Mixed Race Studies

Slaves in the Family: Testamentary Freedom and Interracial Deviance

2008
50 pages

Kevin Noble Maillard, Associate Professor of Law
Syracuse University

This Article addresses the deviance of interracial sexuality acknowledged in testamentary documents. The language of wills calls into question the authority of probate and family law by forcing issues of deviance into the public realm. Will dramas, settled in or out of court, publicly unearth insecurities about family. Many objections to the stated intent of the testator generate from social prejudices toward certain kinds of interpersonal relationships: nonmarital, homosexual, and/or interracial. When pitted against an issue of a moral or social transgression, testamentary intent often fails. In order for these attacks on testamentary validity to succeed, they must be situated within an existing juridical framework that supports and adheres to the hegemony of denial that refuses to legitimate the wishes of the testator. Disinherited white relatives of white testators regularly challenged wills disposing a majority of an estate to paramours and children of African descent. In the nineteenth century, testators who eschewed traditional devises to spouses, relatives, and institutions in favor of mistresses, slaves, or both often incited will contests of testamentary incapacity, undue influence, or fraud. This Article is a case study of In Re Remley, an antebellum will contest between disinherited white collateral heirs and the intended black and mulatto devisees. It retains timeless value in its demonstration of the incompatibility of testamentary freedom and social deviance. I conclude that subjective conceptions of kinship, in particular those unpopular relationships that defy social norms, prevent the idea of testamentary freedom from reaching diverse articulations of family.

Read the entire article here.

Multiracial Identity and Affirmative Action

Asian Pacific American Law Journal
University of California, Los Angeles
Volume 12, Fall 2006 – Spring 2007
32 pages

Nancy Leong, Assistant Professor of Law
Sturm College of Law, Denver University

The classification of multiracial individuals has long posed a challenge in a number of legal contexts, and the affirmative action debate highlights the difficulty of such classification. Should multiracial individuals be categorized according to how they view themselves, how society tends to view them, by some ostensibly objective formula based on their parents’ ancestry, or in some other fashion?

My article draws on sociological research to demonstrate that there are no easy answers to this question. The way multiracial individuals view themselves varies among individuals and, moreover, may vary at different times for the same individual. Society often lacks consensus on an individual’s racial status, and examining a person’s ancestry simply removes the question of categorization to prior generations. Although my article does not attempt to propose a better way to take race into account in the affirmative action context, I strive to raise the issues that must be confronted in developing a coherent system that furthers the goal of affirmative action.

Read the entire article here.

Blurring Racial and Ethnic Boundaries in Asian American Families: Asian American Family Patterns, 1980-2005

Journal of Family Issues
Volume 31, Number 3 (March 2010)
pages 280-300
DOI: 10.1177/0192513X09350870

Danielle Antoinette Hidalgo
University of California, Santa Barbara

Carl L. Bankston, Professor of Sociology
Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana

In this work, the authors use statistics from the U.S. Census to examine trends in intermarriage, racial and ethnic combinations, and categorizations among Asian Americans. Specifically, the authors want to consider the extent to which family patterns may contribute to Asian Americans and their descendants’ continuing as distinct, becoming members of some new category or categories, or simply becoming White. Based on the data analysis and discussion, it seems most likely that Whiteness will increasingly depend on the situation: Where there are Asians,Whites, and Blacks, Asians will tend to become White. Where there are only Whites, Asians, including even those of multiracial background, may well continue to be distinguished. Yet people in mixed families will be continually crossing all racial and ethnic lines in the United States, and their numbers will steadily increase.

Read or purchase the article here.

Review: “Black Gal Swing”: Color, Class, and Category in Globalized Culture [Review of works by Jayne O. Ifekwunigwe, Arthur K. Spears, and Rainier Spencer]

American Anthropologist
Volume 103, Issue 1 (March 2001)
pages 208-211
DOI: 10.1525/aa.2001.103.1.208

Fred J. Hay, Professor and Librarian of the W.L. Eury Appalachian Collection Library
Appalachian State University

• Scattered Belongings: Cultural Paradoxes of “Race,” Nation and Gender. Jayne O. Ifekwunigwe. New York: Routledge, 1999. 221 pp.
• Race and Ideology: Language, Symbolism, and Popular Culture. Arthur K. Spears, ed. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1999. 242 pp.
• Spurious Issues: Race and Multiracial Identity Politics in the United States. Rainier Spencer. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1999. 222 pp.

