Interracial marriage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.

Interracial marriage occurs when two people of differing races marry. Interracial marriage is a form of exogamy (marrying outside of one's social group) and can be seen in the broader context of miscegenation (mixing of different races in marriage, cohabitation, or sexual relations).

Contents 1 General 2 In the United States 2.1 Historical interracial marriage disparities 2.1.1 Asian & Black 2.1.2 Asian & American Indian 2.2 Current interracial marriage disparities 2.2.1 Black & White 2.2.2 Asian & White 2.2.3 Asian & Black 2.2.4 White & American Indian 2.3 Marriage squeeze 2.4 Education and interracial marriage 2.5 Immigrants and interracial marriage 2.6 Cohabitation and interracial marriage 3 In the United Kingdom 3.1 Interracial marriage disparities for certain races 4 In Australia 4.1 Disparities in child-producing unions 5 In Japan 5.1 Interracial marriage disparities for certain races 6 In Africa 6.1 Interracial marriage disparities 7 References 8 See also 9 External links

[edit] General

Historically, there have been controversies over interracial couples, for reasons of racist origin, such as fears of "racial impurity". South Africa, Germany and the most states of the United States of America are but a few countries that have had regulations banning interracial marriage.

[edit] In the United States

See also: Race (United States Census)

In Social Trends in America and Strategic Approaches to the Negro Problem, Gunnar Myrdal (1948) ranks the reasons for segregation according to Southern whites in the 1930s and 40s from least to most important: jobs, courts and police, politics, basic public facilities, “social equality” including dancing, handshaking, and most important, marriage. This ranking scheme seems to have been upheld relatively well into the 1960s. Of less importance was the segregation in basic public facilities, which was abolished with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. And the most important reason for segregation, marriage, was not fully overcome until the last anti-miscegenation laws were struck down later in 1967.

Marriages between Whites and Asians are becoming increasingly common (Lange, 2005). Reasons for this are often cited such as the sterotypical views of assimilation for status amongst Asian people.

[edit] Historical interracial marriage disparities

[edit] Asian & Black

Chinese American men historically married African American women in high proportions to their total marriage numbers due to few Chinese American women in the United States. After the Emancipation Proclamation, Chinese immigrated into the American South to work on plantations. The tenth US Census of Louisiana counted 57% percent of interracial marriage between these Chinese Americans to be with African Americans and 43% percent to be with White American women. After the Chinese Exclusion Act, Chinese American men had fewer potential Chinese American wives, so they increasingly married African American women on the West Coast of United States.^[1]

[edit] Asian & American Indian

Filipino Americans have historically married frequently with American Indian and Alaskan Native people. In the 16th century, Filipinos were under Spanish rule. The Spanish colonists ordered the Filipinos to trade between the Phillippines and the Americas. When Mexico revolted against the Spanish, Filipinos escaped into Mexico, then traveled to Louisiana. In Louisiana the exclusively male Filipinos married American Indian women. In the 1920s, Filipino American communities grew in Alaska. These Filipino American men married Alaskan Native women. In the Westcoast of the United States, Filipino Americans married American Indian women in Bainbridge Island Washington.^[2]

[edit] Current interracial marriage disparities

In 1967, the Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia struck down the last of the anti-miscegenation laws in the United States, and with this, the frontier of available marriage choices shifted out. The number of interracial marriages in the United States has been on the rise: 310,000 in 1970, 651,000 in 1980, and 1,161,000 in 1992 according to the U.S. Bureau of the census 1993. Interracial marriages represented 0.7% of all marriages in 1970 to 1.3% in 1980, to 2.2% in 1992. With the introduction of the mixed-race category, the 2000 census revealed interracial marriage to be somewhat more widespread, with 2,669,558 interracial marriages recorded, or 4.9% of all marriages (census 2000 PHC-T-19). (Here, marriages between two mixed-race persons, or where they are the same race but one is Hispanic and the other not, are not counted as interracial.)^[3]

[edit] Black & White

Although mixed-race partnering has increased, the United States still shows huge disparities between African American male and African American female endogamy statistics. The 1990 census reports that 17.6% of African American marriages occur with White Americans. Yet African American men are 2.5 times more likely to be married to white women than African American women to white men. In the 2000 census, 239,477 African American male to white female and 95,831 white male to African American female marriages were recorded, again showing the 2.5-1 ratio. Despite this, slightly more white men are married than white women.

