Hey E@N,
Thank you for your patience today in waiting for Prof. Banks. I hope you enjoyed the talk nonetheless.
I thought Prof. Banks’s talk was quite approachable. He talked about the decline in marriage and the changing roles of men and women, both generally in America, and specifically (and especially) among African Americans. He then talked about why his book was so controversial. Particularly, Prof. Banks talked about the controversy around allowing black women (who are doing better socioeconomically than black men) to marry across racial lines. On the one hand, of course black women can marry as they will. On the other hand, some people (especially black men) think that doing so is in some sense betraying the black community.
I get the sense that the majority of us will be on the side of fully allowing interracial marriage. But I would like to hear thoughts on that, especially from those of you who think that black women should be somehow encouraged to marry within the black community (if there are some of you who do believe that).
I also want to hear thoughts on the general idea of academia discussing controversial issues. Do you think that some things should be left out of intellectual discussion?
Looking forward to it!
I was particularly invested in the material Professor Banks spoke on today. A crisis in the educational system is occurring in America. Across the board groups of boys in the United States are doing worse. Professor Banks offered a fascinating analysis of the effects of this crisis, through the case study of African-American females.
I found it fascinating that African-American women with advanced degrees are the least likely ethnic socioeconomic class of Americans to have children. I am wondering if anyone else specifically wondered why this was? One irregularity in particular shocked and worried me.
I stayed briefly after class to ask Professor Banks about other ethnic groups of women’s propensity to be mothers in comparison to African-American women… what the professor said shocked me!
Almost entirely, women from ethnic socioeconomic groups are outperforming their male counterparts within their own groups. Amazingly, though, women of all races not African-American with advanced educational degrees are more likely than their less-educated peers to have children.
During the discussion today I did not understand this fully. Only after the talk did this information sink in. A white or Asian or European educated woman is more likely than a poor white or Asian or European woman to have children. I found this simply astounding! Educated African-American women as a group are an enormous oddity in our country, and once I realized this I began to understand the weight of issues Professor Banks’ book aims to expose.
There are many compounding factors contributing to these marriage oddities in the United States, most tracing back to the education equity issues we talked about in week 3. I am excited to learn more about them. I am checking out Professor Banks’ book!
I think the pressure to “marry within the race” is real not only for black women but for many individuals of other races and ethnicities as well. I’ve mostly seen this pressure from a recent immigrant perspective, among individuals who are struggling to become more “American” and at the same time trying to maintain their “roots.” At the heart of this issue is what one’s idea of who they want to be. Parents, relatives, and the community play big roles in kind of nudging individuals toward their own race because having a spouse who readily understands and respects the culture, language, and traditions is important in life. Some individuals, either through their parents’ advice or through their own visions of what they want to be, will also believe these things are important. They decide that yes, they would like to have a spouse who speaks their native tongue, knows the history of their people, and has lived the life as an (insert ethnicity) person. Black women (immigrant black women?) may or may not have the same problems, but I would be interested in seeing what their thought process is. What kind of “pros” and “cons” do they consider? What constitutes “betrayal of the race” or the opposite of that? I look forward to reading the book and hope it sheds light on the thought process of pressured black women.
To go back to the immigrant perspective and to provide a concrete example of pressure: if an immigrant man (or woman) marries someone who does not speak his/her native tongue, chances are his/her children who grow up in this country are going to speak a majority of English and only a minority of that ethnic language. The world may be different in the future and certainly there are exceptions to the norm, but history suggests that biracial children will predominantly use English. If one’s native language is important to him, the possibility that his children will lose the language is going to be something to think long and hard about. And don’t trivialize language here, because language is a powerful and beautiful capacity that allows you to connect to entire cultures. If one cannot speak (insert ethnic language), he simply won’t be able to connect to that group of people in the way that a fluent speaker can. Of course, some will say that “love is all you need” but to that I say this: individuals are compatible with a lot of different persons—with more time I could play with divorce and remarriage rates to argue this. But my point is you can actually choose to fall in love with a person, and you definitely are able to choose who you wants to marry. If language is important to you, you will probably want to be with someone whom you love and will also help you preserve your language for future generations. Or you can be with someone whom you equally love, but your language will likely wither away. Given the choice, what would you do?
