3
Ruby Cramer and Sarah Stillwell |SINCERE: A Relational Safety Model for Counselors
as abusers may target gender identity through coercive
sexual acts, physical assaults, or threats that reinforce
shame, dependency, and fear. Kussin-Shoptaw et al.
(2017) found that 85% of high-risk trans women in
their study reported lifetime experiences of physical
or sexual abuse, which were strongly associated
with elevated psychological distress across multiple
domains. Such findings underscore how physical and
sexual abuse in T-IPV contexts is not only a means of
exerting power but also a reflection of broader societal
systems that devalue and endanger transgender lives.
Manipulation
Manipulation in IPV toward TGD individuals often
manifests through psychological and identity-based
tactics that exploit systemic vulnerabilities and
internalized stigma (Beyer et al., 2022 Kussin-Shoptaw
et al., 2017). Unlike overt physical or sexual abuse,
manipulation operates through subtle, persistent
strategies that distort reality, erode self-trust, and
isolate survivors from affirming support. Abusers may
gaslight TGD partners by questioning the validity of
their gender identity, framing their need for affirmation
as unreasonable, or using societal transmisia to justify
controlling behaviors. For example, an abuser might
insist that a survivor’s gender expression is the cause
of interpersonal conflict or social rejection, reinforcing
shame and dependency. These tactics are particularly
insidious because they mirror the invalidation TGD
individuals often face in broader society, making it
harder for survivors to recognize manipulation as
abuse. Research underscores that TGD survivors
frequently experience compounded psychological
distress due to these dynamics, especially when
manipulation intersects with prior trauma, minority
stress, and systemic erasure (Beyer et al., 2022 Kussin-
Shoptaw et al., 2017). In this context, manipulation
becomes a powerful tool of domination—one that
undermines autonomy not through force, but through
the distortion of identity, reality, and relational safety.
T-IPV
Research shows a notably high rate of intimate partner
violence (IPV) in relationships with at least one
transgender or gender nonconforming (TGD) partner,
along with social exclusion and negative mental
health effects (Beyer et al., 2022 Dolan &Conroy,
2021 Goode, 2023 Henry et al., 2021 Howard et al.,
2020 King et al., 2021 Kurdyla et al., 2021 Marrow
et al., 2024 Peitzmeier et al., 2021 Scheer &Poteat,
2021 Valentine et al., 2017 Whitfield et al., 2021).
Trans women are three times more likely to report
sexual violence compared to their cisgender male and
female counterparts (NCAVP, 2016). Due to the bias
of cisgender and heteronormative language of current
IPV research, prevention programs, public health
programs, and other survivor support services, this
vulnerable population lacks the necessary inclusive
resources for support (Howard et al., 2020). Most
IPV research and support services use language that
excludes transgender and gender non-conforming
individuals, leading to inaccurate data and a lack of
inclusive resources for them. Expanding research and
services for TGD survivors requires moving beyond the
traditional IPV narrative to include their experiences
and stories.
Unique Features, Barriers, and Outcomes of T-IPV
Many common barriers exist in the T-IPV literature.
Most studies indicate that T-IPV survivors face
discrimination when seeking services, such as shelters,
legal protection, and social aid (Beyer et al., 2022 Dolan
&Conroy, 2021 Goode, 2023 Henry et al., 2021
Howard et al., 2020 King et al., 2021 Kurdyla et al.,
2021 Kurdyla, 2023 Marrow et al., 2024 Peitzmeier
et al., 2021 Seelman, 2015 Scheer &Poteat, 2021
Valentine et al., 2017 Whitfield et al., 2021). Research
also highlights various forms of violence against T-IPV
survivors, essential to understanding for providing
effective support (Beyer et al., 2022 Dolan &Conroy,
2021 Messinger &Guadalupe-Diaz, 2021 Momen
&DeKeseredy, 2020 NCAVP, 2016). Momen and
DeKeseredy identified abuse tactics including sexual
violence, stalking, physical violence, psychological
manipulation, persistent threats, financial abuse,
and forcing victims to witness harm to loved ones or
property (2020).
Research shows that TGD survivors face unique
challenges that cisgender IPV survivors do not, such as
being blackmailed with threats of being outed (James et
al., 2016). In 2015, only 27% sought safety in shelters,
with 44% denied entry due to gender identity (NCAVP,
2016). This underscores the need for inclusive shelters
and awareness. Additionally, only 33% reported IPV
Ruby Cramer and Sarah Stillwell |SINCERE: A Relational Safety Model for Counselors
as abusers may target gender identity through coercive
sexual acts, physical assaults, or threats that reinforce
shame, dependency, and fear. Kussin-Shoptaw et al.
