how multiracial people manage messages of stigma: a ... conceptualizations of stigma are currently...
TRANSCRIPT
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 225
How Multiracial People Manage Messages of Stigma:
A Qualitative Research Study
Audrey Scranton
Over nine million people identify as multiracial in the U.S. according to the
2010 Census, however, research dedicated to studying multiracial
populations’ experiences and communication is lacking. Multiracial
individuals encounter unique situations because they are members of two or
more social and cultural groups but are often perceived as belonging to one.
It is imperative to study how mixed-race individuals respond to hurtful
messages related to racial identity because profound implications for their
physical, social, and emotional well-being result. A qualitative study was
conducted to analyze how multiracial people communicatively respond to
messages of stigma related to one’s racial background by searching online
message boards where subjects posted about their experiences and responses
to stigma messages. Once themes were gathered from their stories, the
existing research on stigma communication was used to create a new
framework from which to study patterns of responses from multiracial
people. General types of responses found were confronting, deflecting,
internalizing, and no response due to confusion. Future research expanding
on the outcomes of each response type on the individual as well as the
offender can help provide people specific strategies to deal with offensive
messages in daily interactions, as well as yield insight on how rigid
perceptions of race are challenged and upheld in interpersonal contexts.
n 2010, the U.S. Census reported that over nine million
people identified as belonging to two or more racial
categories. Multiracial people are a substantial and growing
demographic in the United States. In fact, one in five Americans are
estimated to identify as multiracial by the year 2050 (Shih &
Sanchez, 2009). However, mixed-race people are rarely discussed in
social, political, or academic spheres. Mixed-race people face
relentless reminders that they do not fit into society’s norms, for
instance, race is often represented as unidimensional in surveys and
questionnaires, and multiracial people lack a common community
(Renn, 2000).
Multiracial individuals have many unique experiences due to
their uncommon identity that make them worthy of study. Among
other challenges, they may have to construct a complex racial
identity in the face of a monoracial identification system, manage a
Audrey Scranton (B.A. University of Iowa) is a doctoral student at the
University of Iowa in Communication Studies. She would like to thank Keli
Steuber for her mentorship on this project as well as throughout her
undergraduate career. Correspondence should be addressed to audrey-
I
226 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
lack of family acceptance, struggle in the search for role models,
justify their identity choices to others, and face rejection from
multiple racial groups (Root, 1996; Salahuddin & O’Brien, 2011;
Shih & Sanchez, 2005). Many of these incidents originate from
others who see race as a salient factor in interactions thereby making
these messages related to stigma. The fact that a large population
faces such a stressful set of circumstances justifies the importance of
researching experiences of the multiracial community as well as the
individual and societal implications for these potentially stressful
situations.
However, race is difficult to study because its meanings are
culturally and historically constructed. The United States uses a
rather rigid and subjective racial classification system based on
ancestry, whereas other countries, such as Brazil, categorize people
more by individual looks (Carvalho, Wood, & Andrade, 2004; Piper,
1992). Even more complexities exist in the study of multiracial
people due to the extraordinary variance of the group. Due to culture
and history, different racial mixes face unique experiences and
challenges with identity and treatment (Root, 1998). It is difficult to
study and generalize from a category of people that holds such
incredible variety.
The goal of the present study is to use existing frameworks for
how people communicatively respond to stigma in order to create one
for a multiracial context. This area of research is important because
how a person reacts to such messages may profoundly impact
individuals’ health as well as the social boundaries reinforced or
broken within interactions.
Literature Review
Experiences Multiracial individuals face a unique set of experiences that
stem from others’ messages about themselves. Often this
communication is related to stigma because others find it necessary
to communicatively bring race into the interaction, which signifies
they view that characteristic as salient in the particular situation. Past
research has assumed being multiracial in today’s world is naturally
tragic leading to adverse outcomes (Rockquemore, Brunsma, &
Delgado, 2009). However, not all of their unique experiences are
negative; some have positive outcomes for well-being.
Multiracial people are often discriminated against or excluded
based on race, try to fit into multiple groups but do not feel a true
member of any, and experience difficulties with identity development
(Miville, Constantine, Bayson, & So-Loyd, 2005). They also must
deal with a variety of stressful communicative experiences such as
denial of their racial heritage, exclusion by family members, being
targeted with the questions “What are you?” and “Where are you
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 227
from?” and racial misidentification. These events do not necessarily
elicit similar reactions for each individual, for example, one person
may resent being questioned about his or her ancestry while another
may enjoy it. Mixed-race people’s experiences can also result in a
variety of positive, negative, or neutral outcomes. Salahuddin and
O’Brien (2011) found that while some common incidents related to
multiracial identity (such as multiracial discrimination or lack of
family acceptance) are correlated with higher depression, lower
social connectedness, or lower self-esteem, adversity also yields
positive ways of thought (such as appreciation of human differences
and multiracial pride) that are associated with higher self-esteem,
social connectedness, or ethnic identity.
Racially different experiences arise due to society’s need to
make race salient in an interaction. As a result, many of the incidents
that are unique to multiracial individuals’ lives arise from stigma.
The communication of stigma is essential in understanding this
population’s daily lives and interactions.
Stigma Stigma and conceptualizations. Social constructions affect
how people pay attention to particular aspects of a person and send
messages about those characteristics. People feel a need to classify
others they meet, cognitively link stereotypes about how members of
that particular group act, and discriminate based on a person’s
qualities (Goffman, 1963). Because of how society classifies
individuals, stigma is a necessary element of the conversation about
the multiracial population’s experiences.
