in jail. Participant 27 reflected on this:

“We went to the station, uh huh, and there was a White friend who is a trans woman, we committed the same crime [ID-related issues]. She was put in a female cell, and they put me in a male cell. Just because I’m Black. I felt bad. I felt insulted. I was depressed. But the men in the cell were actually nice to me.”

Participant 24 described a similar experience being housed with men, however their cellmates were not as kind.

“--they put me with men. They later put me alone…I felt different, I felt scared, like I was taken away from my security. It felt bad. I could not sleep that night. I sat in a corner because I was scared…Scared of people around me, I-I was scared of performing…one of the men tried to touch me, and I shout…I was touched unwanted and sexually.”

This participant was then transferred to a cell by herself. This participant still remembers this experience vividly, highlighting the traumatic impact this experience had on her.

Participants also reported experiencing verbal harassment, mocking from police, and misgendering while they were detained in jail. Participant 33 reflected on this

“Um, more so, it was, uh, the male police who are really mocking us. They’re just saying, you know, talking that like, look at these men, what they’re wearing. You know, what, what are they trying to prove wearing like, you know, this and all that. So they were using, uh, bad language towards us.”

This treatment was not exclusive of male officers however, as some participants reported experiencing this treatment from other individuals who were incarcerated. Participant 33 adds

“…that was the worst experience. It was very, very uncomfortable. We didn’t feel like we, we fit in. And, and these men, they were just disregarding our emotions and feelings. They, like, were kinda harassing us, literally in the cell…they were just calling us names like cismen, and stuff like that.”

Participants also commented on their perceived variation in the bail process and how it impacted their family members. Some participants noted how they were bailed out the next morning with no issue by family members, but some reflected on how they were prevented from being bailed out earlier. Participant 34 states

“…when they came to bail me out, my friends, when they came to bail me out, they said they should wait. And they wait for an hour in the station…I thought I was being bailed. I spent three days with, I think seven hours at the station.”

One participant found the bail process was discriminatory, perceiving their White friends getting phone calls to family before them and being bailed out the next day, while the participant was prevented from making a phone call for days.

Lastly, participants discussed the interviewing process being taken to the station in a variety of ways. Participant 31 remembers it being “intense, stressful, and pressured,” but felt okay due to knowing they were not guilty. Another participant remembered having to go down to the station to answer some questions about a family member who police suspected was selling drugs after searching their apartment, and having to wait hours before being interviewed.

Interaction Logistics

This second main theme of clusters consists of specific details of interactions including variation in how the police interactions were initiated (e.g., whether they were initiated by participants calling law enforcement for aid, approached by law enforcement in public places, or other people in participants’ environments calling the police on participants), and participant remarks about having no interactions with law enforcement where law enforcement officers approached participants. Other clusters in this main theme consist of three themes about perceived outcomes from interactions, categorized as negative, neutral/no outcome, and positive outcomes.

I initiated the interaction

This invariant meaning cluster consists of meaning units where participants discussed their experiences initiating interactions with law enforcement. For participants who had initiated interactions with law enforcement in the past, this was a result of calling 911. None of the participants in the study who initiated contact with law enforcement described initiating interactions any other way besides calling 911.

Being approached by law enforcement/having no interactions initiated by law enforcement/public spaces

This invariant meaning cluster consists of participant reports of law enforcement initiating interactions, law enforcement approaching or stopping participants in public, or having others call the police on them for various reasons. Participants described how police pulled them over being in their car, being stopped after being on the way from the bar/club, being stopped in the park, being stopped at the scene of a robbery, police knocking on their door in response to a nearby crime happening and wanting to question them, and even neighbors or acquaintances calling the police on them.

Negative outcome

Units of data that describe participant interactions with law enforcement resulting in a negative outcome belong here. Participants report having their employment being negatively affected due to interactions with police or detainment including a docking of pay or losing out on a job opportunity due to interactions with police. Participant 23 in particular discussed how she went to an agency for a job interview, and the receptionist there actually contacted the police/security as she did not believe she had a right to be there. The participant described how when law enforcement showed up, the hiring personnel vouched for her, however the participant believed the experience ultimately negatively affected her ability to get the job. Another participant, Participant 33, discussed their perception of losing two days of pay on their paycheck for missing days of work due to being unjustly incarcerated.

Another topic that arose for participants in terms of negative outcomes is suffering from mental or emotional health issues as a result of their interactions with law enforcement. This took the form of mental/emotional distress and in some cases, isolation, social anxiety, and trauma. Participant 27 remembers having to take two extra days off after being released from law enforcement due to “feeling stressed, being depressed, crying a lot, and just feeling insulted being Black.” Multiple participants endorsed stopping any form of recreational or social activities like drinking alcohol in any amount in a public setting, partying with friends, or going out to bars due to fear of being stopped or harassed by police.

“I don’t think I’m gonna go for partying anymore. Get drunk. I’ll just be who I am. If I want to get drunk, I’ll buy from a store and I’ll wanna take it at home. To not be arrested again. I don’t want to be insulted.”

Furthermore, Participant 35 remembers not wanting to associate with anyone and wanting to be completely on her own out of fear of being humiliated by police in public again. Participant 28 noted that they no longer have many social relationships, don't date anymore, and spend their time indoors, repeating a motto that “Single doesn’t kill. I can’t die being single. And my privacy doesn’t kill.” This participant’s partner called the police on her a few months into dating after finding out she was transgender. A few participants discussed having to receive medical services after their interactions with law enforcement including physical and mental health services.

Neutral outcome/no outcome

Participants sometimes endorsed their interactions not resulting in any major changes, including being detained for a short time and then being released with no follow-up. For example, Participant 15 discussed how she was having trouble at home as her mother kicked her out for being transgender, and after multiple attempts at calling police and police interviewing her mother, nothing changed. She was not given any resources, continued to be homeless, and eventually learned that police could not help her with her problem. She ended up couchsurfing with friends until she could get her own place. While this participant had expectations of police to help her, the researcher believes this is more reflective of the lack of ability to refer to social services as social services would’ve been more likely to help this participant. Other participants endorsed being detained for a short period before being let go with no repercussions. Some participants discussed being stopped by law enforcement in public and then being let go after answering questions.