Professor Banks brought up some very intriguing finding about African Americans and marriage. Unfortunately, I do not have strong opinions on the matter although I am concerned about growing inequality among ethnicities and even within ethnicities. I was not surprised to see that more black females are performing better than black males. That was the general vibe that I felt when I was in high school and I knew that on the whole females are outperforming males. However, the solution to the problem seems even more complex for African Americans because of issue the culture to which Professor Banks alluded.
I also found the whole issue of discussing controversial issues to be very interesting. For one, I don’t think there is any race/ethnicity in the United States that shares the same controversial positioning as African Americans. Due to America’s history of repression and slavery, discussing race issues has become a practice that is sure to bring heated response. Indeed, I find that I could even be criticized for making this generalization. The truth is that racism is still is relevant issue even though we have made enormous strides toward greater equality. The problem of analyzing African Americans in an academic context is that there is a lingering sense that some studies or findings could be hate driven. Therefore, people have erred on the side of caution lest they be label a “racist” or a “bigot”. I think that eventually this whole phenomenon will subside as the issue of civil rights and equality becomes more of an issue of the past. This is not to say that we are not facing civil rights violations today. However, no one can deny that we are continuing to move toward Dr. Martin Luther King’s vision when he made his famous speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.
What struck me the most in Banks’ talk was the fact that black women have a deep set notion of “black first, women second”. I am not surprised how this has developed, much through the black ethnic/racial group promoting solidarity, but I am surprised that so many years after the era of official segregation between races, this attitude still persists. I’m very curious to what extent this is true in younger age groups — Banks implied that he had interviewed women old enough to have married or who had received college and advanced degrees. Within this age grouping, he found the notion that women’s tendency was to marry only black men, or no one at all. My theory is, as time goes on, the social boundaries that stop black women from marrying outside of their race will fade as many stigmas eventually do. Banks has hopefully made a step in the right direction of addressing the problem of aborted interracial relationships.
Personally, I believe that mixing of races in America is an important step for races to assimilate into the predominantly white society in this country. But, I am not fundamentally against the practice of African Americans desiring to stick to marrying within their race. What I AM against is the social stigma that promotes the anti-interracial marriage for many black women. (Distinguished more clearly, I see no problem with pride in marrying within the race, but sense a problem when there is an anti-interracial social construct that prevents interracial marriages.) Therefore, when someone identified that a possible solution to this problem is educating black males to put more suitable prospects on the market for deserving black women, I must disagree. I see inferior black male educational levels a problem in itself, which should be fixed for the sake of the black males themselves — not for the black females who may potentially marry them. Although it may technically resolve the imbalance between male and female education, it does not solve the fundamental issue at hand: a wrongful sense of shame exists when a black women decides to marry a non-black member of the community, which needs to be addressed.
Professor Banks talked about how interracial marriage between a black person and a person of another race is more stigmatized and much less acceptable than other kinds of interracial families. My own parents and several relatives are in interracial marriages, and although none of them involve black people, I definitely don’t see any kind of interracial marriage it as something that should be discouraged. Among my friends and their families, I have noticed that of the interracial couples who have one partner who is black, that partner is always the male. The fact that black males are more likely to find partners outside of their race than black females are is something that I have never thought about before, even though I have seen it many times. It was interesting that some black men see black women are their “property”, and hopefully with increased awareness about the unbalance between black males and females, social stigmas surrounding interracial marriages between black woman and other races will start to disappear.
Professor Banks mentioned that black women with advanced education are less likely to have children, but I don’t recall him explaining the reasons why. It could be worrisome that more children are being born to less educated parents, but is having fewer children necessarily a negative? In light of the current environmental state of our world, it seems to me that we should be encouraging people to have fewer children.
Regarding whether or not controversial issues should be discussed in academic settings, I absolutely think that they are important to talk about. If even intellectuals and highly educated people avoid talking about these issues, then how can we expect society as a whole to come up with a balanced solution?
The comment that stuck in my head the rest of that Friday afternoon was Professor Brown’s comment on how African American women saw themselves first as blacks and then as women. That point stuck with me and framed the bigger issue I was grappling with as I listened to him speak about the issues. While there is pressure to marry within the race, there is a greater pressure on women to marry in general. As a soon to be graduating senior, there are two questions that relatives ask me: (1) What are you going to do next year? and (2) Do you have a boyfriend? Four years ago when I was in high school, that was the last thing any relative would ask me. The idea in my household was to date AFTER college, to find a partner AFTER college, to start looking for love AFTER college. With around a month until I get to that AFTER college period in my life, thoughts about long-term relationships and marriage have begun striking a chord in me.
