Social Stigmas

Social stigma is a negative response to individuals who have characteristics that are different from the social norms. This article addresses the sociological function of deviance and looks at Erving Goffman's types of stigma, including his six dimensions of stigma and his discussion of the stigmatized and stigmatizers. It considers labeling theory in understanding stigma further and discusses several stigmatized groups in an attempt to understand the extent these negative labels can be damaging. Postmodernism is looked at as a critique of the interactionist approach.

Day-to-Day Social Interaction > Social Stigmas

Overview

A stigma is a negative label given to someone because of characteristics that go against the dominant norms of a society. These characteristics might be physical, ideological, or stem from some action the person has done or not done in the past. The stigmatized person is labeled as inferior and "marked" in society. Stereotypes or generalizations, accurate or not, must be created and embraced in order for stigmas to be maintained. Placement in these negative categories almost always ensures a loss of status in society. The stigmatized include those who have physical (e.g., visible birthmark, hunchback) or personal traits (e.g., men with high voices) that are different not because of anything they have done. Stigma also can follow those who are considered deviant because of something they have done, such as the criminally deviant. Stigmas can be applied to people with certain health conditions (e.g., leprosy, AIDS) or are used to exclude minorities.

Our use of the term stigma comes from the same ancient Greek word that meant "tattoo" or "mark." These marks were used to identify the enslaved, those who had committed a crime, and others considered socially or morally inferior and resulted in these people being socially ostracized or cast out of society.

Several social theorists have argued that stigmas have some serious social consequences in that they require the process of creating a category into which the stigmatized person is placed. When the group is created (e.g., people with schizophrenia) and the person is stigmatized into the category of this mental illness, others begin treating the person differently, expecting different, irrational behavior. This results in great frustration for the stigmatized, who may become defensive and seem to be reacting irrationally. This reinforces the notion that the person is different and seemingly justifies the placement of the person in the category.

This self-sustaining system is part of a larger discussion of the creation in the eighteenth century of asylums. In his compelling work Madness and Civilization: Birth of the Asylum, Michel Foucault details how, before modern medicine created its particular system of categorization, those we now call mentally ill were considered touched by some force unknown to people, whether it was God or the devil. But as Enlightenment ideas began to be used to understand the world from a position of reason, explanations that were based on science were considered. Four categories of mental illness eventually emerged: depression, bipolar, obsessive-compulsive, and paranoid schizophrenic. While the categories were originally designed to help treat mental illness, they also created labels that, once applied, become very difficult to remove.

In this same vein, many sociologists have identified a stigma as a label that seems almost irreversible. In other words, once the stigma has become visible, it is very difficult to remove. Of course, it is possible for the individual to move to a different social setting, where the stigma becomes hidden again. But if the stigma is revealed, the person will again have to live as an inferior person. There is a great deal of research on the negative effects of incarceration in this regard. Being a person known to have committed a felony is a stigma; the person convicted of the felony must report their status to employers, and other members may be aware of the person's past. The burden of this stigma is exponential, meaning it grows disproportionately to the person's post-prison experience. If the person convicted of a felony cannot work because the stigma of incarceration insinuates they are not trustworthy, they cannot exist in mainstream society and must find other ways of making a living. Not being able to find a job may lead the person convicted of a felony to engage in illegal means to live. If society will not accept the person convicted of a felony as a normal member of the community, then the person convicted of a felony often looks for assistance among those they know and among groups with which they may retain some status, which is often other people who have been convicted of a felony.

The Sociological Function of Stigma

One way to explain the way stigma works is to take the view of the structural-functionalist. These theorists believe that stigma, like all other elements of a society, has the function of making society operate more smoothly, and this happens when people in the society feel connected to one another. In other words, structural functionalists explain such phenomena as being part of the way societies work and attribute negative elements of society as contributing to the overall order of a society. For functionalists, stigmata assist in reinforcing unity in societies, the most important element of a society. They show the majority society that they are part of the "in-group" and, by creating an "out-group," make it clearer what that "in-group" is. The idea is that there are members in a society who are deviant, whether by way of something they have done or by way of something they have no control over and that seeing this gives other people a better overall idea of how to behave. Put another way, each society has accepted ways of acting and appearance, and these are clarified and emphasized by holding up examples of what not to be or how not to act.

Émile Durkheim, the French structural-functionalist, was the first to explore the sociological concept of stigma in the late nineteenth century. In his larger look at deviance in general, he wrote:

Imagine a society of saints, a perfect cloister of exemplary

individuals. Crimes or deviance, properly so-called, will there be

unknown; but faults, which appear venial to the layman, will there

create the same scandal that the ordinary offense does in ordinary

consciousnesses. If then, this society has the power to judge and

punish, it will define these acts as criminal (or deviant) and will

treat them as such (Durkheim, 1982).

