Just
three decades ago, Thurgood Marshall was only months
away from appointment to the Supreme Court when he
suffered an indignity that today seems not just
outrageous but almost incomprehensible. He and his
wife had found their dream house in a Virginia
suburb of Washington, D.C., but could not lawfully
live together in that state: he was black and she
was Asian. Fortunately for the Marshalls, in January
1967 the Supreme Court struck down the
anti-interracial-marriage laws in Virginia and 18
other states. And in 1967 these laws were not mere
leftover scraps from an extinct era. Two years
before, at the crest of the civil-rights revolution,
a Gallup poll found that 72 per cent of Southern
whites and 42 per cent of Northern whites still
wanted to ban interracial marriage.
Let's fast-forward to the present and another
black - Asian couple: retired Green Beret Lieutenant
Colonel Eldrick Woods Sr. and his Thai-born wife,
Kultida. They are not hounded by the police -- just
by journalists desperate to write more adulatory
articles about how well they raised their son Tiger.
The colossal popularity of young Tiger Woods and the
homage paid his parents are remarkable evidence of
white Americans' change in attitude toward what they
formerly denounced as ``miscegenation.'' In fact,
Tiger's famously mixed ancestry (besides being black
and Thai, he's also Chinese, white, and American
Indian) is not merely tolerated by golf fans. More
than a few seem to envision Tiger as a shining
symbol of what America could become in a post-racial
age.
Interracial marriage is growing steadily. From
the 1960 to the 1990 Census, white - Asian married
couples increased almost tenfold, while black -
white couples quadrupled. The reasons are obvious:
greater integration and the decline of white racism.
More subtly, interracial marriages are increasingly
recognized as epitomizing what our society values
most in a marriage: the triumph of true love over
convenience and prudence.Nor is it surprising that
white - Asian marriages outnumber black - white
marriages: the social distance between whites and
Asians is now far smaller than the distance between
blacks and whites. What's fascinating, however, is
that in recent years a startling number of nonwhites
-- especially Asian men and black women -- have
become bitterly opposed to intermarriage.
This is a painful topic to explore honestly, so
nobody does. Still, it's important because
interracial marriages are a leading indicator of
what life will be like in the even more diverse and
integrated twenty-first century. Intermarriages show
that integration can churn up unexpected racial
conflicts by spotlighting enduring differences
between the races.
For example, probably the most disastrous mistake
Marcia Clark made in prosecuting O. J. Simpson was
to complacently allow Johnny Cochran to pack the
jury with black women. As a feminist, Mrs. Clark
smugly assumed that all female jurors would identify
with Nicole Simpson. She ignored pretrial research
indicating that black women tended to see poor
Nicole as The Enemy, one of those beautiful blondes
who steal successful black men from their black
first wives, and deserve whatever they get.
The heart of the problem for Asian men and black
women is that intermarriage does not treat every
sex/race combination equally: on average, it has
offered black men and Asian women new opportunities
for finding mates among whites, while exposing Asian
men and black women to new competition from whites.
In the 1990 Census, 72 per cent of black - white
couples consisted of a black husband and a white
wife. In contrast, white - Asian pairs showed the
reverse: 72 per cent consisted of a white husband
and an Asian wife.
Sexual relations outside of marriage are less
fettered by issues of family approval and long-term
practicality, and they appear to be even more
skewed. The 1992 Sex in America study of
3,432 people, as authoritative a work as any in a
field where reliable data are scarce, found that ten
times more single white women than single white men
reported that their most recent sex partner was
black.
Few whites comprehend the growing impact on
minorities of these interracial husband - wife
disparities. One reason is that the effect on whites
has been balanced. Although white women hunting for
husbands, for example, suffer more competition from
Asian women, they also enjoy increased access to
black men. Further, the weight of numbers dilutes
the effect on whites. In 1990, 1.46 million Asian
women were married, compared to only 1.26 million
Asian men. This net drain of 0.20 million white
husbands into marriages to Asian women is too small
to be noticed by the 75 million white women, except
in Los Angeles and a few other cities with large
Asian populations and high rates of intermarriage.
Yet, this 0.20 million shortage of Asian wives
leaves a high proportion of frustrated Asian
bachelors in its wake.
Black women's resentment of intermarriage is now
a staple of daytime talk shows, hit movies like
Waiting to Exhale, and magazine articles. Black
novelist Bebe Moore Campbell described her and her
tablemates' reactions upon seeing a black actor
enter a restaurant with a blonde: ``In unison, we
moaned, we groaned, we rolled our eyes heavenward .