[edit] Asian & White

Asian American women were +250% more likely to be married to a White American man than Asian American men married to a white woman; but, the absolute numbers of Asian American women are only +51% more than men among the six largest Asian ethnic groups.^[4] According to the 2000 US Census, Asian American women of the 1.5 generation were +76% more likely to be married to a white man than Asian American men of the 1.5 generation married to a white woman, but the absolute numbers of 1.5 generation Asian American women is +56% more than Asian American men.^[4] According to the 2000 US Census, the number of Asian Americans married to non-Asians is +246% more for Asian American females as opposed to males among the six largest Asian American ethnic groups.^[4] According to the 2000 US Census, the number of 1.5 generation Asian Americans married to non-Asians among the six largest Asian ethnic groups is +56% more for Asian American women as opposed to Asian American men, but the absolute numbers of 1.5 generation Asian American women is +56% percent more for Asian American women as opposed to Asian American men.^[4]

[edit] Asian & Black

With African Americans and Asian Americans, the ratios are even further imbalanced, with +598% percent more Asian female/Black male couples than Asian male/Black female couples according to the 2000 US Census for the six largest Asian American ethnic groups, but the absolute numbers of Asian American women are +51% percent more for Asian American women as opposed to Asian American men among the six largest Asian ethnic groups.^[4] Asian Americans of the 1.5 generation and of the five largest Asian American ethnic groups had Black male/Asian female marriages +222% more than Asian male/Black Female relationships.^[4] Even though the disparity between Blacks and Asian interracial marriages by gender is high according to the 2000 US Census, the total numbers of Asian/Black interracial marriages are low, numbering only 2.2% percent for Asian male marriages and 10.2% percent of Asian female marriages.^[4]

[edit] White & American Indian

The interracial disparity for American Indians is low. According to the 1990 US Census (which only counts indigenous people with US-government-recognized tribal affiliation), American Indian women interrmarried White Americans +2% percent more than American Indian men married White women.^[5]

[edit] Marriage squeeze

A new term has arisen recently to describe the social phenomenon of the so-called "marriage squeeze" for African American females.^[6] The marriage squeeze refers to the belief that the most eligible and desirable African American men are marrying non-African American women, leaving those African American women who wish to marry African American men with fewer partnering options. According to Newsweek, 43% of black women between the ages of 30-34 have never been married.^[7] Explanation of this phenomenon is three-fold. In part it may be due to relatively fewer European American men statistically being willing to marry African American women as the result of the lingering effects of social ostracism which past white American men, who have historically pursued relationships with African American women, were heavily subjected to^[8] -- although today one in five white Americans would seriously consider marrying across the color line nonetheless.^[9] In part it may also be the result of a desire among African American women to marry an African American man due to concepts such as "racial loyalty", "black solidarity" and the internalized stereotypical belief that non-African American men wouldn't find them attractive.^[10] Lastly, there is a desire among educated women of all races to "marry up", although rising income for women has lessened this factor.^[11]

There is a corollary "squeeze" for Asian American females who may view marrying White American men.^[12]

[edit] Education and interracial marriage

Using PUMS data from both the 1980 and 1990 U.S. Census to determine trends among interracial marriage among White Americans, African Americans, Hispanic or Latinos, and Asian Americans, it may be seen that endogamy (marrying within race) was more prevalent for African American men at lower education levels.

