violent, and sexually suspect. Consequently, they often com-
bine, and the effects of racism are compounded by the effects
of classism, sexism, heterosexism, and the other “isms.”
Together, these are what Patricia Hill Collins (1990) calls a
matrix of domination—an interlocking system of control in
which each type of inequality reinforces the others so that the
impact of one cannot be fully understood without also con-
sidering the others (Figure 8.3).Doing Something about It
Finding out what causes prejudice is not as important as find-
ing out how to combat it. Early social scientists argued that
prejudice could be changed by exposure to members
of minority groups (Allport, 1954). We might believe that
Italians are passionate, Blacks are lazy, or Jews are greedy
because we haven’t met enough members of these groups
who don’t fit the stereotypes. A few handshakes, therefore, will end the prejudice.
During the 1960s and 1970s, a huge amount of time and money was invested in
busing students from segregated schools, not only to equalize instruction but to intro-
duce Black and White students to each other. It didn’t work: Contact alone does not
diminish prejudice. People who have never met even one member of another particu-
lar group may not be prejudiced, while people who are surrounded by members of the
minority group may still be prejudiced. In Searching for Aboriginal Languages(1983),
linguist John Dixon finds that many of the White residents of Queensland, Australia,
are prejudiced against the aboriginals and believe they are more sexually promiscuous.
Dixon found that aboriginals actually select romantic partners on the basis of a very
complex system of clans, kinship roles, and informal alliances dating back hundreds of
years. The White residents saw aboriginals every day, talked to them, and worked with
them, but were completely oblivious to anything except “jumping into bed.”
Social psychologist Mark Snyder (1987) found that even awareness of prejudice
and desire to change were insufficient. You can realize that prejudice is wrong, and
you can try to stop, but you might still believe stereotypes: They are beyond the reach
of reason and goodwill. You will tend to notice and remember the ways in which a
person from a minority group seems to fit a stereotype, whether you want to or not.
One of the problems in combating prejudice is that it is not merely a matter of
individual perceptions. Gordon Allport (1954) called prejudice “a self-fulfilling
prophecy.” We see what we expect to see and don’t see what we don’t expect to see.
Thus, what we see “fulfills” our expectations, and the stereotypes are confirmed.
In this model, discrimination is simply a form of socialization, and the targets of
any discrimination can be socialized into believing that the stereotypes are accurate
and behave accordingly. I will then see them behaving according to the stereotypes
and be socialized into more discrimination. In the 1960s, Harvard psychologists
Robert Rosenthal and Lenor Jacobson entered elementary school classrooms and
announced that certain children could be expected to show dramatic academic
improvement over the course of the year. No one knew that they actually selected the
children at random. Some were good students to begin with, and some were not. But
by the end of the year, all of them made clear gains in test performance. What hap-
pened was positive stereotyping. The teachers saw only evidence that the children were
“gifted” and ignored everything else, and treated them accordingly. Soon the children
were behaving as if they actually were gifted, studying more and working harder
(Rosenthal and Jacobson, 1968).260 CHAPTER 8RACE AND ETHNICITYRACEGenderDisabilityClassReligion AgeFIGURE 8.3Matrix of Domination