(2017) found that 85% of high-risk trans women in
their study reported lifetime experiences of physical
or sexual abuse, which were strongly associated
with elevated psychological distress across multiple
domains. Such findings underscore how physical and
sexual abuse in T-IPV contexts is not only a means of
exerting power but also a reflection of broader societal
systems that devalue and endanger transgender lives.
Manipulation
Manipulation in IPV toward TGD individuals often
manifests through psychological and identity-based
tactics that exploit systemic vulnerabilities and
internalized stigma (Beyer et al., 2022 Kussin-Shoptaw
et al., 2017). Unlike overt physical or sexual abuse,
manipulation operates through subtle, persistent
strategies that distort reality, erode self-trust, and
isolate survivors from affirming support. Abusers may
gaslight TGD partners by questioning the validity of
their gender identity, framing their need for affirmation
as unreasonable, or using societal transmisia to justify
controlling behaviors. For example, an abuser might
insist that a survivor’s gender expression is the cause
of interpersonal conflict or social rejection, reinforcing
shame and dependency. These tactics are particularly
insidious because they mirror the invalidation TGD
individuals often face in broader society, making it
harder for survivors to recognize manipulation as
abuse. Research underscores that TGD survivors
frequently experience compounded psychological
distress due to these dynamics, especially when
manipulation intersects with prior trauma, minority
stress, and systemic erasure (Beyer et al., 2022 Kussin-
Shoptaw et al., 2017). In this context, manipulation
becomes a powerful tool of domination—one that
undermines autonomy not through force, but through
the distortion of identity, reality, and relational safety.
T-IPV
Research shows a notably high rate of intimate partner
violence (IPV) in relationships with at least one
transgender or gender nonconforming (TGD) partner,
along with social exclusion and negative mental
health effects (Beyer et al., 2022 Dolan &Conroy,
2021 Goode, 2023 Henry et al., 2021 Howard et al.,
2020 King et al., 2021 Kurdyla et al., 2021 Marrow
et al., 2024 Peitzmeier et al., 2021 Scheer &Poteat,
2021 Valentine et al., 2017 Whitfield et al., 2021).
Trans women are three times more likely to report
sexual violence compared to their cisgender male and
female counterparts (NCAVP, 2016). Due to the bias
of cisgender and heteronormative language of current
IPV research, prevention programs, public health
programs, and other survivor support services, this
vulnerable population lacks the necessary inclusive
resources for support (Howard et al., 2020). Most
IPV research and support services use language that
excludes transgender and gender non-conforming
individuals, leading to inaccurate data and a lack of
inclusive resources for them. Expanding research and
services for TGD survivors requires moving beyond the
traditional IPV narrative to include their experiences
and stories.
Unique Features, Barriers, and Outcomes of T-IPV
Many common barriers exist in the T-IPV literature.
Most studies indicate that T-IPV survivors face
discrimination when seeking services, such as shelters,
legal protection, and social aid (Beyer et al., 2022 Dolan
&Conroy, 2021 Goode, 2023 Henry et al., 2021
Howard et al., 2020 King et al., 2021 Kurdyla et al.,
2021 Kurdyla, 2023 Marrow et al., 2024 Peitzmeier
et al., 2021 Seelman, 2015 Scheer &Poteat, 2021
Valentine et al., 2017 Whitfield et al., 2021). Research
also highlights various forms of violence against T-IPV
survivors, essential to understanding for providing
effective support (Beyer et al., 2022 Dolan &Conroy,
2021 Messinger &Guadalupe-Diaz, 2021 Momen
&DeKeseredy, 2020 NCAVP, 2016). Momen and
DeKeseredy identified abuse tactics including sexual
violence, stalking, physical violence, psychological
manipulation, persistent threats, financial abuse,
and forcing victims to witness harm to loved ones or
property (2020).
Research shows that TGD survivors face unique
challenges that cisgender IPV survivors do not, such as
being blackmailed with threats of being outed (James et
al., 2016). In 2015, only 27% sought safety in shelters,
with 44% denied entry due to gender identity (NCAVP,
2016). This underscores the need for inclusive shelters
and awareness. Additionally, only 33% reported IPV
