From Silence to Solidarity: Can a Ten-Minute Conversation Reduce Discrimination Against Transgender People?

In Chennai, India, the thirunangai, a community of transgender people with a centuries-old cultural role in South Asian society face severe economic exclusion. Despite a 2014 Supreme Court ruling granting them full constitutional rights, discrimination in employment and daily life remains. It hints towards this issue being rooted in persisting social norms. A field experiment by Duncan Webb asks whether something as simple as a ten-minute conversation between neighbors can change this.

Methodology & approach

Over 3,300 Chennai residents were recruited through household canvassing and community leaders, and participants were offered a free grocery delivery as an incentive. They then made ten real-stakes binary choices between delivery workers shown in photos, including thirunangai workers recognizable 97% of the time, and one randomly selected choice was actually implemented weeks later. Some participants made all choices privately, others first had a ten-minute discussion with two neighbors, and a separate group watched a short video on transgender rights under Indian law.

What was found

Without discussion, discrimination was severe: participants were 19 percentage points less likely to hire a thirunangai worker than a non-transgender worker. After a group discussion, that discrimination disappeared on average, even when making private choices. Part of the effect of the discussion also lasted one month later. The legal rights video also reduced discrimination, but less strongly and without lasting effects. The main does not appear to be a shift in attitudes, but a shift in what people think others believe and do. Pro-thirunangai participants (one third of the sample) were more vocal, more likely to use moral language about fairness and equal rights and appeared to have been more persuasive, which pushed the local norm in a less discriminatory direction. Since 93% of control participants already said discrimination was wrong, this is consistent with pluralistic ignorance (when people believe discrimination is unacceptable but assume others disagree, simply making those shared values visible can close the gap between beliefs and behavior).

Why it matters

For policymakers and civil society organizations working on LGBTQ+ inclusion, the implication is both hopeful and actionable: structured conversations within existing social networks can, in the right setting, be a powerful and accessible tool for reducing discrimination. Rather than changing deeply held private beliefs, the study suggests that reducing discrimination may depend on making supportive social norms visible – especially in contexts where many people already believe discrimination is wrong, but assume others do not.

Written by Lea Michel MSc in Public Policy and International Development by Nova SBE and Member of the NOVAFRICA Student Group.