We examine how people construct what it means to be an ally to marginalized groups. Based on 70 in-depth interviews with college students who identify as allies to one or more marginalized groups, we analyze how they construct allyship in ways that ultimately reproduce patterns of social inequality by (1) assigning responsibility for inequalities to minorities, and (2) suggesting individualized, rather than structural, remedies for combatting unequal systems. We find that the combination of these strategies allows them to claim identities as allies without having to engage in concrete efforts that could challenge systems of oppression. We argue that systematically examining processes through which people construct and perform what it means to be an ally may provide insights into mechanisms whereby inequality is maintained and justified. Such systematic examination may also point to potential avenues for combating social inequalities. K E Y W O R D S : allies; gender; generic processes; inequality; race and ethnicity An emerging line of scholarship examines the persistence of social inequalities alongside contemporary discourses asserting that oppression is a thing of the past (Bonilla-Silva 2017; Ridgeway 2011; Sumerau and Mathers 2019). Within a socio-cultural context wherein most people are taught to assume a post-racial, -feminist, -gay society (Ghaziani 2011; Sumerau and Grollman 2018), what happens when people face empirical realities that contradict such lessons? Likewise, within a sociocultural context in which speaking explicitly about inequalities is, at best, frowned upon, and social movements are predicated upon identity membership rather than the needs of a population (Hochschild 2016), how do people make sense of existing inequalities and movements seeking to combat them? Finally, within a socio-cultural context in which one is supposed to be open-minded and morally opposed to oppression (Pfeffer 2017), how do people signify their opposition to disparities while being taught such things warrant no further discussion? Put simply, within the current historical moment when inequalities persist alongside claims about their successful eradication, how do people who may benefit, at least partially, from existing inequalities respond to such conditions in their own negotiation of social life? TehQuin D. Forbes would like to thank members of the Florida State University Sociology Graduate Student Union writing group for their helpful suggestions on earlier versions of this article. All the authors thank the Social Problems editors and anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback on this paper. Please address correspondences to Eric Anthony Grollman, 302E Weinstein Hall, 231 Richmond Way, University of Richmond, Richmond, VA 23173; email: egrollma@richmond.edu. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for the Study of Social Problems 2020. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US. 1 Social Problems, 012020, 0, 1–16 doi: 10.1093/socpro/spaa003 D ow naded rom http/academ ic.p.com /socpro/advance-articleoi/10.1093/socpro/spaa003/5809595 by U niersity of am pa user on 18 M arch 2020 Potential answers to such questions can be found, at least implicitly, in another emerging line of research focused on individuals occupying privileged racial, class, sex, gender, and/or sexual social locations who identify as allies for marginalized groups (Fields 2001; Johnson and Best 2012; Ueno