Positive outcome

In some cases, participants also endorsed having positive outcomes from their interactions with law enforcement. This included getting a perceived positive outcome like an arrest of a person who did them wrong, recovery of items if items were lost or taken from them, and possibly even a positive resolution to relationship issues participants were having. For example, Participant 10 discussed how she gave law enforcement potential names of suspects after being robbed, and they were able to make an arrest and recover stolen cash and items for her. Another participant who called law enforcement to help with domestic violence recalled how law enforcement detained their partner and had her partner sign “an undertaking that he would stop the violence,” feeling satisfied with that outcome.

Identities of Police/Participants

This third main theme consists of clusters involving identity. This includes participants’ description of the identity of law enforcement personnel in any of their interactions including officers’ race and gender and whether these identities shaped interactions with participants. Participant perceptions of whether or not their own race and gender impacted interactions with police are also included in this theme. In particular, descriptions of participants explicitly disclosing their gender to law enforcement and participant perceptions of the impact of “passing” during interactions. Given intersectionality considers identity as inextricably linked, identities cannot be separated when looking at interactions in a specific time and place. For the sake of this discussion, these identities are grouped differently. Some participants explained how their identities being Black and being transgender compounded to form their unique experiences with law enforcement.

The person/officer I was dealing with was a White man/men

This cluster includes participant comments that at least one of the law enforcement officers they interacted with were men and were White and/or White-passing and whether or not the officer’s identities influenced interactions. Some participants did endorse the officer’s identity as White men as influencing the interaction. For example, Participant 21 who experienced being made into a caricature reflected:

“I’m saying, of course, I said. Of course they were men because people who would make caricatures of me. Okay, I know women can also do that. But it would–it would more especially be made because I’m a trans woman, so it’s funny to them.”

Another participant, Participant 29, reflected on the fact that the law enforcement officer who she interacted with shared the same identities as her partner, who called the police on her after she said hello to another man while they were out in public. She believed the law enforcement officer sided with her partner, who was also a White man, because of their shared identity, and consequently believed she was a sex worker just because her partner said so.

The officers I interacted with were Black and/or Women

This cluster of invariant meaning units includes participants’ reflections interacting with officers who appeared to be another race than White, and who appeared to be a woman. Participants noticed if the officers who responded to them were non-White or women, they treated them differently than those who were White men. When asked about the identities of the officers who responded to them in a particular interaction, Participant 28 answered:

To me the law enforcement, the Whites, they don't give you freedom of speech. The discrimination is always that, since they know I'm a woman of Black. The discrimination is always there. They don't welcome your story. They don't listen to your part of your story. But the Black or the Black law enforcement, they are there to help you. They settle down to listen to your part of your story, and write some statements down, so as to work towards it. So as to organize some agency, who we help in educating people about transgender issues, how they should be treated in the society. It don't happen with the Whites. Or they’re after discrimination, because I'm a woman of Black. I'm also at the same time a transgender.

Participant 36 described this in action when they described how a Black officer helped them contact their family and make bail while detained.

“I think because we shared, um, we shared similarities. We were, we were both Black, so he understood. And when I explained to him, the way they discriminated [against] me, and he understood. He told me he was to aid me, he was going to help me…He understood and that’s how the system works. That’s what he said to me.”

Additionally, some participants noticed how women officers treated them differently than officers who were men, showing their “motherly love” as one participant put it. In some cases, even the presence of a woman officer changed the behavior of her male peers. One participant remembers when they were detained, the officers who were men called her names and made fun of her gender identity and expression. When a supervisory woman officer entered the room, the male officers essentially changed their tune and were more respectful. The participant perceived this change in behavior due to the presence of the woman officer, however it could’ve been due to her status in more of a supervisory position. Another participant remembers that women officers advocated for her to be placed in the jail in a separate room away from the incarcerated men. Additionally, Participant 27 remembered how this one White woman officer “does not take nonsense. She stopped them from beating me, mocking me.”

It’s important to note however that some participants did not think there was variation in behavior between officers who were of different racial or gender identities. Some participants remarked how some Black officers did not intervene in interactions where they could have, or some women officers perpetuated just as much mistreatment as their male peers.

Race changed the way the interaction played out

Participants made comments about how their own racial/ethnic identity impacted their interactions with law enforcement and this cluster is made up of these reflections. As stated above, intersectionality assumes that each identity participants hold are influencing interactions in some way, and these units of data are reflective of when participants felt their race in particular was influencing interactions with law enforcement, sometimes even more so than their gender. Participants reflected on differences in racial identities between transgender women in the study and police officers that led to more discrimination, ill treatment, not being listened to, or not being given the same treatment as White transgender people in the same situation. Participant 1 who contacted the police due to a domestic violence situation between her and her White partner, commented:

“I felt like I wasn’t being responded to because of my race, because I mean, I do not see any reason why they were being fair to my partner, and then there seems like there was nothing wrong with what I was going through.”

Multiple participants echoed this remark, believing their mistreatment was due to their race. For example, Participant 27 was placed in a male cell and her White transgender friend was placed in a female cell when they were taken to the station for ID-related issues, believing she was placed in a male cell because she is Black. Another participant described how their mistreatment is tied to the history of racial stigma in the United States:

“Umm they kept on yelling at me and you know, to keep quiet, be quiet or I’ll get shot, and you know their, their racism and stigma, it's really bad…you should be careful being an African American because the state doesn’t, doesn’t treat you very nicely. You, as an African-American, so um at some point you–you feel really discriminated against and not feel very good.”

In one particular interaction, a participant hinted that racial differences do not always have to lead to negative interactions. When this participant was asked if she thought her racial identity had anything to do with her treatment from law enforcement, she thought racial differences between her and law enforcement promoted a positive interaction.

“Oh, yeah, you know, so many Blacks have the ideology that Black rarely gets justice, and sometimes, and they get um they get um being oppressed or being oppressed by the Whites. But so I feel like most of the police are doing their best to see to it that Blacks are not being oppressed.”

In line with intersectionality theory, some participants perceived race compounding on top of gender to create these divides between participants and law enforcement. For example, when asked how her identities impacted her interaction with law enforcement, one of the participants reflected:

“You know, I think they do that a lot of time, even without being trans. There’s just racism among the Blacks. So, so getting–being transgender, it’s more, like two times of what you get…Yeah, it’s harder because you’re trans and you’re Black, so it’s quite hard.”

Some participants were also able to speak to the fluidity of identity and how different identities may be impacting situations in different ways and to different extents. Some participants thought race was more important than gender in influencing their treatment from law enforcement, particularly when participants had negative interactions.

