When Jackie Early (CAS ’26) was choosing her junior year housing, she was hesitant to request the accommodations she needed as a transgender student.
“At that point in my transition, I had only told a handful of souls that I had started HRT,” Early wrote in an email to the Voice. “I would’ve had to come out to Residential Living before some of my closest friends knew about my transition.”
At that time—2023—students had to reach out directly to Residential Living to request gender-inclusive housing, which is safe and comfortable housing accommodations for trans, gender-nonconforming, and nonbinary students. Then, Residential Living would house them appropriately on a case-by-case basis.
“Which is very daunting if you’re a closeted trans student,” Early said in an earlier interview with the Voice. “I transitioned here at college. It’s a very scary experience.”
Early was unable to apply for housing with other women through Campus Housing Roommate Matching System (CHARMS) because of her legal gender marker, which was automatically entered into the system. As Early explained, during this process trans, gender-nonconforming, and nonbinary students had to talk to strangers at Residential Living about personal information such as their transition, or run the risk of being placed with a random roommate who could be transphobic.
She found it easier to get the housing she felt comfortable in by applying to become a Resident Assistant (RA)—a highly competitive process.
“The only way for me to be comfortable in my transition was for me to become an RA, because I knew I would get a single space,” Early wrote. “I do not know if I would have socially transitioned if I had not gotten that position, which would have deteriorated my already questionable mental wellbeing.”
Gender-inclusive housing is a recent addition to Georgetown’s CHARMS housing system. In April 2024, students voted to pass a GUSA-backed referendum that requested Georgetown “establish comprehensive gender-inclusive housing.” The referendum requested that the Office of Residential Living would add a question to the Living Preference Questionnaire on CHARMS regarding “whether a student would be affirming and supportive of a roommate who identifies as LGBTQ+.” According to a university spokesperson, “the university’s gender inclusive housing process enhancement was planned before the referendum.”
Over the following summer, Residential Living launched a pilot program where then-freshmen in the Class of 2028 could indicate their preference for gender-inclusive housing in the CHARMS questionnaire. Last semester, this addition expanded to include all students.
“This new process removes unnecessary barriers and treats gender inclusive housing as a standard option rather than an exception,” a university spokesperson wrote in a statement to the Voice.
Jaden Cobb (CAS ’25), the 2023-24 GUSA president who led efforts to hold the student referendum, recalled wanting to build a system that would make it easier for all students to live with whomever they felt most comfortable.
“We would allow them to choose based off of who the person is, rather than what the gender of that person is,” Cobb said.
Apart from student organizations, some university administrators, like Vice President of Student Affairs Eleanor Daugherty, have also been involved in the push for gender-inclusive housing.
“I was very involved in the question of gender-inclusive housing far preceding the referendum,” Daugherty said in an interview with the Voice. “I think the referendum was an affirmation of the university’s disposition that was shared between students and leadership on ensuring that we have inclusive and welcoming housing.”
Daugherty explained that she believes comfortable housing for students has always been a priority to administration.
“Our priority is always housing students on their identity and then making sure they are in a safe and affirming environment,” she said. “GUPride really deserves a lot of recognition for bringing this to my attention and to others’ attention well preceding the referendum so that we would do better work in welcoming students to housing.”
However, students say that the new process is not perfect.
Paloma Gomez (CAS ’28) is a nonbinary freshman. When they first applied for gender-inclusive housing last summer, they found the process confusing.
“I wish it was just easier, cause I know that it was easier for everyone else,” Gomez said.
After Gomez found their current roommate via Instagram, the pair went on CHARMS to make it official. However, they could not find each other. Gomez and their roommate discovered that—despite both being gender-nonbinary students—they had different gender markers in the system. While Gomez had opted into gender-inclusive housing, their roommate had not, significantly complicating the process.
Gomez told the Voice that it took several meetings, phone calls, and emails before they and their roommate were finally placed into gender-inclusive housing together.
“It’s a new thing, but we have it—so why isn’t this being implemented better?” Gomez said. “Why do I have to go through all of this just because I’m gender nonconforming, whereas everyone else just gets it easy?”
In a statement to the Voice, a university spokesperson wrote that the initial pilot program would expand to include a similar process for returning students in the housing selection process for the 2025-26 academic year. As such, this past housing selection cycle marked the first time gender-inclusive housing was an option on CHARMS for all students.
But this year’s selection process, even for returning students, already proved to be difficult.
In a recent interview, Gomez explained that they reached out to Residential Living to secure comfortable housing for the next academic year, which would include gender-neutral bathrooms—such as a private bathroom in their dorm or a single-stall restroom on their floor, which are the only forms of gender-neutral bathrooms that Georgetown housing currently offers. Other universities, such as Wheaton College in Massachusetts, offer communal, gender-neutral bathrooms in all of their dorms.
However, Residential Living told Gomez that they are unable to guarantee gender-neutral bathrooms.
“Gender Inclusive Housing in this selection process allows students to form groups regardless of gender; however, it does not guarantee a specific room type,” a representative from Residential Living wrote to Gomez in an email.
