
Who Is Marrying Whom - iamwil
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/29/us/20110130mixedrace.html
======
tokenadult
The government definitions applied to these issues have changed over the
decades in the United States. Self-designation under each set of definitions
(last revised in 1997) is changing too. Americans are becoming less and less
race-conscious in self-identification. I have been looking up links on this
subject since a few years ago for online discussion of college admission
issues in the United States.

College reporting to the federal government is based on the U.S. Census bureau
definitions for ethnicity and race categories, which in turn are based on
regulations from the Office of Management and Budget, which were announced on
30 October 1997

<http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html>

to take effect no later than 1 January 2003 for data collection by all federal
agencies.

The Department of Education has more recently updated its guidance to colleges
on how to ask ethnicity and race questions

[http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/10190...](http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/101907c.html)

or

[http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/10190...](http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/101907c.pdf)

and has requested colleges change their forms by the high school class of 2010
application year to ask a two-part question, first inquiring about Hispanic
ethnicity and then about race, for each student. The student will still be
free to decline to answer either part of the question.

"Unlike elementary and secondary institutions, generally, postsecondary
institutions and Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) grantees use
self-identification only and do not use observer identification. As discussed
elsewhere in this notice, postsecondary institutions and RSA grantees will
also be permitted to continue to include a 'race and ethnicity unknown'
category when reporting data to the Department. This category is being
continued in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS)
because the National Center for Education Statistics’ experience has shown
that (1) a substantial number of college students have refused to identify a
race and (2) there is often not a convenient mechanism for college
administrators to use observer identification."

You can look up the detailed category definitions on the website of the United
States Bureau of the Census. As the Census Bureau itself notes,

"The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification
by people according to the race or races with which they most closely
identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be
interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature."

<http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm>

"White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the
Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as
'White' or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near
Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

"Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial
groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Black,
African Am., or Negro,' or provide written entries such as African American,
Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.

"American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the
original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and
who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment.

"Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far
East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example,
Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine
Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. It includes 'Asian Indian,' 'Chinese,'
'Filipino,' 'Korean,' 'Japanese,' 'Vietnamese,' and 'Other Asian.'

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of
the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. It
includes people who indicate their race as 'Native Hawaiian,' 'Guamanian or
Chamorro,' 'Samoan,' and 'Other Pacific Islander.'

. . . .

. . . .

. . . .

The concept of race is separate from the concept of Hispanic origin."

<http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68188.htm>

"Hispanics or Latinos are those people who classified themselves in one of the
specific Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino categories listed on the Census 2000
questionnaire--'Mexican, Mexican Am., Chicano,' 'Puerto Rican', or 'Cuban'--as
well as those who indicate that they are 'other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino.'
Persons who indicated that they are 'other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino' include
those whose origins are from Spain, the Spanish-speaking countries of Central
or South America, the Dominican Republic or people identifying themselves
generally as Spanish, Spanish-American, Hispanic, Hispano, Latino, and so on.

"Origin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality group, lineage, or country
of birth of the person or the person's parents or ancestors before their
arrival in the United States.

"People who identify their origin as Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino may be of
any race."

The federal Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) has posted guidance to colleges about how they are to ask about student
ethnicity and race according to the federally defined categories.

<http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2002/std1_5.asp>

The instructions on the National Center for Education Statistics website
provide details on how word ethnicity and race questionnaires and how colleges
should report the various categories self-reported by students to the federal
government.

See the National Center for Education Statistics Race/Ethnicity FAQ

<http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/visFaq_re.aspx>

and the Association for Institutional Research Race/Ethnicity Information
webpage

<http://www.airweb.org/page.asp?page=1500>

and its subpages for more information about the current of colleges as they
implement the new federal regulations for high school class of 2010 applicants
to college.

Students of higher education (and applicants to schools of postsecondary
education) are treated as adults, and are explicitly permitted to decline to
identify their ethnic or racial category.

Note that the decennial census in the United States redefines "race"
categories from time to time,

[http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1955923,00.ht...](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1955923,00.html)

and there is no consistency between the practice of the United States and that
of any other country in this regard.

I find it interesting that more and more college applicants are declining to
self-report their ethnicity to colleges,

<http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/02/15/race2_15>

an issue explored by the linked article from several points of view. Declining
to self-report is everyone's right under law and something that someone of any
ethnic self-identification might choose to do. People can decide this issue
for themselves, but I like to emphasize in my own life, as a member of a
"biracial" family, the common humanity my children, my wife, and I share with
all our neighbors and compatriots. We prefer the category label "human" but
accept the category label "postracial" in our household.

The latest version of the Minorities in Higher Education Report

[http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Temp...](http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=34214)

has a lot of detailed numbers (all based on reports colleges make to the
federal government) about the growth in college enrollment in all the reported
ethnic categories, and the growth of the reported category "race/ethnicity
unknown." The "race/ethnicity unknown" category has been the fastest-growing
category by far in the reported years.

~~~
protomyth
The "Self-designation" for Native American does have some rules based on blood
and tribal enrollment. A entity (e.g. college) not reporting on this correctly
can bring some consequences.

------
nostrademons
It's somewhat ironic that there's no column for "multiracial" in the data.
Intermarriage doesn't stop at the first generation.

------
OasisG
"Over all, black Hispanics and American Indians have the highest rates of
intermarriage."

I am thrilled to see they are recognizing black Hispanics as a bonafide group.
Being forced to choose between the two gets old quick.

I don't know that I consider black hispanic/african american marriages
interracial however...

