Racial hierarchies and dating preferences

Interracial relationships have come a long way from being an illegal taboo. Less than 100 years ago in the USA, Black men were executed by mobs just for getting close to White women (Braziel; Feliciano et al. 42). Until the 1960s, interracial marriage was banned in some states (Wang) and interracial relationships were forbidden from Hollywood films (Lewis 301).

Since then, there has been a remarkable shift in attitudes. The 2010s have seen the highest rates of interracial marriage (Wang) and support for interracial dating (Pew Research Center). It seems like tolerance is increasing and racial barriers are breaking down.

But this rosy post-racial rhetoric hides details that suggest unequal acceptance. Even if interracial marriage is on the rise, the vast majority are still same-race (Wang). Nearly three quarters of Black-White marriages are between a Black man and White woman (Hwang 29). Nearly all Asian-White marriages are between a White man and Asian woman (Feliciano et al. 40). To explain these, we have to look at the depressing world of racial dating preferences.

What happens when you just ask people to state their preferences?

Unsurprisingly, analyses of thousands of online dating profiles and their stated racial preferences revealed a hierarchy of desirability (Tsunokai, McGrath and Kavanagh 799). Users generally preferred those at the same or higher tier, but excluded those below (Hwang 36).

• Whites were at the top of the hierarchy. All groups were very willing to date them.  However, Whites were least willing to date outside their own race, i.e. “down” the hierarchy (Robnett and Feliciano 807).
• Native Americans, Hispanics and Asians were in the middle of the hierarchy. Middle Easterners were also in this tier but closer to the bottom (Feliciano et al. 46).
• Blacks were at the bottom of the hierarchy. All groups were far less willing to date them.

As Omi and Winant point out, “race is gendered, and gender is racialized” (68), and indeed there are also severe gendered anomalies.

• White women least willing to date outside their race (Feliciano et al. 29)
• Systematic exclusion of Black women (Feliciano et al. 48; Robnett and Feliciano 816)
• Systematic exclusion of Asian men. Even Asian women were not exempt (Feliciano et al. 48; Robnett and Feliciano 816; Hwang 35).

These all coincide with socio-historical factors and orthodox portrayals of gender and race.

White beauty standards

Figure 1. New York Fashion Week showing off its true colours (or lack thereof)

The dominant White majority has power over the media (i.e. the White Eye) and can define who is associated with beauty and desirability. Things like ads, news, TV, films, catalogues, pornography, packaging and dolls accumulate to give us our sense of desirability. These representations are in favour of Whiteness, reproducing the long-standing racist structures that position Whiteness as “superior” and “ideal”, and Blacks as “inferior” and to be shunned.

White women

Figure 2. Scrabble advert. Even though the White woman lives amongst millions of Asian men, she is "destined" only to be with the White man because that is just "right". Note the annoying Asian man who only hinders her romantic progress.

White women have long been valued as beautiful, “pure” and moral “trophies”, reserved for White men who are the only ones deserving of them, but prohibited to minorities who are supposedly a threat to them (Abagond; Gray; Hwang 30; Nemoto 84; Wade). The media continues to construct White partnership as universal and “natural”. It is probably for these reasons that White women are the most likely to face social ostracism for dating interracially (Feliciano et al. 41; Hwang 30).

Black women

Figure 3. Saturday Night Live sketch exemplifying the "sassy Black woman stereotype”.

Black women are negatively stereotyped as sassy, aggressive, unfeminine and ugly, and rarely shown as romantic interests in the media (Hwang 37; Feliciano et al. 42). The influential Moynihan Report suggested that because of “ghetto culture”, they emasculated partners by dominating the relationship (Burton and Tucker 134). Contrast this with Black men; while they are also in the bottom tier of expressed desirability, they are at least represented in ways that befit the cultural expectations of their gender, with strength and independence (Feliciano et al. 42).

Asian men

Figure 4. Contemporary web cartoon satirising Hollywood's strong tendency to de-sexualise Asian male leads.

Asian men are negatively stereotyped as perpetually foreign, submissive, unattractive, effeminate, asexual geeks (the “model minority”) and absent in romantic contexts in the media (Feliciano et al. 50; Hwang 30; Nemoto 97; Tsunokai, McGrath and Kavanagh 800). An old Canadian news article pulled no punches in its headline: “Brides of Chinamen: Many White Girls in Chicago Thus Display a Perverted Taste” (CINARC). Contrast this with Asian women who are accepted as hyper-sexualised objects for consumption by White men (Hwang 36; Tsunokai, McGrath and Kavanagh 799).

