There's a moment when my concentration says stop, this should not like this. Anyway, new text out of Advances In Social Psychology about the use of stereotypes to support the just-world-belief. In fact this text goes about rationalizing and indeed it is sadness (like I put it) that lets people believe in the higher status group which is in fact not giving a lot about the lower status group as such. This process is in fact automatic and is foremost seen when the subject is not aware of this. It seems so to be that we are made to be slaves and masters. It is all about not hating your masters. The processes that lie behind this rationalization are self-enhancement, self-affirmation, social identification and in-group favoritism. While the system is seen as good, fair, legitimate and desirable. The more sad the story could be the more people put affection to the group. Maybe strange I had to think about Schläger-artists and their public, or The Royals. But this is nothing more than teen spirit. The point is that we use stereotypes which are favorably sad to make a nuanced naive realistic view, things are relative and not of that importance while staying in a anticipatory
rationalization of the status quo. Hereby are complement stereotypes used to fulfill the addressing of ideological dissonance which is as earlier stated a form of support from imagined order. The system as a whole is fair, balanced, and legitimate. All about the illusion of equality. According to the automotive model (Bargh et al., 2001) situations become active when so strived for (in mind). So it not so that this rationalization can't work well. Sadness leads to system justification, which is a bit like crying for your mommy. Yes! It is remarkable that we use dichotomies in language to nuance the concept the most as possible and we accept arrogance even as long it feels sad. Also women become flattered by this collective mechanism by putting more responsibilities on them than they from out their just-world-belief should think of. It seemed all more clear to me, experimental seen, it is always the judgment which is different. Probably I have to read over into this.