Goffman (1963) was one of the first major contributors to
scholarly discussions of stigma, which refers to an individual’s
disqualification from full acceptance into society. Stigma may have
served an evolutionary purpose in the past; exclusion could be
utilized to remove a social threat from society (Smith, 2007).
Goffman defined stigma as an attribute that is discrediting to a
particular social group. He also described stigma as a relationship
between an attribute and a stereotype; a particular denigrating mark
must be linked with a negative expectation for how people with that
mark will act. Finally, Goffman (1963) discussed two important
related terms: the discredited and the discreditable. The discredited
are individuals whose stigma is known, and they must manage their
stigma in interactions with others; the discreditables’ stigma is
hidden until revealed, and they must manage this information.
However, conceptualizations of stigma are currently disparate
and imprecise. A common critique is that the term “stigma” is too
vague, and it is unclear how it can be distinguishable from terms such
as stereotypes, discrimination, and power. In response to this
critique, Link and Phelan (2001) created their own conceptualization
228 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
of stigma as a series of interrelated steps: (1) people distinguish and
label human differences, (2) dominant cultural beliefs link labeled
people to negative stereotypes, (3) labeled people are placed into
distinct categories to separate “us” from “them,” (4) labeled people
undergo status loss and discrimination, and (5) each of these steps
takes place in a power situation (Link & Phelan, 2001). While it may
be difficult or even impossible to tell if each of these conditions is
present in a given context, this conceptualization provides
synthesized, valuable insight into how stigma can be viewed as a
process.
Stigma and communication. The communication of stigma
happens in several ways. Smith (2007) researched the spread of
messages that are intended to teach members of communities how to
recognize stigmatized attributes, thus communication is necessary in
order to convey what is considered “normal” to societies. Stigma is
also communicated to the stigmatized, however, few scholars have
explored this area. This lack of research may be in part due to the
complexity of who is able to define an action as stigma
communication, for instance, questions arise regarding whether
stigma communication is present when the producer of the message
has a negative or ostracizing intent, or if it exists only when the
stigmatized feels hurt.
How a person responds to a message is dependent upon how he
or she perceives the situation (Fleming, Lamont, & Welburn, 2012).
Interpreting a message as negative communication about oneself has
profound effects on a person’s well-being; negative impacts of
stigmatization include decreased self-esteem and academic
achievement as well as a greater risk of psychological issues (Major
& O’Brien, 2005). These adverse health consequences emerge when
the stigmatized perceives that he or she is being degraded, therefore,
the perspective of the recipient of stigma messages is essential to the
definition of stigma communication.
Some scholarly work exists regarding how stigmatized people
respond to messages of stigma. Situations in which stigma is
communicated can be difficult to manage, as stigma messages are
identity threatening and therefore produce an affective response
(Blascovich, Mendes, Hunter, & Lickel, 2000). Ashforth, Kreiner,
Clark, and Fugate (2007) found managers in stigmatized occupations
tended to use four strategies to communicatively respond to stigma:
reframing the job, utilizing social buffers, confronting clients and
social perceptions, and defensive tactics. In the context of racial
stigma, Fleming et al.’s (2012) study about how African Americans
respond to stigmatization is helpful. The authors categorized answers
received into two general strategies: confronting and deflecting.
These approaches involve either challenging the discriminatory ideas
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 229
about African Americans or ignoring the messages. Finally,
Meisenbach (2010) developed a communication model related to the
management of stigma listing strategies including accepting the
stigma, avoiding the stigma, evading responsibility for the stigma,
reducing offensiveness of the stigma, denying the stigma, and
ignoring/displaying the stigma. Although Meisenbach’s work marks
an important step in creating an organized system of responses to
stigma, the number of attributes that can be stigmatized is so
immense that this typology may not work perfectly for each one.
Multiracial stigma and communication. Members of
discredited racial groups receive messages that they are inferior in
many areas of life, are expected to act in certain ways, and are not fit
to do certain actions. Multiracial people belong to more than one
racial group, and it is likely that at least one aspect of their identities
is stigmatized. Simply being multiracial is also stigmatized, due to
powerful racial groups’ past beliefs in the superiority of a “pure” race
(Storrs, 1999). Stigma communication is also unique for multiracial
people due to others’ incessant questionings, misidentifications, or
disbeliefs of their racial heritages.
The common experience of multiracial people being asked to
identify their races can be described as others attempting to complete
the first part of the process in stigma: identification. According to
Link and Phelan’s (2001) definition of stigma, each step of labeling,
stereotyping, separation, status loss, and discrimination must take
place in a power situation in order to be considered “stigma.”
Relating the concept of “stigma” to multiracial people’s experiences,
therefore, can be rather complicated due to the unique situation in
which multiracial people exist. Many multiracial people are clearly
different from the “norm,” but others may be uncertain as to how
they can classify them, this situation brings multiracial people to a
strange sort of limbo between Goffman’s terms of the discredited and
the discreditable.
Even if it is not obvious that each of Link and Phelan’s steps
has been realized, experiences of incredulity or puzzlement regarding
one’s racial heritage still can be classified as stigma communication
because the very presence of such a question communicates the
necessity of knowing an individual’s race in that particular
interaction. Whatever a questioner’s intentions of asking about one’s
racial heritage, many multiracial people describe the presence of such
inquiries as insulting and degrading. Being misidentified and having
racial expectations placed upon one’s shoulders can also be a unique
point of stress for multiracial people if they do not identify with one
race. The presence of inquiries or misidentification also can cause
the racial hierarchies that come with these identifications salient in
interactions. Therefore, attempts to identify a multiracial person can
230 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
imply the existence of the next few steps in the stigma process.
