Envious and paternalistic prejudices are psychologically consistent mixed feelings, not ambivalent ones.

Evidence

We have avoided labeling paternalistic and envious stereotypes as ambivalent because that term typically assumes cognitive conflict and warring emotions. The predominant prejudices (envy and pity) for these two mixed clusters, however, are inherently mixed emotions. Pity combines sympathy with superiority. Envy combines admiration with resentment. Nevertheless, neither form of prejudice necessitates a state of psychological conflict (presumably typical of ambivalence). In each case, positive perceptions and feelings are consistent with negative aspects: One would not envy a group that has no desirable attributes, and one would not typically pity a group considered superior to one’s own. Thus, the more positive aspects entirely fit the more negative prejudices. — Susan T. Fiske et al., A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype…, 301

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Sharply distinguishes ‘ambivalent’ (warring emotions, cognitive conflict) from ‘mixed’ but psychologically consistent prejudice — a conceptual distinction the reader’s whole framework needs.
  • XREF: The logic that admiration for a despised group is functionally consistent, not contradictory, echoes the scapegoat-as-threaten model of envy toward ‘respected’ minorities. — connects to: Envy inherently acknowledges the envied group’s good qualities as a source of distress. — Susan T. Fiske et al., A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype…, 277; Perceived competence in envied outgroups fuels resentment-driven prejudice rather than reducing it. — Susan T. Fiske et al., A Model of (Often Mixed) Stereotype…, 302; Most prejudiced people experience torn, alternating rather than pure attitudes (+3 more)

Broader Connections