Race did not impact the way the interaction played out

Invariant meaning units that can be found in this cluster revolved around participants not perceiving their race impacting their interactions with police, not being sure how race was impacting their interaction with law enforcement, or being treated the same as other White people who also were interacting with law enforcement.

Thought gender identity impacted interaction

Like the previous racial category, this cluster is reserved for participant responses that included perceptions that their gender identity/expression negatively or positively impacted their experiences with police. Participants perceived their gender identity as being the main reasons why they may have been stopped on the street, in public, or for police to approach them. Participants also perceived their gender identity was at the root of law enforcement not supporting them during requests for help, the cause for ill treatment from police officers, and the reason law enforcement judged or mocked participants during interactions. One participant felt like police were siding against her for the sole reason she is transgender. Regarding the judgment from law enforcement, one participant recalled how law enforcement officers didn’t say anything explicit about their gender identity/expression but remembered the officers having facial expressions that reflected disgust.

Participants spoke about how their treatment as trans women in U.S. society prepared them for negative treatment by law enforcement, referring to it as a form of desensitization. Having this form of emotional defense prepared some participants in their interactions with law enforcement. For example, Participant 18 reported

“Oh, well, it was far better, and that’s because I went there prepared already. Having–Knowing that all the ways they usually treat people who are trans. I–I just have the ideologies. So I went there prepared.”

Some participants discussed the stereotype that transgender women are sex workers. As stated above, Participant 29 discussed how her partner used that stereotype against her as punishment after saying hello to a male friend on the street while they were out. Participant 30 perceived these stereotypes as the reason why transgender women are stopped and questioned so frequently.

“...They need to understand that, too. And the fact that not all trans are sex workers. Some does it for their money, like make their own money, legit, like very clean.”

Thought gender identity did not influence interaction/was treated well despite gender

Like their racial identity, some participants didn’t perceive their interactions with law enforcement to be influenced by their gender identity. Unlike their racial identity, some participants did not know if law enforcement knew if they were transgender and/or didn’t ask. Others thought they were treated well despite the perception that law enforcement knew they were transgender.

Disclosing I am transgender

This cluster is used to capture participant reflections on moments during interactions where they actively disclosed their transgender status to law enforcement officers. Officers had various reactions to participants disclosing their transgender identity. Some participants believed it negatively impacted interactions as some police officers blamed participants for their circumstances. Some participants believed it led to more mistreatment after disclosing while other participants didn’t think it impacted interactions negatively at all.

Thoughts/Emotions

This fourth main theme of clusters consists of internal mechanisms (i.e., thoughts and emotions) happening within participants during and after their interactions with police. These clusters capture the participants’ plethora of experienced emotion, their thoughts about law enforcement during and after their interactions, perceptions of police going into the interaction that their job is to help those in need, and participants’ perceptions of their main thoughts from their interactions with law enforcement.

My interactions with law enforcement left me feeling sad/bad

This cluster consists of meaning units where participants had a negative experience with law enforcement, and as a result had a negative emotional experience. The emotions used to describe their experiences after interacting with law enforcement included feeling sad, upset, disappointed, scared, frustrating, annoyed, uncomfortable, worried or anxious, discouraged, embarrassed or humiliated, criticized, self-doubting, pressured, stressed or distressed, numb, disheartened, depressed, insulted, disrespected, discriminated against, angry, traumatized, and powerless. In some instances, participants used more vague and general terms, like “bad,” and the researcher would reflect back what the participant said using an emotion word that was more specific. When this happened, the researcher would also check to make sure that the emotion word matched with what the participant was saying and see if the participant agreed with the emotion word.

My interactions with police left me feeling happy/satisfied

Similar to the previous cluster group, this cluster group captures participant emotions during and after interactions where participants experienced more positive emotions. This occurred most often when participants had a positive experience with law enforcement. Words that frequently came up for participants in this category included feeling happy, satisfied, supported, safe, listened to, cared for, at peace, encouraged, and confident. The researcher would also reflect back more specific emotion words to participants if they described their emotions as “good,” or “intact,” for example. The researcher would also check in with the participant to see if the proposed emotion word matched their perception of emotion for clarification.

My perception of police has gotten more positive/stayed neutral

Participants were asked about their perception of law enforcement after their interaction(s). This cluster includes participant descriptions of feeling supported by law enforcement, like law enforcement was going to be there for them following interactions, like police officers are not all bad people/not all police are the same, and that police officers were just doing their job. Other participants expressed a neutral perception of law enforcement. Some participants also described never having a time where they were supported by law enforcement, and those perceptions also were clustered here. Some participants recalled having a negative perception of law enforcement before their interaction; because the interaction was positive, though, they left the interaction with a more positive perspective about the police. For example, Participant 2 reflected that despite assumptions going into their interaction that they wouldn’t be listened to, they left their interaction with law enforcement feeling positive because they felt listened to.

My perception of police has gotten more negative

Participants also found their perception of police as continuing to be negative after their interactions. These perceptions include not wanting to go back to the police in the future as a source of support; being afraid of them; wanting to avoid them in the future; thinking that the police will not treat participants well if they try to contact them again; and that police officers are racist/sexist. For example, Participant 1 had expectations going into their interaction that things may not be great, but didn’t expect it to be worse than previously imagined:

“Yeah, I think it was different because, I mean, even though I knew that somehow I may be discriminated because I do hear some people talk about that from friends, but I didn’t know it be really bad, you know. I didn’t know the response I would be getting would be, you know, really bad.”

Some participants were even able to give insight about their perceptions of police coming from experiences from when they were younger, stories their friends would tell them, seeing police in their community, or even seeing police on television.

Police are supposed to help us

Participants discussed what a police officer’s role should be in regards to their own safety. Participants perceived that police should be reliable, dependable, and available/accessible to them. In fact, participants noted these perceptions are what prompted them to initiate interactions with the police. Participants used phrases such as “should be there whenever you need them,” “that’s what they are there for,” “it’s their job to help people,” and “they’re supposed to help people,” which were all clustered in this group together.

Future Interactions

Lastly, this main theme consists of clusters focused on future interactions. This includes the likelihood participants would reach out to law enforcement in the future or not, as well as how they would want law enforcement to treat others in the future, specifically transgender women of color.

