Social identity theory underestimates ideological domination’s grip on the oppressed.

Evidence

NOTE 1. It is interesting to note that Tajfel & Turner (1979, 1986) originally raised the phenomenon of out-group favoritism among subordinate groups in order to criticize “realistic conflict theory” as defended by Sherif, Campbell, and others. Social identity theory was offered in order to account for negative social identity among disadvantaged groups, but mainly to propose that there are psychological pressures for these groups to improve their situation by challenging established hierarchies. The theory holds that disadvantaged individuals are highly motivated to overcome the effects of the existing social system and that they are frequently successful at it (e.g. Hogg & Abrams, 1988; Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986; Turner & Brown, 1978). This view may underestimate the extent to which ideological domination is possible and the degree to which members of disadvantaged groups persist in explaining and justifying the social order that creates their oppression. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2961 (#expands, via linked claim)

Nor can the social identity of woman be seen, any more than social life generally, as merely a source of restriction and limitation, calling forth only disruption, parody and destabilisation as appropriate responses (Grimshaw 1986:141). Social identities are also sources of empowerment and connection, of stability and continuity, which make it possible to draw on and contribute to wide social sources of meaning and practice. They are, to be sure, never unproblematic given the power relations which shape social identities generally and traditional gender identities in particular. But they are capable of liberatory or subversive reconstruction without total demolition and abandonment. — Val Plumwood, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature, 251 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Social identity theory underestimates how readily disadvantaged groups justify their own oppression — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2961; Totalizing critiques of identity threaten marginalized groups who name identity to resist domination — bell hooks, Teaching to Transgress: Education as…, 162; Social identities empower even when shaped by oppressive power relations. — Val Plumwood, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature, 251 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Social identity theory underestimates how readily disadvantaged groups justify their own oppression #expands (0.93) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2961
• Social identities empower even when shaped by oppressive power relations. #complicates (0.85) — Val Plumwood, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature, 251
• Identity politics freezes identity in false shapes for political convenience. #complicates (0.74)