. . Then we all shook our heads as we lamented for
the 10,000th time the perfidy of black men, and
cursed trespassing white women who dared to 'take
our men.''' Like most guys, though, Asian men are
reticent about admitting any frustrations in the
mating game. But anger over intermarriage is visible
on Internet on-line discussion groups for young
Asians. The men, featuring an
even-greater-than-normal-for-the-Internet
concentration of cranky bachelors, accuse the women
of racism for dating white guys. For example, ``This
[dating] disparity is a manifestation of a silent
conspiracy by the racist white society and
self-hating Asian [nasty word for ``women''] to
effect the genocide of Asian Americans.'' The women
retort that the men are racist and sexist for
getting sore about it. All they can agree upon is
that Media Stereotypes and/or Low Self-Esteem must
somehow be at fault.
LET'S
review other facts about intermarriage and how they
violate conventional sociological theories.
1. You would normally expect more black women
than black men to marry whites because far more
black women are in daily contact with whites. First,
among blacks aged 20 - 39, there are about 10 per
cent more women than men alive. Another tenth of the
black men in these prime marrying years are
literally locked out of the marriage market by being
locked up in jail, and maybe twice that number are
on probation or parole. So, there may be nearly 14
young black women for every 10 young black men who
are alive and unentangled with the law. Further,
black women are far more prevalent than black men in
universities (by 80 per cent in grad schools), in
corporate offices, and in other places where members
of the bourgeoisie, black or white, meet their
mates.
Despite these opportunities to meet white men, so
many middle-class black women have trouble landing
satisfactory husbands that they have made Terry (Waiting
to Exhale) McMillan, author of novels
specifically about and for them, into a best-selling
brand name. Probably the most popular romance advice
regularly offered to affluent black women of a
certain age is to find true love in the brawny arms
of a younger black man. Both Miss McMillan's 1996
best-seller How Stella Got Her Groove Back
and the most celebrated of all books by black women,
Zora Neale Hurston's 1937 classic Their Eyes Were
Watching God, are romance novels about
well-to-do older women and somewhat dangerous
younger men. Of course, as Miss Hurston herself
later learned at age 49, when she (briefly) married
a 23-year-old gym coach, that seldom works out in
real life.
2. Much more practical-sounding advice would be:
Since there are so many unmarried Asian men and
black women, they should find solace for their
loneliness by marrying each other. Yet, when was the
last time you saw an Asian man and a black woman
together? Black-man/Asian-woman couples are still
quite unusual, but Asian-man/black-woman pairings
are incomparably more rare.
Similar patterns appear in other contexts:
3a. Within races: Black men tend to most ardently
pursue lighter-skinned, longer-haired black women
(e.g., Spike Lee's School Daze). Yet black
women today do not generally prefer fairer men.
3b. In other countries: In Britain, 40 per cent
of black men are married to or living with a white
woman, versus only 21 per cent of black women
married to or living with a white man.
3c. In art: Madame Butterfly, a
white-man/Asian-woman tragedy, has been packing them
in for a century, recently under the name Miss
Saigon. The greatest black-man/white-woman
story, Othello, has been an endless hit in
both Shakespeare's and Verdi's versions. (To update
Karl Marx's dictum: Theater always repeats itself,
first as tragedy, then as opera, and finally as
farce, as seen in that recent smash, O.J., The
Moor of Brentwood.) Maybe Shakespeare did know a
thing or two about humanity: America's leading
portrayer of Othello, James Earl Jones, has twice
fallen in love with and married the white actress
playing opposite him as Desdemona.
4. The civil-rights revolution left husband -
wife balances among interracial couples more
unequal. Back in 1960 white husbands were seen in 50
per cent of black-white couples (versus only 28 per
cent in 1990), and in only 62 per cent of white -
Asian couples (versus 72 per cent). Why?
Discrimination, against black men and Asian women.
In the Jim Crow South black men wishing to date
white women faced pressures ranging from raised
eyebrows to lynch mobs. In contrast, the relatively
high proportion of Asian-man/white-woman couples in
1960 was a holdover caused by anti-Asian immigration
laws that had prevented women, most notably Chinese
women, from joining the largely male pioneer
immigrants. As late as 1930 Chinese-Americans were
80 per cent male. So, the limited number of Chinese
men who found wives in the mid twentieth century
included a relatively high fraction marrying white
women. In other words, as legal and social
discrimination have lessened, natural inequalities
have asserted themselves.
5. Keeping black men and white women apart was
the main purpose of Jim Crow. Gunnar Myrdal's
landmark 1944 study found that Southern whites
generally grasped that keeping blacks down also
retarded their own economic progress, but whites
felt that was the price they had to pay to make
black men less attractive to white women. To the
extent that white racism persists, it should limit
the proportion of black-man/white-woman couples.