Attempts to complete this first step in Link and Phelan’s process of
stigma are considered to be stigma communication in this paper; the
fact that many multiracial individuals take offense at these statements
makes this phenomenon worthy of study.
How the addressee of stigma communication responds to these
messages may have a profound impact on the social boundaries
drawn or minimized in an interaction (Fleming et al., 2011). Social
boundaries emerge when a person communicates stigma, as these
messages’ purposes are to remove a social threat from society
(Smith, 2007). The communication of Link and Phelan’s first step of
stigma (such as a person inquiring about one’s identity) is also an
assertion of social boundaries, as the presence of these questions can
imply the necessity of knowing one’s race in an interaction in order
to categorize and possibly discriminate. When a person challenges or
avoids confronting the social boundaries communicated, these
borders may break down or solidify. For instance, by challenging a
person’s racial misattribution, the offender may learn to avoid
making the same assumptions in the future. These micro-interactions
make up a larger societal discourse and may eventually have
implications for how large groups of people see these group
boundaries.
The current study’s purpose was to help fill certain gaps in the
multiracial research by adding to the scholarship on stigma
communication related to the multiracial experience and extend the
literature to a communication perspective. The communicative
tactics multiracial individuals used when responding to stigma
communication were examined. As no research has been conducted
that specifically studies multiracial people’s responses to stigma
communication, the following research question was posed:
RQ: How do multiracial people communicatively respond to
messages of stigma?
Methods To study how multiracial people respond to stigma
communication, stories written by multiracial people were examined
by systematically surveying online discussion boards and selecting
stories that contained experiences about perceived negative
communication related to mixed-race identities. Surveying existing
discussions as a method likely brought the issues that were most
common or salient for participants forward for analysis.
Sample Discussion boards are websites where people can post their own
stories or respond to other comments posted on particular topics.
Using the search engine Google to locate online discussion boards
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 231
multiracial people use to discuss their common experiences, search
terms such as “mixed race forums,” “multiracial forums,” and
“mixed race experiences” were used to ultimately find and use four
websites: Intermix (http://www.intermix.org.uk/forum/default.asp),
EurAsian Nation (http://eurasiannation.proboards.com/), Experience
Project (http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-Mixed-Race
/3362), and the forum section of Experience Project
(http://www.experienceproject.com/groups/Am-Mixed-Race/3362/
forum). The main Experience Project site is not strictly a discussion
board, but a similar website in which people can post stories and
others can comment on them. From the threads used, the earliest post
dated June 17, 2007, and the latest dated January 23, 2012. The
sample included English-speaking multiracial individuals who have
Internet access.
Each post, whether an original story or a comment that
appeared in response to the original story, was considered one unit of
analysis. The following criteria had to exist in order for a post to be
included: (1) the author described an experience (general or specific)
in which he or she communicated feeling uncomfortable, degraded,
or disrespected, and (2) the author expressed a response to that
action, whether to the offender or to other posters online. Posters
were determined to have felt degraded based on the presence of a
negative emotional response (anger, shock, sadness, disgust, or
exasperation) to the communication in question. Such emotions were
showcased in a variety of ways, including emoticons, name-calling,
or explicit statements about the offensiveness of the comment. There
were 137 units in the categories discussed in this paper. Saturation in
themes was reached when no new patterns or categories for how
multiracial people responded to degrading communication appeared.
Analytic Procedures A theme analysis was conducted by reading the chosen posts
four times to gather a holistic view of multiracial people’s
experiences. The fifth time the posts were examined was to look
particularly for patterns in responses; the identification of these
themes was established based on the frequency, intensity, and
extensiveness of stated issues (Krueger, 1998). Frequency refers to
the number of times a reaction was listed, intensity signifies the
power or force of a stated message, and extensiveness refers to the
presence of a stated idea across different units (Krueger, 1998;
Rabiee, 2004). Following Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) coding
framework, open coding was used to identify the common themes
within the data and utilized axial coding to map out relationships
among the listed themes. Finally, similar categories of responses
were condensed to set the unique ones apart, and stigma
232 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
communication models were used to create a new framework for how
multiracial people respond to messages of stigma.
Results The data were placed into Word documents from the four
different websites or sections of websites for the analysis. The page
numbers from the Word document where the data are stored serve as
a reference point for specific examples reported here.
The data yielded four themes for how multiracial people
respond to stigma communication. It should be noted that the
cultural meanings of race might be different in each location because
international discussion boards (most posters were from the U.S. and
Europe) were used; the participants still share a multitude of common
experiences, emotions, and reactions. Participants’ responses were
not limited to communication directed at the offender, although the
majority of what was studied falls into this category. Some
individuals were not hurt by the same messages by which others felt
degraded; emotional responses ranged from apathy to amusement.
The apathetic responses were excluded from analysis given the focus
was to examine how multiracial people reacted to messages that were
perceived as stigma. People also commonly used multiple strategies
within one interaction. The four main response types observed
include confronting, deflecting, internalizing, and no response due to
confusion.
Confronting (n=63) Confronting includes any communicative action that challenges
the statements, stereotypes, or assumptions the offender makes.