(Son Bonds) Now a yellow gal will kiss you. she will kiss you awful sweet—brownskin gal kiss the same.
(John Estes) What do a black gal do?
(Son Bonds:) But a black gal spit ‘bacco juice, spew snuff all on your lips—oh, loving you just the same.

“Black Gal Swing” Delta Boys, 1941

This lyric speaks to the multiple concerns and issues addressed in these three books. In a few short lines, it depicts and satirizes social distinctions based on phenotype. it mocks the dominant economic class’s insistence on the value of whiteness, it rejects these constructs and in addition flaunts (sociologists Odum and Johnson referred to the blues as “the superlative of the repulsive [Odum and Johnson 1925:166]) its defiance of while American capitalist cultural hegemony. It is a multivocalic, nuanced, and subversive manifesto of cultural affirmation by and for those most reviled, oppressed, and economically deprived. Also, it is brutally honest and humorous. Unfortunately, it is rare for scholarly writing to achieve this level of sophistication or this degree of conciseness.

Ifekwunigwe’s Scattered Belongings (“mixed race” people in England) and Spencer’s Spurious Issues (“mixed race” people in the United States) are revised dissertations (Berkeley and Emory, respectively). Spears’s edited volume Race and Ideology is a collection of essays, by nine scholars, each examining an aspect of how racism is “interconnected and maintained” through “language, symbolism and popular culture” (back chut blurb). Ifekwunigwe, Spencer, and Spears agree on one thing: “race” is not a scientifically valid concept and should be discarded. But on how to achieve the goal of a deracialized social order, and on what intermediate steps should be taken to facilitate progress to that goal, there is little agreement among the three.

Spencer, of white German maternity and black American paternity, grew up in a predominantly black neighborhood in Queens. Ifekwunigwe, of British and Caribbean maternity and Nigerian paternity, was born in Nigeria moved to England when quite young, and then, at the age of ten, moved to “upper middle-class Jewish West Los Angeles” (p. 35). Both authors include family pictures emphasizing the wide range of color and other “racial” traits manifested in their families.

A self-proclaimed “antiracialist” and “antiracial advocate.” Spencer attacks multiracialism on the grounds that biological race does not exist and “social” race—based as it is on outdated concepts of scientific racism and popular readings of phenotype—is also spurious. Spencer argues that without race there would be no racism and that multiracialism is based on the false race concept supporting the hegemonic system of white supremacy. Furthermore, as Spencer notes, if race really existed, most, if not all, Americans would be multiracial.

Spencer’s is a straightforward presentation in which he reconstructs the history of federal racial classification and examines its purpose. He analyzes the ideology and goals of the multiracial movement in the United States, especially of the groups Project Race and the Association of Multiethnic Americans. (Spencer has been a prominent figure in multiracial circles through his column “Spurious Issues” regularly featured in InterRace magazine.) The bottom line is that Spencer is opposed to classifying people by race and adamantly against adding a new category of mixed or multi-race to the federal census. With regret, he acknowledges that for purposes of monitoring the enforcement of civil rights legislation—we must continue to use. for the present, the federal government’s existing racial categories.

Spencer’s argument against muluracialism is sound and well-articulated but, perhaps because of his commitment to antiracialist ideology, Spencer downplays issues of class: he does not acknowledge that the majority of the people in the multirace movement are middle class and committed to upward social mobility. He also downplays Project Race’s denial of and desire to escape from, blackness; ignores recent revitalization movements among what were once disdainfully referred to as “little races” and “tri-racial isolates” (especially the new Melungeon pride crusade); and fails to address issues related to individuals who share a “racial” culture different from their “race” (e.g., R&B legend Johnny Otis, culturally black son of Greek immigrants)…

Read or purchase the article here.

