The Stigma of Race: Who Now Bears the Mark of Cain?*

Abstract

Instances are cited from the U.S. and India in which individual whites and Brahmans were attacked as being guilty of prejudice and discrimination simply on the basis of their hereditary group membership. These are characterized as involving “stigma reversal,” defined as the imputation of guilt and moral inferority to the members of a dominant group on the basis of descent when the moral justification of the group's position of advantage is being redefined. Evidence of the use of stigma reversal as an argument in support of protective discrimination or preferential treatment of minority group members is presented. It is postulated that stigma reversal is related to changes in self‐conception which accompany minority protest movements and redefinition of the sense of group position even by members of the dominant group. Dominant group members whose definition of the situation is that they are becoming victims themselves may lead to defensive reactions similar to those previously observed among traditional minorities. The negative consequences which stigma reversal may have for public policies designed to help disadvantaged minorities are discussed.

Individual differences in system justification predict power and morality-related needs in advantaged and disadvantaged groups in response to group disparity

“…Disadvantaged-group members, who are sometimes the target of subjugation and discrimination and are often stereotyped as passive and incompetent (Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2007), might experience threat to their identity as agentic social actors. By contrast, advantaged-group members are often blamed for discriminating against the disadvantaged groups (i.e., "stigma reversal"; Killian, 1985) and subjected to stereotypes that portray them as cold and bigoted (Fiske et al, 2007). Advantaged-group members might, therefore, experience threat to their moral identity.…”

Contesting Stigma: On Goffman's Assumptions of Normative Order

“…In sum, most research on stigma relies on Goffman's focus on stigma management and ignores his statement that “in some instances, individuals and groups who are normatively regarded as stigmatized, in fact, perceive the ‘normals’ as the stigmatized ones” (1963:6). Using data from Somali immigrants in Toronto, Canada, I examine one such instance that challenges a normatively shared understanding of a stigma‐normal processes (Davis 1961; Killian 1985). I describe and analyze how Somali immigrants disavow dominant perspectives on the nature and source of color‐based racial stigma and impose their own version of stigma on the dominant Canadian society.…”

Unemployment Stigma and Multiple Labour Market Equilibria: A Social‐Psychological Interpretation of Hysteresis

“…Moreover, this social status is assumed to be endogenous to a population. As more individuals become unemployed, the stigma, or psychological pain, associated with unemployment is reduced.H Such an assumption follows closely the social-psychological ideas of majorityminority groupings (Crocker and Major, 1989;Davis, 1984;Killian, 1985) and is supported by much of the research into the social effects of unemployment on individuals during the 1930s and 1970s. Throughout the latter period, researchers repeatedly commentated on the keen awareness shown by the unemployed of the low social status, i.e.…”