Implications

Treating entire groups of people as inherently desirable or undesirable is destructive. For groups that are systematically excluded, this can result in shame, frustration and loss of esteem. It was disturbing to see that the White-dominated hierarchy was internalised even by the minority users.

This is a good example of White privilege, as they are desired by all other groups. Although Whites might come across individuals that exclude them, they do not have the experience of being racially denied at almost every turn. They can enjoy the benefits of the desirability hierarchy and White Eye without realising it even exists.

It also reveals how the media is failing to portray interracial relationships properly. Even though they are more common, there are imbalances between particular groups that need to be addressed.

In the end, there is no excuse for racial exclusion in dating. Even if someone’s expressed racial preferences don’t fit this hierarchy, the very concept still treats people by essentialist categories instead of who they are as human beings.

Works cited

Abagond, Julian. “The pure white woman stereotype.” Abagond. Wordpress, 6 May 2008. Web. 1 June 2016.

Braziel, Jana Evans. “History of Lynching in the United States.” ACLAnet. University of Massachusetts, n.d. Web. 31 May 2016.

Burton, Linda M., and M. Belinda Tucker. ”Romantic Unions in an Era of Uncertainty: A Post-Moynihan Perspective on African American Women and Marriage.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 621 (2009): 132-148. SAGE. Web.

CINARC. “Early Chinese-White Marriages in North America.” Chinese in Northwest America Research Committee. CINARC, 26 October 2015. Web. 1 June 2016.

Feliciano, Cynthia, Belinda Robnett and Golnaz Komaie. “Gendered racial exclusion among white internet daters.” Social Science Research 38 (2009): 39-54. Elsevier. Web.

Gray, Emma. “The History Of Using White Female Sexuality To Justify Racist Violence.” Huffington Post. The Huffington Post Inc., 18 June 2015. Web. 1 June 2016.

Hwang, Wei-Chin. “Who are People Willing to Date? Ethnic and Gender Patterns in Online Dating.” Race and Social Problems 5 (2013): 28-40. Springer. Web.

Lewis, Jon. Hollywood v. Hard Core: How the Struggle Over Censorship Saved the Modern Film Industry. New York City, New York, USA: New York University Press, 2000. Print.

Nemoto, Kumiko. “Climbing the Hierarchy of Masculinity: Asian American Men's Cross-Racial Competition for Intimacy with White Women.” Gender Issues 25 (2008): 80-100. Springer. Web.

Omi, Michael and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the United States. 2nd ed. London, UK: Routledge, 1994. Print.

Pew Research Center. “Almost All Millennials Accept Interracial Dating and Marriage.” Pew Research Center. Pew Research Center, 1 February 2010. Web. 31 May 2016.

Robnett, Belinda, and Cynthia Feliciano. “Patterns of Racial-Ethnic Exclusion by Internet Daters.” Social Forces 89.3 (2011): 807-828. EBSCOHost. Web.

Tsunokai, Glenn T., Allison R. McGrath, and Jillian K. Kavanagh. “Online dating preferences of Asian Americans.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 31.6 (2014): 796-814. SAGE. Web.

Wade, Lisa. “Protecting (white) women inthe bathroom: A history.” Sociological Images. The University of Minnesota Twin Cities, 10 November 2015. Web. 1 June 2016.

Wang, Wendy. “Interracial marriage: Who is ‘marrying out’?” Factank. Pew Research Center, 12 June 2015. Web. 31 May 2016.

Formation of the Irish Race

You read that right. The Irish race.

“But I thought their race was White, and Irish is just one ethnicity inside it.”

I thought so too. Nowadays that’s the way we see it. But this hasn’t always been the case.

Across the Anglosphere, it was common to refer to the Irish as a fundamentally separate class of human. Not very positively, I might add.

“The Irish problem is a problem of the Irish race, and is neither a byproduct of politics nor of environment, but is rooted in the racial characteristics of the people themselves.”

—   Captain Hugh Pollard, British intelligence officer (quoted in Nelson 30)

“It cannot be too strongly impressed upon the minds of Englishmen that the Irish are not a mere variety of their own race, that they have had no share in the civilisation and progress of our nation…”

—   Arthur Maning Topp, writer for the Melbourne Review (19)

“the source of all evil [there] lies in the race, the Celtic race of Ireland. … The race must be forced from the soil; by fair, means if possible; still they must leave.”

