Scholarly perspectives on the mixed race experience.
Throughout the various media realms—television, film, news media, and the less clearly defined intersecting worlds of music, sports, and youth culture—representations of interracial sex and relationships follow certain patterns, and what emerges is a delicate dance between interracial sex sells and interracial sex alienates. The small number of representations as well as the particular types of depictions of interracial relationships, when they are shown, reveals the lingering opposition to interracial sexuality and marriage as well as the persistent racialized images of racial Others and the protection of whiteness. Interracial representations are symbolic struggles over meaning, not only in how interracial relationships are portrayed but also in how they are received, understood, and responded to in the larger society. In particular, interracial images are used to perpetuate negative stereotypes yet are simultaneously marketed as an example of how color-blind we have become and of the declining significance of race. Yet one may ask, Why are interracial relationships shown at all if they are still widely opposed by whites and other racial groups? The answer is twofold, as we have seen throughout the book, that showing interracial relationships is a necessary piece of the current rhetoric that asserts race no longer matters and the representations are only shown in ways that either deviantize these relationships, privilege whiteness, or support the contention that America is color-blind.
Multiracialism cuts its teeth on the denial of this fundamental social truth: not simply that antiblackness is longstanding and ongoing but also that it is unlike other forms of racial oppression in qualitative ways—differences of kind, rather than degree, a structural singularity rather than an empirical anomaly.
Jon Kraszewski, Assistant Professor of Communication Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersery
The Real World’s focus on multiracial identity is part of the MTV’s efforts to rebrand itself as being more tolerant of all political opinions in the 2000s. Post-2000 seasons of The Real World contain two different portraits of multiracialism that appeal to viewers across the political spectrum. The liberalism in these seasons comes from multiracialism functioning as a liberal utopia free of racism, one where fluidity, not hostility, defines race relations. At the same time, these seasons appeal to conservative sensibilities by making multiracial cast members models of neoliberal self-management that conservatives recently have used to justify dismantling the welfare state and civil rights initiatives. While neither the liberal nor the conservative portraits of multiracialism on post-2000 seasons of The Real World appear to be overtly racist, I unearth subtext where The Real World articulates multiracialism to white supremacy and anti-blackness.
The Real World is one of the longest running series in American television history. Premiering in 1992. the series has already completed 22 seasons, and MTV recently contracted for four more. Scholars have interrogated the racial politics of the series, but they have equated race with either blackness, specifically the series’ stereotypical portraits of black masculinity, or tensions between urban blacks and rural whites (Bell-Jordan, 2008; Kraszewski, 2009; Orbe, 1998; Park, 2008). This focus has excluded scholarly engagement with other racial identities on the series. This essay unsettles the scholarly equation of race with blackness in The Real World by exploring the politics of multiracialism on the series in the 2000s. A list of multiracial characters on recent seasons includes Aneesa from The Real World, Chicago; Irulon and Arissa from The Real World, Las Vegas; Adam from The Real World, Paris, and Brianna from The Real World, Hollywood. These cast members has one parent who is black and one who is white. The erasure of these characters from discussions about race relates to a larger omission of mixed-race people from media studies scholarship. In Mixed Race Hollywood, Beltrán and Fojas (2008) write that despite “the veritable explosion of multiracial imagery in Hollywood film and media culture today, there has been little published scholarship to dale on the history or current representation of mixed-race individuals, romances, families, or stars on screen” (p. 2).
Analyzing a long-running series such as The Real World presents methodological and historical problems: a channel undergoes branding changes over the course of 18 years, which…
RICHMOND— Richmond’s famous Hollywood Cemetery serves as the final resting place of presidents, statesmen and generals.
Few have had the impact of Dr. Walter Plecker. His stormy legacy continues today, 150 years after his birth.
“My parents always made sure we knew the story of what Walter Plecker had done and how it had affected our people,” said Wayne Adkins, president of the Virginia Indian Tribal Alliance For Life.
“Plecker was a menace to Virginia Indians over many years,” said Stephen R. Adkins, chief of the Chickahominy Tribe. “My mom and dad, for instance, had to go to Washington DC in 1935 to get married as Indians. It was illegal to do so in Virginia under penalty of up to a year in jail.”
“Dr. Plecker was convinced that there was a need to purify the white race,” said Paul Lombardo, a law professor at Georgia State University and formerly a eugenics expert at the University of Virginia. “He thought that he was preserving the Commonwealth of Virginia, that he was maintaining the United States of America and, most importantly to him, that he was protecting the white race.”
For 34 years, starting in 1912, Dr. Plecker served as the director of Virginia’s Bureau of Vital Statistics, carefully compiling birth, death and marriage records.
For Plecker, a native of Augusta County, there were only two races: white and non-white. Anyone who had what he thought was one drop of other than white blood was listed as “colored.” They were mongrels, in his view.