SINCE
these inequalities in interracial marriage are so
contrary to conventional expectations, what causes
them? Academia's and the mass media's preferred
reaction has been to ignore husband - wife
disproportions entirely. When the subject has raised
its ugly head, though, they've typically tossed out
arbitrary ideas to explain a single piece of the
puzzle, rather than address the entire yin and yang
of black - white and white - Asian marriages. For
example, a Japanese-American poetry professor in
Minnesota has written extensively on his sexual
troubles with white women. He blames the internment
of Japanese Americans during World War II.
Presumably, the similarity of frustrations of
Chinese-American men is just a coincidence caused
by, say, China losing the Opium War. And the
problems of Vietnamese men stem from winning the
Vietnam War, etc. But piecemeal rationalizations are
unappealing compared to a theory which might explain
all the evidence.
The general pattern to be explained is: blacks
are more in demand as husbands than as wives, and
vice-versa for Asians. The question is, what
accounts for it?
The usual sociological explanations for who
marries whom (e.g., availability, class, and social
approval) never work simultaneously for blacks and
Asians. This isn't surprising because these
social-compatibility factors influence the total
number of black - white or white - Asian marriages
more than the husband - wife proportions within
intermarriages.
By emphasizing how society encourages us to marry
people like ourselves, sociologists miss half the
picture: by definition, heterosexual attraction
thrives on differences. Although Henry Higgins and
Colonel Pickering are so compatible that they break
into song about it (``Why Can't a Woman Be More like
a Man?''), Higgins falls in love with Eliza
Doolittle. Opposites attract. And certain race/sex
pairings seem to be more opposite than others. The
force driving these skewed husband - wife
proportions appears to be differences in perceived
sexual attractiveness. On average, black men tend to
appear slightly more and Asian men slightly less
masculine than white men, while Asian women are
typically seen as slightly more and black women as
slightly less feminine than white women.
Obviously, these are gross generalizations about
the races. Nobody believes Michael Jackson could
beat up kung-fu star Jackie Chan or that comedienne
Margaret Cho is lovelier than Sports Illustrated
swimsuit covergirl Tyra Banks. But life is a game of
probabilities, not of abstract Platonic essences.
So, what makes blacks more masculine-seeming and
Asians more feminine-seeming? Media stereotypes are
sometimes invoked. TV constantly shows black men
slam-dunking, while it seems the only way an Asian
man can get some coverage is to discover a cure for
AIDS. Yet try channel-surfing for minority women.
You'll see black women dancing, singing, joking, and
romancing. If, however, you even see an Asian woman,
she'll probably be newscasting -- not the most
alluring of roles.
Conventional wisdom sometimes cites social
conditioning as well. But while this is not
implausible for American-born blacks, who come from
a somewhat homogeneous culture, it's insensitive to
the diversity of cultures in which Asians are
raised. Contrast Koreans and Filipinos and Cambodian
refugees and fifth-generation Japanese-Americans.
It's not clear they have much in common culturally
other than that in the West their women are more in
demand as spouses than their men.
One reasonable cultural explanation for the
sexual attractiveness of black men today is the
hypermasculinization of black life over the last few
decades. To cite a benign aspect of this trend, if
you've followed the Olympics on TV since the 1960s
you've seen sprinters' victory celebrations evolve
from genteel exercises in restraint into orgies of
fist-pumping, trash-talking black machismo. This
showy masculinization of black behavior may be in
part a delayed reaction to the long campaign by
Southern white males to portray themselves as ``The
Man'' and the black man as a ``boy.'' But let's not
be content to stop our analysis here. Why did Jim
Crow whites try so hard to demean black manhood? As
we've seen, the chief reason was to prevent black
men from impregnating white women.
So, did all racist whites a century ago make
keeping minorities away from their women their
highest priority? No. As noted earlier, the
anti-Asian immigration laws kept Asian women out,
forcing many Asian immigrant bachelors to look for
white women (with mixed success). While white men
were certainly not crazy about this side effect, it
seemed an acceptable tradeoff, since they feared
Asian immigrants more as economic than as sexual
competitors. But why did whites historically dread
the masculine charms of blacks more than those of
Asians? Merely asking this question points out that
social conditioning is ultimately a superficial
explanation of the differences among peoples. Yes,
society socializes individuals, but what socializes
society?
There
are only three fundamental causes for the myriad
ways groups differ. The first is unsatisfying but no
doubt important: random flukes of history. The
second, the favorite of Thomas Sowell and Jared
Diamond, is differences in geography and climate.
