Theorizing Stigma as a Hegemonic Process: A Situated Epistemological and Institutional Analysis
Stigma and stigmatization are the subjects of growing interest, particularly within sociology, (social) psychology, and organization studies. Notably, stigma scholarship is characterized by longstanding calls for macro-level conceptualizations of stigma as a ‘(social) process.’ Answering these calls, this conceptual piece is guided by the following key questions: What would be a macro-level theory of stigma? Why is it important to have such a theory? Why is it challenging to develop? How could we effectively develop it? First, major macro-leaning stigma concepts and the persistent calls for macro conceptualizations are reviewed. Given the call’s relevance but elusiveness, and the lack of an adapted concept, it is proposed to theorize stigma as a hegemonic process. Second, an analysis of the field’s dominant epistemological characteristics reveals how they limit its conceptual expansion, thereby showing how stigma is epistemologically hegemonic. Third, an epistemologically situated theoretical framework for hegemonic stigma is introduced. Grounded in institutional field analysis, it theorizes how (de)stigmatization functions as an engine of neoliberal hegemony. This work advances macro-level stigma conceptualizations by challenging prevailing epistemologies, introducing the concept of hegemonic stigma, emphasizing the dynamic nature of (de)stigmatization, and clarifying the motivations of (de)stigmatizing audiences. Ultimately, it underscores stigma’s relevance as a conceptual tool to study broad mechanisms of institutional and societal governance.