Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Dehumanization
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Conceptualizations == [[File:1895erzurum-victims.jpg|thumb|Slain Armenians in [[Erzurum]] as part of [[Hamidian massacre]]]] Behaviorally, dehumanization describes a [[disposition]] towards others that debases the others' individuality by either portraying it as an "individual" species or by portraying it as an "individual" object (e.g., someone who acts inhumanely towards humans). As a process, dehumanization may be understood as the opposite of [[personification]], a figure of speech in which inanimate objects or abstractions are endowed with human qualities; dehumanization then is the disendowment of these same qualities or a reduction to [[abstraction]].<ref>{{cite web|date=2019-03-17|title=Dehumanization is a mental loophole..|url=https://betterblokes.org.nz/2019/03/dehumanization-is-a-mental-loophole/|access-date=2021-03-25|website=Free Peer Support for Male Sexual Abuse Survivors|language=en-US |author1=Betterblokesnz }}</ref> Dehumanization can occur in both absolute and relative forms.<ref name="Haslam2014245">{{cite journal |last1=Nick |first1=Haslam |last2=Steve |first2=Loughnan |date=3 January 2014 |title=Dehumanization and Infrahumanization |journal=Annual Review of Psychology |volume=65 |issue=1 |pages=399–423 |doi=10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045 |pmid=23808915 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Absolute dehumanization involves perceiving a group as entirely devoid of human qualities, while relative dehumanization entails attributing fewer human characteristics to one group in comparison to another.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Historically, dehumanization has involved the outright denial of someone's humanity, such as in claims that certain groups, like enslaved people, were not fully human.<ref name=":0236"/> It can also portray others as less human, such as through the [[objectification]] of women or the [[demonization]] of migrants.<ref name=":0236"/> Both forms are understood as expressions of dehumanization, differing primarily in the extent to which human attributes are denied.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> This distinction relates to the difference between blatant and subtle forms of dehumanization.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Blatant dehumanization typically involves overt and explicit comparisons to animals or other non-human entities, often verbalized through direct language.<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal |last=Nick |first=Haslam |date=2024 |title=Dehumanization and mental health |journal=World Psychiatry |language=en |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=173–174 |doi=10.1002/wps.21186 |issn=2051-5545 |pmc=11083880 |pmid=38727065}}</ref> In contrast, subtle dehumanization, often referred to as [[Infrahumanisation|infrahumanization]], manifests in the implicit belief that members of out-groups possess fewer uniquely human emotions or traits.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> These processes may occur unconsciously.<ref name=":12" /> Early studies on dehumanization focused primarily on its blatant forms, particularly in the context of intergroup conflicts.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> However, subsequent research has indicated that dehumanization could also occur in more subtle ways, even in the absence of overt hostility.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Moreover, although traditionally associated with dominant or oppressive groups within hierarchical structures, research indicates that dehumanization can occur reciprocally, including amongst oppressed or disadvantaged groups.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Emile |first1=Bruneau |last2=Kteily |first2=Nour |date=2017-07-26 |title=The enemy as animal: Symmetric dehumanization during asymmetric warfare |journal=PLOS ONE |language=en |volume=12 |issue=7 |pages=e0181422 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0181422 |doi-access=free |issn=1932-6203 |pmc=5528981 |pmid=28746412|bibcode=2017PLoSO..1281422B }}</ref> [[File:Contest To Cut Down 100 People.jpg|thumb|Two [[Imperial Japanese Army]] officers in [[Second Sino-Japanese War|occupied China]] who competed to see who could kill [[Contest to kill 100 people using a sword|one hundred Chinese people with a sword]] first during the [[Nanjing Massacre]]]]Animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization are further distinguished based on their distinct psychological underpinnings, which influence the contexts in which dehumanization occurs and the forms of harm it may motivate.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Jamie L. |first1=Goldenberg |last2=Courtney |first2=Emily P. |last3=Felig |first3=Roxanne N. |date=January 2021 |title=Supporting the Dehumanization Hypothesis, but Under What Conditions? A Commentary on Over (2021) |url=https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32348710 |journal=Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=14–21 |doi=10.1177/1745691620917659 |issn=1745-6924 |pmid=32348710}}</ref> Also, the distinction between animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization lies not only in their content but also in the typical contexts of application.