Would reach out to law enforcement in the future

Participants reported being open to contacting law enforcement in the future to varying degrees. Some participants reported being open to contacting law enforcement as that is “what they’re there for,” while some reported contacting law enforcement agencies in emergencies as a last resort due to past negative experiences. When asked if they would contact law enforcement in the future, one participant stated

“I think I might. And I might not. But it depends. But I’ll get to that bridge when I cross it.”

Another participant endorsed that if they needed help, they would reach out to law enforcement for help, however “If I needed help, there are [also] other agencies who I can ask for help.” Others expressed some openness to going to law enforcement, however felt uncomfortable doing so. “...You know, most times, if I, if I have something to like to report, like I feel uncomfortable to go to them asking them for help,” one participant expressed.

Won’t reach out to law enforcement

Participants also endorsed not going back to law enforcement and “best to avoid” them, particularly participants who had negative experiences with law enforcement. One participant reported:

“I mean after that experience I had, I couldn’t possibly go back to them for anything.”

Participants 36 expressed their negative perceptions of law enforcement as reasoning to not going back to them, like this participant:

“...I’ve seen the bad side of law enforcement officers, and I, ultimately, I wouldn’t want to work with them anymore because, um, I think they can be racist, most of them, I’m finding not at all, but most of them are actually racist.”

I would have police treat people better/more respect/more equal

Participants also expressed their wishes for law enforcement to treat them and other transgender women of color differently in the future, specifically those who had negative experiences with law enforcement or felt like their needs were not being met. Participants discussed wanting to be treated with more equality, with more respect, and like they are human beings. Participants perceived that they should be listened to more and wanted to feel safer and secure with law enforcement. They further suggested that law enforcement officers could be more knowledgeable and informed, accepting, and unbiased when interacting with them in the future. Participants expressed their perception that police have many negative biases about transgender women and women of color and would want those to change as well. Participant 25 summarizes this point:

I–I–I would–I would really love them to–to have this–this–this um rule of law between them in which it goes that every man is [*muffled*; 21:35] and it doesn't matter if you’re trans, it doesn't matter if you’re Black, doesn’t matter if you’re White, it doesn’t matter if you’re cis. It doesn’t matter whatever you are, two-spirit, bisexual, whatever you are, it’s a personal decision. I–I me being Black, I didn't put myself since they turned out the way they are. So I have no control about this, so they should learn to accept this and treat everyone as equal.

Participant 1 similarly stated:

“I would definitely change, you know, how they treat people, you know. I would try to make sure that there is equality, respective of one’s gender, one’s ethnicity, one’s color. I mean I feel like we are all human, so we have the same right. And as such, we should be treated equally.”

Participants discussed the idea that systemic changes to treatment of transgender women of color should come from within law enforcement agencies themselves. Other participants discussed how they believe there should be more systems of accountability and easier governmental processes in changing gender markers on documents that reflect the process of transitioning.

I wouldn’t have police change how they treat people

A few participants mentioned not wanting to change how police treat transgender women of color because they had generally positive experiences. These participants remember being treated with respect, with positive regard, and equally to others. For example, one participant reflected:

“Well, I can't really place my thoughts on that, because um, depending on the way I was, you know, treated, and I was interacted with, it went pretty well and positive. So I can't really say I would change anything about that, because I would love for it to stay that way, you know. Pretty smooth, pretty okay, yeah.”

Similarly, another participant reflected their desires for things to stay the same:

“Nothing. Because I mean I didn’t really have you know weird experience from them. I just felt like I was being treated equally. Like I didn’t notice anything like that. So I don’t if there is anything I would change about it. I mean they were not rude to me. They were not discriminatory. They were not trying to judge me, so I don't think there is anything.”

In summary, participants perceived mixed interactions with law enforcement officers. Participants perceived their race and gender impacting interactions in various ways and to differing degrees. Participants also reported mixed thoughts and emotions after their interactions with law enforcement, as well as mixed willingness to reach out to law enforcement in the future.

Discussion

This study attempted to capture the lived experiences transgender women of color have with law enforcement in detail and to explore the ways in which these experiences are perceived by transgender women of color using a phenomenological research design. This research is important in many ways: (1) it adds to the existing research about what these experiences are like; (2) it details how transgender women of color are affected by their interactions with law enforcement; (3) it outlines how transgender women of color feel about reaching out to law enforcement in the future; and (4) it lays the groundwork for how law enforcement agencies can better improve their policies and treatment.

The overall essence of interactions transgender women of color found in this study echoes previous recommendations made by the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (n.d.; 1988). These standards outline how law enforcement should treat individuals with compassion, respect, dignity, equal and humane treatment, without discrimination, and sensitivity to the special needs of this population. Amnesty International (2005) believed these standards should serve as the core of all programming needs working with any individuals.

Only a portion of participants in the study described how they were treated well in their interactions and felt empowered from their interactions with law enforcement. This includes participants feeling as though they were respected in their interactions and treated equally to others, law enforcement responding quickly to their needs, carrying out investigations, and having positive outcomes like recovering lost or stolen items and making arrests. This also echoes recommendations made by the United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (n.d.; 1988). These positive reflections from participants hint at promising systemic or individual changes that may promote more positive interactions and relationships between law enforcement and the community. More research is necessary to corroborate how police may be making positive changes in policing behaviors toward this community.

Contrary to these recommendations, participants also outlined instances of when they felt not cared for, not listened to, and not respected and that police mistreated them verbally and physically, including verbal harassment, mocking and being made fun of, physical and excessive force, starvation while detained, and unlawful searches. In this way, participants corroborate previous research detailing the use of multiple forms of verbal and physical comorbid, overt, and explicit forms of violence (Amnesty International, 2005; Avalos & Carrillo, 2024; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012; James et al., 2017a; Reback et al., 2001; Ritche, 2016a; Shields, 2021; Tromadore, 2016; Woods et al., 2013). Furthermore, participants in this study provided insight to how this abuse and mistreatment may have been as recent as within the past two years. Although participants did not report instances of sexual violence or harassment from law enforcement, contrary to previous research (James et al., 2017a; Lambda Legal, 2015; Stotzer, 2009), more research is necessary in order to explore the extent to which this occurs.

Study participants’ perceptions aligned with broader literature outlining how transgender women of color are stopped by police on the street at a disproportionate amount despite their perceptions they are doing nothing wrong, supporting previous research outlining how the transgender community are profiled for being involved with sex work (Calhoun, 2017; Carpenter & Marshall, 2017; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012; Griffin, 2016; Irvine, 2015; New York Civil Liberties Union, 2019).

