Abstract Existing literature treats the corrected identity of stigmatized states as i) nonstigmatized, ii) a parolee whose past crimes are not forgotten, and iii) a legitimate identity that fails to get reintegrated with the group of the stigmatizers. However, there remains little focus in studying how noncompliant states arrive at each of these identity dynamics of social (non)recognition from the stigmatizers. In addressing this gap, this article argues that corrective identity typologies are dependent on the ways in which the stigmatized convinces the stigmatizer of the former’s new identity. To do so, and using the empirical cases of India, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Iran, this article develops a political rhetoric typology employed by the stigmatized in terms of forensic rhetoric (using a track record of past compliant acts in wanting justice for oneself), compliant rhetoric (acceptance of previous incongruent acts and practices), and stasis rhetoric (contestation practices over long periods of time). Alongside rooting this typology in the anxious relationship between the stigmatized and the stigmatizer, this article contributes to the scholarship on stigma management and the literature on political rhetoric.
Aniruddha Saha (2026) studied this question.