8 ms·

Who Is Marrying Whom

53 points by iamwil 16y ago

OasisG 16y ago
"Over all, black Hispanics and American Indians have the highest rates of intermarriage." I am thrilled to see they are recognizing black Hispanics as a bonafide group. Being forced to choose between the two gets old quick. I don't know that I consider black hispanic/african american marriages interracial however...
- alexpeattie 16y ago
  But I guess you can't have it both ways - if Black and black Hispanics should indeed be two distinct racial groups it would be a bit arbitrary to say marriages between them aren't interracial, no?
  - RK 16y ago
    That's why it says they are listing interracial and interethnic marriages.
  - huherto 16y ago
    What is a black Hispanic? hispanic + amerindian or hispanic + african. At least here in Mexico, no one will think at themselves as black. May be the term should be hispanic non white
    - michael_dorfman 16y ago
      What about elsewhere in Latin America? For example, in Cuba, there is a large Afro-Cuban community, isn't there?
      - OasisG 16y ago
        There are black people all over Latin America. During the slave trade, about 60% of slaves wound up in Portuguese and Spanish America. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#New_World_destinations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#New_World_...
      - huherto 16y ago
        yes, that may apply for some countries. But then how do you classify hispanics of amerindian origin?
        OasisG 16y ago
        Mestizo, typically.
  - OasisG 16y ago
    Yeah, I should have clarified. I don't think black hispanics and african americans should be classified as separate racial groups, but the two groups are definitely make up different ethnic groups. Different languages, food, perspectives on America (considering our status as 1st and 2nd gen immigrants), etc. That said, a marriage between a black person from North Carolina and someone from Panama is about as remarkable as an white American marrying another white person from France. Inter-ethnic, yes, but not quite belonging on a chart equating it with interracial relationships.
maeon3 16y ago
I'll bet genetic predispositions have a lot to do with these statistics. I'd like to see which groups are generating the most offspring.
angryindian 16y ago
WTF?! Can we stop calling NATIVE AMERICANS indians already. Since I was born in America and my family is from the country of INDIA, I guess I am known as an Indian American? Are American Indians, children of Americans who are born in India? Logically thats the only thing that makes sense. Just cause someone made a mistake we shouldn't propagate it. Otherwise we should all start using titles given to various ethnic groups which are no longer politically correct. /rant
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- solipsist 16y ago
  You have a good point, but it came across poorly. If you want people to listen to your ideas, let them know using respect and proper language. HN is not a place for slang, rants, or frequent uses of capitalization.
  - lkrubner 16y ago
    I would prefer it if people responded to the content of a remark, rather than the tone. I agree with what Paul Graham wrote here: "The next level up we start to see responses to the writing, rather than the writer. The lowest form of these is to disagree with the author's tone. E.g. 'I can't believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion.' Though better than attacking the author, this is still a weak form of disagreement. It matters much more whether the author is wrong or right than what his tone is. Especially since tone is so hard to judge. Someone who has a chip on their shoulder about some topic might be offended by a tone that to other readers seemed neutral. So if the worst thing you can say about something is to criticize its tone, you're not saying much. Is the author flippant, but correct? Better that than grave and wrong. And if the author is incorrect somewhere, say where." http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html I myself have been downvoted a lot due to tone, rather than substance. This, more than anything else, has caused me to cut back my participation on Hacker News. If people are going to react to my tone, then I do not think I want to post much here.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
klbarry 16y ago
I am surprised the number of white men marrying asian women is so low (though it is high compared to others). I imagine living in NYC skews my view a great deal though.
- p90x 16y ago
  There are very many more white men than their are asian women.
  - astrofinch 16y ago
    In the United States.
- Confusion 16y ago
  You're looking at it from the wrong side. 1.4% of all white men marry an Asian woman (I'm ignoring the minute amount of gay marriages and marriages to non-Americans). However, a stunning 18.8% of all Asian women marry a white male. Only roughly 7.5% of all white males could possibly marry an Asian woman. In that light, 1.4% is quite a lot.
tokenadult 16y ago
The government definitions applied to these issues have changed over the decades in the United States. Self-designation under each set of definitions (last revised in 1997) is changing too. Americans are becoming less and less race-conscious in self-identification. I have been looking up links on this subject since a few years ago for online discussion of college admission issues in the United States. College reporting to the federal government is based on the U.S. Census bureau definitions for ethnicity and race categories, which in turn are based on regulations from the Office of Management and Budget, which were announced on 30 October 1997 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html to take effect no later than 1 January 2003 for data collection by all federal agencies. The Department of Education has more recently updated its guidance to colleges on how to ask ethnicity and race questions http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/101907c.html http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/10190... or http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/101907c.pdf http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/10190... and has requested colleges change their forms by the high school class of 2010 application year to ask a two-part question, first inquiring about Hispanic ethnicity and then about race, for each student. The student will still be free to decline to answer either part of the question. "Unlike elementary and secondary institutions, generally, postsecondary institutions and Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) grantees use self-identification only and do not use observer identification. As discussed elsewhere in this notice, postsecondary institutions and RSA grantees will also be permitted to continue to include a 'race and ethnicity unknown' category when reporting data to the Department. This category is being continued in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) because the National Center for Education Statistics’ experience has shown that (1) a substantial number of college students have refused to identify a race and (2) there is often not a convenient mechanism for college administrators to use observer identification." You can look up the detailed category definitions on the website of the United States Bureau of the Census. As the Census Bureau itself notes, "The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature." http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm "White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as 'White' or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish. "Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Black, African Am., or Negro,' or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian. "American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment. "Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. It includes 'Asian Indian,' 'Chinese,' 'Filipino,' 'Korean,' 'Japanese,' 'Vietnamese,' and 'Other Asian.' Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Native Hawaiian,' 'Guamanian or Chamorro,' 'Samoan,' and 'Other Pacific Islander.' . . . . . . . . . . . . The concept of race is separate from the concept of Hispanic origin." http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68188.htm http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68188.htm "Hispanics or Latinos are those people who classified themselves in one of the specific Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino categories listed on the Census 2000 questionnaire--'Mexican, Mexican Am., Chicano,' 'Puerto Rican', or 'Cuban'--as well as those who indicate that they are 'other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino.' Persons who indicated that they are 'other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino' include those whose origins are from Spain, the Spanish-speaking countries of Central or South America, the Dominican Republic or people identifying themselves generally as Spanish, Spanish-American, Hispanic, Hispano, Latino, and so on. "Origin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality group, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person's parents or ancestors before their arrival in the United States. "People who identify their origin as Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino may be of any race." The federal Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has posted guidance to colleges about how they are to ask about student ethnicity and race according to the federally defined categories. http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2002/std1_5.asp http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2002/std1_5.asp The instructions on the National Center for Education Statistics website provide details on how word ethnicity and race questionnaires and how colleges should report the various categories self-reported by students to the federal government. See the National Center for Education Statistics Race/Ethnicity FAQ http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/visFaq_re.aspx http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/visFaq_re.aspx and the Association for Institutional Research Race/Ethnicity Information webpage http://www.airweb.org/page.asp?page=1500 http://www.airweb.org/page.asp?page=1500 and its subpages for more information about the current of colleges as they implement the new federal regulations for high school class of 2010 applicants to college. Students of higher education (and applicants to schools of postsecondary education) are treated as adults, and are explicitly permitted to decline to identify their ethnic or racial category. Note that the decennial census in the United States redefines "race" categories from time to time, http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1955923,00.html http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1955923,00.ht... and there is no consistency between the practice of the United States and that of any other country in this regard. I find it interesting that more and more college applicants are declining to self-report their ethnicity to colleges, http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/02/15/race2_15 http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/02/15/race2_15 an issue explored by the linked article from several points of view. Declining to self-report is everyone's right under law and something that someone of any ethnic self-identification might choose to do. People can decide this issue for themselves, but I like to emphasize in my own life, as a member of a "biracial" family, the common humanity my children, my wife, and I share with all our neighbors and compatriots. We prefer the category label "human" but accept the category label "postracial" in our household. The latest version of the Minorities in Higher Education Report http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=34214 http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Temp... has a lot of detailed numbers (all based on reports colleges make to the federal government) about the growth in college enrollment in all the reported ethnic categories, and the growth of the reported category "race/ethnicity unknown." The "race/ethnicity unknown" category has been the fastest-growing category by far in the reported years.
bane 16y ago
A side comment, we really have to collectively agree to drop "whom". It's archaic and has not been part of common usage for at least the last century if not longer. It's noticeable only with the unusually low frequency it shows up and does nothing to aid or clarify communication. It's like spelling "old" with a silent final 'e', "olde". It's time to get over this and move the language forward a bit, thank you. rant off
- lkrubner 16y ago
  I think "whom" is still in use. I still use it, and I still see it used in the emails my friends send me. Despite that, I agree with part of what you say: it would be good to modernize the language.
  - bane 16y ago
    It still shows up in formal writing with some frequency, but it's slowly fading away. Most modern formal writing guides usually have a footnote or some such to note that. In less formal speech, it's pretty much unheard these days. Anecdotally, I went and searched my email archives, going back to 1992, and I found a couple dozen uses of it, all in emails I received from religious family members quoting the bible.
- chancho 16y ago
  So ... you've come full circle back to prescriptivism then? Great, now you just have to get on the faculty at Oxford and you can foist your opinions regarding correct usage of the English language on the world. Or failing that, you can work your way on to the editorial board of the newspaper-of-record of major Anglophonic nation, like, I don't know, the New York Times.
  - bane 16y ago
    That was rather rancorous.
markessien 16y ago
In spite of Obama being a product of such a mixed-race union, he picked 'Black' as his racial categorization in the 2010 census, according to an article linked from there. I think that's backwards. A person equally white and equally black should not become black out of political expediency. They should be equally representative of both of their heritages.
nostrademons 16y ago
It's somewhat ironic that there's no column for "multiracial" in the data. Intermarriage doesn't stop at the first generation.
John89 16y ago
I don’t see how the sexes within a race can be different. For every Male that’s interracially married that’s one female that has to be interracially married. It could come down to parts of the population that are not married to skew it. IE in prison, if one sex marries older or same sex marriages. But I suspect it’s actually more about perceptions.
- sudont 16y ago
  No, because these aren’t pairs of people separated at birth. There’s groups of one thousand men, and one thousand women per racial group represented here. I agree on the perceptions though, there’s a ton of demographic sloughing going on here that can’t be represented simply.
- philwelch 16y ago
  That's exactly what it is. For every Asian woman who marries a white or black man, there's (statistically) an Asian man who has to either marry a white or black woman or remain single. Likewise, for every black man who marries a white or Asian woman, there's a black woman who has to marry a white or Asian man or remain single. Now, it's true that for every Asian woman who marries interracially, there has to be a white or black man who also marries interracially, but in practice, having a large white majority population means that proportionally fewer whites have to marry interracially to really muck up the proportions among minorities. Statistically, Asian men and black women tend to remain single as Asian women and black men tend to marry interracially. One possible interpretation is that there's kind of a continuum: Black White Asian where women interracially marry to the left and men interracially marry to the right. But it doesn't loop around.

