(film reel clattering) - Welcome to Ethnic Media Services' weekly national news briefing.

I'm Sandy Close, EMS director.

Today our topic is interracial marriage in a polarized America.

Can love trump hate?

Interracial and intercultural marriages have been on the rise for many years.

According to Pew, about 17% of new marriages are interracial couples.

In San Diego County, the figure is close to 30%.

Many of these unions produce children that are multiracial and multicultural.

The 2020 census found that mixed race is the fastest growing category under racial identity.

Our age old taboos about love between race is weakening, even as open racism and racist hate crimes are increasing.

[audio distorts] What does the research say about public opinion and hidden biases?

Can mixed race families themselves help mitigate and even overcome prejudice in the long term?

Our thanks to the state library of California's Stop the Hate initiative, which is helping to support today's briefing.

Now to our moderator, Pilar Marrero, veteran journalist, author, and EMS associate editor, who, together with Sunita Sohrabji, coordinates our Friday briefings.

All yours, Pilar.

- Thank you, Sandy.

And, we are here in Silicon Valley having our retreat.

And, I'm on my iPad, so it looks a little weird, but here I am!

Welcome, everyone.

This is a topic that is close to my heart of having covered immigration and multicultural Los Angeles for a long time.

I wanna just move on to our first guest, Dr. Justin Gest.

And, he wrote a very intriguing and a very interesting article that appeared in the LA Times in June.

And, his proposition was that relationships between people, building relationships with people who are different from you, racially, culturally, in other ways, actually can help counter the separation and polarization and some of the violence that we are seeing in our country.

So, I'll invite Dr. Gest to just expand a little bit on that.

How can that happen?

And, let's move on from there.

And, how can Ethnic Media help promote these ideas?

- Thank you so much, Pilar, for that introduction.

Thank you, Sandy, for hosting me.

Thank you for our interpreters for making sure everyone understands what I have to say today.

Buenos dias!

Hello to everyone.

I'm bilingual and I speak Spanish, but I don't speak all the other languages that you all speak and understand.

So, I'll stick with English today.

It's a pleasure to be with you.

So, the article that I wrote that Pilar mentioned in the Los Angeles Times was really derived from my most recent book, which is called "Majority Minority."

And, in "Majority Minority," I anticipate the upcoming demographic milestone in the United States, where the original, or at least earlier ethnic racial majority of white non-Hispanic people will no longer be a majority in the United States and will be one of many pluralities, one of many minorities in the country in/around 2045.

And, many people think of this milestone as unique to the United States, but what I've found in my research is that actually, it's rare, but it's not unique.

There are a number of countries that have undergone similar transitions, and we have a lot to learn from them.

Even though they're smaller than us, they're microcosms of our country.

We have a lot to learn from them and we can better anticipate our own milestone in our own politics by watching how they pivot towards inclusion or exclusion, away or to backlash.

And, of course, this milestone and demographic change, more broadly, I think is a shadow that is overshadowing so much of our politics today.

I think that in many ways, immigration and demographic change is the sort of fulcrum around which our partisan politics revolves these days.

And, it is paralyzing us as a country legislatively, and it is dividing people because our partisan identities are now stacked with our social identity.

What I mean by that is, there was a time in recent American history, in the late 20th century, when you did not have parties that were so-- whose constituencies were not predictably of one race or another.

But, basically since 2004 until around 2020, every major racial or ethnic minority in the United State, and many religious minorities in the United States, broke relatively heavily for the Democrats.

And, the Republican Party was increasingly homogeneously people of non-Hispanic white backgrounds.

And, that's not healthy for a democracy because it creates identity politics that make the ideological opponents not just feel like you disagree on individual issues, but it makes it seem like it's an existential opposition.

And, that's why we see so many of our debates over identity today and the legitimacy of people's presence or status in the United States.

So, these politics are not uncommon across countries elsewhere that have experienced similar demographic shifts.

And, the question I think is, well, what can we do to get around it?