<ref name="Haslam, N, 200622">{{cite journal |last1=Haslam |first1=Nick |year=2006 |title=Dehumanization: An Integrative Review |url=http://general.utpb.edu/FAC/hughes_j/Haslam%20on%20dehumanization.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=[[Personality and Social Psychology Review]] |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=252–264 |doi=10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4 |pmid=16859440 |s2cid=18142674 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130626110654/http://general.utpb.edu/fac/hughes_j/Haslam%20on%20dehumanization.pdf |archive-date=2013-06-26}}</ref> Animalistic dehumanization is primarily observed on intergroup dynamics,<ref name="Haslam, N, 200622" /> where individuals or groups are seen as lacking culture, civility, or [[rationality]], traits thought to separate humans from animals.'''''<ref>{{Cite book |last=Yancey |first=George |title=Dehumanizing Christians: Cultural Competition in a Multicultural World |publisher=Transaction Publishers |year=2014 |isbn=9781412852678 |location=New Brunswick, NJ |page=36}}</ref>''''' In contrast, mechanistic dehumanization tends to occur in interpersonal settings,<ref name="Haslam, N, 200622" /> where people are perceived as lacking emotionality, warmth, and other qualities associated with lived beings,<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> akin to robots and machines.<ref name=":0236"/> Although animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization are often presented as distinct dimensions, they are not mutually exclusive; in some cases, individuals or groups may be denied traits associated with both.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Dehumanization is widely understood as a psychological mechanism that facilitates violence and [[Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment|inhumane treatment]].<ref name=":0236"/> It plays a central role in justifying harm by removing the moral consideration typically granted to human beings, thereby weakening psychological restraints such as compassion and empathy.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> One component of this process is the denial of others' mental states, known as "dementalization," which contributes to their moral exclusion and increases the likelihood of mistreatment.<ref name="Haslam2014245" /> Scholars distinguish dehumanization from related psychological phenomena such as dislike, as it entails the denial of a person's moral and mental worth, adding a particularly harmful layer by diminishing the relevance of their suffering.<ref name=":22">{{Cite journal |last1=Nour |first1=Kteily |last2=Alexander |first2=Landry |date=2022-03-01 |title=Dehumanization: trends, insights, and challenges |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661321003119 |journal=Trends in Cognitive Sciences |language=English |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=222–240 |doi=10.1016/j.tics.2021.12.003 |issn=1364-6613 |pmid=35042655}}</ref> Unlike people who are stigmatized or marginalized but still recognized as normatively human, individuals who are dehumanized are perceived as fundamentally lacking in essential human qualities and moral worth.<ref name=":04">{{Cite book |last=Adrienne |first=De Ruiter |title=Dehumanisation in the global migration crisis |date=2024 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-889340-0 |edition=1 |location=New York}}</ref> This distinction is significant because moral inclusion often imposes limits on how individuals may be treated, whereas dehumanization removes such constraints, enabling more extreme forms of violence and exclusion.<ref name=":04"/> Although dehumanization is a significant factor in enabling violent behaviour, scholars emphasize that it is not sufficient on its own to explain all instances of violence.<ref name=":0236"/> Research indicates a strong association between dehumanization and increased levels of aggression, and it can be used to justify or sustain acts of violence and long-term animosity.<ref name=":23">{{Cite journal |last1=Kteily |first1=Nour S. |last2=Landry |first2=Alexander P. |date=2022-03-01 |title=Dehumanization: trends, insights, and challenges |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661321003119 |journal=Trends in Cognitive Sciences |language=English |volume=26 |issue=3 |pages=222–240 |doi=10.1016/j.tics.2021.12.003 |issn=1364-6613 |pmid=35042655}}</ref> It may also intensify intergroup conflict by sharpening distinctions between [[In-group and out-group|in-groups and out-groups.]]<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Daniel Roy Sadek |first1=Habib |last2=Salvatore |first2=Giorgi |last3=Brenda |first3=Curtis |date=2023-07-04 |title=Role of the media in promoting the dehumanization of people who use drugs |journal=The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse |volume=49 |issue=4 |pages=371–380 |doi=10.1080/00952990.2023.2180383 |issn=1097-9891 |pmc=10759778 |pmid=36995266}}</ref> Beyond its role in facilitating violence, dehumanization can serve several social and psychological functions. These include legitimizing harm such as exploitation, submission, or killing by reducing moral restraint, managing existential anxieties through the projection of one’s fears and vulnerabilities, and reinforcing social stratification or defending the status quo.