In 1980, the numbers were as follows: African American males without a high school diploma participated in endogamy at 96.5%; for those who received a high school diploma, 95.6%; for a college degree and above, the percentage of endogamy dropped to 94.0%. However, the rates for African American women changed very little with different educational attainment levels. For the African American woman who had not received a high school diploma the rate is 98.7%, high school diploma is 98.6%, with some college it is 98.2%, and college degree and more, 98.5%. And, during this time, there was a significant increase in marriages between whites and African Americans maintaining that African Americans are most likely to marry whites over other groups.

The 1990 results show that rates of endogamy dropped for both males and females, albeit more for the African American male. In 1990, an African American male with a college degree and more was participating in endogamy at 90.4%, for an African American female with the same educational attainment level, 96.4%. The results for the propensity of individuals at higher educational attainment levels to participate less in endogamy over the 10 year period were similar across races, including whites, Hispanics, and Asian Americans.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Immigrants and interracial marriage

It is found that racial endogamy is much stronger for immigrants as compared to natives; it is 4.9 times more likely for immigrants of African descent than for African Americans. Additionally, immigrants of African descent have the highest rates of endogamy of immigrants. Also, African immigrants are much more likely to marry other same-race immigrants and African Americans, than to out-marry racially. Native-born White Americans are also 1.6 times more likely to marry a native-born African American than an immigrant of African descent. Female immigrants of African descent are generally more likely to marry native-born whites than their male counterparts.

[edit] Cohabitation and interracial marriage

African American men are 2.5 times more likely to be married to a white spouse and 3.3 times more likely to be cohabitating with a White American, as compared to their African American female counterparts. Research yields that 7% of married African American men are with white wives and 15% of African American men cohabit with white women.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] In the United Kingdom

See also: United Kingdom Census 2001

[edit] Interracial marriage disparities for certain races

A similar trend can be seen in the UK. According to the UK 2001 census ^[13], Black British males were around 50% more likely than black females to marry outside their race, whereas British Chinese women were twice as likely as their male counterparts to marry someone from a different ethnic group. British Asian men (South Asian not including Chinese) were more likely to have an inter-ethnic marriage than their female counter parts by a small percent.

[edit] In Australia

See also: Demographics of Australia

[edit] Disparities in child-producing unions

Interracial and interethnic partnering disparities are evident in birth statistics, with Australian women more likely to form partnerships and families with foreign men than Australian men with foreign women^[14].

In 2005 there were 255,481 live births in Australia. 71.5% of these infants were born to Australian-born fathers, and 75.9% were born to Australian-born mothers.

In unions between Australian and non-Australian born people that produce children, the Australian-born partner is more likely to be male when the female was born in North Asia, Southeast Asia, Russia, Poland, Hungary, Switzerland, Netherlands, Canada or Zimbabwe. Australian-born women rather than men are more likely to produce children with partners born elsewhere.

However the disparity is generally only marginal when the foreign-born partner is from Western Europe, New Zealand or the Americas. At an extreme there are 3.6 times more births to Australian-born men/Chinese-born women than to Australian-born women/Chinese-born men, while there are 2.7 times more births to Pakistani-born men/Australian-born women than to Pakistani-born women/Australian-born men.

[edit] In Japan

See also: Demographics of Japan

[edit] Interracial marriage disparities for certain races

For the purpose of comparison, roughly four times as many Japanese men are married to foreign wives as Japanese women are married to foreign husbands, according to recent data.^[15] However, there is significant disparity in the country of origin of the partners: while 83% of foreign women married to Japanese men come from just three regions—China (35%), the Philippines (27%), and the Koreas (21%)—the foreign partners of Japanese women are more diverse, with the Koreas representing 32%, "other" (i.e., not the Koreas, China, the Philippines, Thailand, the US, the UK, Brazil, and Peru) at 28%, and the US at 19%. (For historical reasons, figures for partners with North or South Korean citizenship consist almost entirely of Korean nationals born in Japan; see Zainichi Koreans.) In any event, the absolute numbers are small, as just over 1% of Japan's population is foreign.

