Denying or concealing a stigma causes more distress than acknowledging it

Evidence

One way in which targets of prejudice may distance themselves from a devalued ingroup is to deny membership in the stigmatized group. Allport (1954/1979) argued, “Perhaps the simplest response a victim can make is to deny his membership in a disparaged group” (p. 145). This response, however, is also perhaps the most psychologically costly a target of prejudice can make. People who deny or conceal a stigma from close others may experience more distress that those who do not deny or conceal it (Major & Gramzow, 2000). … Targets of prejudice may also distance themselves from their group by altering their self-definitions. For example, when warned of the possibility of being negatively evaluated by a sexist evaluator, women subsequently described themselves as less stereotypically feminine compared to women who were not threatened with the possibility of being a target of prejudice (Kaiser & Miller, 2001). Similarly, African Americans whose race was made salient in the context of an intellectual test described themselves in less stereotypical ways than those whose race was not made salient (Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002). — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 956

One way in which targets of prejudice may distance themselves from a devalued ingroup is to deny membership in the stigmatized group. Allport (1954/1979) argued, “Perhaps the simplest response a victim can make is to deny his membership in a disparaged group” (p. 145). This response, however, is also perhaps the most psychologically costly a target of prejudice can make. People who deny or conceal a stigma from close others may experience more distress that those who do not deny or conceal it (Major & Gramzow, 2000). Targets of prejudice may also distance themselves from their group by altering their self-definitions. For example, when warned of the possibility of being negatively evaluated by a sexist evaluator, women subsequently described themselves as less stereotypically feminine compared to women who were not threatened with the possibility of being a target of prejudice (Kaiser & Miller, 2001). Similarly, African Americans whose race was made salient in the context of an intellectual test described themselves in less stereotypical ways than those whose race was not made salient (Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 956

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to stereotype threat (Steele) and the double-burden of concealment echoed in Erving Goffman’s work on stigma. — connects to: A stigmatized identity becomes concealable and then actively disowned — Cornel Verwey and Michael Quayle, Whiteness, racism, and Afrikaner…, 73
• DEEPTHINKING: Counterintuitive and dense: the seemingly safest coping response (denying/concealing stigma) is actually the most psychologically costly, which upends the intuitive reading of what a victim ‘should’ do.
• SEED: Article angle: ‘the cost of passing’ — why concealment of a stigma is more harmful than disclosure, and what this means for identity politics and workplace disclosure debates.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 956; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 956