|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Moved a Sentence To The Top
I moved the sentence (below) to the opening paragraph. It was buried farther down in the article but is clearly essential to the core definition of what 'stigma' actually is:
"Stigma is often based on ignorance, irrational or unfounded fears, mass hysteria, lack of education, or a lack of information pertaining to a particular person or group."
- Although this is a popular cliché, it's mostly disproved by empirical research, so I replaced it with something based on science. Tijfo098 (talk) 10:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
I added 'sane' and 'mentalliy ill' under the differentiation section.Social stigma being such a major factor associated with visible or known mental illnesses.
I might just be being ignorant but I'm pretty sure 'positive stigma' is
an oxymoron a contradiction in terms. Plus the following sentence ends in nonsense. 22.214.171.124 19:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
it seems pretty lame to me to qualify " a jew in nazi germany, a african american before 1960, an arab post 9-11/"...aren't these stigmas still active? - signed by an anon IP
- Not the same way as it was under these periods of time. It's a social stigma to be a woman in some social situations, even more to be a homosexual in a religious-oriented environment and even for myself a white American on certain issues to admit they have Native American ancestors, there's a small level of self-shame, discomfort and mourning in that retrospective. In the U.S. back in the 1970's and '80s, there was a wave of ethnic pride of an "Americanized" people to safely say they are "Irish, Italian, German, Polish, Greek, etc." without being seen as ethnics or foreigners, the trend of multiculturalism for a "color blind" society to tolerate African-American, as well Asian and Hispanic ethnic identity that once was stigmatized...and the watch word "tolerance" in the 1990's allowed more social groups to "come out" and discuss experiences as a formerly stigmatized group of people. + 126.96.36.199 (talk) 04:01, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
- Let's discuss this at Talk:Stigma (sociological theory)#Merge proposal. delldot talk 09:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Origin of the Term
I'm interested and some others probably are as to the origin of the term stigmatization. Obviously -ation can be taken off, giving you the verb to stigmatize. The earliest recorded use of stigma is in the greek ... oh god... I think it's a diagraph? Or a ligature? Whatever. So where is the connection? -Panther (talk) 16:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
The article appears to be more of an opinion based editorial exclusive to Wikipedia rather than an encyclopedic treatment of a subject. There are a lot of broad sweeping ascertions expressed with little or no facts or evidence to substantiate. Several vague comments (e.g. lack of education?) add to the implausibility of this entry. Perhaps more references to credible scientific studies, with detailed analysis and explanation. What, specifically, does "lack of education" imply? mrcdem
This article appears theory-ladden with a lot of detailed exposés of various theories of how stigma might occur being given upfront. Are these widely accepted in sociology? Most of them seem rather untestable to me, and the wiki article doesn't attempt to discuss that aspect. Tijfo098 (talk) 15:39, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Just some points to add/consider:
- Individuals who are forced, and errouneous, jailed in psychiatric hospitals, and who do not have consolidated diagnosis, resulting on mistaken stigmatization, rejection in social groups and in some exceptional cases, violence and death.
- Individuals who are caught/discovered by having a paraphilia. This subject is similar to someone who are caught to be gay (and who don't want this to become public). Note that paraphilia is also present in hetero/"straight" people and this is worth mention.
The subject is vast. I just reported cases that I know (empirical observation) that resulted in social isolation and deaths in Brazil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 13:24, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
these are the changes i have made to this article:
- the first change I plan to make to the social stigma page is to change the layout of the page, as of now it is very confusing and not orderly. I plan to have the introduction start with the definition then the etymology then the 3 forms of social stigma followed by a little talk on Goffman who first named the 3 forms and then a summary of some research done on social stigma. After this I plan to make the following headings of what social stigma is, main theories and contributions, followed by current research. - the next change I plan to make is to eliminate some categories and form them in to bigger categories to make the paper flow better. For example, etymology can go in the introduction of what social stigma is as the section is only about 2 sentences. Also, there is about 3 sections talking about people who have contributed to the study of social stigma so I plan to form those in to one big section. - the last thing I will do to this page is add some information on social stigma in the media by talking about gender stereotypes and a study done on them. This will go under the research portion of the page. The study I chose is called looking through gendered lenses: female stereotypes in advertisement. It is a study about 150 high-school students who are divided in to 2 groups, one that views stereotypical images and one that does not. The results showed that brief exposure to gender stereotypes played a role in reinforcing them. This study was done by S.Lafky, M.Duffy, M.Steinmaus, and D, Berkowitz in 1996. Mnettle (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Are these people considered respectable in psychology community? So and so said xxx and have published A,B,C, D and E books and here are the ISBN and links... clearly looks like an attempt to increase publicity and promote their books.