53 points by iamwil 16y ago

"Over all, black Hispanics and American Indians have the highest rates of intermarriage." I am thrilled to see they are recognizing black Hispanics as a bonafide group. Being forced to choose between the two gets old quick. I don't know that I consider black hispanic/african american marriages interracial however...

alexpeattie 16y ago
But I guess you can't have it both ways - if Black and black Hispanics should indeed be two distinct racial groups it would be a bit arbitrary to say marriages between them aren't interracial, no?
- RK 16y ago
  That's why it says they are listing interracial and interethnic marriages.
- huherto 16y ago
  What is a black Hispanic? hispanic + amerindian or hispanic + african. At least here in Mexico, no one will think at themselves as black. May be the term should be hispanic non white
  - michael_dorfman 16y ago
    What about elsewhere in Latin America? For example, in Cuba, there is a large Afro-Cuban community, isn't there?
    - OasisG 16y ago
      There are black people all over Latin America. During the slave trade, about 60% of slaves wound up in Portuguese and Spanish America. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#New_World_destinations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#New_World_...
    - huherto 16y ago
      yes, that may apply for some countries. But then how do you classify hispanics of amerindian origin?
      - OasisG 16y ago
        Mestizo, typically.
- OasisG 16y ago
  Yeah, I should have clarified. I don't think black hispanics and african americans should be classified as separate racial groups, but the two groups are definitely make up different ethnic groups. Different languages, food, perspectives on America (considering our status as 1st and 2nd gen immigrants), etc. That said, a marriage between a black person from North Carolina and someone from Panama is about as remarkable as an white American marrying another white person from France. Inter-ethnic, yes, but not quite belonging on a chart equating it with interracial relationships.

maeon3 16y ago

I'll bet genetic predispositions have a lot to do with these statistics. I'd like to see which groups are generating the most offspring.

angryindian 16y ago

WTF?! Can we stop calling NATIVE AMERICANS indians already. Since I was born in America and my family is from the country of INDIA, I guess I am known as an Indian American? Are American Indians, children of Americans who are born in India? Logically thats the only thing that makes sense. Just cause someone made a mistake we shouldn't propagate it. Otherwise we should all start using titles given to various ethnic groups which are no longer politically correct. /rant

