The Harms of Childhood Innocence: Whiteness in Trans Policies and Early Childhood Pedagogies

• In Event: Advancing Gender and Racial Justice in Early Childhood Education: Persistent Challenges and Promises

Abstract

Purpose and objectives: In this paper, I argue that childhood innocence whitewashes our policy and practice efforts toward trans justice. I unfold my argument by conducting critical discourse analysis of policy texts and teacher interview data and ask: What does the innocent child rhetoric do to trans activism and trans (early childhood) pedagogies?

Theoretical framework: I draw on critical childhood scholarship that has theorized childhood innocence as a historical, social construction regulating not only young children’s agency on gender and sexuality matters but primarily racial relations (Robinson, 2008; Templeton and Cheruvu, 2020). The figure of the (White) innocent child flourished in the US during the 19th century in the context of significant social changes threatening the social order and White male authority (Bernstein, 2011; Garlen, 2019, 2021). Making child innocence sacred yet attaching it exclusively to the White body serves America to regulate cultural and racial hierarchies (Dyer, 2019; Farley and Henry, 2019; Meiners, 2016; Ramjewan & Garlen, 2020).

Methods and Data Sources: Data comes from a qualitative case study in which I examined how early childhood teachers enacted gender-inclusive educational policies in New York City schools. I worked with a purposive sample (Yin, 2016) of educators (preschool-3rd grade) from schools engaged in efforts toward gender diversity. I interviewed teachers (n=22), school administrators (n=8), policymakers, and professional development providers (n=19). I also collected and critically analyzed the normative discourses embedded in gender policy documents and other relevant cultural texts.

Results: The political responses to anti-trans backlash and gender-inclusive early childhood pedagogies take the innocent child for granted, failing to account for the intersectional nature of gender oppression. For example, the analysis of policy texts shows that pro-trans arguments towards gender-affirming therapies are framed within child protective narratives, primarily arguing that parents should be able to “get second opinions” from doctors and that “children are at risk of losing life-saving treatments.” This discourse not only ignores children’s right to self-determination but also presumes trans children’s families have the material and human resources to navigate and afford the complex and costly U.S. healthcare system. It obscures that most children do not have access to the type of care these bans forbid (Lett et al., 2022). At the micro-level, findings indicate that even when teachers engage in pedagogical efforts to disrupt gender rules, the ideology of childhood innocence still operates. For instance, I show how a kindergarten teacher mobilized the construct of childhood innocence to avoid discussing a child’s inquiry regarding racial and gender oppression in domestic work.

Significance of the study: In an era of increased anti-trans backlash and violence, where trans people of color are the most disenfranchised, this paper points out the pitfalls of framing pro-trans policy and pedagogy within child protective rhetoric. It is critical that those of us who strive for gender justice disengage from innocence narratives and respond more productively to anti-trans backlash.

Author

• Carolina Snaider, University of Texas at Austin