(Trans)National Gender Expertise and the Politics of Recognition

International nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) require a global rights category around which they can make claims. But, social category systems vary across context. How do INGOs articulate a global transgender rights category amid rapidly shifting political landscapes? Drawing from interviews, participant observation, and expert reports published between 1990 and 2019, I show how the gender experts who staff INGOs used a variety of recognition strategies to navigate competing demands from gender-diverse communities, opponents of LGBT rights, and broader political and cultural shifts. Initially, gender experts subsumed divergent gender category systems. As a widening array of gender-diverse people and opponents of LGBT rights contested the universality of the category system, INGOs shifted their approach. Rather than flattening divergences or decoupling them from institutional categories, gender experts substantively responded to misalignments, qualifying and transforming the original category in the process. In showing how INGOs address contradictions inherent to human rights frameworks and reflexively respond to critiques of coloniality, this article advances science, knowledge, and technology studies, global and transnational studies, and gender and sexuality studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Sociological Review
Published
2025-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00031224251388654
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

(Trans)National Gender Expertise and the Politics of Recognition

Tara Gonsalves
American Sociological Review
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

(Trans)National Gender Expertise and the Politics of Recognition

Tara Gonsalves
article en

Abstract

International nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) require a global rights category around which they can make claims. But, social category systems vary across context. How do INGOs articulate a global transgender rights category amid rapidly shifting political landscapes? Drawing from interviews, participant observation, and expert reports published between 1990 and 2019, I show how the gender experts who staff INGOs used a variety of recognition strategies to navigate competing demands from gender-diverse communities, opponents of LGBT rights, and broader political and cultural shifts. Initially, gender experts subsumed divergent gender category systems. As a widening array of gender-diverse people and opponents of LGBT rights contested the universality of the category system, INGOs shifted their approach. Rather than flattening divergences or decoupling them from institutional categories, gender experts substantively responded to misalignments, qualifying and transforming the original category in the process. In showing how INGOs address contradictions inherent to human rights frameworks and reflexively respond to critiques of coloniality, this article advances science, knowledge, and technology studies, global and transnational studies, and gender and sexuality studies.

American Sociological ReviewVol. 90(6)
Columbia University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.