Races: Passing

TIME Magazine
1947-10-20

Greying, blue-eyed Walter White, for 16 years executive secretary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, has a skin so light that he frequently has to explain that he is, in deed, a Negro. Last week, in the Saturday Review of Literature, Propagandist White talked openly about a subject many Negroes are careful to avoid: the Negro who lives secretly as a white man.  Wrote he : “Every year approximately 12,000 white-skinned Negroes disappear — people whose absence cannot be explained by death or emigration. Nearly every one of the 14 million discernible Negroes in the United States knows at least one member of his race who is ‘passing‘ — the magic word which means that some Negroes can get by as whites…  Often these emigrants achieve success in business, the professions, the arts and sciences. Many of them have married white people…  Sometimes they tell their husbands or wives of their Negro blood, sometimes not…”

Read the entire article here.

Half vs. Double: Hybrid Mathematics

Column: Little Momo in the Big Apple
Discover Nikkei: Japanese Migrans and Their Descendants
2008-03-28

Simone Momoye Fujita

My mother is Japanese American, and my father is African American.

According to this equation, most would assert that this fact makes me exactly one-half Asian and one-half Black, right? I whole-heartedly disagree. When faced with an either/or dilemma, I will defiantly choose the both/and option. The sum of my parts, racially speaking, is greater than one. Let me explain:

I am of the school of thought that takes the math-defying stance that mixed people are not split schizophrenically down the middle when it comes to their ethnic identities. This means that despite my ambiguous phenotypic appearance, I consider myself just as Japanese American as anyone who was born to two Japanese American parents. The same applies to my African American side. The fact that my parents are of two different races is incidental to the big picture – my blended cultural heritage cannot be quantified in percentages. If one should insist on doing so, the most accurate description would be to say that I am 100% Japanese and 100% African American, much like a participant in kip fulbeck: part asian, 100% hapa exhibition suggested…

Read the entire article here.

The Perils of Compartmentalization

Columbia Daily Spectator
New York, New York
Friday, 2008-09-26

Dennis Yang
Teachers College

When I arrived from California as an incoming graduate student at Teachers College, one of the first things I attempted to find was a large-scale supermarket—a task that proved to be more difficult than I had anticipated. Without a car or friends nearby, I ventured on foot to the market nearest to my on-campus dormitory and was pleasantly surprised at my discovery. Though modest in physical infrastructure, this market was just like any other that I had ever visited; every item was organized and stacked according to predetermined labels. The chips were aligned, the vegetables were neatly displayed in an aisle, and the frozen meat section was impeccably synchronized—chicken, pork, beef…

…To my understanding, the cardinal reason why Barack Obama is being branded “black” is simply for no other reason than his skin color—which, by the way, is not by any conventional definitions, black. Obama, like other mixed-race individuals in America, is the victim of a society that prefers to attach labels on and insert into categories those people who unambiguously do not fit into austerely sealed boxes. What this election has shown is that Americans, in general, with exceptions of course, are unable to differentiate a child who is a product of one African American parent and a child who is a product of two African American parents. Debates abound regarding the importance of such clarifications, but to anyone who grows up answering questions, both internally and externally, about which pre-ordained ethnic/racial categories they are forced to identify with, this clarification is of monumental importance. We owe it to the multiracial and multicultural Americans from Sacramento, Calif., to Scranton, Pa., to extend appropriate recognition to their unique experiences in life…

Read the entire article here.

Faculty Spotlight: Melissa Harris-Lacewell

CAAS News
Center for African American Studies
Princeton University
Spring 2008 Newsletter
Pages 6-7

Dara-Lyn Shrager

Melissa Harris-Lacewell smiles broadly when asked about Senator Barack Obama’s run for the democratic nomination for President. She is clearly a fan of both the man and his campaign.  As a former Chicagoan, who lived in the state while Obama was first a State Senator and then a US Senator, Harris-Lacewell considers herself an Obama supporter.  After just a few minutes spent chatting with Harris-Lacewell in her cozy Corwin Hall office, I realize how lucky Obama – or anyone for that matter – would be to find Harris-Lacewell on his side. She is a veritable storm of intelligent exuberance, possessing equal parts charm and determination. I left our meeting as a fan and supporter of Melissa Harris-Lacewell.