<ref name=":0236"/> According to Adrienne De Ruiter, dehumanization occurs in three manifestations: through the failure to perceive individuals as human, the portrayal of them in ways that disregard their humanity, or the treatment of them in ways that diminish their human qualities.<ref name=":04"/> These manifestations can occur discursively (e.g., idiomatic language that likens individual human beings to non-human animals, [[verbal abuse]], erasing one's voice from discourse), symbolically (e.g., imagery), or physically (e.g., chattel [[slavery]], [[physical abuse]], refusing eye contact). Dehumanization often ignores the target's [[Individualism|individuality]] (i.e., the creative and exciting aspects of their personality) and can hinder one from feeling [[empathy]] or correctly understanding a [[Social stigma|stigmatized]] group.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Andrighetto|first1=Luca|last2=Baldissarri|first2=Cristina|last3=Lattanzio|first3=Sara|last4=Loughnan|first4=Steve|last5=Volpato|first5=Chiara|date=2014|title=Human-itarian aid? Two forms of dehumanization and willingness to help after natural disasters|journal=British Journal of Social Psychology|language=en|volume=53|issue=3|pages=573–584|doi=10.1111/bjso.12066|pmid=24588786|issn=2044-8309|hdl=10281/53044|hdl-access=free}}</ref> Dehumanization has been examined across various disciplines as a mechanism that reinforces social hierarchies and exclusion.<ref name=":22" /> According to Maria Kronfeldner, ‘’dehumanization establishes difference and distance between human beings’’, and enables ‘’a stratified organization of humanity’’.<ref name=":0236"/> Dehumanization may be carried out by a social [[institution]] (such as a state, school, or family), interpersonally, or even within oneself. Dehumanization can be unintentional, especially upon individuals, as with some types of ''de facto'' [[racism]]. State-organized dehumanization has historically been directed against certain political, [[Race (human classification)|racial]], [[Ethnic group|ethnic]], national, or religious [[minority group]]s. Other minoritized and [[Marginalization|marginalized]] individuals and groups (based on [[sexual orientation]], [[gender]], disability, [[Social class|class]], or some other organizing principle) are also susceptible to various forms of dehumanization. The concept of dehumanization has received empirical attention in the [[Psychology|psychological]] literature.<ref>Moller, A. C., & Deci, E. L. (2010). "Interpersonal control, dehumanization, and violence: A self-determination theory perspective". ''[[Group Processes & Intergroup Relations]]'', 13, 41-53. [http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2010_MollerDeci_GPIR.pdf?hosts= (open access)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622030420/http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2010_MollerDeci_GPIR.pdf?hosts= |date=2013-06-22 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Haslam|first1=Nick|last2=Kashima|first2=Yoshihisa|last3=Loughnan|first3=Stephen|last4=Shi|first4=Junqi|last5=Suitner|first5=Caterina|title=Subhuman, Inhuman, and Superhuman: Contrasting Humans with Nonhumans in Three Cultures|journal=Social Cognition|volume=26|issue=2|year=2008|pages=248–258|doi=10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.248}}</ref> Besides [[infrahumanization]],<ref name="Leyens, JPh, 2000">{{cite journal|last1=Leyens|first1=Jacques-Philippe|last2=Paladino|first2=Paola M.|last3=Rodriguez-Torres|first3=Ramon|last4=Vaes|first4=Jeroen|last5=Demoulin|first5=Stephanie|last6=Rodriguez-Perez|first6=Armando|last7=Gaunt|first7=Ruth|title=The Emotional Side of Prejudice: The Attribution of Secondary Emotions to Ingroups and Outgroups|journal=Personality and Social Psychology Review|volume=4|issue=2|year=2000|pages=186–197|url=http://www.armandorodriguez.es/Articulos/archivos/LeyensPaladinoRTorresVaesDemoulinRPerezGaunt2000.pdf|doi=10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_06|s2cid=144981501|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130611113035/http://armandorodriguez.es/Articulos/archivos/LeyensPaladinoRTorresVaesDemoulinRPerezGaunt2000.pdf|archive-date=2013-06-11}}</ref> it is conceptually related to [[delegitimization]],<ref name="Bar-Tal, D, 1989">Bar-Tal, D. (1989). "Delegitimization: The extreme case of stereotyping and prejudice". In D. Bar-Tal, C. Graumann, A. Kruglanski, & [[Wolfgang Stroebe|W. Stroebe]] (Eds.), ''Stereotyping and prejudice: Changing conceptions''. New York, NY: Springer.</ref> [[moral exclusion]],<ref name="Opotow, S., 1990">{{cite journal|last1=Opotow|first1=Susan|title=Moral Exclusion and Injustice: An Introduction|journal=Journal of Social Issues|volume=46|issue=1|year=1990|pages=1–20|doi=10.1111/j.1540-4560.1990.tb00268.x}}</ref> and [[objectification]].<ref name="Nussbaum, M (1999)">Nussbaum, M. C. (1999). ''Sex and Social Justice''. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. {{ISBN|0195112105}}</ref> === Humanness === In [[Herbert Kelman]]'s work on dehumanization, humanness has two features: "identity" (i.e., a perception of the person "as an individual, independent and distinguishable from others, capable of making choices") and "community" (i.e., a perception of the person as "part of an interconnected network of individuals who care for each other"). When a target's agency and embeddedness in a community are denied, they no longer elicit compassion or other moral responses and may suffer violence.