Description
Existing literature treats the corrected identity of stigmatized states as i) non-stigmatized, ii) a parolee whose past crimes are not forgotten, and iii) a legitimate identity that fails to get reintegrated with the group of the stigmatizers. In each of these dynamics of social (non)recognition, one is left unsure whether the amendment of non-compliant speech or the correction of an undertaken incongruent act can lead to any form of legitimate recognition from the normals. In addressing this gap, this paper argues that corrective identity typologies are dependent on the ways in which the stigmatized convinces the stigmatizer of the former’s new identity, rather than the engaged corrective act. To do so, and using the empirical cases of India, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Iran, this paper develops a political rhetoric typology employed by the stigmatized in terms of forensic rhetoric (using a track record of past compliant acts in wanting justice for oneself), compliant rhetoric (acceptance of previous incongruent acts and discourses), and stasis rhetoric (robust contestation discourses over long periods of time). Alongside rooting this typology in the anxious relationship between the stigmatized and the stigmatizer, this paper contributes to the scholarship on stigma management and the literature on political rhetoric.
Keywords: Act; Behavior; Identity; Rhetoric; Stigmatized
