"Ex" marks a spot: The stickiness of dirty work and other removed stigmas.

Abstract

This theoretical paper proposes that some stigmas, once removed, can continue to incite prejudice toward the formerly marked ("stickiness"), essentially restigmatizing individuals and continuing the stressful experience of being a "dirty person" in others' eyes. The authors focus on dirty work roles (e.g., morticians, exotic dancers) as prototypes of sticky marks that can lead to continued devaluation and, due to legitimizing myths about work, may be especially vulnerable to it. The authors argue that stickiness results from internal attributions made by others about dirty work and is influenced by visibility, onset- and offset-controllability, taint, tenure, and how the work ended. The authors conclude with an analysis of how stickiness might affect vocational patterns of former dirty workers.

Contextualizing dirty work: The neglected role of cultural, historical, and demographic context

“…However, because the taint of dirty work is often 'sticky' (Bergman & Chalkley, 2007), individuals may carry the taint with them when they exit the micro culture.…”

“…Finally, whereas observers are apt to impugn the character of the individual, the individual is apt to attribute this condemnation to the observers' prejudices, widening the gulf yet more (Bergman & Chalkley, 2007). The upshot is that individuals performing dirty work are often driven to:…”

“…Hartung, Fouad, Leong, & Hardin, 2010). Accordingly, entering and remaining in low-prestige dirty work is more likely to be attributed to the character of the individual in the former cultures, leading to more marked condemnation (Bergman & Chalkley, 2007).…”

“…As the long-running advertising slogan for Las Vegas stated, 'What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas'. Bergman and Chalkley (2007) argue that the stigma of dirty work is 'sticky' in that it often persists even after exiting the occupation, whether temporarily (e.g., commuting home) or permanently (e.g., quitting). Because dirty work, especially of the moral variety, is perceived to blemish the very character of those who perform it, exiting the occupation tends not to remove the stain of having performed it.…”

“…This renders low-prestige dirty work doubly stigmatizing as individuals engaged in such occupations are essentially blamed for making 'poor' choices ('What is wrong with you that you couldn't find better work? '; Bergman & Chalkley, 2007).…”