Amnesty International (2005) previously outlined that transgender individuals are wrongfully detained due to police perceptions and assumptions, and thus face negative repercussions related to employment. Participants in the study corroborated this through their own report of their employment being affected in some cases, with loss of positions, docking of pay due to missed hours, or even missing out on employment opportunities that they had access to before their interaction with law enforcement.

Previous research also outlines reporting habits of transgender communities of color. Transgender women of color may not report being victims of crimes due to overall negative perceptions of police, mistrust resulting from historical policing behaviors, perceptions that police do not provide them safety, fear of being outed to others who are not aware of their gender status, minimal comfort levels reaching out to police due to multiple intersecting identities, being at risk of police misconduct during the response, and possibly not receiving help at all (Barlow & Barlow, 2018; Carpenter & Marshall, 2017; Greenberg, 2012; James et al., 2017a; James et al., 2017b; James & Magpantay, 2017; James & Salcedo, 2017; Lee & Santiago, 2022; Serpe & Nadal, 2017; Shields, 2021). Participants in this study reflected on their own attitudes about reaching out to law enforcement in the future and provided mixed sentiments. Participants expressed that they would reach out to law enforcement for help in the future, but these were largely from participants who reported positive encounters with police. Other participants who did not have the best interactions reported discomfort going to law enforcement in the future and only wanting to go to law enforcement as a last resort, if at all, reinforcing past research (Lee & Santiago, 2022; Shields, 2021).

Implications

Participants in the study endorsed changes they would like to see from law enforcement officers and agencies including wanting to be treated more humanely, equally, and with more respect. They want law enforcement officers to be more informed, accepting, and unbiased in interactions. This is congruent with previous research detailing a lack of culturally competent diversity training informed by transgender individuals and partnerships among law enforcement agencies, with a special focus on how transgender individuals may use different strategies to change their gender presentation (Amnesty International USA, 2005; Boudin, 2021; Calhoun, 2017; Avalos & Carrillo, 2024; Cohen & Goodman, 2023; Copple & Dunn, 2017; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012). Specifically, Cohen & Goodman (2023) found that 34 states out of 50 require police academy students to take on average 5 hours of diversity training, translating to 0.78% of all required training. The diversity courses offered through this state-mandated curriculum does not have to be focused on gender or sexuality specifically, with only a handful of courses offered in states focusing on this specific diversity group (Cohen & Goodman, 2023). Calhoun (2017) additionally discussed the potential effectiveness of an LGBTQ+ liaison unit in promoting community ties.

Participants discussed structural and policy changes that they would like to see that would help mitigate their interactions with police and negative experiences overall. These changes include more ease with accessing and changing ID-related documents to reflect their position in the transitioning process. This is in line with Calhoun’s (2017) recommendations to increase access to identity documents and healthcare for gender-affirming procedures in an effort to prevent contact with the criminal-legal system. Calhoun (2017) also recommended having a uniform and standard practice for how law enforcement document individuals’ gender presentation, pronouns, and names if they are different from their government-issued ID, which participants in this study did not discuss.

Similar to other accounts, one participant in this study reported a forced strip search to determine genitalia, which was humiliating and terrifying for the participant. This reinforces the need for changes to searches proposed by scholars to consider transgender individuals’ preference for the gender of the officer that does the search, promoting autonomy and power to the individual being searched, and searches used to determine genitalia of transgender individuals as cruel and unusual punishment (United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, 1979). If an individual does not specify a preference, scholars suggest frisk, strip, or pat down searches should be conducted by officers with congruent gender presentation as the individual being searched (Amnesty International USA, 2005). Additionally, policies that outline placing transgender individuals in cells that match their genitalia should be replaced by policies that accommodate transgender individuals' feelings of safety and autonomy in sex-segregated facilities (Amnesty International, 2005). Multiple participants in the study endorsed being placed in cells with other men despite identifying as women. These practices place transgender women at increased risk for sexual assault while in sex-segregated facilities (Carpenter and Marshall, 2017; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012; Lambda Legal, 2015; Stotzer, 2009).

Lastly, scholars outline the lack of accountability among officers and larger agencies to punish those officers who violate rights of individuals, with current practices consisting of anecdotal and narrative data; physical, virtual, and institutional witness mobilizing; and electronic recordings (Gonzalez & Deckard, 2022; Lee et al., 2022). More oversight is needed throughout the chains of command to increase accountability around policy compliance, as officers are not motivated to engage in positive practices without repercussions (Amnesty International USA, 2005; Avalos & Carrillo, 2024; Galvan & Bazargan, 2012). One participant did discuss reporting an officer to their higher-up and that officer was consequently reprimanded for it, however only felt comfortable doing so because she knew the higher-up through a personal relationship. While the participant reporting the incident to a higher-up is positive, more open and direct reporting procedures for police misconduct should be created and adhered to so individuals don’t have to have a personal connection to feel comfortable reporting police misconduct.

The findings from the current research can be used in multiple ways in regards to future research projects. More research needs to be done to determine if other transgender women of color experience the same treatment from law enforcement, not just Black transgender women. Further research could help to elaborate areas in which law enforcement officers and agencies could improve services for this population and make responses more consistently positive. Participants perceived interactions being different when there were non-White and women police officers present. More research is needed in order to explore how these identities, and other LGBTQ+ identifying police may change interactions for transgender communities and communities of color. Rarely did participants mention other forms of identity influencing interactions with law enforcement, including age, socioeconomic class, or sexuality, as well as how their environment is contributing (i.e. being at their home versus being questioned on the street). These identities and environments could have been influencing interactions, however more research is needed to explore this. Additionally, more research is necessary to explore the impact of geographic location (rural vs. urban) on policing culture related to the LGBTQ+ community, as these interactions are also dependent on such factors and were not explicitly discussed by participants in the study or asked to participants.

The results from this research create a foundation for further exploring culturally competent police training, policing behaviors, overall policing culture, and accountability and reporting of violation of rights. Cohen & Goodman (2023) provide a pathway to do this research, as their comprehensive analysis of diversity training in police academies outlines areas for improvement.

