Do We Appreciate or Shun Those Who Confront Discrimination?

Not long ago, an almost impossible thing happened: one of the most powerful people in Hollywood, Harvey Weinstein, was forced to face his crimes. It seemed that some Western societies were finally ready to question the culture that enabled inappropriate and discriminatory behaviors against members of marginalized groups.

Weinstein’s downfall was facilitated by the work of several journalists (Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey from The New York Times, and Ronan Farrow of The New Yorker) who exposed his wrongdoings and gave victims support and voice. Standing up to discrimination is hard. Those who confront it risk being punished by the perpetrators, but also can face backlash from friends, family, and greater society.

The Upsides and Downsides of Confrontation

In our research, we aimed to understand when and why those who confront discrimination may be liked or resented for their actions.

To achieve that, we need to consider two additional features of the situation:

• The identity of the person who is confronting discrimination. Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey are both members of a less powerful group—women—that is often targeted by sexist behaviors. In contrast, Ronan Farrow belongs to a more advantaged group—men—and he is seen as an ally: someone who stands with women in the fight against sexism.
• The identity of the audience and whether those people belong to the more or less advantaged groups in society. The perceptions of those who confront discrimination do not only depend on their identity, but also on their relationship with the audience.

We imagined more than one way the scenario could play out. If a member of a less powerful group confronts discrimination, they may win fewer accolades than allies. That could be because people see protest by marginalized group members as meant to benefit themselves or their own group. But when members of advantaged groups confront discrimination on behalf of marginalized group members, people may infer a “pure” motive that is not tainted by self-benefit.  

However, we also imagined a competing outcome. Let’s say a friend—versus a stranger—speaks up against a racist joke at a party, while we stayed silent. Who would make us feel uncomfortable and even guilty? Probably our friend, because they are a more important standard of comparison for our own actions. Our friend’s action made our inaction look bad! Using this logic, we proposed that the confronters may be more disliked by audience members who belong to the confronter’s same group than by those who do not.

We examined these questions in three experiments. In the first study, we asked: what do women and men think of men—allies—who confront sexism? Participants read a story where the ally would either politely ask or demand for a sexist advertisement to be removed. We found that while women evaluated a male confronter very positively, men’s evaluations were more neutral and became very negative if the confronter acted more assertively.

In the next two studies, we compared different confronters standing up to sexism and racism. We presented participants with fictional scenarios describing a person politely asking for either a sexist or a racist advertisement to be removed from a shop. In one of the studies, some participants read about a woman confronting sexism, while others read about a man. In a different study, some read about a black person confronting racism, while others read about a white person.

We also included stories where the key character (i.e., the character the readers were evaluating) perceived the situation as sexist or racist, but instead of confronting decided not to say anything. After reading the stories, readers had to judge whether the confronter acted appropriately and seemed like a friendly person, or whether they overreacted and were a complainer.

Identities Matter

Women liked a male confronter more than a female confronter. Moreover, a woman confronting sexism rather than staying silent was seen as a complainer by other women. And, black people liked both black and white confronters to the same extent.

Importantly, participants who belonged to the advantaged groups (men, white people) liked allies (who, remember, were in the advantaged groups) less than they liked the confronters who belonged to the less powerful group. Thus, the more similar the confronter is to us, the more likely it is that we will not appreciate them fully.

What Does This Add Up To?

Several, possibly surprising, conclusions emerge from our research.

Public opinion is more divided on the role of allies than on the role of marginalized group members. That is not to say that marginalized group members are less likely to elicit negative reactions, but simply that the public opinion about them may not be as polarized.

We also learn that solidarity among women is not a given thing, unfortunately. While it is great to appreciate a guy who is willing to stand up to sexism (and we need more of them who do!), a woman doing the same thing deserves at least the same level of support.

And finally, our allies may not necessarily be effective in getting other members of their group on board. In all studies, we find that members of advantaged groups did not look that kindly on one of their own acting against discrimination. Thus, we would advise allies to be careful how they communicate. It turns out that maybe allyship is even harder than we realized, but of course all of us—whatever our identity—need to keep on fighting the good fight.

For Further Reading

Kutlaca, M., Becker, J. C., & Radke, H. (2020). A hero, a black sheep or both? How disadvantaged and advantaged groups perceive those who confront prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103832.

Kutlaca, M., Radke, H. R., Iyer, A., & Becker, J. C. (2020). Understanding allies’ participation in social change: A multiple perspectives approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(6), 1248-1258. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2720

Radke, H. R., Kutlaca, M., Siem, B., Wright, S. C., & Becker, J. C. (2020). Beyond allyship: Motivations for advantaged group members to engage in action for disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24, 291-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320918698

Maja Kutlaca is a social psychologist working at Durham University in the United Kingdom.