and Gentile 2015). Implications of these studies include that people who identify as allies generally become connected to movement and social support efforts of marginalized groups due to a personal connection to someone within the marginalized group, and that they can provide at least symbolic comfort and friendship for members of marginalized groups navigating potentially hostile and/or isolating social spaces, situations, and groups. Such research also suggests that the term ally has become a common symbolic marker that may provide people in privileged groups with moral value (i.e., “I’m not part of the problem”), but, in practice, allies act in ways that ultimately reproduce the subordination of marginalized groups (Broad 2011; Mathers, Sumerau, and Ueno 2018; Pierotti, Lake, and Lewis 2018). While these studies have begun the process of explicating where allies come from and how they fit within specific minority movements or groups, we know much less about how they construct allyship – that is, what an “ally” is and what allies should do. How do people who identify as allies conceive of what it means to be an ally, and what consequences do these definitions have for the persistence of inequality? We examine these questions through an inductive interview study of college students who, without provocation, identified as allies in the course of in-depth interviews focused on other topics. Specifically, we analyze how they – responding to the existence of inequalities in the social world – constructed allyship by defining this term in ways that allowed them to articulate support for marginalized others while also excusing them from engaging in concrete activities that could potentially disrupt interactional patterns of social inequality. In doing so, we synthesize and extend emerging analyses on both allies and the persistence of inequalities by demonstrating how people in privileged social locations within a given inequitable system may simultaneously articulate opposition to social inequality while also doing so in ways that leave the structural foundations of oppression intact. However, it is not our intention to generalize these findings to all people who identify as allies. Rather, we use the data from this case to elaborate strategies of constructing allyship that people may use in various social settings when they seek to articulate opposition to inequality without having to engage in actions that might challenge oppression in their own lives or more broadly. T H E P E R S I S T E N C E O F S O C I A L I N E Q U A L I T Y In the past two decades, sociologists have demonstrated the persistence of systemic oppression along the lines of race, class, sex, gender, sexuality, and other social locations despite major changes, advancements, and transformations since, at least, the 1950s (Bonilla-Silva 2017; Collins 2015; Davis 2015; Ridgeway 2011; Schrock, Sumerau, and Ueno 2014). Rather than show a clear, linear progression or regression for marginalized groups, these studies demonstrate fragmented conflicts wherein some individuals seek to maintain or reinstall systems of oppression; others seek to challenge or eradicate such systems; and many others experience social life without much consideration for either side of these battles, unless such conflicts enter their own personal experience. Within this context, scholars have increasingly turned their attention to the ways in which people respond to societal