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
solipsist 16y ago
You have a good point, but it came across poorly. If you want people to listen to your ideas, let them know using respect and proper language. HN is not a place for slang, rants, or frequent uses of capitalization.
- lkrubner 16y ago
  I would prefer it if people responded to the content of a remark, rather than the tone. I agree with what Paul Graham wrote here: "The next level up we start to see responses to the writing, rather than the writer. The lowest form of these is to disagree with the author's tone. E.g. 'I can't believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion.' Though better than attacking the author, this is still a weak form of disagreement. It matters much more whether the author is wrong or right than what his tone is. Especially since tone is so hard to judge. Someone who has a chip on their shoulder about some topic might be offended by a tone that to other readers seemed neutral. So if the worst thing you can say about something is to criticize its tone, you're not saying much. Is the author flippant, but correct? Better that than grave and wrong. And if the author is incorrect somewhere, say where." http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html I myself have been downvoted a lot due to tone, rather than substance. This, more than anything else, has caused me to cut back my participation on Hacker News. If people are going to react to my tone, then I do not think I want to post much here.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

klbarry 16y ago

I am surprised the number of white men marrying asian women is so low (though it is high compared to others). I imagine living in NYC skews my view a great deal though.

p90x 16y ago
There are very many more white men than their are asian women.
- astrofinch 16y ago
  In the United States.
Confusion 16y ago
You're looking at it from the wrong side. 1.4% of all white men marry an Asian woman (I'm ignoring the minute amount of gay marriages and marriages to non-Americans). However, a stunning 18.8% of all Asian women marry a white male. Only roughly 7.5% of all white males could possibly marry an Asian woman. In that light, 1.4% is quite a lot.

tokenadult 16y ago

The government definitions applied to these issues have changed over the decades in the United States. Self-designation under each set of definitions (last revised in 1997) is changing too. Americans are becoming less and less race-conscious in self-identification. I have been looking up links on this subject since a few years ago for online discussion of college admission issues in the United States. College reporting to the federal government is based on the U.S. Census bureau definitions for ethnicity and race categories, which in turn are based on regulations from the Office of Management and Budget, which were announced on 30 October 1997 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg/ombdir15.html to take effect no later than 1 January 2003 for data collection by all federal agencies. The Department of Education has more recently updated its guidance to colleges on how to ask ethnicity and race questions http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/101907c.html http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/10190... or http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/101907c.pdf http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2007-4/10190... and has requested colleges change their forms by the high school class of 2010 application year to ask a two-part question, first inquiring about Hispanic ethnicity and then about race, for each student. The student will still be free to decline to answer either part of the question. "Unlike elementary and secondary institutions, generally, postsecondary institutions and Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) grantees use self-identification only and do not use observer identification. As discussed elsewhere in this notice, postsecondary institutions and RSA grantees will also be permitted to continue to include a 'race and ethnicity unknown' category when reporting data to the Department. This category is being continued in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) because the National Center for Education Statistics’ experience has shown that (1) a substantial number of college students have refused to identify a race and (2) there is often not a convenient mechanism for college administrators to use observer identification." You can look up the detailed category definitions on the website of the United States Bureau of the Census. As the Census Bureau itself notes, "The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature." http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm "White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as 'White' or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish. "Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Black, African Am., or Negro,' or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian. "American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment. "Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. It includes 'Asian Indian,' 'Chinese,' 'Filipino,' 'Korean,' 'Japanese,' 'Vietnamese,' and 'Other Asian.' Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Native Hawaiian,' 'Guamanian or Chamorro,' 'Samoan,' and 'Other Pacific Islander.' . . . . . . . . . . . . The concept of race is separate from the concept of Hispanic origin." http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68188.htm http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68188.htm "Hispanics or Latinos are those people who classified themselves in one of the specific Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino categories listed on the Census 2000 questionnaire--'Mexican, Mexican Am., Chicano,' 'Puerto Rican', or 'Cuban'--as well as those who indicate that they are 'other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino.' Persons who indicated that they are 'other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino' include those whose origins are from Spain, the Spanish-speaking countries of Central or South America, the Dominican Republic or people identifying themselves generally as Spanish, Spanish-American, Hispanic, Hispano, Latino, and so on. "Origin can be viewed as the heritage, nationality group, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person's parents or ancestors before their arrival in the United States. "People who identify their origin as Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino may be of any race." The federal Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) has posted guidance to colleges about how they are to ask about student ethnicity and race according to the federally defined categories. http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2002/std1_5.asp http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2002/std1_5.asp The instructions on the National Center for Education Statistics website provide details on how word ethnicity and race questionnaires and how colleges should report the various categories self-reported by students to the federal government. See the National Center for Education Statistics Race/Ethnicity FAQ http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/visFaq_re.aspx http://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/visFaq_re.aspx and the Association for Institutional Research Race/Ethnicity Information webpage http://www.airweb.org/page.asp?page=1500 http://www.airweb.org/page.asp?page=1500 and its subpages for more information about the current of colleges as they implement the new federal regulations for high school class of 2010 applicants to college. Students of higher education (and applicants to schools of postsecondary education) are treated as adults, and are explicitly permitted to decline to identify their ethnic or racial category. Note that the decennial census in the United States redefines "race" categories from time to time, http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1955923,00.html http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1955923,00.ht... and there is no consistency between the practice of the United States and that of any other country in this regard. I find it interesting that more and more college applicants are declining to self-report their ethnicity to colleges, http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/02/15/race2_15 http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/02/15/race2_15 an issue explored by the linked article from several points of view. Declining to self-report is everyone's right under law and something that someone of any ethnic self-identification might choose to do. People can decide this issue for themselves, but I like to emphasize in my own life, as a member of a "biracial" family, the common humanity my children, my wife, and I share with all our neighbors and compatriots. We prefer the category label "human" but accept the category label "postracial" in our household. The latest version of the Minorities in Higher Education Report http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=34214 http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=CAREE&Temp... has a lot of detailed numbers (all based on reports colleges make to the federal government) about the growth in college enrollment in all the reported ethnic categories, and the growth of the reported category "race/ethnicity unknown." The "race/ethnicity unknown" category has been the fastest-growing category by far in the reported years.