Gomez said they first emailed Residential Living to see if there was a way to get housing with gender neutral bathrooms. However, the only initial response they received was a follow-up directing Gomez’s question to a specific representative. Later, Gomez went in-person to the office—only to be told that the best way to contact Residential Living was through email.
By then, Gomez had formed a group with three other students. After sending an additional email to clarify, they received a response to their original question over two weeks later.
“There will be a gender inclusive housing [GIH] option for students via the Hoya Housing application, which will go live on March 10,” Residential Living wrote. “All 4 students will need to indicate interest in GIH and the group leader will need to determine the group as a GIH group after all members have been added to the group.
Gomez followed the instructions and, with their roommates, applied for Phase One housing, which includes suites and apartment-style housing with gender neutral bathrooms. But, they weren’t selected.
“I know it’s competitive, but also this is one of the few ways to get guaranteed private or gender neutral bathrooms,” Gomez said.
Gomez said they then reached out to Residential Living again to learn about how to prepare for Phase Two housing, which has more traditional dorm housing options with fewer gender neutral bathroom options. They wanted to know whether they could acquire adequate housing with a gender neutral bathroom through Phase Two selection.
“Well, if they didn’t give us housing now, we need to make sure that they’re going to give us adequate housing in the next step,” Gomez said. “So we emailed them a couple of times—a lot of times—and then I emailed them saying, ‘Hey, what actually does gender inclusive housing guarantee?’”
University representatives told them that selecting gender inclusive housing on CHARMS does not impact the dorms students are able to select, since they are based on what dorms are available during students’ specific selection date and time.
“Gender Inclusive group formation will allow you to form groups of students regardless of their gender. Forming a GIH group does not impact the space you are able to select as your options for selections will be based on what space is available during your selection date and time,” Residential Living wrote.
According to a university spokesperson, while gender inclusive housing allows students to choose roommates regardless of gender identity, students need to go through the housing accommodations process to request specific housing.
“Gender-inclusive housing allows students to indicate their unique gender identities and whether they are welcoming and affirming of individuals who identify as LGBTQIA, and to form groups with other students regardless of their gender identity during the housing application process,” the spokesperson wrote. “Housing accommodations for individuals with disabilities and/or medical needs as well as those with unique religious identities are managed in separate processes by Residential Living in partnership with the Academic Resource Center.”
Gomez said they were previously told that they would need to indicate a preference for gender inclusive housing, which would guarantee a specific room type for people who are gender nonconforming or nonbinary.
“I have been told by my [Community Director], by my RA, by the people who were negotiating with housing to get gender inclusive housing, that this is the pathway for students who are nonbinary to get housing that fits their needs,” Gomez said. “Right now, there is no pathway to get housing that fits my needs.”
Residential Living wrote to Gomez that they needed to look for appropriate housing on their own by reviewing how to select a dorm, as well as what buildings and amenities best fit their needs.
“Your next steps should include reviewing our housing selection process to ensure you understand how to select a space during the process. Additionally, I recommend reviewing the available buildings and their amenities to find the best fit for your needs,” Residential Living wrote.
This was concerning to Gomez.
“That should not be my responsibility,” Gomez said. “That should be on the housing system.”
In further email conversations with Residential Living and Gomez’s Community Director, Residential Living told Gomez that an alternative way to get appropriate housing as a nonbinary student was to apply for medical accommodations.
“I recommend Paloma to look into medical accommodation housing as our office can’t guarantee room type in regards to gender inclusive housing,” a representative from Residential Living wrote.
Gomez said that this process has made them angry, exhausted, and terrified.
“If I cannot get guaranteed housing that respects my identity, it is signaling to me that I do not have a place at Georgetown—that I don’t deserve to exist as my true self at Georgetown and I have to conform to some other standard,” Gomez said. “And that’s not okay, because this place is supposed to be my home.”
Cobb said the original goal of passing a gender-inclusive housing measure was to remove the question of gender from the housing process at all.
“What we envisioned it to be—and what I hope it does become—is where we just get rid of gender altogether when it comes to housing, across the board,” Cobb said.
Before Georgetown reaches this goal, Cobb acknowledged that there is significant room for improvement in making gender-inclusive housing accessible to all, especially in the midst of the Trump Administration’s attacks on queer communities.
”Us getting to where we are now with even the option of gender-inclusive housing for people is a huge step, which is amazing,” Cobb said. “But it’s just going to take future generations—especially as some of them graduate—to continue the work to keep it moving forward, especially with all these attacks on inclusivity in today’s current administration.”
While the referendum made it easier for students like Early and Gomez to seek housing, Gomez said the system needs a stronger foundation.
“I really appreciate the fact that gender-inclusive housing as it exists, does exist. Like, you are able to room with someone regardless of your gender identity,” Gomez said. “That’s great, but it is not enough.”
Elizabeth Foster contributed reporting.
Editor’s Note: This piece has been updated to more accurately reflect the timeline of administration’s implementation of the new gender inclusive housing process and to incorporate a new statement from a university spokesperson
