Saturday, June 05, 2010

Interracial marriages at an all-time high, study says

Interracial marriages at an all-time high, study says

 By Stephanie Chen, CNN

 The first time Priya Merrill, who is Indian, brought her white boyfriend home for Thanksgiving in 2007, the dinner was uncomfortable and confusing. She still remembers her family asking if Andrew was the bartender or a family photographer.

The couple married last August, and her Indian family has warmed up to her husband despite their racial differences.
"I think we get the best of both cultures," said Merrill, 27, of New York. She added, "Sometimes I just forget that we're interracial. I don't really think about it."
Asian. White. Black. Hispanic. Do race and ethnicity matter when it comes to marriage?
Apparently, race is mattering less these days, say researchers at the Pew Research Center, who report that nearly one out of seven new marriages in the U.S. is interracial or interethnic. The report released Friday, which interviewed couples married for less than a year, found racial lines are blurring as more people choose to marry outside their race.
"From what we can tell, this is the highest [percentage of interracial marriage] it has ever been," said Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer for the Pew Research Center.
He said interracial marriages have soared since the 1980s. About 6.8 percent of newly married couples reported marrying outside their race or ethnicity in 1980. That figure jumped to about 14.6 percent in the Pew report released this week, which surveyed newlyweds in 2008.
Couples pushing racial boundaries have become commonplace in the U.S., a trend that is also noticeable in Hollywood and politics. President Obama is the product of a black father from Africa and a white mother from Kansas. Supermodel Heidi Klum, who is white, married Seal, a British singer who is black.
But not everyone is willing to accept mixed-race marriages. A Louisiana justice of the peace resigned late last year after refusing to marry an interracial couple.
However, studies show that support for interracial marriages is stronger than in the past, especially among the Millennial generation. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, about 85 percent accept interracial marriages, according to a Pew study published in February. Scholars say interracial marriages are important to examine because they can be a barometer for race relations and cultural assimilation.
Today's growing acceptance of interracial marriages is a contrast to the overwhelming attitudes 50 years ago that such marriage was wrong -- and even illegal. During most of U.S. history, interracial marriages have been banned or considered taboo, sociologists say.
In 1958, a woman of black and Native American descent named Mildred Jeter had married a white man, Richard Loving. The couple married in Washington, D.C., instead of their home state of Virginia, where state laws outlawed interracial marriages. The couple was arrested by police. Their case made its way to the Supreme Court in the case Loving vs. Virginia in 1967, where the justices unanimously ruled that laws banning interracial marriages were unconstitutional.
In the decades after the court's ruling, the U.S. population has been changed by an unprecedented influx of immigrants. The growing numbers of immigrants, said Pew researchers, is partially responsible for the increase in interracial marriages.
The Pew Center study released Friday found that marrying outside of one's race or ethnicity is most common among Asians and Hispanics, two immigrant groups that have grown tremendously. About 30 percent of Asian newlyweds in the study married outside of their race, and about a quarter of Hispanic newlyweds reported marrying someone of another race.
David Chen, 26, of Dallas, Texas, is Taiwanese. He is planning a wedding with his fiancee, Sylvia Duran, 26, who is Mexican. He says race isn't an issue, but parts of their culture do play a role in their relationship. They will probably have a traditional Chinese tea ceremony at their wedding.
"The thing that we really focus on is our values and family values," instead of their race, he said. "We both like hard work, and we really put a focus on education."
The African-American population also saw increases in interracial marriage, with the number of blacks participating in such marriages roughly tripling since 1980, the study said. About 16 percent of African-Americans overall are in an interracial marriage, but researchers point out a gender difference: It's more common for black men to marry outside of their race than for black women.
The gender difference was the reverse in the Asian population surveyed. Twice as many newlywed Asian women, about 40 percent, were married outside their race, compared with Asian men, at about 20 percent.
"We are seeing an increasingly multiracial and multiethnic country," said Andrew Cherlin, professor of public policy and sociology at Johns Hopkins University. "The change in our population is bringing more people into contact with others who aren't like them."
The Pew Center also found education and residency affected whether people married interracially, with college-educated adults being more likely to do so. More people who live in the West marry outside their race than do people in the Midwest and South, the survey found.
Cherlin explained why education has helped bridge various races and ethnic groups: With more minorities attending college, education, rather than race, becomes a common thread holding couples together.
"If I'm a college graduate, I am going to marry another graduate," Cherlin said. "It's of secondary importance if that person is my race."
Technology is also making it easier for people to date outside their races, said Sam Yagan, who founded OkCupid.com, a free Internet dating site. He said his site, which receives 4 million unique visitors a month, has seen many interracial relationships result from people using its services.
Adriano Schultz, 26, who is Brazilian, met his wife, Theresa, who is white, through the site in 2006. A year later, the couple married.
"I don't feel as if ethnicity for us was a big issue," said Schultz, of Indiana. "It was more about personalities and having things in common that really drove us together."
Yagan attributes the increase in interracial relationships to the Internet, which makes it easier to connect with someone of a different race. People who live in a community where race is an issue can meet someone of another race more privately, than say, instead of having to start their relationship in a public setting.
"You don't have to worry about what your friends are going to think," he said. "You can build the early parts of the relationship."