patterns of inequality that, regardless of a given person’s intentions, impact the persistence of inequality. Investigating such sense-making in relation to varied systems of oppression reveals that a primary component in the persistence of inequality involves how people construct inequality itself, marginalized groups, and the social roles of privileged groups (Bonilla-Silva 2017; Ridgeway 2011; Sumerau, Grollman, and Cragun 2018). Following Goffman (1974), such efforts involve the meaning-making in which people engage concerning the current reality of a society or social group (i.e., what is going on here), and the ways people should respond to such definitions or frames (i.e., what should I do). As symbolic interactionists have long noted (Blumer 1969; Goffman 1977; Schrock et al. 2014; Schwalbe et al. 2000), we may thus conceptualize the persistence of inequalities as the result of the 2 Sumerau et al. D ow naded rom http/academ ic.p.com /socpro/advance-articleoi/10.1093/socpro/spaa003/5809595 by U niersity of am pa user on 18 M arch 2020 everyday meaning-making activities that provide the foundation for the macro-social world (Collins 1981). Whereas the elements of everyday meaning-making in which people engage vary dramatically historically, culturally, and across different social settings, all such endeavors establish the scaffolding whereby people make sense of how the world is and how people should act, which provide the symbolic foundation for broader social patterns (Goffman 1959; Hochschild 2016; Schwalbe and MasonSchrock 1996). Examining the meaning-making through which people construct inequality, marginalized groups, and the role of people in privileged groups in such systems, however, also requires attention to current meanings that have become widespread in a culture (Loseke 2007). In the current historical moment, researchers investigating such patterns in relation to race (Bonilla-Silva 2017), class (Hochschild 2016), gender (Ridgeway 2011), and sexuality (Mathers, Sumerau, and Cragun 2018) in the United States reveal the construction and affirmation of what have been termed “difference blind” (e.g., Smith and Shin 2014) conceptualizations of social life (also see Henricks 2018). Specifically, these societal frames suggest the following: (1) inequality is a thing of the past and we are all equal beyond differences now; (2) explicit articulation concerning inequality is problematic and divisive; and, (3) good people oppose oppression and would not stand for such things to exist in our society anymore. Put simply, individual and societal narratives continuously argue that society is now “post” or beyond inequalities (Moon, Tobin, and Sumerau 2019; also see Loseke 2018 and Mueller 2017). So, when people encounter evidence to the contrary, they may – like the college students at the heart of our study – seek to define themselves as an exception to such patterns. Historically, one strategy people use to define themselves as exceptions to broader

中文翻译：

---

建立同盟和不平等的持续存在