What Durkheim means is if there ever were a society in which all members conformed perfectly to the norms and values of a society, there still would be those who, by no fault of their own, would be different from others and because societies need some type of benchmark for behavior, would create deviance out of some difference found in some members. So, by stigmatizing others, a greater sense of unity is achieved between the other conforming members of a society. In fact, Durkheim says that by making some behaviors or physical characteristics deviant, a sense of moral unity, or solidarity, is created.

This notion of creating a sense of unity by having a group of "outsiders" to hold up and show what not to be is reiterated by sociologist Gerhard Falk, who, in his work Stigma: How We Treat Outsiders, related the idea that all societies will always stigmatize some conditions and some behaviors because doing so provides for group solidarity by delineating "outsiders" from "insiders." Falk also distinguishes between different types of stigma by way of making it clear that if a person is perceived as being responsible for the difference, the social reaction is altered. Falk puts stigma in two categories: existential stigma and achieved stigma. Existential stigma is one that a person is born with, such as ethnicity, sexuality, physical deformity, or any other characteristic over which the person has no control. This is distinguished from achieved stigma, such as criminality, body alterations, or any other attribute that comes out of conduct by the individual.

Erving Goffman & Stigma

A complementary explanation for stigma was set forth by Canadian social interactionist Erving Goffman. In fact, the most well-known work in sociology on the topic of stigma is Goffman's Stigma: Notes on the Management of a Spoiled Identity. As an interactionist theorist, Goffman believed human beings have a "self" that is defined by the larger social world. Further, the self, or the perception of what each person perceives themself to be, is the result of interactions each has with others, out of which the individual comes with an impression of what others think of them (even though it may not be accurate). In fact, according to interactionists, our sense of self is embedded in what we think others think of us. Goffman said that we need to put on a convincing act—that we are actors on various stages, and we need to make a believable impression. Individuals work very hard to make an accurate impression on others, what Goffman called "impression management."

Goffman defined stigma as "the situation of the individual who is disqualified from social acceptance" (Goffman, 1963, p. i). The stigmatized has what Goffman called a "spoiled identity," which means the person's public persona, or self, either has never been or is no longer accepted as a qualified full social member by the stigmatizers, whom he calls "normals." Goffman said that we give information about ourselves when we meet people, which is called "social information," and we are more or less open about what we will divulge upon meeting others depending on if we think they may or may not stigmatize us. Further, when we meet a stranger, we must categorize them based on first appearances and try to figure out into what category to put this person; this is called "social identity." Certain characteristics are assumed about the stranger when we meet, which is called "virtual social identity." Finally, there are the actual characteristics of the person, and this is called "actual social identity." The difference between virtual and actual social identity is the space for stigma. Because people are so aware of the negative implications of stigma, they often hide information from others, and this is called "hidden identity."

According to Goffman, one of the purposes of putting individuals in categories is to ensure that members know what to expect from each; in other words, societies have defined roles, and people expect that when they meet someone, the person will act in some accordance to what is expected of that social position. In fact, it is necessary for people to have these social expectations for others in order for the world to be predictable. If we did not have them, the world would be a confusing and frightening place. So, we anticipate how others will behave, and when they do not behave in these ways, we stigmatize them as odd or deviant. Goffman says stigma is a process of socially discrediting or the rejecting of an individual based on an attribute.

While Goffman was an interactionist, he recognized the structural-functionalist explanation of stigma as serving to reinforce the social norms of a society and to further create unity among members. An example might be a mother who is stigmatized as neglectful because she lets her child take the bus home at age nine. Other mothers see how others perceive this mother, and this keeps them from allowing their children to take the bus at age nine. It does not matter if the mothers think it is positive for the children to learn independence; they only see that the "neglectful" mother is stigmatized, recognize how demoralizing that label is, and confirm through behavior and a collective critique of the neglectful mother what it means to be a "good" mother. In this way, social norms and expectations are reinforced among members.

Further Insights

Types of Stigma

Goffman said that there are two types of stigmatized members: discreditable and discredited. A discreditable person has yet to be found out. In other words, the member conceals the attribute that is considered inferior and could reveal the attribute, or it could be revealed unintentionally, by someone else, or by accident. It is also possible no one will find out about the stigmatizable trait, and this is called “passing.” The potentially stigmatized member must keep up the impression and hope not to be found out. The discredited person has either already revealed their position, been revealed, or cannot conceal their stigma. This, then, affects not only how the stigmatized behaves toward others but how others behave in the presence of the stigmatized.

Goffman describes universal or historical forms of stigma: Overt or external deformities, such as a club foot or muscular dystrophy; known deviations in personal traits—in other words, being perceived as weak, evil, or dishonest, as in those with mental illnesses or addictions, the homeless, one with radical political ideas, the unemployed, or the imprisoned or those convicted of a felony; and tribal stigma, which emerges out of a person's affiliation with an ethnic group, such as being Jewish or African American.