ISRAELE HA FATTO BENE A SPARARE

DIECI MORTI TRA GLI AMICI DEI TERRORISTI
ISRAELE HA FATTO BENE A SPARARE

Con la scusa del pacifismo, una flotta di navi voleva violare la sovranità dello Stato ebraico e portare aiuti ad Hamas. I soldati di Gerusalemme l’hanno fermata per controlli e sono stati aggrediti: reazione inevitabile

di
Vittorio Feltri

Q
uello che stiamo per dire non pia­cerà a tutti. Me­glio dirlo prima perché conosciamo molti polli italiani e i lo­ro sentimenti antisrae­liani. La notizia nuda e cruda l’avete appresa ie­ri dalla tivù, dalla radio e da internet. Una flotta di navi carica di pacifi­sti e di aiuti materiali per gli abitanti della stri­scia di Gaza (assediata) è stata intercettata dal­la marina militare di Israele, ed è successo un macello. Si parla di una decina di morti e ventisei feriti. Non era­vamo sul posto (né noi né altri giornalisti) quin­di non siamo in grado di ricostruire l’accaduto se non attraverso fonti ufficiali, quella di Tel Aviv, che ha fermato le imbarcazioni con a bor­do gli amici dei palesti­nesi, e quella della Tur­chia da cui sono salpate
le navi.
Versione israeliana.

La flotta dei pacifisti è entrata in acque israe­liane con l’intenzione di rompere l’assedio di Gaza e di portare alla gente dieci tonnellate di aiuti umanitari. La marina militare l’ha bloccata in obbedienza agli ordini del governo. I soldati sono saliti sulle navi non autorizzate a dirigersi a Gaza: sem­brava una normale ope­razione di polizia e, in­vece, i pacifisti hanno reagito con armi da fuo­co, bastoni, coltelli ecce­tera. La risposta degli israeliani è stata imme­diata e rabbiosa, come sempre avviene in que­ste circostanze, con con­seguenze tragiche. Sul numero delle vittime ab­biamo già detto; vari i fe­riti da entrambe le par­ti.
Versione turca . Non è vero che la flotta sia stata intercettata in ac­que israeliane bensì in­ternazionali, a 70 mi­glia nautiche dalla terra­ferma. Non è vero che i passeggeri fossero ar­mati. Erano saliti a bor­do passando attraverso il metal detector e i rag­gi X; responso negativo. La dogana conferma.
Sia come sia, un dato è sicuro. Gli amici dei palestinesi non aveva­no il permesso di appro­dare in territorio israe­liano, quindi non dove­vano trovarsi in quel punto del mare; è evi­dente che progettasse­ro una azione di forza, forse non calcolando la inflessibilità della mari­na. Inoltre trasportava­no tonnellate di merce
(non zavorra) che avreb­bero scaricato senza l’ok di Israele. Infine non hanno tollerato le ispezioni e ciò ha provo­cato la sparatoria.
A prescindere da chi abbia attaccato per pri­mo, c’è comunque un fatto non trascurabile: Israele è in conflitto da sempre con i palestine­si, ma non lo è col popo­lo sofferente e incolpe­vole, bensì con Hamas che non è un mite parti­to votato ad amministra­re con garbo la sua gen­te; è un grande movi­mento terroristico col quale ogni trattativa è regolarmente finita nel sangue, bombe e roba del genere. Pensare che uno Stato sovrano accet­ti di ospitare chi dà una mano ai suoi nemici è imprudente. Tanto più che, chi va in soccorso dei terroristi, è IHH, cioè un gruppo terrori­stico, come spiega Fiam­ma Nirenstein nel suo articolo.
Il minimo che doveva­no aspettarsi quelli del­la Freedom Flotilla era una raffica di mitra, vi­ceversa sono andati avanti con una tranquil­lità ai limiti dell’inco­scienza: ovvio non ab­biano trovato un sorri­dente comitato di acco­glienza.
Israele è circondato da Paesi più o meno isla­mici che non gli ricono­scono il diritto di esiste­re e meditano (vedi l’Iran) di trasformarlo in un cumulo di detriti mediante bomba atomi­ca. Non è un sogno: è un piano. Basti pensare che nelle carte geografi­che mediorientali non vi è neppure traccia del­l’odiato nemico. Ebbe­ne, se la situazione è questa, è da irresponsa­bili recarsi in determi­nate zone facendo il tifo per chi tenta di cancella­re la patria degli ebrei. I quali si difendono con i denti, e non hanno tem­po per convincere con le buone i pacifisti a ri­nunciare alle loro cro­ciere finalizzate a soste­nere Hamas, una banda di feroci assassini. Spa­rare è più persuasivo.
Per concludere il di­scorso con una semplifi­cazione polemica, desi­deriamo ricordare ai si­gnori pacifisti che, se agiscono da supporto ai terroristi, tanto pacifi­sti non sono, semmai complici dei seminato­ri di morte. E che la rego­la madre è quella di oc­cuparsi dei casi propri; così non ci sarebbero più le guerre e nemme­no
i pacifisti.