User:AshlynkD/Passing (sociology)

Lead
Usually through visual and behavioral cues, usually trying to avoid stigma.

"Still, both strategies have the same basic goal: to remove stigma from the self that is presented to the audience"

When an individual deliberately attempts to 'pass' as a member of an identity group, they may actively engage in performance of behaviors they believe to be associated with membership of that group. Passing practices can also include information management where the passer attempts to control or conceal any stigmatizing information that may reveal disparity from their presumed identity.

Ethnicity and race
Especially for young children, the act of passing can come with feelings of shame and guilt. A study conducted by Shuko Takeshito, beginning in 1999, found that many passers feel shame and guilt that they cannot be honest and must deny their origins. Furthermore, Takeshito also found that 'invisibly' mixed children who are given little choice but to pass to avoid school bullying and/or social intolerance "find it difficult to form multiple identities." One female Japanese-Filipino participant recalled ignoring and denying relation to her mother when she came to her school as a child. Takeshito also notes that "whether or not the child is ‘visibly’ different from other children in Japanese society, and how their parents and teachers perceive their situations are major factors shaping the children’s experiences."

Sexuality and Gender
Due to bi-erasure, some bisexual individuals may feel the need to engage in passing within presumed predominantly heterosexual circles as well as even within LGBTQ circles for fear of stigma. In Adjusting the Borders: Bisexual Passing and Queer Theory, Jessica Lingel writes "The ramifications of being denied a public sphere in which to practice a sexual identity that isn't labeled licentious or opportunistic leads some women to resort to manufacturing profiles of gayness or straightness to pledge membership within a community."

Disability
In a study on individuals' experience with prosthetics, the ability of users to be able to pass as if they were 'like everybody else' with their prosthetic based off of the realistic or unrealistic appearance of the prosthetic was one factor in predicting whether patients would accept or reject prosthetic use. Though cosmetic prosthetics that, for example, were skin-colored or had the added appearance of veins, hair, and nails were often harder to adapt to and use, many expressed preference for them over more functional, more conspicuous prosthetics in order to maintain personal conceptions of social and bodily identity. One prosthesis-user characterized her device as one that could "maintain her humanness (‘half way human’), which in turn prevented her, quite literally, from being seen to have an ‘odd’ body". Prosthesis-users also discussed wanting prosthetics that could help them maintain a walking gait that wouldn't attract stares and prosthetics that could be disguised or concealed under clothes in efforts to pass as able-bodied.

In sports, some mobility impaired individuals have been observed strategically exaggerating the extent of their disability in order to pass as more disabled than they are and be placed in divisions where they may be more competitive. In quadriplegic rugby, or wheelchair rugby, some players are described as having 'incomplete' quadriplegia in which they may retain some sensation and function in their lower limbs that can allow them to stand and walk in limited capacities. Based on a rule from the United States Quad Rugby Association predicating that players only need a combination of upper and lower extremity impairment that precludes them from playing able-bodied sports, these incomplete quads can play alongside other quadriplegics who have no sensation or function in their lower limbs. This is justified by classifications the USQRA has developed where certified physical therapists compare arm and muscle flexibility, trunk and torso movement, and ease of chair operation between players and rank them by injury level. Yet, thanks to inconsistencies between medical diagnoses of injury and these classifications, players are able to perform higher levels of impairment for the classifiers and pass as more disabled than they may actually be. As a result, their ranking may underestimate their capacity and they may attain a competitive advantage over teams with players whose capacity is not equivalent. This policy has raised questions from some about the ethics and fairness of comparing disabilities, as well as about how competition, inclusion, and ability should be defined in the world of sports.

Academic Origins/Framework (possible new section)(perhaps 1st section)
Passing, as a sociological concept, was first coined by Erving Goffman as a term for one response to possessing some kind of, often less visible, stigma. Stigma, according to Goffman's framework in his work Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (1963), "refer[s] to an attribute that is deeply discrediting" or "an undesired differentness from what [was] anticipated". According to Goffman, "This discrepancy, when known about or apparent, spoils his social identity; it has the effect of cutting him off from society and from himself so that he stands a discredited person facing an unaccepting world". Thus, inhabiting an identity associated with stigma can be particularly dangerous and harmful. According to Link and Phelan, Roschelle and Kaufman, and Marvasti, it can lead to loss of opportunities due to status loss and discrimination, alienation and marginalization, harassment and embarrassment, and social rejection. These can be a persistent source of psychological issues.

So, to resist, manage, and avoid stigma and its associated consequences, individuals might choose to pass as a non-stigmatized identity. According to Nathan Shippee, "Passing communicates a seemingly “normal” self, one that does not apparently possess the stigma.” According to Patrick Kermit, "To be suspected of being “not quite human” is the essence of stigmatisation, and passing is a desperate means to the end of appearing fully human in the sense of being like most other people."

