Impressive growth in Asia, as one of most dynamic regions in the world, sometimes happens at the expense of marginalisation. Individuals who do not fit normative ideals, who are deemed economically unproductive or who do not participate in heterosex-centred reproduction are often regarded as different, even deviant, and come to take on or are given identities that are marginalised. These include, but are not limited to, people with physical or intellectual disabilities, the elderly, gender and sexual minorities, never-married parents or unmarried people. Stigmatisation can be pronounced in homogenous or insular societies and communities that use ‘culture’ and ‘tradition’ as a justification to extract conformity. It can also appear where the self-sufficiency of individuals and heterosexual, biological and nuclear families is touted as a moral virtue that aligns with neoliberal and anti-welfare ideologies. Against this backdrop, we sought papers that would speak to the theme of this Special Issue. We were interested in the processes of stigmatisation involving a range of interactions and relationships, including being treated as burdensome and unproductive members of society, or regarded as a threat to the social order, as well as social processes in which those who are stigmatised respond to such treatment by coming up with strategies, taking action or deciding not to take action. How do these processes emerge and transform, and what do they look like? How do people respond to differential treatment based on their stigmatised identities at home, at work or against state authorities? How are they protected or persecuted under the law and what forms of recourse do they have? What do these experiences tell us about the manner in which law matters to identities, human relationships and social life? In collaboration with David Engel (SUNY Buffalo, Law), Rosie Harding (University of Birmingham, Law) and Sida Liu (University of Toronto, Sociology and Law), we first put out a call for workshop papers. We received forty submissions, out of which we chose fifteen. Although we had planned to hold the workshop in person in June 2020 at the National University of Singapore, we converted the workshop to an online event due to the coronavirus disease (Covid-19) outbreak. At the workshop, the authors received feedback from an online audience around the world, engaged in conversation with one another and received feedback from us and our three collaborators. In the end, six of the authors moved forward with the Special Issue with this Journal. Together, these authors cover a wide range of stigmatised identities: from the more conventional ‘blemishes of character’ attributes as described by Goffman, such as sex workers, sexual minorities and ethnic minorities, to people whose identities push the boundaries of how we conceptualise stigma, such as elderly prisoners and female international arbitrators. Although our reference to ‘stigmatisation’ is inspired by Erving Goffman, we did not require the authors to draw extensively from Goffman’s Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (1963) or subsequent scholarship that built on his work in any particular manner. Nevertheless, their analyses of stigma and the processes of stigmatisation help to bring light to the plight of marginalised identities in different parts of Asia and advance the scholarship on stigma and stigmatisation in the Global South.

中文翻译：

---

污名化、身份和法律：亚洲和比较视角

作为世界上最具活力的地区之一，亚洲令人印象深刻的增长有时是以牺牲边缘化为代价的。不符合规范理想、被认为在经济上没有生产力或不参与以异性恋为中心的再生产的个人通常被认为是不同的，甚至是离经叛道的，并开始接受或被赋予被边缘化的身份。这些包括但不限于身体或智力残疾的人、老年人、性别和性少数群体、未婚父母或未婚人士。在以“文化”和“传统”为正当理由的同质或孤立的社会和社区中，污名化可能很明显。它也可以出现在个人和异性恋自给自足的地方，生物和核心家庭被吹捧为符合新自由主义和反福利意识形态的道德美德。在此背景下，我们寻找与本期特刊主题相关的论文。我们对涉及一系列互动和关系的污名化过程感兴趣，包括被视为社会负担重和生产力低下的成员，或被视为对社会秩序的威胁，以及那些被污名化的人回应的社会过程通过提出策略、采取行动或决定不采取行动来进行此类治疗。这些过程是如何出现和转变的，它们是什么样的？人们如何应对基于他们在家里被污名化的身份的差别待遇，是在工作还是反对国家当局？他们如何受到法律的保护或迫害，他们有哪些追索方式？这些经验告诉我们法律对身份、人际关系和社会生活的重要性？我们与 David Engel（纽约州立大学布法罗分校，法律）、Rosie Harding（伯明翰大学，法律）和 Sida Liu（多伦多大学，社会学和法律）合作，首先发出了研讨会论文的征集。我们收到了 40 份意见书，我们从中选出了 15 份。尽管我们原计划于 2020 年 6 月在新加坡国立大学亲自举办研讨会，但由于冠状病毒病 (Covid-19) 的爆发，我们将研讨会改为在线活动。在研讨会上，作者收到了来自世界各地在线观众的反馈，彼此进行了交谈，并收到了我们和我们的三位合作者的反馈。最后，六位作者与本刊一起推出了特刊。这些作者共同涵盖了广泛的污名化身份：从戈夫曼描述的更传统的“性格缺陷”属性，例如性工作者、性少数群体和少数民族，到身份突破我们如何概念化污名的界限的人，如老年囚犯和女性国际仲裁员。尽管我们对“污名化”的提及受到了欧文·戈夫曼的启发，但我们并不要求作者广泛借鉴戈夫曼的《污名：对被破坏的身份管理的注释》（1963 年）或以任何特定方式建立在他的工作之上的后续学术研究。尽管如此，