…Q. What do you make of the criticism that Obama is not really black?

R. It’s wrong. Americans are really stupid about race, partly because we live so far apart from each other. Black people have always been a mixed race but whites cannot say this about themselves.  Doubting his authenticity as a black candidate means that white people cannot feel good about supporting him because he’s not really black. That’s ridiculous.  It also discredits his ability to make claims on the black resistance movements and other important issues.  Obama has actively promoted himself as someone onto whom we can cast our own understandings. His race is something of a blank slate onto which we can project our own hopes, dreams and desires…

Read the entire interview here.

Princeton Professor tweets about  her views on mixed-race identity (Interview with Melissa Harris-Lacewell)

Mixed Child: The Pulse of the Mixed Community
2009-07-29

Jeff Eddings

MSNBC contributor, Princeton University’s Associate Professor of Politics & African American Studies and author of Barbershops, Bibles, and BET: Everyday Talk and Black Political Thought Melissa Harris-Lacewell had a frank  discussion with a follower on Twitter about the concept of mixed-race identity.

The conversation with Jeff Eddings of Silicon Valley, CA went as follows (published Monday, July 27th [2009]):

Eddings: Wrong pres[idential]. predictions aside, the biggest missed opp. w/BO [Barack Obama] as pres. & you in the mix is lack of discussion re: multiracial.

Harris-Lacewell: I’m not sure its a missed opportunity. From my perspective I am not “multi-racial” the term has no meaning for me.

Eddings: We keep talking about race as if it were one thing. e.g. You & pres. are both multiracial, but only self-identify as black.

Harris-Lacewell: because race is a social construct it is clear to me that I am constructed as black and self-identify as such.

Eddings: Being multiracial & having grown up in both cultures, I can tell you that I’m not constructed as simply one or the other 🙂

Harris-Lacewell: Though I respect that ppl [people] have right to think of themselves as anything they like, I think “multi-racial” is a weird idea…

…Harris-Lacewell: I don’t believe multi-racial makes sense by my understanding of race.  Race is socially constructed and “multi-racial” seems to assume that race is biological: if parents are of different then the kid is “mixed”.  But that is not how race works. Race is constructed through law, history, culture, practice, custom, etc… I have a white mother and black father, but this doesn’t make me mixed race. Race is not biology. In USA this combo makes me black…

Read the entire interview here.

Mixed Race Hollywood (review) [Emily D. Edwards]

Journal of Film and Video
Volume 61, Number 4 (Winter 2009)
E-ISSN: 1934-6018
Print ISSN: 0742-4671
DOI: 10.1353/jfv.0.0051

Emily D. Edwards, Professor of Broadcasting and Cinema
University of North Carolina, Greensboro

Mixed Race Hollywood is a collection of essays that could not be timelier. As popular media, journalists, and citizen bloggers actively dispute the impact of President Barack Obama’s election on attitudes toward race, editors Mary Beltrán and Camilla Fojas have compiled a series of essays that explore ways popular media and celebrity have presented miscegenation and racial identity for Americans. These historical and critical essays analyze specific films, television programs, Internet sites, and the appearance of celebrity image to help explain the ways popular media presentations of race correspond with the development of social behaviors and attitudes. Though some might credit “liberal Hollywood” for ushering America into the “mulatto millennium,” it is obvious from the collection of essays in this book that Hollywood is not always the leader of public opinion but often takes the more conservative approach, lagging behind fairly widespread social attitudes.

The editors divide the book into four sections: themes of mixed race representation, miscegenation and romance, genre and mixed race characters, and finally, a section that examines the shift in media presentation of mixed race characters from tragic to heroic. The introduction by Beltrán and Fojas helps set the background and the overall argument that media presentations reveal a cultural shift in American attitudes toward mixed race characters. The introduction also provides some useful notes on terminology.

The essays begin, appropriately, with J. E. Smyth’s chapter, “Classical Hollywood and the Filmic Writing of Interracial History, 1931–1939.” This chapter examines films such as Cimarron (1931), Ramona (1936), Show Boat (1936), Jezebel (1938)…

Read the entire review here.