ing. Trans people may feel as though our voices do not represent us; this does not just hurt internally, but could also put us at risk for harassment or assault. When we present ourselves to the world (through our speech, dress, mannerisms, or otherwise), we might find ourselves walking a line between what we want to see in ourselves and what others expect of us. Another of my interview participants said she sometimes presents herself as more feminine than she feels in order to be gendered correctly by others. While a voice-training app could be useful, it could easily become prescriptive and propagate notions about how trans people should sound, act, and live. Without appreciating the complex personal and social contexts in which such technologies would be used, they will fail.

 

Conclusion

At CHI 2017, Ann Light presented her
alt.chi submission (for which she won
a Best Paper Award), 4 which consid-
ered what HCI researchers should do
in the face of existential crisis, a politi-
cal and socioeconomic climate hostile
to many, and the continuing decline
of the environment and the associated
uprising of the upper class. She was
asked, “Are you hopeful?” To which she
responded, “No, but I am determined
to make change.”
Her words inspired me to fight for
change in my institutional environ-
ments and through my research, and I
am excited to join a community of re-
searchers who share that goal. As we
pursue work that appreciates the mul-
tifaceted nature of human identity, the
injustices of stigma and oppression,
and the shared responsibility of tech-
nology designers, engineers, and aca-
demics to work toward true social good
(the health of our people and our plan-
et), 5 we are making a statement. And
with every author, advisor, and collabo-
rator behind that work, we are building
collective power. We are beginning to
move beyond diversity and inclusion—
are you joining us?

Addendum

Because this column was first written following CHI 2017, I want to add some thoughts on this year’s conference, which wrapped up at the end of April.

If you made a word cloud from the SIG-
pens inside it. Without that power, we
can be ignored, silenced, or removed,
and the status quo remains intact.

These issues impact not only the environments in which we do our work, but also the work itself. I have realized that asking certain research questions—such as how to build technology for women, disabled people, or trans people—requires critical engagement with sociopolitical problems. In my field of human-computer interaction (HCI), we have recently seen the development of important frameworks and approaches to support this: feminist HCI, anti-oppressive design, and social justice-oriented design. These are much more than research tools; as a graduate student slowly developing my mind-set and conceptual framing, they were impactful. And in a computer science department whose faculty, students, and administration largely look nothing like me, they are indispensable.

CHI 2017 featured papers that applied and built upon these frameworks and introduced new ones: they analyzed the full corpus of the conference’s proceedings with an intersectional feminist lens; explored technological interventions for sex workers; and promoted an equitable participatory relationship between disabled people and assistive technology researchers. I made a point of meeting several like-minded authors throughout the conference, and as we laughed, shared our struggles and successes, and talked trash about the old guard, I began to believe we could change the future together. Or, at the very least, I wanted it.

One of many avenues that beg
further exploration in HCI involves
transgender people. As a group, we
are systematically oppressed at both
the institutional and individual lev-
els: we face disproportionate violence
due to hate crimes and punitive polic-
ing practices; barriers in access to both
primary and transition-related health-
care (and significant health disparities
more broadly), denials of coverage by
insurance providers and lack of pro-
vider knowledge, discrimination in
public accommodations, housing, and
employment; the list goes on. 3 And, of
course, these injustices can be amelio-
rated or intensified by race, class, gen-
der, and disability. Schlesinger’s analy-
sis indicated that only three papers in
CHI’s history dealt directly with the ex-
periences of transgender people. 6

These papers, among others, tend to deal with the experiences and challenges of transgender users within existing technologies, such as Facebook and Tumblr. Such studies are critical in understanding how interactive systems fall short of providing trans people self-determination; they consistently find the assertion of identity, fear of reprisal and judgment, and the importance of collective belonging mark our interactions with technologies. From my own experiences, these findings extend to our daily lives, and the everyday struggles that arise from living in a society that oppresses us. It should come as no surprise, then, that most interactive systems we use today reflect and reinforce dominant and damaging cultural narratives. Technology designers—and researchers more broadly—therefore inhabit a privileged position; whether we perpetuate or subvert oppressive social structures is our decision. My goal, which I share with the inspiring researchers I met at CHI 2017, is to subvert narratives that silence and suppress, that obstruct our self-determination, and that strip us of power. I am committed to using my privilege to collaboratively design technologies with and for trans people.

As an example: in my work designing trans health technology, I interviewed several trans people about their experiences. One woman said that the pressure to come out “perfect”—as an embodiment of a stereotyped and ob-jectified notion of womanhood— completely stopped her from transitioning and forced her to stay in the closet for decades, at the severe expense of her mental health. These narratives are reflected not just in media and culture, but also in the resources and health professionals that trans people frequently navigate throughout their lives. My dissertation work focuses on building a mobile application for voice train-

Who gets to decide
who is “the right kind
of diverse”?