When making the decision of whether to pass or not, there are many factors stigmatized actors may consider. First, there is the notion of visibility. How visible their stigma is may problematize how much ease or difficulty they may face in attempting to pass. However, how visible their stigma is may also determine the intensity and frequency of adversity they may face from others as a result of their stigma. Goffman explains that "Traditionally, the question of passing has raised the issue of the "visibility" of a particular stigma, that is, how well or how badly-the stigma is adapted to provide means of communicating that the individual possesses it." Other scholars further emphasize the cruciality of visibility and conclude that "whether a stigma is evident to the audience can mark the difference between being discredited or merely discreditable". Other factors can include risk, context, and intimacy. Different contexts and situations may make passing more easy or difficult and/or more safe or risky. How well others know the passer may impede their abilities as well. One scholar explains "Individuals may pass in some situations but not others, effectively creating different arenas of life (depending on whether the stigma is known or not). Goffman claimed that actors develop theories about which situations are risky for disclosure (1963), but risk is only one factor: intimacy with the audience can lead actors to disclose, or to feel guilty for not doing so (p. 74)." In addition to guilt, since passing can sometimes involve the fabrication of a false personal history to aid in concealment of their stigma, passing can complicate personal relationships and cause feelings of shame at having to be dishonest about their identity. According to Goffman, "It can be assumed that the possession of a discreditable secret failing takes on a deeper meaning when the persons to whom the individual has not yet revealed himself are not strangers to him but friends. Discovery prejudices not only the current social situation, but established relationships as well; not only the current image others present have of him, but also the one they will have in the future; not only appearances, but also reputation." Relating to this experience of passing, actors may have an ambivalent attachment to their stigma that can cause them to fluctuate between acceptance and rejection of their stigmatized identity. Thus, there may be times when the stigmatized individual will feel more inclined to pass and others when they feel less inclined.

Despite all of the potentially distressing and dangerous parts of passing, some passers have expressed a habituation with it. In one study, Shippee accounts that "participants often portrayed it as a normal or mundane event." For those whose stigma invites particularly hostile responses from majorities of society, passing may become a regular part of everyday life, necessary for survival in that society.

Regardless, the stigma that passers are subject to is not inherent. As Goffman explains, stigma exists not within the person but between an attribute and an audience. As a result, stigma is socially constructed, differing based on the cultural beliefs, social structures, and situational dynamics of various contexts. Thus, passing is also immersed in different contexts of the socially structured meaning and behavior of daily life and passing implies familiarity with that knowledge.

Passing has been interpreted in sociology and cultural studies through different analytical lenses, including as information management per Goffman and as cultural performance per Bryant Keith Alexander.

Passing as Information Management
Goffman defines passing as ‘the management of undisclosed discrediting information about self."    Similarly, other scholars add that "Passing is mostly associated with strategies of information management that the discreditable use to pass for normal [in everyday life]". Whereas some individuals' stigma is immediately apparent, passers deal with different problems in that their stigma is not always so obvious. Goffman elaborates "The issue is not that of managing tension generated during social contacts, but rather that of managing information about his failing. To display or not to display; to tell or not to tell; to let on or not to let on; to lie or not to lie; and in each case, to whom, how, when, and where."

In Goffman's understanding, individuals possess various symbols that convey social information about us. There are prestige symbols that convey creditable information and there are stigma symbols that convey discrediting information. By managing the visibility and apparentness of their stigma symbols, passers prevent others from learning of their discredited and stigmatized status and remain discreditable. Passing can also include the adoption of certain prestige symbols as well as a personal history or biography of social information that aids to conceal and draw attention away from their actual stigmatized status.

Goffman also notes offhandedly that "The concealment of creditable facts-reverse passing-of course occurs". Reverse passing, related to terms like "blackfishing", has emerged as a topic of discourse as critics raise concerns over cultural appropriation and accuse nonstigmatized individuals, such as prominent celebrities Kim Kardashian and Ariana Grande, of concealing creditable information about themselves for some social benefit. Notions of cultural appropriation, racial fetishization, and reverse passing particularly entered public debate in 2015 after former college instructor and president of the Spokane, Washington NAACP, Rachel Dolezal, was discovered to be white with no black racial heritage, after presenting herself as black for several years. As many point out, reverse passing crucially differs from passing in that individuals who reverse pass are not stigmatized and therefore are not subject to the harms of stigma that may force stigmatized individuals to pass.

Passing as Cultural Performance
Bryant Keith Alexander, a professor of Communication, Performance and Cultural Studies at Loyola Marymount University, defines cultural performance as "a process of delineation using performative practices to mark membership and association". Using this definition, passing is reframed as a method to maintain cultural performance and choose both consciously and unconsciously to participate in other performances. Rather than through the management of symbols and the social information they convey, passers assume "the necessary and performative strategies that signal membership". Alexander reiterates "Cultural membership is thus maintained primarily through recognizable performative practices." Hence, to successfully pass is to have your cultural performance assessed and validated by others.

With this interpretation, avoiding stigma by passing necessitates intimate understanding and awareness of social constructions of meaning and expected behaviors that signal membership. Shippee explains that "far from merely appraising situations to determine when concealment is required, passing encompasses active interpretations of several aspects of social life. It requires an understanding of cultural conventions, namely: what is considered “normal” and what is required to maintain it; customs of everyday interaction; and the symbolic character of the stigma itself. . .Passing, then, embodies a creative mobilization of situational and cultural awareness, structural considerations, self-appraisals, and sense-making" Recognizing this, Alexander asserts then that "passing is a product (an assessed state), a process (an active engagement), performative (ritualized repetition of communicative acts), and a reflection of one's positionality (politicized location), knowing that its existential accomplishment always resides in liminality."