<ref>Kelman, H. C. (1976). "Violence without restraint: Reflections on the dehumanization of victims and victimizers". pp. 282-314 in G. M. Kren & L. H. Rappoport (Eds.), ''Varieties of Psychohistory''. New York: Springer. {{ISBN|0826119409}}</ref> === Objectification === Psychologist [[Barbara Fredrickson]] and Tomi-Ann Roberts argued that the [[sexual objectification]] of women extends beyond [[pornography]] (which emphasizes women's bodies over their uniquely human mental and emotional characteristics) to society generally. There is a normative emphasis on female appearance that causes women to take a third-person perspective on their bodies.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Fredrickson|first1=Barbara L.|title=Objectification Theory: Toward Understanding Women's Lived Experiences and Mental Health Risks|last2=Roberts|first2=Tomi-Ann|journal=Psychology of Women Quarterly|volume=21|issue=2|year=1997|pages=173–206|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258181826|doi=10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x|s2cid=145272074|access-date=2014-11-07|archive-date=2020-09-10|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200910172534/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258181826_Objectification_Theory_Toward_Understanding_Women%27s_Lived_Experiences_and_Mental_Health_Risks|url-status=live}}</ref> The psychological distance women may feel from their bodies might cause them to dehumanize themselves. Some research has indicated that women and men exhibit a "sexual body part recognition bias", in which women's sexual body parts are better recognized when presented in isolation than in their entire bodies. In contrast, men's sexual body parts are better recognized in the context of their entire bodies than in isolation.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Gervais|first1=Sarah J.|last2=Vescio|first2=Theresa K.|last3=Förster|first3=Jens|last4=Maass|first4=Anne|last5=Suitner|first5=Caterina|title=Seeing women as objects: The sexual body part recognition bias|journal=European Journal of Social Psychology|volume=42|issue=6|year=2012|pages=743–753|doi=10.1002/ejsp.1890}}</ref> Men who dehumanize women as either animals or objects are more liable to rape and sexually harass women and display more negative attitudes toward female rape victims.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rudman|first1=L. A.|last2=Mescher|first2=K.|title=Of Animals and Objects: Men's Implicit Dehumanization of Women and Likelihood of Sexual Aggression|journal=Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin|volume=38|issue=6|year=2012|pages=734–746|url=http://rutgerssocialcognitionlab.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/9/7/13979590/rudman__mescher_2012._of_animals_and_objects.pdf|doi=10.1177/0146167212436401|pmid=22374225|s2cid=13701627|access-date=2014-11-07|archive-date=2014-11-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141107204838/http://rutgerssocialcognitionlab.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/9/7/13979590/rudman__mescher_2012._of_animals_and_objects.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> Philosopher [[Martha Nussbaum]] identified seven components of sexual [[objectification]]: [[wikt:instrumentality|instrumentality]], denial of [[autonomy]], [[wikt:inert|inertness]], [[fungibility]], [[personal boundaries|violability]], [[ownership]], and denial of [[subjectivity]].<ref name="Nussbaum1999">{{cite book|author=Martha C. Nussbaum|title=Sex and Social Justice |chapter=Objectification: Section - Seven Ways to Treat A Person as a Thing |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7zoaKIolT9oC&pg=PA218|date=4 February 1999|publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-535501-7|page=218}}</ref>{{explain|date=September 2020}} In this context, instrumentality refers to when the objectified is used as an instrument to the objectifier's benefit. Denial of autonomy occurs in the form of the objectifier underestimating the objectified and denies their capabilities. In the case of inertness, the objectified is treated as if they are lazy and indolent. [[Fungibility]] brands the objectified to be easily replaceable. Volability is when the objectifier does not respect the objectified person's personal space or boundaries. Ownership is when the objectified is seen as another person's property. Lastly, the denial of subjectivity is a lack of sympathy for the objectified, or the dismissal of the notion that the objectified has feelings. These seven components cause the objectifier to view the objectified in a disrespectful way, therefore treating them so.<ref>{{Citation |last=Papadaki |first=Evangelia (Lina) |title=Feminist Perspectives on Objectification |date=2021 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/feminism-objectification/ |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |edition=Spring 2021 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=2022-12-01}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)