None of the participants in the study reported working with police liaison units. These interactions may be further improved or mitigated by police liaison units specifically trained on LGBTQ+ and transgender issues. A study done by Dwyer et al. (2021) outlines how an LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex) police liaison program was introduced in the 1980s in Australia. The liaison was specially trained to understand LGBTQ+ issues and provide support to LGBTQ+ victims, offenders, and witnesses; however these resources were underutilized. While this study was done in Australia, more research is needed to explore the extent to which these liaison units exist and operate within the U.S. policing system.

Participants in this study experienced emotional turmoil after negative interactions with police. Participants discussed how these longer lasting effects of their interactions included social isolation, trauma, symptoms of general anxiety, and social anxiety. Having a formal mechanism of support following police encounters is one way to buffer the long term negative impacts of police encounters, including trauma-informed approaches. Participants who did experience negative turmoil due to their experiences largely did not report seeking mental health services, however it’s important for counselors, clinical social workers, and other mental health professionals to know how these negative interactions may influence the mental health and wellbeing of transgender communities and communities of color.

Limitations

There were a few limitations to the current study related to sampling and interviewing. While the purpose of qualitative research is not to generalize, experiences of other racial/ethnic transgender women with law enforcement were not captured in the study as a result of these changes in sampling strategies. Multiple limitations arise from participant interviews. Interviews were conducted at a single time frame, which may not fully capture the complexity of participant perceptions and experiences. The inability to conduct in-person interviews with participants reduced the ability for the researcher to build more effective rapport with participants during the interviewing process and observe more in-person behaviors to make for more effective interviewing. Despite trying to use feminist and anti-oppressive interviewing procedures, the researcher’s identity as a White gay cisgender researcher may have caused participants not to fully trust the researcher with their honest perceptions of law enforcement. Additionally, due to technological issues during participant interviews, some of the interview recordings and transcriptions suffered in quality. Participants may also have been influenced by bias, as participant memory recall of events may have changed over time. Also, depending on why participants came into contact with law enforcement, perceptions of law enforcement may have been impacted by the consequences of illegal activity, which may create negative bias of law enforcement for participants. Despite these limitations, this study seeks to understand and give voice to the lived experiences of a marginalized population; contributes to social work values of promoting social justice, the importance of human relationships, and treating individuals with integrity; and seeks to inform current research, policies, and practice working with transgender women of color.

References

Alexander, M. (2020). The New Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. The New Press.

Alzhami, A. A., & Kaufmann, A. (2022). Phenomenological qualitative methods applied to the analysis of cross-cultural experience in novel educational social contexts. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13.

Amnesty International USA. (2005). Stonewalled: Police abuse and misconduct against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in the U.S.

Baker, D. V., & Garcia, G. (2019). An analytical history of black female lynching’s in the United States, 1838-1969. Journal of Qualitative Criminal Justice & Criminology, 8(1), 83-128.

Barlow, D., & Barlow, M. H. (2018). Police in a Multicultural Society: An American Story (2nd ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Boudin, C. (2021). Policy directive: San Francisco District Attorney’s Office gender neutral and gender inclusive pronoun use for people encountering the criminal legal system. San Francisco District Attorney’s Office.

Breslow, A. S., Brewster, M. E., Velez, B. L., Wong, S., Geiger, E., & Soderstrom, B. (2015). Resilience and collective action: Exploring buffers against minority stress for transgender individuals. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2, p. 253–265.

Calhoun, C. (2017). Bullseye on their back: Police profiling and abuse of trans and gender non-conforming individuals and solutions beyond the Department of Justice guidelines. Alabama Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Law Review, 8(1), 127-144.

Canan, S., Denniston-Lee, J., & Jozkowski, K. (2023). Descriptive data of transgender and nonbinary people’s experiences of sexual assault: context, perpetrator characteristics, and reporting behaviors. LGBT Health, 11(4).

Carpenter, L. F., & Marshall, R. (2017). Walking while trans: Profiling of transgender women by law enforcement, and the problem of proof. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, 24(1), p. 5-38.

Avalos, S., & Carrillo, A. (2024). ‘Took my money, called me a guy, and made me sleep in jail overnight’: Police procedural failings when interacting with trans folx. Policing and Society, 34(6).

Cho, S., Crenshaw, K. W., & McCall, L. (2013). Toward a field of Intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis. Signs, 38(4), p. 785-810.

Cohen, G. & Goodman, D. (2023). Rethinking diversity in policing: An analysis of diversity training standards in basic police academies across the United States. Journal of Social Equity and Public Administration, 1(2), p. 65-85.

Copple, J. E., & Dunn, P. M. (2017). Gender, sexuality, and 21st century policing: Protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ Community. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS).

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, (1).

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), p. 1241-1299.

Dank, M., Yahner, J., Madden, K., Banuelos, I., Yu, L., Ritchie, A., Mora, M., & Conner, B. (2015). Surviving the streets of New York: Experiences of LGBTQ youth, YMSM, and YWSW engaged in survival sex. The Urban Institute.

Davis, A. (1981). Women, race and class. New York: Random House.

Dwyer, A., Bond, C. E. W., Ball, M., Lee, M., & Crofts, T. (2021). Support provided by LGBTI police liaison services: An analysis of a survey of LGBTIQ people in Australia. Police Quarterly, 25(1), p. 33-58.

Fitzgerald, E., Patterson, S. E., Hickey, D., & Biko, C. (2015). Meaningful work: Transgender experiences in the sex trade. Red Umbrella Project, Best Practices Policy Project, National Center for Transgender Equality.

Galvan, F. H., & Bazargan, M. (2012). Interactions of Latina transgender women with law enforcement. Bienestar, Williams Institute School of Law UCLA.

Gonzales, S. & Deckard, F. (2022). “We got witnesses”: Black women’s counter surveillance for navigating police violence and legal estrangement. Social Problems, 71(3), p. 894-911.

Greenberg, K. (2012). Still hidden in the closet: Trans women and domestic violence. Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law, & Justice, 27(2).

Griffin, M. J. (2016). Intersecting intersectionalities and the failure of the law to protect transgender women of color in the United States. Tulane Journal of Law and Sexuality: Review of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the Law, 25, p. 123-144.

Gyamerah, A. O., Baguso, G., Santiago-Rodriguez, E., Sa’id, A., Arayasirikul, S., Lin, J., Turner, C. M., Taylor, K. D., McFarland, W., Wilson, E. C., & Wesson, P. (2021). Experiences and factors associated with transphobic hate crimes among transgender women in the San Francisco Bay Area: Comparisons across race. BMC Public Health, 21.