Because of the rather unique stigma situation many multiracial
people are forced to tolerate (being misidentified or questioned about
one’s racial identity), they must often confront others’ assumptions of
their racial identities. When confronting, they challenge the very
core of society’s expectation that all people belong to solely one
racial group. Reactions that align with the confronting label include
showing anger, revealing or asserting identity/background, teaching
the ignorant, and challenging assumptions with creativity and humor.
Showing anger (n=7). Showing anger, irritation, or other
negative affect is a way of challenging a statement because such a
confrontational emotion can send the message that the commenter
has crossed a boundary. In these stories, anger was not necessarily
used strategically, but it nevertheless had the effect of denouncing the
insult. One multiracial person described such a situation:
I remember one time my friend and I were looking for a part
time job while we were at 6th form, he just randomly said
"you'll have a better chance of getting a job then me cuz your
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 233
only half black" To be fair when he saw how pissed off and
upset his comments made me feel he did try and apoligise and
make out like it was a joke but I could tell by his tone he was
serious at first. (p. 28 Intermix)
In this situation, showing anger communicated the offensiveness of
the comment and possibly changed the offender’s future behavior.
Anger can be expressed in a variety of ways; in another situation, an
individual used physical force to convey fury: “I remember a very
long time ago that some kid ‘laughed’ when he saw my dad and said
‘That's your dad??!!’ […] But I beat the sh*t out of him for it. Wasn't
going to hide my dad” (p. 19 EurAsian). However expressed, anger
confronts the behavior by communicating to the offender that the
message is unacceptable.
Revealing or asserting identity/background (n=34). In
instances where multiracial people are falsely identified or in which a
racist comment is unknowingly spoken around them, they have the
rather unique option of revealing information about themselves that
challenges the validity of the comment, embarrasses the offender, or
reveals the comments as offensive:
I heard a story from another Eurasian about how she went for a
meal with her father (white) and some rude, nosy woman kept
[…] saying on loud how disgusting it was that her father had an
'Asian fetish'. Eventually she got fed up and said 'He's my dad!'
and some other punters congratulated her on shutting the
woman up. (p. 8/9 EurAsian)
In this situation, revealing an identity that others were previously
unaware of confronted the offensive communication and made the
offender look foolish.
Asserting one’s identity or background is another way that
multiracial people challenge the way others think about ethnicity.
Whereas revealing is usually utilized when others are unaware of a
multiracial person’s presence, asserting involves correcting an
assumption by insisting on a particular way to identify. Several
multiracial people indicated feeling frustrated when forms did not
allow them to answer in terms of their racial identities. Therefore,
some found creative ways to navigate this constraint: “When I do fill
out a form and it asks for my race, I choose ‘Other’ and write in
Human Race!” (p. 55 MRES). Asserting can also take the form of
answering in ways that emphasize how a person identifies, even
though the answers may be unexpected: “I always get asked ‘what
are you?’ I […] simply answer ‘American’ (p. 58 MRES). These
answers challenge an offending statement’s presence.
Teaching the ignorant (n=8). Teaching the ignorant is a tool
used to gain recognition and challenge stereotypes; its purpose is to
234 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
paint a more complete picture of reality to counter or replace the
expressed stereotype or ignorance (Fleming et al., 2011). It always
involves explaining race in a way that is more detailed than simply
revealing one’s personal background, presumably to prevent the
offender from making the same remark in the future. One poster
tried to help another reach understanding by detailing his personal
background:
I was asked by a store clerk in Prague where I was from and I
said "America," he then said, "No I mean your color." I told
him that I was mixed with black and white. He didn't know
what I meant when I said black! I stood there for a good two
minutes trying to explain to him what black was. I ended up just
telling him I was African and white. I couldn't think of any
other way of explaining it. (p. 31 MRES)
In this situation, the poster not only revealed his background, but also
spent a significant amount of time trying to make the other
understand the details. Educating the ignorant does not have to relate
to one’s personal background, however. One individual, after
hearing a friend’s ignorant comment, simply corrected his statement:
“Teammate: 'You can go and get a Thai bride. Pretty cheap I hear.'
Yours truly: 'Not likely I'll find a Thai bride in China'” (p. 26
EurAsian). Correcting one’s assumptions is a clear way to confront
ignorance.
Challenging assumptions with creativity and humor (n=14).
Creativity and humor most often were used to make a point when
others asked for specific information related to multiracial people’s
backgrounds or identities. Even though this category is related to
revealing or asserting one’s identity, these responses avoid disclosing any personal information and instead involve answering the questions
in a completely different way than expected. For example, one
poster challenged her principal’s assumption of her and her mother’s
race without revealing information about her background: “My
prinpcial asked me once when she had to call me mom ‘Does she
speak English?’ I just looked at her and said ‘I don't know do you?’”
(p. 25 MRES).
Multiracial people also used humor to challenge existing ideas
about race. This response type always stemmed from others’
inquiries about one’s race or heritage. For instance, in response to
the questions, “what are you and where are you from?” one poster
stated that he usually replies: “Hungry, but I’ll wait till lunch and
Oregon” (p. 45 MRES). Another poster encouraged the use of humor
while discussing a friend’s strategies:
Start telling these folks your Swedish and watch their heads
spin. I actually have a friend who's mom's family was from
Jamaica and his dad's were from Africa but HEEE was born in
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 235
Sweden.....He's had some AWESOME fun with this too!!” (p.
12 MRES)
In both cases, humor was used to confront existing ideas about race
when the questioned refused to answer in the ways the questioner
expected.