Plecker was a complex man who saved the lives of countless babies, including those of blacks and Indians, with updated birthing and midwife techniques, along with simple, homemade incubators for premature babies, according to historic profiles.
He was relentless. With great energy he compiled lists and wrote letters chastising whites who applied for marriage licenses with those Plecker thought were impure. Those letters are part of the extensive correspondence that are part of the vast Plecker record.
“There’s no question that Plecker was incredibly aggressive using the few prerogatives the law gave him to register people,” Lombardo said. “He used those prerogatives really to threaten people, to coerce them… Dr. Plecker once boasted that he had a list of people, by race, that rivaled the list that was kept by Hitler of the Jews.”
If he even just suspected someone had any African-American blood, they would go on his mongrel list.
Virginia’s Native Americans particularly felt his wrath. He was certain the tribes had interbred with blacks. “Like rats, when you’re not watching, they’ve been sneaking in their birth certificates though their own midwives,” Plecker wrote.
“We couldn’t claim we were Indian, it was against the law to say we were Indian,” said Kenneth Branham, chief of the Monacan Tribe. “What do we claim? We’re not black. And we’re not white.”
“That whole idea that you’re not what you believe yourself to be,” said Sharon Bryant, the newly elected Monacan chief. “That an entire community would tell you that, it becomes very oppressive to the people.”
“Whole groups of people who formerly were recognized among the tribes of Virginia simply disappeared from the records,” Lombardo said. “They were no longer considered to be Native Americans or Indians as they were called. Their children were not recognized as members of the tribes, and they’re living with that legacy right now.”
Plecker and his many supporters believed not only that the races should never intermarry, they shouldn’t even mingle. Strict segregation would last for generations.
Blacks had to have their own schools and neighborhoods. So did Indians…
…In 1924, at Plecker’s urging and with the support of many Virginians, the General Assembly passed the Racial Integrity Act, which narrowly defined race and made it illegal to for whites to marry anyone of any other race. Plecker wrote to the governors of the rest of the states, urging them to pass similar laws to save the white race.
Also, that year, Lombardo said, “there’s a sterilization law that’s passed in Virginia, upheld later in the United States Supreme Court, allowing some 60,000-plus people to be sterilized in institutions in 32 states all over the country.”
There was also a strict immigration law passed then.
The Racial Integrity Act stood until 1967, when the Loving case about an interracial couple led to a Supreme Court reversal.
But the damage to Virginia’s Indian tribes continues. There are more than 560 federally recognized Indian tribes in the country. But none of Virginia’s tribes, the ones that helped the settlers survive, have that crucial recognition that gives them, in essence, sovereign status and entitles them to nation-building assistance.
The U.S. Department of the Interior requires that tribes be able to show an unbroken bloodline. And Walter Plecker carved a hole – decades long – in their heritage…
Arlington Public Schools
Clarendon Education Center
2801 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 308
Arlington, Virginia
2011-11-30, 10:00-12:00 EST (Local Time)
Have you ever wondered about how children from multiracial backgrounds develop their racial identity? Please join us in welcoming Dr. Ricia Weiner, Ms. Eleanor Lewis, and Ms. Veronica Sanjines, School Psychologists, who will share valuable information with families and school staff about the stages and factors that impact the development of identity in multiracial children.
In this exciting session, Dr. Weiner, Ms. Lewis and Ms. Sanjines will review current theories, explain and dispel myths and inaccuracies, and help participants understand external influences in multiracial identity development. They will also explore the impact of adoption and exposure to multiple languages on this population. Participants will learn specific factors that support successful and adaptive multiracial identity development.
How mixed-race Brits are tackling issues surrounding dual heritage
LAST MONTH, the UK’s fastest growing ethnic minority, as part of the BBC’s Mixed Britannia series, reignited the debate of what it means to be ‘mixed-race’.
Demographers have predicted that Britain’s mixed-race population will reach 1.3 million by 2020 – almost double the number recorded in 2001. Of this figure, 45 percent are mixed white and black.
But despite increasing acceptance of inter-racial relationships and more visible mixed-race people such as Formula One driver Lewis Hamilton, actress Thandie Newton and Olympian Kelly Holmes, the concept of being mixed-race remains quite literally a grey area – a type of no man’s land where nothing is as simple as black or white.
Some critics find the need for mixed-race people to identify as such divisive, and argue that biologically there can be no such thing. Others argue that by merit of having a collective experience, mixed-race people should be free to align themselves in this way, and subsequently, get their voice heard when it comes to policy and decision-making.
Self-defining
Then there are those who are comfortable self-defining as black in the political sense as a means of navigating British society.