I have my college degrees and now I’m supposed to have a job, a guy, and the whole package of what is considered “successful.” Without that job and that guy, though, something appears to be missing. This is what the media feeds us and this is what society deems natural.
Professor Banks said that marriage rates have been declining in the recent years. I don’t doubt it. He said that more women are getting college degrees than men. Sure, I can see that. So why? What exactly is changing all this? Some of those answers are probably in his book. What I have observed is the role that education plays in people’s lives. Education gives people knowledge which empower them to live more freely in knowing than in ignorance. A college degree nonetheless offers people the opportunity to live more independently and to chase after other dreams, dreams beyond marriage. Professor Banks also mentioned that people across time have always looked for stable relationships. Yes, I totally believe that at the end of the day, it’s the people in your life that matter, not as much money or accolades. Some people may disagree with that statement and that’s fine. But also at the end of the day, education has given women more power to actually WANT more in a relationship and I praise Professor Banks for helping empower women to use that to their advantage.
In the words of many wise people, “Don’t settle!”
Two ethical dilemmas arose from Richard Banks’ talk. The first is the ethical problems involved with men falling so far behind women in schooling. The other is the ethical justifiability of the decision to only marry within race.
I see no justification for deciding only to entertain romances within race. What would we say if a white male said that he would not be romantically involved with a black woman in principle? While it is obvious that most people marry within their own race due to close vicinity to that same race, that fact does not explain why people would decide against it if they are in close proximity to other races.
At its core, this is a stereotyping issue. Black women are continually characterized as obnoxious and uneducated, which is unfair. The moral code of equality exists because we think it is unfair to have preconceived judgments about individuals based on perceived group characteristics. (“She is a black woman, so she must be x, y, and z”).
I have met many people who have told me that they wouldn’t date or marry any black woman except the more Anglo-saxonized ones like Stacey Dash or Halle Berry. It is little more than xenophobia and bigotry that leads one to ignore whole segments of the population romantically or otherwise. What if I said “You know, Asians are great and all, but I could never date one or even befriend one”? That would be blatantly immoral.
The argument that language needs to be protected is pretty convincing, even though I suspect that many Asian parents would not be all too pleased if their daughter were to bring me (a black male) home to them.
The biggest point that I took away from this talk was not so much how African American women weren’t marrying at the same rate as their women counterparts, but rather on the question why it should be a big deal at all, in some respect. Professor Banks highlighted that marriage was slowing down incredibly across all nations, and couples are deciding (if at all) to get married later on in their relationship. However, what I found more intriguing about this debate was the intersection of the role of African American man and marriage within the black community.
It was no surprising to me the statistics that pointed to higher achievement amongst African American women than men. It’s a huge problem that needs to be solved in order for the black community to grow, but I wonder how trying to fix issues within racial lines might actually propagate further racial lines. I understand that culturally, it is often important to preserve one’s heritage by marrying within races, but I don’t think that it’s all that relevant to today’s world. Ethically, I don’t really see the issue at hand, and I struggled to comprehend that ethical basis during the talk with Professor banks (although this made it not any less interesting!).
As far as discussing controversial issues within academia, I can only hope that it continues! Controversial issues appear to retain their “controversiality” but the our labeling as it so. Race is definitely a delicate topic, but that does not mean that it shouldn’t be discussed in a polite way. I’d hope that by now we as a society, as a country, as a community, would want to break down the racial barriers that have subsisted for hundreds of years, and the only apparent way to accomplish this is in honest, educated discussion.