Hamilton, P. (2020). ‘Now that I know what you’re about’: Black feminist reflections on power in the research relationship. Qualitative Research, 20(5), p. 519-533.

Hancock, A. (2007). When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), p. 63-79.

Hendricks, M. L., & Testa, R. J. (2012). A conceptual framework for clinical work with transgender and gender nonconforming clients: An adaptation of the Minority Stress Model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 43(5), p. 460–467.

Hesse-Biber, S., & Leavy, P. (2011). The practice of qualitative research (2nd edition). Sage Publications, Inc.

Hill Collins, P. (2005). Black sexual politics: African Americans, gender, and the new racism. Routledge.

Hillman, J. (2023). Predictors, victimization, and negative health outcomes associated with incarceration among 9180 Trans women from the US Transgender survey. Perceptions of Female Offenders, 2, p. 75-92.

Howard, J. A., & Renfrow, D. G. (2015). Intersectionality. In McLeod, J. D., Lawler, E. J., & Schwalbe (Eds.), Handbook of the Social Psychology of Inequality (pp. 95-124). New York: Springer.

Human Rights Campaign. (2018). A national epidemic: Fatal anti-transgender violence in America in 2018.

Irvine, A. (2015). You can't run from the police: Developing feminist criminology that incorporates black transgender women. Southwestern Law Review, 44(3), p. 553-561.

Jackson, A., Hernandez, C., Scheer, S., Sicro, S., Trujillo, D., Arayasirikul, S., McFarland, W., & Wilson, E. (2022). Prevalence and correlates of violence experienced by transwomen. Journal of Women’s Health, 31(5).

James, S. E., Brown, C., & Wilson, I. (2017a). 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey: Report on the Experiences of Black Respondents. Washington, DC and Dallas, TX: National Center for Transgender Equality, Black Trans Advocacy, & National Black Justice Coalition.

James, S. E., Jackson, T., & Jim, M. (2017b). 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey: Report on the Experiences of American Indian and Alaska Native Respondents. Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality.

James, S. E. & Magpantay, G. (2017). 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey: Report on the Experiences of Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Respondents. Washington, DC and New York, NY: National Center for Transgender Equality & National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance.

James, S. E. & Salcedo, B. (2017). 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey: Report on the Experiences of Latino/a Respondents. Washington, DC and Los Angeles, CA: National Center for Transgender Equality and TransLatin@ Coalition.

Kattari, S. K., & Begun, S. (2016). On the margins of marginalized: Transgender homelessness and survival sex. Affilia, 32(1), 92-103.

Lambda Legal. (2015). Protected and Served?

Lee, Y., & Santiago, L. (2022). Race, class, and gender identity: Implications for transgender people’s police help seeking. Police Practice and Research, 24(1).

Lee, T., Anderson, J., Langsam, A., & Hatter, S. (2022). Disparate law enforcement practices against women of color and gender variant women: The More things change, the more they stay the same. Journal of Law and Criminal Justice, 10(1), p. 1-13.

Lefevor, G. T., Boyd-Rogers, C. C., Sprague, B. M., & Janis, R. A. (2019). Health disparities between genderqueer, transgender, and cisgender individuals: An extension of minority stress theory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 66(4), p. 385–395.

Lenning, E., Brightman, S., & Buist, C. L. (2020). The trifecta of violence: A socio-historical comparison of lynching and violence against transgender women. Critical Criminology, 29, p. 151-172.

Lugones, M. (2007). Heterosexualism and the Colonial/Modern gender system. Hypatia, 22(1), p. 186-209.

McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3).

Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129, p. 674–697.

Momen, R. E., & Dilks, L. M. (2020). Examining case outcomes in US transgender homicides: An exploratory investigation of the intersectionality of victim characteristics. Sociological Spectrum, 41(1), p. 53-79.

New York Civil Liberties Union. (2019). Stop-and-Frisk in the de Blasio Era.

Owen, S. S., Burke, T. W., Few-Demo, A. L., & Natwick, J. (2017). Perceptions of the police by LGBT communities. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 43, p. 668-693.

Reback, C. J., Simon, P. A., Bemis, C. C., & Gatson, B. (2001). The Los Angeles transgender health study: Community Report. University of California at Los Angeles.

Ritchie, A. (2016a). Law enforcement violence against women of color. In INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence (Eds.), Color of violence: The INCITE! Anthology (pp. 138-156). Duke University Press Books.

Ritchie, A. (2016b). SayHerName: Racial profiling and police violence against black women. NYU Review of Law & Social Change, 41, p. 187-200.

Seely, N. (2021). Reporting on transgender victims of homicide: Practices of misgendering, sourcing and transparency. Newspaper Research Journal, 42(1), p. 74-94.

Serpe, C. R. & Nadal, K. (2017). Perceptions of police: Experiences in the trans* community. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 29(3), p. 280-299.

Shields, D. (2021). Stonewalling in the brick city: Perceptions of and experiences with seeking police assistance among LGBTQ citizens. Social Sciences, 10(1).

Starks, H. & Trinidad, S. (2007). Choose your method: A Comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and ground theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17(10), p. 1372-1380.

Stotzer, R. (2009). Violence against transgender people: A review of United States data. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, p. 170-179.

Taket, A., Crisp, B. R., Nevill, A., Lamaro, G., Graham, M., Barter-Godfrey, S. (2009). Theorising social exclusion. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Talusan, M. (2016, December 8). Documenting trans homicides. Mic.com.

Testa, R. J., Habarth, J., Peta, J., Balsam, K., & Bockting, W. (2015). Development of the gender minority stress and resilience measure. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2(1), p. 65-77.

The National Center for Transgender Equality. (2023). TDOR Remembrance Report-2022.

Timmins, L., Rimes, K. A., & Rahman, Q. (2017). Minority stressors and psychological distress in transgender individuals. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 4, p. 328–34.

Tromadore, C. E. (2016). Police officer sexual misconduct: An urgent call to action in a context disproportionately threatening women of color. Harvard Journal on Racial & Ethnic Justice, 32, p. 153-188.

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (n.d.). International human rights standards for law enforcement.

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (1988). Body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment.

United States Census Bureau, Geography Division. (n.d.). Census Regions and Divisions of the United States.

Walker, A. (2011). Racial profiling – separate and unequal keeping the minorities in line – the role of law enforcement in America. St. Thomas Law Review, 23, p. 576-619.