One of the things that my book emphasizes is the role of governments and states to make decisions that structure our societies in ways that avoid these politics.

But, unfortunately, states and governments don't always behave in the most responsible way.

In a way that is conscious of both fostering equality, cultivating pluralism, and making sure that people can live harmoniously together.

Instead, many states actually behave in exclusionary ways and sometimes they exploit people's divisions in order to win elections.

Well, if you don't wanna trust states, one thing that I found in my research that we can do is build relationships across these social divides, across these ethnic and religious boundaries with one another.

And, there is no relationship, I think, stronger than that between two spouses.

And, intermarriage is a really powerful way that I've found that people, individuals, can overcome the really divisive politics that takes place in societies that are undergoing a lot of demographic change.

Now, I know that many of you are located in California, and beyond all the statistics that you've already heard from Sandy and also Pilar, California is really the leader of intermarriages in the United States.

And, of course, intermarriages are subject to how you want to define them, but we're basically focusing on interracial marriages, interethnic marriages in the country.

Almost, about half of the top 10-- I think it is half the top 10 counties in terms of interracial marriages in the United States are in California.

Hawaii is another source of many intermarriages as well, in case any of you are from Hawaii.

And, this is meaningful because in many ways this is the vanguard of these politics.

It wasn't so long ago that intermarriages were actually prohibited, but California actually led the way in the 1950s with a Supreme Court case that fought for the right for people to have marriages across racial boundaries.

And, there were religious justifications for it back then.

You had two Catholics who wanted to be married in a Catholic church, and that's actually the basic logic that the Supreme Court used.

And, that predated the ultimate U.S. Supreme Court decision in Loving versus Virginia which took place 20 years later, actually.

So, California was ahead of its time then, and in many ways, it's ahead of its time today.

I think that when we talk about pluralism in the United States, we focus a lot on what there is to be pessimistic about.

And, there is a lot to be pessimistic about.

Because of the nature of partisan identity stacking up against and with social identities, it has led many people to be very concerned about the way our politics become so polarized.

There's tons of statistics these days, a lot of really excellent studies that are quite depressing.

It shows that Americans are less likely to want to date people who have ideological preferences different from them, to be neighbors, to engage in conversations, to go to social events with people who are different from them.

And, unfortunately, that's really no way to actually build bridges across a single nation.

And, one of the primary interventions that researchers have studied to fix this situation is what's called "intergroup contact."

Some of you may have heard of "contact theory."

What "contact theory" supposes is that, when people of different social groups, across different boundaries, meet and spend time together, quality time together, often pursuing a similar goal in a place of equal status, then relationships build and pluralism flourishes and prejudice becomes reduced.

And, this theory is up for a lot of debate, because there is evidence that this is real, but there's also counter evidence that it may not be as strong as we think.

Many of the studies on this subject matter are focused on children and people under the age of 25 and students in many cases, as well, at the university level.

Professors love experimenting on students.

They're just nearby!

The problem is we don't know very much about what happens with people over 25, because it's very challenging to study the effects of intergroup contact on adults over 25.

And so, the jury is still out on contact, but I can tell you that, looking at the countries that I've studied and across their various histories, when people are intermarrying, it basically disarms the politics of polarization and division.

And, the reason why is that those politics rely on very clean lines between groups, but these relationships, whether you're married or not- even if it's just a good friend, a neighbor, a coworker, a member of your church- these relationships transcend those boundaries.

They blur those boundaries.

They don't allow politicians and others to fearmonger us, to divide us on those boundaries because people themselves transcend it.

In some cases, they themselves are on two sides of those boundaries, when they are the children of diverse parents.

And so, while the jury is out on intergroup contact, my research, which looks at things historically rather than psychologically, suggests that actually it's a really powerful way of disarming these politics of division and polarization.

So, I'll go ahead and conclude my remarks there because I know Sandy was very excited for this panel, but as a member of the panel, I'm really excited to hear your questions.