The third is human biodiversity. Let's look at three
physical differences between the races. 1) Asian men
tend to be shorter than white and black men. Does
this matter in the mating game? One of America's
leading hands-on researchers into this question,
7'1", 280-pound basketball legend Wilt Chamberlain,
reports that in his ample experience being tall and
strong never hurt. Biological anthropologists
confirm this, finding that taller tends to be better
in the eyes of most women in just about all
cultures. Like most traits, height is determined by
the interaction of genetic and social factors (e.g.,
nutrition). For example, the L.A. Dodgers'
flamethrowing pitcher Hideo Nomo is listed as 6'2",
an almost unheard-of height for any Japanese man
fifty years ago, owing to the near-starvation diets
of the era. While the height gap between Japanese
and whites narrowed significantly after World War
II, this trend has slowed in recent years as
well-fed Japanese began bumping up against genetic
limits. Furthermore, it can be rather cold comfort
to a 5'7" Asian who is competing for dates with
white and black guys averaging 5'11" to hear, ``Your
sons will grow up on average a couple of inches
taller than you, assuming, of course, that you ever
meet a girl and have any kids.'' In contrast,
consider a 5'1" Asian coed. Although she'd be happy
with a 5'7" boyfriend if she were in an all-Asian
school, at UCLA she finds lots of boys temptingly
much taller than that, but few are Asian.
2. This general principle -- the more racial
integration there is, the more important become
physical differences among the races -- can also be
seen with regard to hair length. The ability to grow
long hair is a useful indicator of youth and good
health. (Ask anybody on chemotherapy.) Since women
do not go bald and can generally grow longer hair
than men, most cultures associate longer hair with
femininity. Although blacks' hair doesn't grow as
long as whites' or Asians' hair, that's not a
problem for black women in all-black societies.
After integration, though, hair often becomes an
intense concern for black women competing with
longer-haired women of other races. While
intellectuals in black-studies departments' ebony
towers denounce ``Eurocentric standards of beauty,''
most black women respond more pragmatically. They
one-up white women by buying straight from the
source of the longest hair: the Wall Street
Journal recently reported on the booming
business in furnishing African-American women with
``weaves'' and ``extensions'' harvested from the
follicularly gifted women of China.
3. Muscularity may most sharply differentiate the
races in terms of sexual attractiveness. Women like
men who are stronger than they; men like women who
are rounder and softer. The ending of segregation in
sports has made racial differences in muscularity
harder to ignore. Although the men's 100-meter dash
is among the world's most widely contested events,
in the last four Olympics all 32 finalists have been
blacks of West African descent. Is muscularity
quantifiable? PBS fitness expert Covert Bailey finds
that he needs to recommend different goals -- in
terms of percentage of body fat -- to his clients of
different races. The standard goal for adult black
men is 12 per cent body fat, versus 18 per cent for
Asian men. The goals for women are 7 points higher
than for men of the same race. For interracial
couples, their ``gender gaps'' in body-fat goals
correlate uncannily with their husband - wife
proportions in the 1990 Census. The goal for black
men (12 per cent) is 10 points lower than the goal
for white women (22 per cent), while the goal for
white men (15 per cent) is only 4 points lower than
the goal for black women (19 per cent). This 10:4
ratio is almost identical to the 72:28 ratio seen in
the Census. This correlates just as well for white -
Asian couples, too. Apparently, men want women who
make them feel more like men, and vice versa for
women.
Understanding
the impact of genetic racial differences on American
life is a necessity for anybody who wants to
understand our increasingly complex society. For
example, the sense of betrayal felt by Asian men
certainly makes sense. After all, they tend to
surpass the national average in those long-term
virtues -- industry, self-restraint, law-abidingness
-- that society used to train young women to look
for in a husband. Yet, now that discrimination has
finally declined enough for Asian men to expect to
reap the rewards for fulfilling traditional American
standards of manliness, our culture has largely lost
interest in indoctrinating young women to prize
those qualities.
The frustrations of Asian men are a warning sign.
When, in the names of freedom and feminism, young
women listen less to the hard-earned wisdom of older
women about how to pick Mr. Right, they listen even
more to their hormones. This allows cruder measures
of a man's worth -- like the size of his muscles --
to return to prominence. The result is not a
feminist utopia, but a society in which genetically
gifted guys can more easily get away with acting
like Mr. Wrong.
George Orwell noted, ``To see what is in front of
one's nose requires a constant struggle.'' We can no
longer afford to have our public policy governed by
fashionable philosophies which insists upon ignoring
the obvious. The realities of interracial marriage,
like those of professional sports, show that
diversity and integration turn out in practice to be
fatal to the reigning assumption of racial
uniformity. The courageous individuals in
interracial marriages have moved farthest past old
hostilities. Yet, they've discovered not the
featureless landscape of utter equality that was
predicted by progressive pundits, but a landscape
rich with fascinating racial patterns. Intellectuals
should stop dreading the ever-increasing evidence of
human biodiversity and start delighting in it.