[edit] In Africa

[edit] Interracial marriage disparities

Asian Indian men have married many African women in Africa. Asian Indians have long been traders in East Africa. The British Empire brought workers into East Africa to build the Uganda Railway. Asian Indians eventually populated South Africa, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Rhodesia and Zaire. These interracial unions were mostly unilateral marriages between Asian Indian men and East African women.^[16]

[edit] References

1. ^ Color Q World. Chinese Blacks in the United States. September 1, 2006. <http://www.colorq.org/MeltingPot/article.aspx?d=America&x=ChineseBlacks>.
2. ^ Color Q World. Asian and Native Intermarriage in the US. September 1, 2006. <http://www.colorq.org/MeltingPot/article.aspx?d=America&x=AsianAndNative>.
3. ^ Portillo, Eli, Greve, Frank. "Social integration in the U.S., including cohabiting and marriage, is surging", McClatchy Newspapers, 2006-07-20. Retrieved on 2006-07-23.
4. ^ ^{a b c d e f g} Asian-Nation: "Interracial Dating and Marriage" (2006) Retrieved July 25, 2006
5. ^ U.S. Bureau of the Census."Race of Wife by Race of Husband:." 1998. July 29, 2006. <http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/race/interractab1.txt.>
6. ^ Crowder, Kyle D, and Stewart E. Tolnay. "A New Marriage Squeeze for Black Women: The Role of Racial Intermarriage by Black Men." 2000. August 14, 2006. <http://apt.allenpress.com/aptonline/?request=get-abstract&issn=0022-2445&volume=062&issue=03&page=0792>.
7. ^ Razib. Gene Expression. The Black Gender Gap. 2003. November 5, 2006.[1]
8. ^ Miller, Candace. Interracial Voice. Sauce for the Goose. 2001. August 14, 2006. <http://www.webcom.com/intvoice/candace.html>.
9. ^ Miller, Candace. Interracial Voice. Sauce for the Goose. 2001. August 14, 2006. <http://www.webcom.com/intvoice/candace.html>.
10. ^ Miller, Candace. Interracial Voice. Sauce for the Goose. 2001. August 14, 2006. <http://www.webcom.com/intvoice/candace.html>.
11. ^ Melendez, Michele M. The San Diego Union-Tribune. Education is changing the face of wedded life. 2004. August 14, 2006. <http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040425/news_mz1c25marry.html>.
12. ^ Tanaka, Tomoyuki. Disparity in Asian/white interracial dating FAQ. 1994. August 14, 2006. <http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~tanaka/disparity/disparity.txt>.
13. ^ National Statistics. Inter-ethnic Marriage. 2001. August 14, 2006. <http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1090 Inter-Ethnic Marriage: 2% of all marriages are inter-ethnic>.
14. ^ Australian Bureau of Statistics. Births, Australia. 3301.0. 2005. Chapter 8. Tables 8.14 and 8.15 "Country of Birth of Father" and "Country of Birth of Mother"
15. ^ Change by Year in Marriage Numbers as Seen by Spouse's Nationality (in Japanese)
16. ^ Color Q World. Jotawa: Afro-Asians in East Africa. September 1, 2006.<http://www.colorq.org/MeltingPot/article.aspx?d=Africa&x=Indians>.

[edit] See also

• Fictional interracial couples
• Miscegenation
• Multiracial
• The Race of the Future
• Silent Holocaust
• The Adventure of the Yellow Face

[edit] External links

• Asian-Nation: Interracial Marriage Among Asian Americans by C.N. Le, Ph.D.
• Interracial Voice (web magazine about interracial relationships) archive of articles
• INTERracialWeb.com Magazine
• Loving Day. June 12. Commemorating the day in 1967 when Interracial couples were legalized
• Interracial marriage — is it Biblical? (from a creationist site, answering "yes")