Deflecting (n=60) Another common category of response is deflecting conflict or
avoiding confrontation and is a way to conserve emotional energy
(Fleming et al., 2011). People used seven common strategies to
deflect conflict: managing social networks, ignoring/saying nothing,
shifting focus, reframing, understanding/forgiving, avoiding, and
managing information. Many of these deflecting strategies may not
be communicative at the time, such as reframing and
understanding/forgiving. Nevertheless, they are important to include
because how someone mentally processes an event can profoundly
affect that person’s actions and communication as a result.
Managing social networks (n=12). Common reactions for
multiracial people who encountered offensive others was to cut those
people out of their social networks or seek validating relationships.
Many multiracial people stopped associating with people who made
hurtful or offensive comments. One person even stated explicitly: “I
have dumped many ‘friends’ once I discovered how racist they were
towards my own ancestry” (p. 1 EurAsian). Another poster described
such an occurrence:
I met this French woman one day. She offered to help me get
used to the area and I accepted. On our first trip together, a
group of Chinese people sat in front of us and began talking in
Cantonese. She immediately pulled a disgusted face and went,
'Nyeah, nyeh, nyeh!' […] I don’t talk to her any more. (p. 5
EurAsian)
Choosing to no longer affiliate with people who cause stress is a way
of deflecting because it saves one’s emotional energy in the long
term.
In addition to limiting one’s social network, the stigmatized
work to cultivate and seek validating relationships, a response often
involving searching for a mixed community in order to share
experiences with others who may understand. The use of these
online message boards itself may indicate such an action; one poster
stated: “I am glad that I found a group where I can talk with others
just like me” (p. 19 MRES). One Black/White biracial individual
expressed that she wished she could continue to meet others who
could understand her experiences: “I feel left out of my own culture
and I wish I knew of other people in the same unique situation, it
would make things a lot easier!” (p. 53 MRES). Even though the
236 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
search for like-minded others is not a direct response to conflict, it is
an important communication behavior that manages emotional
energy as a result of derogatory or draining statements from
insensitive others.
Ignoring/saying nothing (n=12). Many people mentioned
ignoring comments that are stereotypical or otherwise hurtful.
Sometimes they explained the action as a way to prevent emotional
baggage: “I could have roasted him, but I prefer not to burden
myself with other peoples' stupidity” (p. 26 EurAsian). Others
described their lack of engagement by stating their belief that action
would make the situation worse: “No use getting into a pointless
argument and have a lotta unnecessary friction added to the situation”
(p. 56 MRES). Another poster stated: “Its classic stereotyping. I
don't think it will ever stop, when it happens to me I usually let it fly
over my head […] Its not worth getting the hump about, especially
when it happens because of other people's ignorance” (p. 14
Intermix). Here, the poster saw confronting as an option that was
likely to lead to fewer rewards and more emotional drainage.
Shifting focus (n=5). Shifting focus involves ensuring that
one’s energy is being directed towards things that are meaningful in a
person’s life rather than responding to those who have communicated
something harmful. These values may include family, significant
others, or other life goals. Shifting focus can relate to managing
one’s social network in that people may choose to focus on those
who matter to them, but this approach is not limited to relationships.
Many of the experiences people shared in which they shifted
focus stemmed from hurtful comments; focusing on things that
mattered to them was a strategy to manage emotions. In response to
chronic bullying, one person eloquently described why she shifted
focus:
I have […] tried: ignoring it, talking to people, rationalizing it,
laughing along etc and so on. I am 48 years old, I have lived
through some very bad things and I find the only way I can deal
with it without turning bitter and mean (tried that too and it isn't
for me) is to stay focused on the people in my life I love and my
spiritualality. (p. 38 EurAsian)
Refocusing on important matters was the only way she was able to
avoid stress from the hurtful comments she received. Multiracial
people describe shifting focus as a tool to manage energy in
uncomfortable or injurious interactions.
Reframing (n=18). Reframing refers to cognitively changing
the story of a situation or choosing to view a concept in a particular
way in order to manage emotional energy. The data showed two
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 237
patterns of reframing: participants viewing their stigma as positive
and expressing superiority to monoracial people. Many posters
conveyed the opinion that being multiracial was beneficial even if
they had been mistreated for the same characteristic: “I feel quite
lucky to have inherited the genetic mixture that I have, and that I’ve
received different gifts from each side. Intellectually I think I’ve
benefitted enormously, and maybe emotionally too in certain
respects” (p. 3 MRES). At other times, multiracial people tried to
encourage others by lifting their multiracial status above monoracial
people:
Don’t think that you need to be accepted by any race because
you are special mixed race people are usually better looking
than other races this is a big factor in why we get resentment
from other races (because they want to be mixed race).” (p. 3
MRES Forums)
By reframing a societally stigmatized identity as positive or even
superior, multiracial people are managing stigma communication in a
way that does not directly confront the offender.
Understanding/forgiving (n=2). While forgiveness and
understanding take cognitive energy, these tactics may also be used
to calm down and disengage from feelings of resentment or anger.
These processes relate to reframing because they involve changing
the way one thinks about a situation, which changes how he or she
reacts communicatively. However, in understanding/forgiving, the
stigmatized individual thinks about the offender differently rather
than his or her own identity, as that person would do in reframing.
One responder described his mental process: “Anglo people have
dehumanised my daughter before she is even born, this the reality of
my life. Yet I've come to understand why they have such racial views
instead of condemn them entirely as racists with no hope” (p. 24
EurAsian). Changing how the victim thinks about the perpetrator
may prevent negative emotional flooding.
