individuals are particularly vulnerable. We can see now how the ostensibly
harmless principle you are what you wear is a Janus-faced social practice that
separates social groups, for good or ill. Differences in dress, be it single items of
apparel or whole outfits, are deliberately employed to reinforce group
boundaries, but when a skullcap is enough to harm even small children, the
dangers of openly displaying a minority group identity are obvious and may lead
to the irrepressible desire to conceal it.
Attire that is identified with a social group sometimes serves as a catalyst of
conflict. The 2016 controversy about the ban by some French municipalities of
full-body swimwear (burkini) on beaches and the outlawing by some countries
of face-covering (burqa) in public are recent examples. They also illustrate the
difficulties hybrid identities present to societies that are committed to individual
liberty but have long taken a level of homogeneity for granted that visible
displays of distinction seem to challenge.
Conclusions
Social identity, then, is to do with membership in groups that are horizontally
and vertically structured, internally and in relation to each other. Taken together
these groupings constitute a society. In industrial society, education, work, and
income used to be the major determinants of social identity. With the growth of
the service sector, class divisions started to become less distinct and were at the
same time supplemented, if not superseded, by ethnic divisions. Consequently,
the general understanding of social class is changing, but since economic
inequality not only persists but rises, the issue of social stratification and identity
remains topical. Group identities are relational, resulting from the inclusion of
peers and the exclusion of others. Reducing individuals to a single identity as
members of a group amounts to discrimination and stigmatization.