And so, I wanna make sure you have ample time to ask them.

- Thank you.

Thank you so much, Dr. Gest.

Sunita?

Sunita has a question.

- Dr. Gest, pleasure to meet you.

I wanted to ask, how significant is the threat of ending interracial marriages, both at the Supreme Court level, and also at the state level?

- This would be a better question for a lawyer!

(Pilar chuckles) However, there has been some noise about a revocation of Loving versus Virginia since the revocation of Roe versus Wade.

But, I think that that's hyperbolic.

I think it's completely unlikely at this juncture.

And, honestly, good luck!

(Sunita laughing) - Yeah.

- This country continues to mix.

Some of the statistics that you guys might be interested in.

Interracial-- I should say, biracial or mixed race individuals jumped threefold, tripled, over the period of 2010 to 2020, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

And, across those different people, it's not just that people are having more mixed race children.

It's also that people who are of mixed backgrounds are more willing to identify themselves in that way.

So, the statistics sometimes are revealing, not just the objective reality, but the subjective reality that people are more comfortable identifying in this way.

And, those numbers are only going to grow over time because the cohort of children these days are all already majority minority.

So, dating across these social boundaries is taking place extensively, as are many multiracial friendships because children are being socialized in multiracial environments.

And so, it's only going to grow.

And so, good luck to anyone who wants to go back to the days of anti-miscegenation laws.

It's highly unlikely to happen.

Sunita, the other statistic that might be of interest to you all is that, among the group of people that the census identified as mixed race, or that self-identify as multiracial, 80% of them have one white parent, it's estimated.

Which is really interesting for a number of reasons.

One is obviously that they are what some sociologists might call "white adjacent", and the second is that this may have consequences for how we understand whiteness in the United States.

Because so many people think of our majority minority divide.

It relies on this understanding of whiteness being stable, non-Hispanic white, but the idea of whiteness has never been stable.

It's a total social construction- of course, race is- and whiteness has changed historically and it will likely change again.

So, if you looked at the United States through a 19th century lens, we have been a majority minority country since earlier in the 20th century, because white people in 19th century were people who are of northern European Protestant backgrounds.

Italians did not count.

Irish did not count.

Jews, Slavs, Greeks did not count.

And they were called "white ethnics", in many cases.

And, they were excluded from that understanding of whiteness, even if they were not subjugated to the same extent as Asians, or as they were called "Asiatics" at the time, or African Americans historically.

And so, because you've had this changing of what whiteness means historically, because all those "white ethnic groups" are now counting as white, it is reasonable to expect that those groups, that we may see whiteness change again to start to embrace people who are of mixed background or potentially even Hispanic white people.

Remember that 60% of U.S. Latinos self-identify as white.

Of course, some of you might be thinking, 'well, maybe it's a good thing that whiteness 'is so absorbent, that it broadens so easily.

'Maybe it's a testament to assimilation in the United States.'

I would disagree.

The problem with these expansions of whiteness is that they invited new white adjacent people into this fraternity of status historically in the United States, but in exchange for the continued subjugation of people of Asian, African American, and then eventually Latino backgrounds.

And so, if we were to do it again we would simply extend that subjugation or extend the exclusion from whiteness of many other people who are deemed "just too different."

Rather, what we should be focusing on, I think, is broadening the understanding of what it means to be an American, not what it means to be white.

To unhinge being American from whiteness altogether and to focus on our civic identity.

And, I think a Supreme Court case would obviously undercut that enormously.

- Dr. Gest, thank you.

We're gonna move on to Sonia Smith-Kang and Richard, Richard Kang.

And, I'm just gonna ask some questions of them both and then you can also join asking questions if you want.

So, Sonia?

So, you grew up in a family that was biracial, African American and Mexican American.

How was that like?

Did you feel different than everyone else?

- We're just gonna go straight for it!

Huh?

- [Pilar] Yes, we are!

