Mixed Ethnicity Families in Britain
Several press reports over the weekend and today in Britain have mentioned a new report on mixed ethnicity (or mixed race) families in Britain. The headline finding is that about 1 in 10 children are in mixed-ethnicity families. To be (slightly) more precise, 9 per cent of children are themselves of mixed ethnicity and/or living in families of mixed ethnicity. The report is credited to Lucinda Platt of the Institute for Social and Economic Research. The headline figure sounded on the high side to me, so I wanted to track down the report itself. As there was nothing about it on the website of the ISER I was beginning to suspect an odorous rodent, but I finally found a link to the text on the website of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which sponsored the research. A copy can be downloaded here. I have only skimmed it, but the most relevant findings seem to be at pages 39-40. On a quick read I don’t see any obvious flaw in the methods (such as double-counting), but at first sight there is one important area of uncertainty. The list of ethnic groups includes ‘Other White’, i.e. other than ‘White British’. ‘Other White’ accounts for about 5 per cent of the population, and it is reaonable to assume that a large proportion – probably a majority [this is not correct: see Addendum below] – of them will be in mixed families with ‘White British’. If these are counted among ‘mixed ethnicity’ families, they could account for up to half of the ’1 in 10′ headline figure, which is perhaps not quite what the headline writers had in mind. Perhaps a closer reading will clarify this. Kudos to the first reader to find the answer.
Addendum: On a slightly closer reading, I find I was wrong to assume that a majority of ‘Other White’ would be in families with ‘White British’. Of those ‘Other White’ adults who are in partnerships, only about 1 in 3 such partnerships are ‘mixed’ (see pages 24-30). However, it does seem (unless I have missed something) that the ‘headline’ figure for children in ‘mixed ethnicity’ families would include ‘White British – Other White’ families. It also appears possible that ‘mixed ethnicity’ would include, say, ‘Black Caribbean – Black African’ or ‘Indian – Pakistani’. If so, it seems distinctly misleading for the author to equate ‘inter-ethnic’ and ‘mixed-race’ (page 3 and elsewhere).
Chloe Mortaud may represent a new and disturbing trend in European attitudes toward mixed-race people. The new Miss France is of mixed origin, her mother being African-American while her father is native French. What is disturbing is that Mortaud breaks with the European tradition of recognizing mixed race as a separate category, and instead identifies herself as fully black. In other words, she has taken up America’s one-drop rule despite having lived her whole life in a country, and on a continent, where people reject such simplistic categorization.
Is Mortaud the start of a trend? Time will tell.
What are the boundaries of “other white”? Does it include Turks, Arabs, Persians? Just wondering.
There seem to be two opposite tendencies. One is for greater mingling, the other for greater separation. “Rainbow” marriages between black, brown, yellow and white; and enforced clan marriages between first cousins.
Everyone has to eventually choose his race, his ethnicity, and even his tribe. Isn’t that human nature?
To be mixed means to be mixed.
You can’t choose your race, though you can choose what to make of it, as Chloe Mortaud has done. You can’t choose to be Asian in the same way you can choose to support China or the UK in the Olympics. You can’t choose to be ethnically Jewish, but you can choose to believe or disbelieve in the Torah, or to support or oppose Zionism.
Racism & sexism are bad because they mean attacking people for brute physical facts about their biology which they are powerless to change. Arguably homophobia is the same. But the word “Islamophobia” is a dishonest use of language. It implies that believing that Muhammad is the Seal Of The Prophets is a hard-wired biological feature of certain groups. In fact it’s an opinion, one which anyone in a free society might wish to challenge. Challenging it doesn’t make you a Nazi.
As I understand it, respondents are asked to choose one of 15 groups which they think best describes them. I think an Arab (say) would effectively have a choice between ‘Other White’, ‘Other Asian’, and ‘Any Other Ethnic Group’. ‘Other White’ would also be the obvious choice for Europeans and for those Irish or Irish-ancestry people who do not wish to classify themselves as ‘White British’.
Following the “one drop” doctrine is awfully shortsighted. It means that most of the “mixed marriage” genes will enter the non-white side of the gene pool. If that occurs long enough the non-white population will gradually become more and more Caucasian while little change occurs in the white population.
In reality, I doubt that the number of mixed race people who only embrace their non-white identity is sufficient to cause such an imbalance but for some people the division of the world into “morally superior” victims and “morally inferior” oppressors makes the desire to protect one identity and dismiss the other an important goal.
But the word “Islamophobia” is a dishonest use of language. It implies that believing that Muhammad is the Seal Of The Prophets is a hard-wired biological feature of certain groups.
It may be your opinion but this is quite questionable.
You are promoting the “amalgam” between ethnicity and beliefs while pretending to denounce it.
Egyptians must have a very hard time classifying themselves in racial terms, whether in the United States or Britain. Being quite dark in many cases, they probably would not be willing to call themselves white. Unlike Middle Eastern Arabs, Asian isn’t an option because they’re from the wrong continent. Although the ancient Egyptian civilization has been redefined as a black African civilization, in the United States at least, I don’t believe that the Egyptians today think of themselves as black.
Perhaps they’re one of the relatively few groups for which “other” is the only appropriate option.
Unlike Middle Eastern Arabs
egypt is part of the middle east. i think you meant levantine arab, as those are the reasonable comparison point.
egypt is part of the middle east. i think you meant levantine arab, as those are the reasonable comparison point.
Yes, you are correct. Also Saudi/Gulf Arabs.
What I said with respect to Egyptians would apply to other North Africans, though perhaps some might be more willing to classify themselves as white.