Wareham, J. (2021, November 11). 375 Transgender People Murdered in 2021 – “Deadliest Year” Since Records Began. Forbes.

Westbrook, L. (2022). Violence against transgender people in the United States: Field growth, data dilemmas, and knowledge gaps. Sociology Compass, 16(6).

Williams, S. (2016). #Say her name: Using digital activism to document violence against black women. Feminist Media Studies, 16(5), p. 922-925.

Winiker, A., White, S., Candelario, J., Takahashi, L., & Tobin, K. (2022). “Through the things that have happened to me, they’ve made me stronger”: Individual and interpersonal sources of violence and resilience among a diverse sample of transgender women in Los Angeles. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(5-6).

Woods, J. B., Galvan, F. H., Bazargan, M., Herman, J. L., & Chen, Y. (2013). Latina transgender women’s interactions with law enforcement in Los Angeles County. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 7(4), p. 379-391.

Xavier, J., Bradford, J. B., Reisner, S. L., & Honnold, J. A. (2012). Experiences of transgender-related discrimination and implications for health: Results from the Virginia transgender health initiative study. American Journal of Public Health, 103(10).

Contributor

Anthony Banks (he/him/his) is currently a tenure-track assistant professor at the University of Minnesota-Duluth in the Department of Social Work. Anthony's research focuses on LGBTQIA2S+ populations and their engagement with law enforcement, correctional systems, and gender-affirming healthcare. Anthony borrows from feminist and queer theorists and scholars to inform his research with LGBTQIA2S+ populations. Anthony is also a clinical social worker working in mental health and private practice settings. He works with queer individuals seeking gender-affirming care, as well as individuals presenting with depression, anxiety, and behavioral disorders. Anthony has experience using TF-CBT, motivational interviewing, strengths-based work, exposure therapy, and CPT. Anthony is also Level 2 Gottman trained and has experience working with monogamous and ethically non-monogamous couples.

APPENDIX A

In the analysis, Alhazmi and Kaufmann’s (2022) process of phenomenological explication was followed, which consists of 9 steps. The first step in this process is transcription of interviews, which had already been completed at this point. The second step in this process is “developing a sense of the whole” by reading and listening to participant transcripts multiple times (Alhazmi & Kaufmann, 2022). Interviews were listened to and read a total of three times each by the main author. The third step in Alhazmi and Kaufmann’s (2022) process is a process known as horizontalization, whereby meaning units for each participant’s experience is reviewed and coded as invariant meaning units (i.e. statements or phrases that explicitly or implicitly capture a moment, or several moments, of what has been experienced by participants). Certain criteria were followed to ensure that meaning units were not repetitive, overlapping, or unclear, and participant statements, phrases, and descriptions described the phenomenon being investigated (Alhazmi & Kaufmann, 2022). This process took place using NVivo exclusively. The authors consulted together during the formation of invariant meaning units to ensure compliance and fidelity to the analysis process.

The fourth step in the explication process consists of clustering relevant units of meaning into groups. In this step, invariant meaning units were clustered via theme and description using NVivo and Microsoft Word. A cluster was established if 10 or more invariant meaning units had the same core theme. If invariant meaning units fell under more than one cluster, it was placed under multiple groups. During this step, invariant meaning units were not connected to participants in any way. Cluster groups described general treatment from police/law enforcement, how interactions were initiated, perceptions of race and gender impact interactions, perceptions of law enforcement afterwards, outcomes, emotions during and after interactions, and experiences in jail. Some examples of the cluster titles include “Wasn’t being responded to/wasn’t being listened to/being attended to,” “police mistreated me verbally/physically,” “Race changed the way the interaction played out,” and “Thought gender identity impacted the interaction.” For a complete list of group clusters, see Appendix A.

Up until this point, participant invariant meaning units were kept in the native language of participants. The fifth step in the analysis process outlined by Alzhami & Kaufmann (2022) consists of translating meaning units into the researcher’s native language if the project transcends cultural languages. Because participant interviews took place in English, this step was not necessary.

The sixth step in the explication process consisted of developing a textural description for each participant. Alzhami and Kaufmann (2022) describe phenomenological “texture” as being a description of what the experience is actually like, while the phenomenological “structure” is taking away emergent themes describing essential aspects of the experience. In this step, participant invariant meaning units were then reviewed and connected to cluster titles, whereby the main author then provided texture to the participant’s experience in his own words. This was done in a table format in Microsoft Word, and an example of this could be found below in Table 1.

The seventh step in the explication process consisted of searching for essential structures that could express the entire textual description made in the previous step. Again, the structures are the essential aspects of each textural description. In this step, the main author moved from bracketing to an imaginative variation/interpretive attitude in order to reflect and extract themes (Alzhami & Kaufmann, 2022). In order to accomplish this, the main author examined and reflected on the connected cluster groups for each participant, as well as the textural description devised by the main author in the previous step, and highlighted perceived essential aspects from the textural description that may serve as structural essence. This was then translated over into structural meaning in the final column as seen below in Table 1. This was done for every participant.

The eighth step consists of evaluating the textual description and structural theme of each participant’s experience to ensure congruence. Alzhami and Kaufmann (2022) suggest criteria to ensure rigor and congruence between textural/structural points, including bringing participants in again to review textural and structural units and providing feedback. Due to challenges engaging participants post interview, it was not feasible to consult participants again in this stage of analysis. The researchers made a concerted effort during the interviewing and post-transcription process in order to capture participant experiences by using reflective listening skills, checking for understanding during the interview, and having participants review their completed transcription. Instead of engaging participants at this stage of analysis, the main author revisited the textural and structural units once more through reflection and readings in order to ensure congruence and essence. Co-authors were consulted to ensure rigor and fidelity to the analysis process up until this point before moving on to the final step.

The final stage of explication involves synthesizing the structural units from each participant in order to come up with a universal essence of the experience in the most general description. Alzhami and Kaufmann (2022) state “because this is the final activity in terms of data treatment, the main research question of the study must be addressed directly. The discussion over the structures that emerge from all participants’ interviews should take the form of writing a composite summary to describe how the experienced phenomenon is seen by participants” (p. 10). This process was done using the same Microsoft Word document and table in steps 6 through 8. At the bottom of the table, the structural themes were compiled together to form a general composite of the experience.

Table 2. Steps Seven, Eight, and Nine of the Explication Process