>For a long time, many social scientists were convinced that Conservatives were more biased and more in need of explaining than Liberals. However, recent scholarship has challenged this assumption, contending that the predominance of Liberals in the social sciences might have caused social science to view Conservatives unfairly as alien and abnormal and Liberals as unbiased and "normal." Here, we build on this work, arguing that one potent source of liberal bias-perceived victims' groups-has remained largely unstudied. We argue that most Liberals are cosmic egalitarians, that is, they believe that (especially ethnic) demographic groups do not differ biologically on socially valued traits (e.g., math ability, IQ, self-control). This, when coupled with a sacred narrative about protecting perceived victims' groups (e.g., Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, Women), leads to bias against any challenge to cosmic egalitarianism that appears to cast a perceived privileged group (e.g., men) in a more favorable light than a perceived victims' group (e.g., women). We support our theory with X studies, which show that Liberals, but not Conservatives, evaluate information in a biased manner when that information portrays perceived victims' groups or perceived privileged groups as superior on a socially valued trait. We argue that this bias is due to a liberal trait we call Equalitarianism.