我们研究了人们如何构建成为边缘化群体的盟友意味着什么。基于对认定为一个或多个边缘化群体盟友的大学生的 70 次深入访谈，我们分析了他们如何通过 (1) 将不平等责任分配给少数群体，以及 (2) 以最终重现社会不平等模式的方式构建联盟) 建议针对不平等制度采取个性化而非结构化的补救措施。我们发现，这些策略的结合使他们能够声称自己是盟友，而无需参与可能挑战压迫制度的具体努力。我们认为，系统地检查人们构建和执行成为盟友意味着什么的过程可能会提供对维持和证明不平等的机制的见解。这种系统的检查也可能指出解决社会不平等的潜在途径。关键词：盟友；性别; 通用流程；不等式; 种族和族裔 一个新兴的学术研究考察了社会不平等的持续存在以及当代话语声称压迫已成为过去（Bonilla-Silva 2017; Ridgeway 2011; Sumerau and Mathers 2019）。在大多数人被教导去假设一个后种族、女权主义、同性恋社会的社会文化背景下（Ghaziani 2011；Sumeau 和 Grollman 2018），当人们面临与这些教训相矛盾的经验现实时会发生什么？同样，在明确谈论不平等的社会文化背景下，充其量是不受欢迎的，社会运动以身份成员身份而非人口需求为基础（Hochschild 2016），那么人们如何理解现有的不平等和寻求与它们作斗争的运动？最后，在一个人应该思想开放和道德上反对压迫的社会文化背景下（Pfeffer 2017），人们如何在被教导这样的事情时表示反对差异，而无需进一步讨论？简而言之，在当前的历史时刻，不平等持续存在并声称其已成功消除，那些可能至少部分受益于现有不平等的人如何在他们自己的社会生活谈判中应对这种情况？特昆 D. 福布斯感谢佛罗里达州立大学社会学研究生会写作小组的成员对本文早期版本提出的有益建议。所有作者感谢社会问题编辑和匿名审稿人对本文的建设性反馈。请将信件发送至 Eric Anthony Grollman, 302E Weinstein Hall, 231 Richmond Way, University of Richmond, Richmond, VA 23173；电子邮件：egrollma@richmond.edu。由牛津大学出版社代表社会问题研究学会 2020 出版。本作品由美国政府雇员撰写，在美国属于公有领域。1 社会问题，012020, 0, 1–16 doi: 10.1093/socpro/spaa003 D ow naded rom http/academ ic.p.com /socpro/advance-articleoi/10。1093/socpro/spaa003/5809595 由 U niersity of am pa user 于 2020 年 3 月 18 日发表 在另一项新兴研究中，至少可以隐含地找到这些问题的潜在答案，该研究侧重于享有特权种族、阶级、性别、性别和/或被边缘化群体认定为盟友的性社会场所（Fields 2001；Johnson 和 Best 2012；Ueno 和 Gentile 2015）。这些研究的含义包括，被认定为盟友的人通常会因为与边缘化群体中的某个人的个人联系而与边缘化群体的运动和社会支持工作产生联系，并且他们至少可以为边缘化群体的成员提供象征性的安慰和友谊。导航潜在敌对和/或孤立的社会空间、情况和群体的群体。此类研究还表明，盟友一词已成为一种常见的象征性标记，可为特权群体中的人们提供道德价值（即“我不是问题的一部分”），但实际上，盟友的行为方式最终会再现边缘化群体的从属关系（Broad 2011；Mathers、Sumerau 和 Ueno 2018；Pierotti、Lake 和 Lewis 2018）。虽然这些研究已经开始解释盟友的来源以及他们如何适应特定的少数族裔运动或群体，但我们对他们如何构建盟友——即“盟友”是什么以及盟友应该做什么——知之甚少。认定为盟友的人如何理解成为盟友意味着什么，这些定义对不平等的持续存在有什么后果？我们通过对大学生的归纳访谈研究来检验这些问题，这些大学生在没有挑衅的情况下，在专注于其他主题的深入访谈过程中确定为盟友。具体来说，我们分析了他们如何应对社会世界中存在的不平等现象，通过定义这个术语来构建联盟，让他们能够表达对边缘化他人的支持，同时也避免他们参与可能破坏互动模式的具体活动社会不平等。在这样做，我们综合并扩展了对盟友和不平等持续存在的新兴分析，展示了在给定的不公平制度中处于特权社会地位的人们如何同时表达对社会不平等的反对，同时又以保持压迫的结构性基础完好无损的方式这样做。然而，我们并不打算将这些发现推广到所有认定为盟友的人。相反，我们使用来自这个案例的数据来详细阐述建立联盟的策略，当人们在寻求表达反对不平等而不必参与可能挑战他们自己生活或更广泛的压迫的行动时，他们可能会在各种社会环境中使用这些策略。社会线质量的持久性 在过去的二十年里，尽管至少自 1950 年代以来发生了重大变化、进步和转变，但社会学家已经证明了种族、阶级、性别、性别、性取向和其他社会地点的系统性压迫持续存在（Bonilla-Silva 2017；Collins 2015； Davis 2015；Ridgeway 2011；Schrock、Sumeau 和 Ueno 2014）。这些研究并没有显示边缘化群体的清晰、线性的进展或回归，而是展示了零散的冲突，其中一些人试图维持或重新安装压迫系统；其他人试图挑战或根除此类系统；许多其他人在经历社会生活时不会考虑这些战斗的任何一方，除非这种冲突进入他们自己的个人经历。在此背景下，学者们越来越多地将注意力转向人们对不平等的社会模式的反应方式，无论特定人的意图如何，都会影响不平等的持续存在。对与各种压迫制度相关的这种意义进行调查表明，不平等持续存在的一个主要组成部分涉及人们如何构建不平等本身、边缘化群体以及特权群体的社会角色（Bonilla-Silva 2017；Ridgeway 2011；Sumera， Grollman 和 Cragun 2018）。继 Goffman (1974) 之后，这些努力涉及人们参与社会或社会群体当前现实（即这里发生的事情）的意义构建，以及人们应对此类定义或框架的方式（即， 我应该怎么办）。正如符号互动论者长期以来所指出的那样（Blumer 1969；Goffman 1977；Schrock 等人 2014；Schwalbe 等人 2000），因此我们可以将不平等的持续存在概念化为 2 Sumerau 等人的结果。Dow naded rom http/academ ic.p.com /socpro/advance-articleoi/10.1093/socpro/spaa003/5809595 by U niersity of am pa user 2020 年 3 月 18 日日常意义创造活动，为宏观提供基础-社会世界（柯林斯 1​​981）。尽管人们参与的日常意义建构的要素在历史、文化和不同的社会环境中发生了巨大的变化，但所有这些努力都建立了一个支架，使人们能够理解世界如何以及人们应该如何行动，这提供了象征基础用于更广泛的社会模式（Goffman 1959；Hochschild 2016；Schwalbe 和 MasonSchrock 1996）。然而，研究人们构建不平等、边缘化群体的意义创造，以及人们在此类系统中的特权群体中的作用，还需要关注在一种文化中已经普遍存在的当前意义（Loseke 2007）。在当前的历史时刻，研究人员在美国调查与种族（Bonilla-Silva 2017）、阶级（Hochschild 2016）、性别（Ridgeway 2011）和性（Mathers、Sumerau 和 Cragun 2018）构建和肯定被称为“差异盲”（例如，Smith 和 Shin 2014）的社会生活概念（另见 Henricks 2018）。具体而言，这些社会框架表明：(1) 不平等已成为过去，现在我们都平等了；(2) 对不平等的明确表述是有问题的和分裂的；并且，（3）好人反对压迫，不会容忍这样的事情在我们的社会中存在。简而言之，个人和社会叙事不断争辩说社会现在是“后”或超越不平等（Moon、Tobin 和 Sumerau 2019；另见 Loseke 2018 和 Mueller 2017）。因此，当人们遇到相反的证据时，他们可能——就像我们研究的核心大学生——试图将自己定义为这种模式的例外。从历史上看，人们用来将自己定义为更广泛的例外的一种策略 个人和社会叙事不断争辩说，社会现在是“后”或超越不平等（Moon、Tobin 和 Sumerau 2019；另见 Loseke 2018 和 Mueller 2017）。因此，当人们遇到相反的证据时，他们可能——就像我们研究的核心大学生——试图将自己定义为这种模式的例外。从历史上看，人们用来将自己定义为更广泛的例外的一种策略 个人和社会叙事不断争辩说，社会现在是“后”或超越不平等（Moon、Tobin 和 Sumerau 2019；另见 Loseke 2018 和 Mueller 2017）。因此，当人们遇到相反的证据时，他们可能——就像我们研究的核心大学生——试图将自己定义为这种模式的例外。从历史上看，人们用来将自己定义为更广泛的例外的一种策略