Higher Moral Obligations of Tolerance Toward Other Minorities

Abstract

In four experiments, we tested whether members of stigmatized groups are expected to be more tolerant toward other minorities than members of non-stigmatized groups and assessed the consequences of disconfirming those expectancies. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that majority group members expected members of a stigmatized group to be more tolerant toward immigrants, particularly when the stigmatized minority was perceived as having overcome the negative consequences of its victimization. When this tolerance expectation was disconfirmed, stigmatized group members were judged more immoral than members of a non-stigmatized group that held the same intolerant attitudes. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that these effects were driven by the belief that stigmatized groups should derive benefits from their suffering. These findings suggest that stigmatized groups are judged according to stricter moral standards than non-stigmatized groups because majority group members need to make meaning of the undeserved suffering experienced by victims of social stigma.

Historical group victimization entails moral obligations for descendants

“…Learning of injustice can instigate meaning making in the form of benefit finding, implying that groups that have suffered compared to those that have not are morally obligated to refrain from harming others. The present research adds to the growing literature showing how observers restore a sense of justice after exposure to individuals who have experienced tragedy by believing that good can emerge from suffering (Anderson et al, 2010;Fernández et al, 2014;. The current studies go beyond prior work in demonstrating how the process underlying this effect-benefit finding for the victims-has consequences for groups who violate observers' expectations and engage in harm doing toward a new group.…”

“…Indeed, victims themselves often report deriving benefits following traumatic experiences including learning what is really important in life and becoming a kinder, more understanding person (Affleck et al, 1987;Bower et al, 2009;Davis et al, 1998;Lazar et al, 2004;Poulin et al, 2009;Taylor, 1983). Witnesses of traumatic events can similarly make meaning of adversity by deriving benefits for the victims, which results in higher expectations that those victims will display tolerance toward others (Fernández et al, 2014). In fact, there is evidence that threat to belief in a just world is reduced, with observers exhibiting less distress, when a victim's suffering is subsequently reinterpreted as meaningful (Lazarus et al, 1965).…”

“…If the historically victimized groups we examined were believed to be continuing to suffer in the present, it is unlikely that observers would hold them to a higher moral standard of conduct. That is, without some passage of time during which recovery might be expected to take place, observers are unlikely to expect character growth and engage in benefit finding for the victims' descendants (Fernández et al, 2014).…”

Inclusive Victim Consciousness in Advocacy, Social Movements, and Intergroup Relations: Promises and Pitfalls

“…Warner and Branscombe (2012) demonstrated that third-party observers believe victims of genocide to be morally obliged to help other victim groups. Similarly, majority group members expect members of disadvantaged minorities to be more tolerant toward other minorities such as immigrants (Fernandez, Branscombe, Saguy, Gomez, & Morales, 2014). This results in backlash against minority group members who do not express such tolerance and are judged as more immoral than members of nonstigmatized groups expressing the same attitudes (Fernandez et al, 2014).…”

Perceptions of Indigenous Peoples in Canada: Modern Racism, Benefit Finding, and Moral Obligations for Descendants of Residential School Survivors

“…This disparity does not simply manifest in an imbalance in the appraisals of behaviours of victimized groups versus non-victimized groups. Fernandez et al (2013) found that observers extend these expectations to include the belief that members of victimized minorities (individuals with dwarfism) ought to be more tolerant of other persecuted minorities (namely gay people, immigrants). This is especially true if the victim group is perceived as having persevered to overcome a history of maltreatment.…”