Similar to a couple of the posts above, I was deeply struck by Prof. Banks statement that black women see themselves as “black” first and “woman” second. This has never crossed my mind. As a white woman, I have always seen myself first as a woman; my race has never really come into mind in describing my identity. It goes to show the cultural differences that are present in our community, even between women of different races. This comment also appealed strongly to my psychology major side. It made me think of the psychology of black woman and in particular their self-identity. The fact that a majority of black woman view themselves as “black” first is a major factor in observing the statistics that black woman are the least likely to marry and have children. In identifying themselves as “black” first, black woman’s identity is with their race, not there identity as woman. One’s view of their own identity is very important and strongly affects one’s actions. With placing their identity in their race, they feel a strong obligation towards their race. It would be as if I identified myself as an athlete, I would feel a strong obligation towards my sport and the athletic community. In the case of black woman, they are confounded by the social pressures of what it means to be black; that they have an obligation to their race through their success and life choices. In the terms of marriage, they feel obligated to marry within their race, to not turn their back on the black men in their community. I understand the strong sense of obligation. This idea supports the evidence that black woman are the least likely to marry. They feel the strong duty to marry within their race, but this is not always the most suitable option. So instead of going against their identity of being “black” and the social pressures that entails, they deny themselves marriage. This is not to say that marriage is for everyone and everyone needs to marry. It is merely an observation that seems to be supported by the data presented in class. I personally believe that woman, of any race, has the right to choose who they marry. That race should not matter. But this is a naive hope. The predicament of black woman goes to show how alive the role of race is in our society. Is this something that we will ever be able to escape, or will it continue to dominate our social constraints, especially for black woman.
I think it’s interesting to explore the reasons for encouraging black women to marry within the race. It seems that there are a couple of major considerations: (1) to preserve the culture, language, heritage, (2) to defend the honor of the black community. The ethical question in this discussion would be when it is an obligation of the individual to sacrifice for the larger community, because in both the listed considerations, the needs of the larger community: its continuation, its proliferation, and its promotion are at stake when a member of the race community marry out. While these are all good things, where does the community draw the boundary between individual freedom and community obligation?
A side observation, while all these are more pronounced when black women marry outside of their race, I wonder why it is not so when black men do or when any one race marries outside, or even, why it has to be between race but not between communities, say Stanford alum marrying a Cal alum, semi-jokingly, or more seriously, a Jewish person marrying a Buddhist? Perhaps looking at the phenomenon categorically, which takes away the specific lenses one applies mostly subconsciously when it is framed as a racial problem, could help one understand the key ethical issues better. Each of us would always feel closer to one of our particular identities than others. An example raised in the talk was that black women feel that they are “black first, women second”. It is natural for a person to protect, preserve, and promote that identity first. This is where individual freedom comes in. When one can articulate what are the most important bits of identity in oneself, and assuming we live in a society that respects personal choices, it seems that the apparently internal dilemma of “self-interest vs community-interest” could be more easily solved – in the sense that it is always both self-interest and community-interest, it’s just that the community-interest part may not coincide with what the loudest voice is in one’s world.
Professor Banks presented an interesting point about the elevated pressure to marry within the race for black women especially, that they “see themselves as black first, and then as women.” I’d be interested to hear his perspective on where the pressure comes from and why it’s especially prominent for black women. I feel the invisible hand that steer people toward marrying within the race is conserved among all races, and this pressure is not necessarily from an outside source. It’s possible that a person may feel the “pressure,” or to put it another way, the inherent inclination toward marrying someone within the same race simply because they have physical features similar to him/herself. A person of a particular race is likely to see a disproportionate number of others in his/her own race (family, friends, etc.) and therefore more use to the physical features and ways of conduct. As a result, when choosing a partner, people may feel more initial attraction toward people of the same race because of this comfort. Given the status quo of predominant intra-racial marriage, what are specific ways to open the doors to interracial marriage? And is this a good thing? I feel like marriage should be a personal choice regardless of race, religion, or other categorizing factors as long as both parties involved are acceptable. However, in real like, these arbitrary categories may pose more of a hassle than the simple “accept differences” attitude. The reason that these differential factors are able to persist may partly be due to the fact that they do make a difference. For instance, if a interracial couple were to get married and be perfectly fine with each other, their families may not. Although marriage in the US is primarily based on the nuclear family, opinions of the larger families may complicate a simple two-people union and only time can tell its consequences.
All the points brought up in the talk were based on the assumption that marriage is valuable and divorce or being single is less so. Professor Banks made the point that divorce is bad for the child(ren). Though this is a valid point, I’m curious to know what his views on non-marital relationships or being single if there were no kids involved. Aside from the lawful definition of marriage and its associated social benefits, what truly makes marriage superior other than the culturally constructed value? One may argue that marriage brings stability to the relationship, and this may very well be true in some relationships. However, for some, marriage may seem like a lock that defines certain socially appropriate behaviors that may seem restraining and damage the relationship.