Search Results (5)

The racial classification of mixed-race people has often been presumed to follow hypo- or hyperdescent rules, where they were assigned to either their lower- or higher-status monoracial ancestor group. This simple framework, however, does not capture actual patterns of self-identification in contemporary societies with multiple racialized groups and numerous mixed-race combinations. Elaborating on previous concepts of multiracial classification regimes, we argue that two other theoretical models must be incorporated to describe and understand mixed-race identification today. One is “co-descent”, where multiracial individuals need not align with one single race or another, but rather be identified with or demonstrate characteristics that are a blend of their parental or ancestral races. The other is the “dominance” framework, a modern extension of the “one-drop” notion that posits that monoracial ancestries fall along a spectrum where some—the “supercessive”—are more likely to dominate mixed-race categorization, and others—the “recessive”—are likely to be dominated. Drawing on the Pew Research Center’s 2015 Survey of Multiracial Adults, we find declining evidence of hypo- and hyperdescent at work in the United States today, some support for a dominance structure that upends conventional expectations about a Black one-drop rule, and a rising regime of co-descent. In addition, we explore how regimes of mixed-race classification vary by racial ancestry combination, gender, generation of multiraciality, and the time period in which multiracial respondents or their mixed-race ancestors were born. These findings show that younger, first-generation multiracial Americans, especially those of partial Asian or Hispanic descent, have left hypo- and hyperdescent regimes behind—unlike other young people today whose mixed-race ancestry stems from further back in their family tree. Full article

Multiracial identities in Brazil, South Africa, and the United States all formed within White supremacist, White racist, and anti-Black social orders. Brazil and South Africa historically acknowledged multiracials in ternary racial orders with a structurally intermediate status somewhat higher than that of other nonWhites, particularly Blacks, but significantly lower than that of Whites. In contrast, in the United States, multiracial identities have historically been prohibited due to hypodescent and the monoracial imperative, which categorize multiracials according to their most subaltern racial background and necessitate single-racial identification. In the 1980s and 1990s, a U.S. multiracial movement challenged these norms. This article compares the multiracial phenomenon in the United States with historical formations in Brazil and South Africa using data from published literature, censuses, written correspondence with activists, and observations of public behavior in the United States. The objective is to theorize whether and to what extent U.S. multiracial identities function in ways similar to the historical formations of Brazil and South Africa, particularly with regards to questions of collective identity, anti-Blackness, and White adjacency. Full article

The racialization of Mexican Americans in northern Mexico, that is, the U.S. Southwest, following the Anglo-Americanization during the second half of the nineteenth century, is an excellent case study of the historical formations of Anglo-American and Spanish American racial orders. Both racial orders were based on a hierarchy that privileged Whiteness and stigmatized Blackness. Yet Spanish America’s high levels of miscegenation resulted in ternary orders allowing for gradation in and fluidity within racial categories, in addition to the formation of multiracial identities, including those of individuals with African ancestry. Anglo-America was characterized by restrictions on miscegenation and more precise definitions of and restrictions on racial categories. This prohibited the formation of multiracial identities while buttressing a binary racial order that broadly necessitated single-race (monoracial) identification as either White or nonWhite, and more specifically, as White or Black, given their polar extremes in racial hierarchy. Within this order, hypodescent applies most stringently to those with African ancestry through the one-drop rule, which designates as Black all such individuals. This article examines monoracialization through historical processes of Mexican–American identity formations. Over the twentieth century, this shifted from White to Brown, but without any acknowledgment of African ancestry. Full article

Today, identity expression and acceptance represent an important area of political advocacy and representation. Yet, how responsive are voters to new racial identity cues promoted by political leaders? Using candidates with interracial backgrounds as a case study, we assess whether voters are responsive to candidates who assert a mixed-race identity or if voters primarily rely on other traits, such as the candidate’s family background, in determining their support of that candidate. Using an experimental design, this study presents participants with various hypothetical candidates who vary both in their racial heritages (i.e., candidates with Asian and White interracial parents or Black and White interracial parents) and identity choices (i.e., as single-race minority, single-race White, or biracial). We then compare how the mixed-race, single-race minority, and White participants evaluate the candidate. We expect that the mixed-race participants will be most supportive of candidates who signal a common in-group identity by identifying specifically as “biracial”. On the other hand, the single-race minority and White participants should be more likely to adhere to the one-drop rule or hypodescent in their evaluations, meaning they will provide more positive evaluations of interracial candidates who identify as a single-race minority. Our study finds that the single-race minority and White participants completely overlook racial identity cues and instead focus on the description of the candidate’s family heritage along with their own assumptions about hypodescent. The mixed-race participants, on the other hand, show strong support for biracial-identified, in-group political candidates This study adds to a burgeoning literature on racial perception and on political representation. Full article

Perceptions of race influence the way health care is delivered to minority populations, particularly multiracial people. Currently only 11% of American physicians are Black or Latinx, making the chances slim that Black and Latinx patients will be treated by a co-ethnic. White supremacy is well documented in the medical literature—along with efforts to combat it—yet medical education and health care are still largely based on studies by and about white people. This privileging of whiteness is increasingly evident as the COVID-19 pandemic has shone a renewed spotlight on disparities in health and care in the U.S. The current study considers how doctors perceive race and use it to make healthcare decisions. Among the (N = 509) doctors in this sample, few said they considered the patient’s race. Of those who did, many determined race by some method other than asking the patient directly. The most common methods were observing skin tone and observing cultural cues. Doctors perceived nearly half the multiracial targets as monoracial. Targets who followed the norm of hypodescent were significantly more likely to be identified congruently by doctors. Targets who identified at the extremes of the color spectrum (black and white) were easier to identify, while the beige tones in the middle of the spectrum were more challenging. Patient ancestry was the most relevant criterion in explaining the congruence of racial identification between patients and doctors, while characteristics of the doctors were nearly irrelevant. Full article