Minority influence on majorities requires social legitimacy, which stigmatized groups cannot attain

Evidence

How does this picture comport with our emphasis on the minority’s successes? We have argued that minorities can affect majority beliefs and behaviors, but only when they are accepted as legitimate members of the larger group. Minorities attempt to move into this status for many reasons, such as to fulfill belongingness needs and to enable them to move the majority. Minorities that are of low status, heavily stigmatized, or socially disadvantaged are not likely to be accepted by the majority as in-group, irrespective of their desires for inclusion. When the minority is not accepted as legitimate or acceptable for inclusion, its power to influence is forfeit. Satisfying uniqueness needs may motivate individuals to distance themselves from the majority; however, unless the uniqueness is reigned in and the minority is accepted as a legitimate part of the majority, it is destined to remain out-group and thus surrenders its power to influence. — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1425

Categorization

• XREF: This is the core ingroup/outgroup mechanism reading purpose targets - connects directly to the same-text question of low-status minority influence (stigmatized Islamophobia-relevant groups specifically). — connects to: Marginalized scholars must accept powerful groups border-crossing into their terrain despite real risks.
• ADDENDUM: This generalizes the moral-panic/immodesty thread’s insight that outsider status blocks influence: here stated as a formal social-psych legitimacy condition.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1425