Symbolic Interaction, Volume 24, Number 4, pages 395–406, ISSN 0195-6086; online ISSN 1533-8665. © 2001 by the Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction. All rights reserved. Send requests for permission to reprint to: Rights and Permissions, University of California Press, Journals Division, 2000 Center St., Ste. 303, Berkeley, CA 94704-1223. Direct all correspondence to Leon Anderson, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Lindley Hall, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701-2979; email : andersoe@ohio.edu. Inequality and the Self: Exploring Connections from an Interactionist Perspective Leon Anderson Ohio University David A. Snow University of California, Irvine Symbolic interactionism provides a major contribution to understanding inequality by illuminating the various manifestations and contexts of ine- quality at the micro, everyday level of social life. Drawing on a spectrum of symbolic interactionist theory and research, we examine the range of sym- bolic and interactional manifestations of social inequality, the consequences of being the object of patterned interactional affronts, and the strategies people use to negotiate interactional stigmatization in everyday life. We argue that symbolic interaction’s unique contribution to understanding inequality results from two of the perspective’s central features. First, symbolic inter- actionism emphasizes the necessity of investigating social life in situated social interaction. Second, it highlights social actors’ capacities to interpret and construct lines of action rather than respond directly to the stimuli they encounter. Symbolic interactionist research and theory thus contribute to a more complex understanding of social stratication than that provided by perspectives focused exclusively on macroscopic structural factors. The study of social inequality in mainstream sociology traditionally has been ap- proached from a macroscopic structural vantage point with an emphasis on political- economic factors. This focus has clearly advanced understanding of the structural dimensions, precipitants, and correlates of the array of topics associated with ine- quality and stratication, such as class differences, poverty, mobility, the occupa- tional structure, and wage and salary differences. Yet this structural focus misses much of relevance to understanding the real-life implications of inequality for the everyday functioning and psychology of social actors. From this vantage point, a host of insufciently examined questions arise:What are the different ways in which systems of stratication manifest themselves at the micro, interactional level of so-