Theories of Prejudice
and Discrimination
Social scientists and philosophers have wondered about prejudice for centuries. Why
does prejudice exist? Why are we prejudiced against some groups and not others? Why
do we believe certain stereotypes and not others? And most importantly, what can
we do about it?
Theprimordial theorysuggests that a conflict exists between in-groups and out-
groups, but doesn’t explain how some groups come to be classified as out-groups. Is
there any evidence that we have an “innate preference for people like us”? Often we
prefer people who are not at all like us. In fact, “opposites attract”: We tend to select
friends and romantic partners who complement our personalities or physical attrib-
utes. It is not unusual to see athletes paired with couch potatoes, supermodels paired
with faces that would stop a clock, trust fund babies paired with steelworkers, peo-
ple so light they burn under fluorescent lamps paired with people so dark that they
can spend the entire day at the beach without reaching for the sunblock. More impor-
tantly, these “innate” theories disregard the political, social, and economic processes
behind individual prejudices. People can and do become racist through deliberate
choice and socialization, not through any innate preferences.
According to frustration-aggression theory,people are goal directed, and when
they can’t reach their goals, they become angry and frustrated. If they cannot find the
source of their frustration, or if the source is too powerful to challenge, they will direct
their aggression toward a scapegoat, a weak, convenient, and socially approved tar-
get. Considerable evidence shows racial and ethnic hostility increases during periods
of economic instability (Blackwell, 1982). Sometimes people may become convinced
that the scapegoat is actually the cause of their frustration—for instance, that they
are unemployed because illegal immigrants have stolen their job—but often they are
just lashing out at someone convenient. This theory does not explain why some groups
become scapegoats and others do not or why we are prejudiced against groups who
are not immediately visible.
Conflict theorysuggests that prejudice is a tool used by the elites, people at the top
of the social hierarchy, to “divide and conquer” those at the bottom, making them eas-
ier to control and manipulate (Pettigrew, 1998). Racial and ethnic stereotypes are used
to legitimate systemic inequality. For instance, if blacks are really lazy, we can explain
why there are so few working in high-power corporate jobs without having to deal with
institutional discrimination. This theory is supported by research suggesting that prej-
udice decreases when racism is not institutionally supported (Pettigrew, 1998), but it
ignores the role of race in the lives of those at the bottom of the hierarchy.
In the United States and worldwide, members of minority groups are often
prejudiced against other minority groups, and they can harbor their own stereotypes
about the elites (Kinloch, 1999; Phinney, Gerguson, and Tate, 1997; Tsukashima,
1983). For example, Puerto Rican shopkeepers who own small neighborhood bode-
gas are deeply suspicious that the Asian greengrocers have been supported by the city’s
wealthy to drive the Puerto Ricans out of business. Cross-cultural historical studies
show that racial and ethnic minorities often promote prejudice against other minori-
ties to try to increase their own wealth, power, and privilege (see, for example, Dreier,
Mollenkopf, and Swanstrom, 2005).
Feminist theoryconsiders how the category of race overlaps with other social
categories, especially gender but also sexual orientation, social class, religion, age,
and ability status. Stereotypes about stigmatized groups in all of these categories are
remarkably similar: They are almost always illogical, emotional, primitive, potentially
THEORIES OF PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION 259