Bradley Lincoln, founder of social enterprise Mix-D, whose aim is to provide a year-round national platform for mixed-race debate, said: “When we talk about being mixed-race there is a danger of either over-celebrating or sounding like a victim.
“Mixed-race people are not foot soldiers for a new racism. It is not a homogenous group. It is not a separate ethnic grouping – but it is time to move the conversation forward, particularly within the education and the social care system where many mixed children are considered just black.”…
Ilana Gelfman, Skadden Fellow Greater Boston Legal Services
The federal doctrine of sex discrimination in employment depends on the underlying yet unstated assumption that sex is binary: one is either a man or a woman, and there is no other possibility. The existence of intersex individuals challenges this assumption. This article asks how Title VII doctrine can be applied to intersex employees. In answering, the Article considers (1) the ramifications of the ever-developing definition of “because of . . . sex” in Title VII jurisprudence as applied to sexual minorities and (2) the implications of Title VII doctrine regarding mixedrace individuals for our understanding of how the law treats (and should treat) individuals “in between” the categories. The article moves beyond previous work, which suggests that intersex individuals be protected as a third sex category under Title VII, because that work only reinforces the exact sex categorizations that should be undermined by any serious examination of intersexuality. Instead, the article proposes a new model for protection against sex discrimination in employment—that of discrimination “because of perceived sex.”
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
I. TITLE VII AND INTERSEX INDIVIDUALS: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN DOCTRINE AND REALITY
A. Title VII’s Binary Conception of Sex
B. Intersexuality Challenges the Binary
C. A Conflict Between Doctrine and Reality
II. IN SEARCH OF A DEFINITION: “BECAUSE OF…SEX” AND SEXUAL MINORITIES
A. The First Generation: The “Plain Meaning” of Sex
B. The Second Generation: Sex Stereotyping
C. The Third Generation: Discrimination Against Transgender Individuals
D. Moving Forward: Implications for Intersex Individuals
III. TROUBLE WITH CATEGORIES: ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAW AND MULTIRACIAL PLAINTIFFS
A. A Brief History: Law and the Multiracial Individual
B. Federal Anti-discrimination Law and the Multiracial Plaintiff
C. “In Between” the Categories: Multiracial and Intersex Plaintiffs Compared
IV. DOCTRINAL POSSIBILITIES: CATEGORIZING INTERSEX INDIVIDUALS FOR THEIR OWN PROTECTION
A. Why Protect Intersex Individuals at All?
B. Maintaining the Traditional Categories of Male and Female
C. Adding a Third Category: Acknowledging Intersexuality
V. RECONCEPTUALIZING SEX DISCRIMINATION: PERCEIVED SEX
NeWest Press
Spring 1999
208 pages
paperback ISBN 13: 978-1-896300-03-0
Edited by:
Anne Nothof, Professor Emeritus of English Athabasca University, Alberta, Canada
Edited by Anne Nothof, the three plays included this anthology all deal with intercultural issues in Canada with humour, wit and at times, heartbreak. They range from a village idiot in a French Canadian hamlet to arranged marriages to a multiracial relationship that is unhinged once he tells his parents that he is ‘living with a white girl.’
The anthology features biographic details of the contributing playwrights and their work:
According to Fred Wah, the act of thinking critically is one of exploration and discovery. In Faking It, Wah demonstrates how writing poetry is writing critically. This scrapbook of Wah’s work—collected from fifteen years of his writing—contains essays, reviews, journals, notes and, most importantly, poetic improvisations on contemporary poetry and identity. Faking It was written between 1984 and 1999—during major shifts in critical thinking and cultural production—and the hybrid style of the book is an apt reflection of these changing times, as well as a reflection and study of Wah’s own hybrid identity.
This story of family and identity, migration and integration, culture and self-discovery is told through family history, memory, and the occasional recipe.
Diamond Grill is a rich banquet where Salisbury steak shares a menu with chicken fried rice, and bird’s nest soup sets the stage for Christmas plum pudding; where racism simmers behind the shiny clean surface of the action in the cafe.
An exciting new edition of Fred Wah’s best-selling bio-fiction, on the 10th anniversary of its original publication, with an all new afterword by the author and the same pagination as the original publication.
This course will examine literary and selected filmic representations of interracial and inter-ethnic identities, mixed-race relationships and intermarriage, and bicultural communities in comparative national and international contexts. We shall be especially concerned with the ways in which North American literature and cinema challenge dominant constructions of community identities in terms of ethnic and racial categories. (We will also look at one British film by Mike Leigh.) We will consider such pertinent issues as the problems of identity formation and voice in mixed-race communities, the politics of multiculturalism, and the history of attitudes towards racial boundary crossing.
THEORY (Selections from the following to be available as a custom course packet at the UBC bookstore.)
Required readings will include the following: We will usually consider one literary work or a film alongside a relevant critical article or chapter each week.
