Backlash
In 1972, the U.S. Congress passed what was to be the 28th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA): “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.”
That seemed an obvious and necessary change to many, but not enough states ratified the amendment by the deadline for it to be included in the Constitution. The ERA has come up in Congress since, and states have continued to take up its ratification, but not with the intense scrutiny of the years before the original deadline. Those years were marked by a flurry of activity in legislatures, courts, media, and activism.
Awareness of gender inequality soared, and yet, suggests researcher Brian Wheaton, those years “set back belief in gender equality by about a decade.”
That doesn’t make sense, Wheaton writes, “a straightforward and sensible conjecture would be that, by legislating better conditions or enhanced treatment for a certain group of individuals, public attitudes toward that group would also become more positive.” But that conjecture doesn’t take backlash into account.
Social backlash is a negative reaction to social change, often in response to increasing freedoms or to changing social norms. It’s a common feature of social change. Writing about backlash against the Black Lives Matter movement, journalist Clyde McGrady observes, “There has always been a rhythm to American social movements: forward momentum followed by backlash.”
Backlash happens at community, national, and even global scales. It can threaten and ruin organizations, friendships, and families. It can be brutal and dangerous, especially when championed by those with real political and legal power. New York University Professor Steven Hahn warns, “People get silenced, and then before you know it, we’re back at a really bad square one.”
Our work at the ILI is to look hard at phenomena like backlash and wonder: What new strategies are there to lessen its power? What wisdom and insight, from all corners of thinking and practice, might reveal new paths forward?
Historian Manisha Sinha contends that backlash is not inevitable. Historians, she writes, “know that things just don’t happen on their own.” So what causes backlash, and what do those causes suggest about new ways to stop it?
Social science points to perceived threats to social position or status and group identity as the root of backlash. In organizations, backlash emerges when employees feel that the change at hand doesn’t honor formal and informal collective identity reflected in mission, impact, organizational culture, and values. Social change in the context of other uncertainties – for example, a longstanding economic downturn – can also drive backlash as an effort to fend off more uncertainty.
And social science isn’t the only source of insight here. Brian Wheaton thinks in the context of for-profit companies, as does Forbes contributor Gillian Oakenfull. Reflecting on the impact of social backlash on company brands, Oakenfull suggests that backlash is directly related to “social well-being: the degree to which people feel recognized, connected, empowered, and safe in their social world.”
Oakenfull goes on, “These fundamental social needs aren't partisan. Consumers across the political spectrum are navigating this crisis of connection and trust. . . . conservatives and progressives share the same basic requirements for social thriving.” To hold on to their consumer base, Oakenfull argues, companies must “focus beyond demographic targeting to understanding how consumers are doing socially—and designing experiences that help them feel recognized, empowered, and secure across ideological divides.” (Italics mine)
Now there’s a challenge: how can changemakers design experiences that help people feel “recognized, empowered, and secure” enough to step back from backlash against change that means all people can thrive as who they understand themselves to be?
It’s not always easy to take up this challenge, to consider security and empowerment for those who, in the throes of backlash, would and do cause terrible harm. It’s especially hard when backlash is cynical, bigoted, and cruel. Still, alongside fierce resistance to all of that must come responses to those who lash back out of honest fear, uncertainty, and insecurity.
I believe backlash is more fearful than cruel, fueled by perceived threats more than stubborn bigotries. There’s an opening there, and it’s time to step through it.
Lucinda Garthwaite, ILI Founder and Executive Director
References and Resources
“Laws, belief, and backlash.” Brian Wheaton. Working paper. UCLA School of Management. June 27, 2022. (For a summary, see Do Social Laws Always Cause a Backlash? Brian Totty. UCLA Anderson Review. February 22, 2023.)
“5 Years After George Floyd’s Murder, the Backlash Takes Hold.” Clyde McGrady. New York Times. May 5, 2025.
“How social threat drives consumer backlash and erodes brand trust.” Gillian Oakenfull. Forbes. April 8, 2005.
“The psychology of social change and backlash: Examining contemporary social issues for insights on attitudes, identity, and behavior.” (2020) Eric Gomez. Dissertation. University of Wisconsin.
“This will not change us: Leader's use of continuity rhetoric to promote collective change.” Lily Syfers, David E. Rast III, and Amber M. Gaffney. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Volume 110, January 2024.
“Uncertainty-Identity Theory.” Michael Hogg. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Volume 39, 2007.
“Reactions to Vanguards: Advances in Backlash Theory.” Laurie A. Rudman, Corinne A. Moss-Racusin, Peter Glick, Julie E. Phelan. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Volume 45, 2012.
“The Buzz: How Do We Effectively Respond to Backlash?” Maria Morukian. The Inclusion Solution website, (undated).
“The Backlash Effect: How to Transform Violence into Justice.” Wayne Hsiung. Direct Action Everywhere website, March 18, 2015.