—   Robert Knox, Scottish anatomy lecturer (quoted in Nelson 33)

Many of you will be familiar with the classic example of scientific racism below, attempting to “prove” that Blacks were physically closer to apes and thus inferior to Whites.

 

You may be surprised to know that this approach was also taken with the Irish.

The caption reads “The Iberians are believed to have been originally an African race, who thousands of years ago spread themselves through Spain over Western Europe. Their remains are found in the barrows, or burying places, in sundry parts of these countries. The skulls are of low prognathous type. They came to Ireland and mixed with the natives of the South and West, who themselves are supposed to have been of low type and descendants of savages of the Stone Age, who, in consequence of isolation from the rest of the world, had never been out-competed in the healthy struggle of life, and thus made way, according to the laws of nature, for superior races.”

Note the idea that the Irish were really from Africa, which tries to directly connect them to the “inferior” Blacks. This was an attempt to “prove” that they weren’t really White (or human) and that their negative traits were naturally innate, a prime example of biological essentialism.

These ideas resonated with the public, forming dehumanising “common sense” stereotypes in which Irish were portrayed as apelike and with the negative traits also ascribed to Blacks – poor, unintelligent, lazy, violent, irrational and childlike. The example below, published in the mainstream American magazine Puck, presents a dull-eyed simian Irish caricature. The title, “The King of A-Shantee”, references the well-known R&B singer African tribe Ashanti and the “shanty”, again suggesting that Irish have something to do with Africans and they’re all really poor. The words “celebrity” and “king” make the tone derisive and mocking, and this jab is the entire punchline.

These stereotypes were perpetuated in cartoons, songs, humour, political discourse and “Stage Irish” (essentially the Irish equivalent of Blackface).

Why were Irish seen as a “Race”?

By modern standards this is bizarre. But looking at the context of the late 19^th Century, we can understand where these ideas came from. Economic recession and the potato famine caused many Irish to emigrate to other English-speaking countries in unprecedented numbers. They became the target of anti-immigration attitudes in society, which formed the Irish racial category for political purposes, i.e. protection of the pre-existing hegemony.

The negative traits of the Irish stereotypes were invoked to stoke fear of this “alien race”. It was argued that they could not be allowed to immigrate because their passionate, violent nature would subvert social order. The cartoon below (entitled “The mortar of assimilation – and the one element that won’t mix”) suggests that the USA has been successful in integrating many ethnic groups but to extend this to the Irish would be a mistake.

On the economic front, they were seen as taking jobs from so-called “Native” (i.e. White American) labourers. Many job advertisements included the phrase “No Irish Need Apply” to explicitly exclude them. This fits Omi & Winant’s definition of the racial project, “simultaneously an interpretation, representation, or explanation of racial dynamics, and an effort to reorganise and redistribute resources along particular racial lines” (56).

Anti-immigration forces also latched onto the fact that many Irish were Catholics. There was a popular yet unfounded fear that if the Irish were let into the country, they would use their hive-mind powers to secretly subvert institutions to convert them to Catholicism. Topp insisted that they were “…invariably with the enemies of the empire, and that they are ever hoping for and secretly aiming at its subversion, and destruction” (19), and “have used their voting strength, at the dictation of their priestly leaders, to render any stable and lasting government impossible” (25).

As the Irish community assimilated into American society, these attitudes slowly faded out, but it took a long time. In the 1960s, many conservatives refused to vote for John F. Kennedy because he was an Irish Catholic; they believed that he must therefore be part of some sort of secret plot to help the Pope take over America (Donaldson 107). Even today there still many who think it is okay to perpetuate jokes about how stupid Irishmen are.

The moral of the story is that race is only a socio-political tool used to serve a hegemonic agenda for a particular time and place. The example of the Irish “Race” is no more absurd than any of the racial formations our contemporary society has. There are interesting parallels with today’s discourse, like the idea that a Mexican "race" naturally commit crimes and steal American jobs, or that a Muslim "race" is secretly infiltrating the government to establish Shariah law. The sooner that society sees these racialised ideas as farcical and outdated as the Irish “Race”, the better.
  

Works cited

Donaldson, Gary. The First Modern Campaign: Kennedy, Nixon, and the Election of 1960. Lanham, MD, USA: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007. Print.

Nelson, Bruce. Irish Nationalists and the Making the Irish Race. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press, 2012. Print.

Omi, Michael and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the United States. 2nd. London, UK: Routledge, 1994. Print.

Topp, A. M. “English Institutions and the Irish Race.” Melbourne Review January 1881: 10-30. Web. National Library of Australia.