Avoiding (n=7). Another solution for multiracial people who
had felt hurt by certain comments was to avoid the people or
situations in which they were likely to receive that communication
again. Avoidance can be closely related to social network
management, but is slightly different in that some have reported
avoiding people they have not met whom they fear may say hurtful
things. For instance, one poster stated: “when walking down any
street i do not like to make eye contact or small talk to anybody i
don't know” (p. 7 MRES). Rather than cutting people out of one’s
social network who they know will not treat them respectfully, this
strategy involves avoiding certain interactions altogether.
238 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
Posters also reported avoiding situations in which they had bad
experiences. For instance, several European-Asian mixed females
described the desire to avoid the mortifying phenomenon of being
mistaken for their father’s girlfriend when out with their European or
White fathers: “It's gotten to the point where I don't want to go out in
public with my father at all unless my mother is also there” (p. 6
EurAsian). Others have reported moving or wishing to leave the
areas they were living due to negative interactions. One woman
(with presumably some Black or African ancestry) who had faced
ongoing disparaging comments about her hair expressed this
sentiment: “while i was walking to the shops one day two men […]
shouted that i should go and cut my hair :( It made me remember why
i […] kinda want to move out from where i live now” (p. 3 Intermix).
Avoiding locations one may experience painful remarks may lessen
fear of dealing with such an interaction again.
Managing information (n=4). As Goffman (1963) discussed,
sometimes a stigmatized attribute is not immediately obvious to
others. Others may communicate confusion to multiracial people in a
variety of ways, such as inquiring about one’s racial identity or
misidentifying someone. In response to these potentially frustrating
or offensive situations, multiracial people use information
management tactics. Individuals may strategically hide their racial
identifications in situations to avoid confrontation; being
misidentified and choosing to get away with it is called passing
(Goffman, 1963). They may also answer in ways that make sense to
the asker, don’t tell the whole story, or hide part of their identities.
Several participants discussed passing as a strategy to save
energy: “Nowadays if I can get away with it, I deny the white part of
my ancestry, makes life a lot simplier when you can deny your mix if
your looks favor one side” (p. 16 EurAsian). Sometimes passing
consisted of simplifying one’s ancestry, as one half Malaysian
Chinese individual explained: “I usually alternate between half
Malaysian & half Chinese when I'm asked depending on who I'm
talking to. Saves time and futile effort” (p. 11 EurAsian). These
posters passed in order to save energy.
Managing identity can also take the form of giving the offender
an answer that he or she can understand rather than attempting to
challenge assumptions. In the following example, a European-Asian
person first attempted to educate the ignorant and reveal information
before deciding it was not worth the effort to try and explain:
Her: What nationality are you? Me: British Her: Really? Me:
Yeah. Got a British passport, go to a British school. Her: I
mean like where were you born? Me: France (truth) Her: So
you're French? *Short pause* Me: Yes. I'm French. (p. 10
EurAsian)
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 239
To eventually deflect, the multiracial person related information that
the ignorant would understand despite its inaccuracy. Managing
information in this way is rather unique to multiracial individuals, as
some others can tell that they are part of some stigmatized group but
are not sure which.
Internalizing (n=8)
Internalizing here refers to incorporating another’s beliefs about
oneself, or accepting others’ communication as truth. Some
multiracial people were emotionally or psychologically affected by
others’ hurtful communication in such a way that they became
uncertain or unconfident. With loss of self-assurance often came
desires to be “normal” and even attempts to erase the stigma. This
process is not strictly in the realm of communication, but it can affect
communication.
Many multiracial people, in response to verbal abuse, inquiries
about background, and the feeling of not fitting into social groups,
reported a loss of feelings of self-worth. Wishing to be “normal” was
often expressed in conjunction with a loss of self-confidence: “I
have always seen myself as ugly, and with my skin I feel even uglier.
i wish I was just one race, I am sick of being called a mutt […] I just
hate the color of my skin” (p. 23 MRES). This individual’s
internalization of others’ comments has dramatically affected her
confidence.
The longing to be like others sometimes leads to actions that are
an attempt to eliminate the stigma itself, for example, some change
their looks to be more like one race or another. In these stories the
act was often expressed as a result of others’ hurtful communication.
One woman related a time when she was a girl and she tried to
change her looks: “im mixed race and i have two older sisters and
when i was little they use to make fun of my afro, […] this went on
until i cried one day and brushed my hair until it was straight” (p. 4
Intermix). Changing one’s appearance in attempts to resemble a
member of one racial group is not necessarily a result of
internalization or a negative act in itself; Root (1998) argues that it
can be a way for multiracial individuals to reject society’s racial
classification system. However, the fact that the receiver felt hurt
enough by the social rejection to be coerced into changing her
appearance to feel better about herself reveals the potential for
harmful psychological effects of stigma messages. The emotions
experienced as a result of exclusion can affect how multiracial people
communicate about themselves and interact with others.
No Response due to Confusion (n=6)
Finally, some people reported experiencing such bewilderment
at the time a comment was stated that they could not respond, or they
240 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
gave an answer with which they were not happy. Not knowing what
to say in certain situations may be a step in the process of gaining
strategic communication to deal with these circumstances. Some
described confusion as a part of their experiences when trying to
learn how to define themselves, especially in communication with
others. A Peruvian/Dominican man described this struggle: “Other
kids would ask me what are you? Though I would eventually learned
to say Hispanic I really didn’t know what that really meant” (p. 28
MRES). Others have reported bemusement when others mistook
them for another ethnicity: “People have thought i was almost every
ethnicity under the sun. i can’t decide how i feel about it, but it’s a
conversation that makes me uncomfortable… i don’t really know
what to say” (p. 59 MRES). This perplexity is integrated with
multiracial people’s struggles in discovering where they fit in a world
where others see race as discrete and mutually exclusive.