~~~
alexpeattie
But I guess you can't have it both ways - if Black and black Hispanics should
indeed be two distinct racial groups it would be a bit arbitrary to say
marriages between them aren't interracial, no?

~~~
huherto
What is a black Hispanic? hispanic + amerindian or hispanic + african.

At least here in Mexico, no one will think at themselves as black. May be the
term should be hispanic non white

~~~
michael_dorfman
What about elsewhere in Latin America? For example, in Cuba, there is a large
Afro-Cuban community, isn't there?

~~~
huherto
yes, that may apply for some countries. But then how do you classify hispanics
of amerindian origin?

~~~
OasisG
Mestizo, typically.

------
John89
I don’t see how the sexes within a race can be different. For every Male
that’s interracially married that’s one female that has to be interracially
married.

It could come down to parts of the population that are not married to skew it.
IE in prison, if one sex marries older or same sex marriages.

But I suspect it’s actually more about perceptions.

~~~
philwelch
That's exactly what it is. For every Asian woman who marries a white or black
man, there's (statistically) an Asian man who has to either marry a white or
black woman or remain single. Likewise, for every black man who marries a
white or Asian woman, there's a black woman who has to marry a white or Asian
man or remain single.

Now, it's true that for every Asian woman who marries interracially, there has
to be a white or black man who also marries interracially, but in practice,
having a large white majority population means that proportionally fewer
whites have to marry interracially to really muck up the proportions among
minorities.

Statistically, Asian men and black women tend to remain single as Asian women
and black men tend to marry interracially. One possible interpretation is that
there's kind of a continuum:

    
    
      Black    White    Asian
    

where women interracially marry to the left and men interracially marry to the
right. But it doesn't loop around.

------
klbarry
I am surprised the number of white men marrying asian women is so low (though
it is high compared to others). I imagine living in NYC skews my view a great
deal though.

~~~
p90x
There are very many more white men than their are asian women.

~~~
astrofinch
In the United States.

------
maeon3
I'll bet genetic predispositions have a lot to do with these statistics. I'd
like to see which groups are generating the most offspring.

------
bane
A side comment, we really have to collectively agree to drop "whom". It's
archaic and has not been part of common usage for at least the last century if
not longer. It's noticeable only with the unusually low frequency it shows up
and does nothing to aid or clarify communication. It's like spelling "old"
with a silent final 'e', "olde".

It's time to get over this and move the language forward a bit, thank you.

 _rant off_

~~~
lkrubner
I think "whom" is still in use. I still use it, and I still see it used in the
emails my friends send me.

Despite that, I agree with part of what you say: it would be good to modernize
the language.

~~~
bane
It still shows up in formal writing with some frequency, but it's slowly
fading away. Most modern formal writing guides usually have a footnote or some
such to note that. In less formal speech, it's pretty much unheard these days.

Anecdotally, I went and searched my email archives, going back to 1992, and I
found a couple dozen uses of it, all in emails I received from religious
family members quoting the bible.

------
markessien
In spite of Obama being a product of such a mixed-race union, he picked
'Black' as his racial categorization in the 2010 census, according to an
article linked from there.

I think that's backwards. A person equally white and equally black should not
become black out of political expediency. They should be equally
representative of both of their heritages.

------
angryindian
WTF?! Can we stop calling NATIVE AMERICANS indians already.

Since I was born in America and my family is from the country of INDIA, I
guess I am known as an Indian American? Are American Indians, children of
Americans who are born in India? Logically thats the only thing that makes
sense.

Just cause someone made a mistake we shouldn't propagate it. Otherwise we
should all start using titles given to various ethnic groups which are no
longer politically correct.

/rant

~~~
olalonde
Can we stop calling U.S. people AMERICANS already?

Since I was born in the continent AMERICA and my family is from the country
Canada, I guess I am known as a Canadian American?

Just cause someone made a mistake we shouldn't propagate it.

/sarcasm

~~~
wyclif
My family migrated to the US from Canada. "America" is a geography not
restricted to the US, at any rate.

~~~
Locke1689
What? American is the official demonym for US citizens. Sorry for the
confusion, but American is the only correct demonym and has been for a long
time.

Edit: Actually, when is there ever any confusion? There isn't a whole lot the
"Americas" as a whole have in common. If you want to do continent-based
demonyms, just prefix North or South.

~~~
olalonde
> The Americas, or America, (Spanish: América, Portuguese: América, French:
> Amérique, Dutch: Amerika, Aymara: Amërika, Quechua: Amirika, Guaraní:
> Amérika) are lands in the Western hemisphere, also known as the New World.

I was initially being sarcastic but if you want to get serious on the topic,
let's at least admit that there would indeed be confusion for an
extraterrestrial coming to Earth for the first time. Wouldn't you find it
funny if people from China were called Asians instead of Chinese or if Mexican
people called themselves Americans instead of Mexicans?

~~~
Locke1689
_I was initially being sarcastic but if you want to get serious on the topic,
let's at least admit that there would indeed be confusion for an
extraterrestrial coming to Earth for the first time_

If that's the primary confusion scenario, I think I'm comfortable with the way
things worked out. ;) Also, I was mostly commenting on wyclif, I got your
sarcasm.