bane 16y ago

A side comment, we really have to collectively agree to drop "whom". It's archaic and has not been part of common usage for at least the last century if not longer. It's noticeable only with the unusually low frequency it shows up and does nothing to aid or clarify communication. It's like spelling "old" with a silent final 'e', "olde". It's time to get over this and move the language forward a bit, thank you. rant off

lkrubner 16y ago
I think "whom" is still in use. I still use it, and I still see it used in the emails my friends send me. Despite that, I agree with part of what you say: it would be good to modernize the language.
- bane 16y ago
  It still shows up in formal writing with some frequency, but it's slowly fading away. Most modern formal writing guides usually have a footnote or some such to note that. In less formal speech, it's pretty much unheard these days. Anecdotally, I went and searched my email archives, going back to 1992, and I found a couple dozen uses of it, all in emails I received from religious family members quoting the bible.
chancho 16y ago
So ... you've come full circle back to prescriptivism then? Great, now you just have to get on the faculty at Oxford and you can foist your opinions regarding correct usage of the English language on the world. Or failing that, you can work your way on to the editorial board of the newspaper-of-record of major Anglophonic nation, like, I don't know, the New York Times.
- bane 16y ago
  That was rather rancorous.

markessien 16y ago

In spite of Obama being a product of such a mixed-race union, he picked 'Black' as his racial categorization in the 2010 census, according to an article linked from there. I think that's backwards. A person equally white and equally black should not become black out of political expediency. They should be equally representative of both of their heritages.

nostrademons 16y ago

It's somewhat ironic that there's no column for "multiracial" in the data. Intermarriage doesn't stop at the first generation.

John89 16y ago

I don’t see how the sexes within a race can be different. For every Male that’s interracially married that’s one female that has to be interracially married. It could come down to parts of the population that are not married to skew it. IE in prison, if one sex marries older or same sex marriages. But I suspect it’s actually more about perceptions.

sudont 16y ago
No, because these aren’t pairs of people separated at birth. There’s groups of one thousand men, and one thousand women per racial group represented here. I agree on the perceptions though, there’s a ton of demographic sloughing going on here that can’t be represented simply.
philwelch 16y ago
That's exactly what it is. For every Asian woman who marries a white or black man, there's (statistically) an Asian man who has to either marry a white or black woman or remain single. Likewise, for every black man who marries a white or Asian woman, there's a black woman who has to marry a white or Asian man or remain single. Now, it's true that for every Asian woman who marries interracially, there has to be a white or black man who also marries interracially, but in practice, having a large white majority population means that proportionally fewer whites have to marry interracially to really muck up the proportions among minorities. Statistically, Asian men and black women tend to remain single as Asian women and black men tend to marry interracially. One possible interpretation is that there's kind of a continuum: Black White Asian where women interracially marry to the left and men interracially marry to the right. But it doesn't loop around.