Discussion The goal of the current study was to use existing frameworks of
stigma management communication in order to understand
multiracial people’s response strategies to degrading communication.
The participants were recipients of a wide variety of circumstances
including bullying, misidentification, racism, exclusion from social
groups, and inquiries about identity or background. These messages
relate to stigma communication because the comments were
offensive and communicated the necessity of knowing another’s race
in the interaction. An analysis of online forums used to discuss
multiracial experiences revealed themes among the responses.
Regarding the research question, multiracial people tended to use one
of four responses to stigma: confronting, deflecting, internalizing,
and no response due to confusion. Confronting and deflecting
included a variety of sub-strategies used to challenge the spoken
ideas or avoid conflict and save emotional energy. These tactics
came most obviously from Fleming et al.’s (2011) framework for
monoracial management of stigma, but both Meisenbach (2010) and
Ashforth et al. (2007) provided valuable information in the shaping
of the sub-strategies.
Implications for Theory The findings suggest gaps in the current research on stigma
management theories. A stigma management model that aligns
completely in a multiracial context does not exist. Accordingly, three
different frameworks informed this work. Fleming et al.’s (2011)
study of general strategies monoracial people used to confront and
deflect conflict was immensely useful in the analysis, but the article
was unable to provide detailed information on specific strategies
utilized. However, even a more comprehensive model such as
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 241
Meisenbach’s (2010) general stigma communication model did not
translate well to the given responses of multiracial individuals
handling stigma. Although several of the actions or strategies
Meisenbach describes were observed, the behaviors occurring did not
necessarily happening for the reasons she provides. For instance,
Meisenbach (2010) lists humor as a strategy used in a self-
deprecating manner solely to ease others’ discomfort, highlight the
stigma, and “indicate to others that they are right to stigmatize the
individual” (p. 279). However, participants here used humor to make
the offender uncomfortable and challenge stereotypes and
assumptions. It is possible that each stigmatized attribute yields
slightly different stigma communication strategies, but if this is the
case then differences need to be specified. These results indicate a
need for a more complete theoretical picture of stigma and responses.
Implications for Practice A practical implication of studying multiracial management of
stigma communication is that individuals may learn specific
strategies to assist their daily interactions. Guidance related to
increasing one’s repertoire of communicative skills may be useful, as
each behavior may yield different outcomes for the individual’s
emotional state or social relationships (Meisenbach, 2010).
Therefore, it would be beneficial for scholars to gather more
information about the health and social network effects of different
reactions so researchers or practitioners could provide more complete
feedback in counseling or similar contexts. Future studies on the
emotional outcomes of different response types or the perceptions of
the best ways to respond could also yield more guidance for
recipients of stigma communication.
Directions for Future Research Mixed-race issues are gaining more attention in social science
research, but scholarship thus far has been slanted by biases and
leaves many gaps. Most research has been cross-sectional, making
causality impossible to determine, and qualitative studies dominate
the literature (Rockquemore et al., 2009). Only certain populations
have been commonly studied, and few empirically tested measures
uniquely for multiracial individuals exist (Romo, 2011; Salahuddin &
O’Brien, 2011). Furthermore, few studies have connected the
experiences multiracial people have with stigma communication.
Future research that fills these gaps will help to paint a more
complete picture of challenges this population face.
As stigma management communication interacts with many
variables, almost endless possibilities exist for study in relation to it.
One such area involves what factors affect how people
communicatively respond to stigma. The variables could include
242 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
gender, sexuality, modeled behavior from parents or guardians,
culture, aspects of the interactive situation, frequency of encounters
with stigma communication, and diversity of one’s environment.
The effects of different types of responses on the recipient of stigma
communication as well as on the offender may also be useful. After
discovering if certain responses lead to different social or emotional
outcomes, researchers and practitioners can give concrete advice for
people who wish to learn how to effectively use these strategies.
Studies on how challenging assumptions or stigma in conversations
affects perceptions in interpersonal contexts as well as broad societal
discourse also may be valuable.
Finally, issues exist with the current breadth of theory about
stigma management communication. This study has emphasized that
multiracial people experience unique stigma situations, and there
exist so many types of stigmatized attributes that it is likely
impossible to create a model that works for all types of stigma.
Therefore, researchers must gather a more detailed, nuanced picture
of the types of stigma communication according to stigma. This
exploration may involve completing a meta-analysis of response
strategies for multiple types of stigma to determine the similarities
and differences among them.
Strengths and Limitations Analyzing experiences from online discussion boards ensured
that strengths as well as limitations existed in the study. Allowing
the individuals to share their stories before attempting to determine
how they communicatively respond was a large advantage to this
method. By utilizing spontaneous accounts, themes and patterns
were gathered without preconceived notions constraining the data.
However, there exist several limitations from this method of
data collection as well. There were almost certainly unknowable
population limitations from this sample, as whoever wanted to
participate in these forums could do so. For instance, young people
seemed more likely to participate in discussions, and it is possible
that different racial mixes would be more likely to post based on
whether a person had the inclination to identify as multiracial or not.