Goffman's Six Dimensions of Stigma

There are six dimensions that match discreditable and discredited stigma:

1. Concealable is the extent to which others can see the stigma and/or that the person is able to hide the stigma from others, as in the case of a tattoo of a former gang member;

2. Course of the mark is whether the stigma becomes more prominent over time, as in disease that continues to worsen;

3. Disruptiveness is the degree to which the stigma gets in the way of social interactions, and people notice it, as when someone has a speech impediment or a facial deformity;

4. Aesthetics is other's reactions to the stigma, which is the extent to which people conceal their discomfort; for instance, children may stare at someone who has lost a limb;

5. Origin is whether others think the stigma is present at birth, accidental, or deliberate; this affects the likelihood of the stigmatizer being sympathetic to the stigmatized;

6. Peril is the apparent danger of the stigma to others, or whether the normals perceive the stigmatized to be capable of operating in mainstream society.

The six dimensions determine the level of normal social interaction the stigmatized can expect, including the ability to work, live, go to school, and be a general part of the community.

Stigmatizer & Stigmatized

Sociologically speaking, it is not possible for a person to be stigmatized without a stigmatizer, otherwise known as the "normal." Goffman saw the relationship between the stigmatizer and the stigmatized as a somewhat fluid one that is dependent on the social setting. He suggested that at any given time, a person could be either a stigmatizer or the stigmatized. In other words, Goffman recognized the relative nature of the social world in his analysis of stigma. In order to stigmatize another, there must a sort of dehumanization of the stigmatized. The stigmatized must be separated from the group, and this is necessary so as to comfortably categorize the person as inferior. To do this, the stigmatized must be somehow perceived as a threat to the rest of society, although this can be very vague and poorly developed. Stigmatizing others can have the effect of making the stigmatizer feel a boost in self-esteem by ensuring that there is always someone inferior.

Goffman describes the stigmatized as those who are ostracized, shunned, ridiculed, or even killed. While the stigmatized almost always have negative experiences due to their differences from the rest of society, this does not necessarily translate to low self-esteem. Stigmatized people can have an excellent sense of self against these collective odds in society. Still, there are many stigmatized who feel alienated from society and experience high rates of self-hatred because of these traits that, in some ways, are outside of their own control.

Finally, Goffman said our relationship to stigma has three possibilities: we are the stigmatized, the normals, or the wise. The wise are not just those who do not stigmatize others, but they are those who, for some reason, have insight into the world of the stigmatized. Goffman said that, in some cases, the wise will become honorary members of the stigmatized group.

Examples of Stigmatization

People Convicted of a Felony

One of the more troublesome and socially destructive stigmas is toward those convicted of a felony. Sociologists have long been aware that one of the reasons recidivism (return to prison) is so high is because, once out of prison, it is very difficult for a person who was formerly incarcerated to get work, find housing, engage in positive personal relationships, and meet new people and make new friends. Many are suspicious of those convicted of a felony and stigmatize them as immoral and not trustworthy. People who are convicted of a felony are also stigmatized as incapable of becoming successful and upstanding members of society, including completing a degree. In one study, it was found that men who had been to prison and were returning to college were very aware of the stigma associated with being in prison; this created a great deal of anxiety for them and lowered their self-esteem, and they manufactured many ways of covering up their past.

Class Consciousness

Another study looked at how working-class students hid their lower-class status when they attended an Ivy League college. It is in these cases we can see the relativity of stigma; in other words, being working class is not inherently socially deplorable, but for those students competing with others from the upper classes, they had to hide their social actual identities.

Sex Workers

Many women who are sex workers report hiding their identities, as detailed in a study that looked at how exotic dancers coped with the stigma that came from their partners. While the dancers did not claim to be personally ashamed of their occupations, they did report internalizing the shame and ridicule they got from their partners. Many of them were not willing to accept the trade-off and were more likely to change partners rather than change jobs. On the other hand, in a 2012 study, female escorts reported greater social support when they shared their actual social identities with selected individuals than when they concealed their identities completely to avoid stigmatization.

Stigma and COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 provided a look into the social stigmas that can occur within the context of health. These stigmas occur when a negative association is made between a disease and a group of people. The treatment of the group of people declines due to their association with the disease. This was seen in relation to specific ethnic groups during the pandemic.

Viewpoints

Postmodernist critiques of these theories of stigma lie, for the most part, in an alternative explanation of the self. That is, postmodern theories are those that see the social world as fractioned, or many pieces, that are not reality but perceived reality. Postmodernism questions assumptions of the modern ideas of reason and rationalism. Interactionist theories are embedded in ideas of pragmatism that are inherently modern. So, the notion of identity and self in the way the sociologists of the twenty-first century see it is absurd to them.