Those who had negative or frustrating experiences related to being
multiracial and possibly even people who utilized a certain strategy
type may have been more likely to post on these forums.
Furthermore, reliable information on the demographics of the posters
was incapable of being gathered, which does not allow analysis of the
diversity of responses or generalizability.
Another limitation refers to the frequency of strategies that
emerged in the data. Some of the listed responses emerged only a
few times, but remained a noticeable pattern or were potent enough
to be included. It may be natural that even significant themes emerge
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 243
only a few times, but caution must also be taken to avoid overstating
the results.
Finally, this study was largely exploratory in nature and cause
and effect behaviors could not be assessed. Future research should
attempt to examine this phenomenon in observational and
longitudinal studies.
Conclusion A clear need for more complete research on the historically
ignored but significant population of multiracial people particularly
in the context of stigma communication is evident. In the discourse
examined, multiracial people engaged in a variety of strategies to
confront or deflect conflict and offensive messages. They were often
emotionally affected by these messages having implications for their
future communication. Future research relating to this group’s
responses to stigma-related communication may not only give people
specific strategies to help with their daily interactions, but it also can
provide information on the social, emotional, and physical health of
multiracial people and possibly give insight into how assumptions are
broken down or reinforced in interpersonal contexts. Studying how
these boundaries are communicated and how borders are being
changed will yield new insight into how people in society relate to
one another and how these relationships can be improved.
References Ashforth, B. E., Kreiner, G. E., Clark, M. A., & Fugate, M. (2007).
Normalizing dirty work: Managerial tactics for countering
occupational taint. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1),
149-174. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.24162092
Blascovich, J., Mendes, W. B., Hunter, S. B., & Lickel, B. (2000).
Stigma, threat, and social interactions. In Heatherton, T, Kleck,
R., and Hull, J. G., (Eds.), Stigma. Retrieved from
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/
Carvalho, J. A. M. D., Wood, C. H., & Andrade, F. C. D. (2004).
Estimating the stability of census-based racial/ethnic
classifications: The case of Brazil. Population
Studies, 58(3),331-343. doi:10.1080/0032472042000272375
Fleming, C. M., Lamont, M., & Welburn, J. S. (2012). African
Americans respond to stigmatization: The meanings and
salience of confronting, deflecting conflict, educating the
ignorant and ‘managing the self’. Ethnic and Racial
Studies, 35(3), 400-417. doi:10.1080/01419870.2011.589527
Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled
identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Krueger, R. A. (1998). Analyzing and reporting focus group results:
244 Scranton Iowa Journal of Communication
Focus group kit 6. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications,
Inc.
Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual
Review of Sociology, 27(1), 363-385. doi:10.1146/annurev.
soc.27.1.363
Major, B., & O'Brien, L. T. (2005). The social psychology of
stigma. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 393-421. doi:10.
1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137
Meisenbach, R. J. (2010). Stigma management communication: A
theory and agenda for applied research on how individuals
manage moments of stigmatized identity. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 38(3), 268-292. doi:10.1080/0090
9882.2010.490841
Miville, M. L., Constantine, M. G., Bayson, M. F., & So-Loyd, G.
(2005). Chameleon changes: An exploration of racial identity
themes of multiracial people. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 52(4), 507-516. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.507
Piper, A. (1992). Passing for white, passing for black. In Ginsberg, E.
K. (Ed.), Passing and the fictions of identity. Retrieved from
http://www.books.google.com/
Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis.
Proceedings of the NutritionSociety, 63, 655–660.
Renn, K. A. (2000). Patterns of situational identity among biracial
and multiracial college students. The Review of Higher
Education, 23(4), 399-420. doi:10.1353/rhe.2000.0019
Rockquemore, K. A., Brunsma, D. L., & Delgado, D. J. (2009).
Racing to theory or retheorizing race? Understanding the
struggle to build a multiracial identity theory. Journal of
Social Issues, 65(1), 13-34. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.
01585.x
Romo, R. (2011). Between black and brown: Blaxican (black-
mexican) multiracial identity in California. Journal of Black
Studies, 42(3), 402-426. doi:10.1177/0021934710376172
Root, M. P. P. (1996). 50 experiences of multiracial people.
Retrieved from http://www.drmariaroot.com/doc/50Experien
ces.pdf
Root, M. P. P. (1998). Experiences and processes affecting racial
identity development: Preliminary results from the biracial
sibling project. Cultural Diversity and Mental Health, 4(3),
237-247. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.4.3.237
Salahuddin, N. M., & O’Brien, K. M. (2011). Challenges and
resilience in the lives of urban, multiracial adults: An
instrument development study. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 58(4), 494-507. doi:10.1037/a0024633
Shih, M., & Sanchez, D. T. (2005). Perspectives and research on the
Volume 46, Number 2, Spring, 2014 pp. 225-245 Scranton 245
positive and negative implications of having multiple racial
identities. Psychological Bulletin, 131(4), 569-591. doi:10.1037
/0033-2909.131.4.569
Shih, M., & Sanchez, D. T. (2009). When race becomes even more
complex: Toward understanding the landscape of multiracial
identity and experiences. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1), 1-11.
doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01584.x
Smith, R. A. (2007). Language of the lost: An explication of stigma
communication. Communication Theory, 17(4), 462-485.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00307.x
Storrs, D. (1999). Whiteness as stigma: Essentialist identity work by
mixed‐race women. Symbolic Interaction, 22(3), 187-212.
doi:10.1525/si.1999.22.3.187
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.