For this reason, theories of stigma that use the notion of social identity fall short. Related to this is French historian Michel Foucault's idea that the self is the effect of the power relations in societies. For Foucault, the self we think of is a body that is limited and formed through forces of power. Instead of an individual being a thing separate from the rest of the world, a rational creature, the self is a coerced entity, not an agent, but a mechanism for the power structure to work through. So, stigma cannot be due to a spoiled identity because there is no identity. Instead, stigma is a way to reproduce the power structure.

Terms & Concepts

Achieved Stigmas: According to Gerhard Falk, these are stigmas received because of something the individual did or was responsible for doing.

Actual Social Identity: According to Erving Goffman, these are the characteristics that are truly part of the person versus the characteristics that are assumed about the person.

Existential Stigmas: According to Gerhard Falk, these are stigmas received because of something the individual was born with and has no true responsibility for.

Labeling Theory: Howard Becker's theory explaining deviance as a process of socialization.

Postmodernism: A theory seen in sociology, as well as literature, architecture, and history, it contests the rational ideas that emerged from the Enlightenment and argues that power structures are the forces that define the social world.

Social Identity: According to Erving Goffman, this is the identity given to strangers based on an immediate categorization of the person.

Social Information: According to Erving Goffman, the information given to others upon meeting them.

Virtual Identity: According to Erving Goffman, the difference between the characteristics applied to the person and the person's actual identity; a perceived identity.

Bibliography

A guide to preventing and addressing social stigma associated with COVID-19. (2020, Feb. 24). World Health Organization (WHO). Retrieved June 11, 2023, from https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/a-guide-to-preventing-and-addressing-social-stigma-associated-with-covid-19

Barratt, W. (2011). Social class on campus: Theories and manifestations. Sterling, VA: Stylus Pub. Retrieved October 30, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost).

Bradley, M. (2007). Girlfriends, wives, and strippers: Managing stigma in exotic dancer romantic relationships. Deviant Behavior, 28, 379–406. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text.

Campbell, C., & Deacon, H. (2006). Unraveling the contexts of stigma: From internalisation to resistance to change. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 16, 411–417. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier

Copenhaver, A., Edwards-Willey, T., & Byers, B. (2007). Journeys in social stigma: The lives of formerly incarcerated felons in higher education. Journal of Correctional Education, 58, 268–283. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier.

Durkheim, E. (1982). The rules of sociological method. New York, NY: Free Press.

Falk, G. (2001). Stigma: How we treat outsiders. New York, NY: Prometheus Books.

Foucault, M. (1994). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. London, England: Routledge.

Foucault, M. (2001). Madness and civilization: Birth of the asylum. London, England: Routledge.

Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Doubleday/Anchor Books.

Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of a spoiled identity. New York, NY: Prentice-Hall.

González-Torres, M., Oraa, R., Arístegui, M., Fernández-Rivas, A., & Guimon, J. (2007). Stigma and discrimination towards people with schizophrenia and their family members. Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42, 14–23. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier.

Granfield, R. (1991). Making it by faking it: Working-class students in an elite academic environment. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 20, 331–351.

Heatherton, T., Kleck, R., Hebl, M., & Hull, J. (Eds.) (2000). The social psychology of stigma. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Koken, J. (2012). Independent female escort's strategies for coping with sex work related stigma. Sexuality & Culture, 16, 209–229. Retrieved October 30, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.

Lamont, M., & Mizrachi, N. (2012). Ordinary people doing extraordinary things: Responses to stigmatization in comparative perspective. Ethnic & Racial Studies, 35, 365–381. Retrieved October 30, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.

Murphy, D. S., Fuleihan, B., Richards, S. C., & Jones, R. S. (2011). The electronic 'scarlet letter': Criminal backgrounding and a perpetual spoiled identity. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 50, 101–118. Retrieved October 30, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.

Peitl, M., Peitl, V., Pavlović, E., Prološčić, J., & Petrić, D. (2011). Stigmatization of patients suffering from schizophrenia. Collegium Antropologicum, 35, 141–145. Retrieved October 30, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text.

Suggested Reading

Curra, J. (2011). Being deviant. In The relativity of deviance (pp. 33–60). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved October 30, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database eBook Academic Collection (EBSCOhost).

Johnson, C. (2008). Don't call him a cowboy: Masculinity, cowboy drag, and a costume change. Journal of Leisure Research, 40, 385–403. Retrieved September 23, 2008, from EBSCO online database, Academic Search Premier.

Peacock, J., & Greene, D. (2007). I am who I am, and I am who you say I am: Identity salience, commitment, and competing paradigms. Michigan Sociological Review, 21,149–178. Retrieved August 27, 2008, from EBSCO online database, SocINDEX with Full Text.

Rosenhan, D. (1973). On being sane in insane places. Science, 179, 250–258.