- I wanna start by just saying thank you for having me and give a land acknowledgement.

I'm here today from Los Angeles.

I'm on the occupied territory of the Gabrielino-Tongva Nation land.

So, it's in this acknowledgement process that we take the first steps on the long road towards reconciliation as stewards of these lands.

So, thank you for having me.

Yes, my father is African American and my mom is Mexican.

I'm a proud military brat.

And so, my parents were stationed on the island of Puerto Rico where I was born.

So, I have also that "third-culture kid" part to me as well that I identify with.

And, from Puerto Rico we went to the Hawaiian island of Oahu.

And so, from Hawaii to Los Angeles where I met my husband, Richard, who is Korean American.

Together we have four children that we are raising intentionally in a multicultural, multiracial, multilingual home here in Los Angeles.

- Richard, welcome.

How are you?

- [Richard] Hi, thank you.

- Good to have you.

So, you are the son of immigrants, right?

You're the child of immigrants.

- [Richard] Yes.

- What was that like?

- So, interestingly, you know, my growing up was a little different than Sonia.

So, I actually spoke Korean.

I didn't speak English until I was school age.

So, growing up in America, even though I was born here, I didn't really-- even between my siblings, we spoke Korean because one, even though my dad spoke English, my mom didn't speak English.

So, the only way to communicate with her was in Korean.

So like I said, it was a very-- it was very-- we kinda, I guess knew.

I kinda knew I was different when I entered school age because, one, it was the first time I had used English.

And, it was-- You know, I lived in a predominantly white area so I could already tell that there was something (chuckles) different about our family!

- Thank you.

So, when you both met and fell in love, how was that for both of your respective families?

Did they accept each other?

Was it a struggle or was it easy?

- Yeah, my family was very easy.

I think we did face some pushback and challenge from Richard's family.

Um, Richard?

- Yeah.

My parents were not-- I mean, I'll like frankly say that they were not accepting and they were opposed to us, even.

I think it was just not the relationship, but even as we got close to getting married, that's where the opposition-- 'cause that was almost like a finality for them.

And, it wasn't-- it's a story that I know is not unique to us, but to me it felt like there was no resolution at the time, that it would never resolve.

That this was just a crossroads that we were at.

But, I knew it was one that I would-- one I would have to bear.

'Cause I was gonna marry Sonia no matter, whether my parents accepted it or not.

So-- And, talking with other people who were going through similar, or who had gone through similar, they would always reassure me.

Oh, eventually my parents would come around.

But, I think when you're at the time, in the moment you feel like you've probably lost your parents.

And, I think it's a story that a lot of people can attest to.

But, at the time?

Yeah.

I felt like probably, there's a... You know?

I didn't realize it doesn't have to be a choice, but it felt like I would have to choose between Sonia and my parents.

And, of course, I chose Sonia.

And, I married her.

And, eventually my parents did come around, which is another story!

But, um?

So-- So, there were definitely struggles in the beginning.

- So, the grandchildren helped - Yes.

- to bring them around?

- And, that's one of the things people would tell me, once they see the grandchildren, everything changes.

Which, still at the time I felt like it wasn't, but there were a couple of things.

My father became sick, and he knew that there was limited time for him.

So I think that was one, but [voices in background] it was really not until they met their grandchildren that they really opened their hearts to us.

- So, in your case, Sonia, how did being biracial influence your life and your choice of partner?

Did it at all?

- Yeah.

I mean, Richard and I started as friends.

I didn't even think, necessarily, about who I was going to marry at that time.

It was just, you know?

It was kinda an "equal opportunity dater", if you will.

And so, I think growing up I just always knew-- you know, I didn't fit in very well.

Like, I grew up in-- When we left to Hawaii and came to Los Angeles, I grew up at a time of the '80s, kind of Farrah Fawcett, blonde hair, blue eyes, big waves.

And, I was darker skinned, had tight curly hair.

And so, I knew this whole time I had a surname of Smith in a predominantly Latino area in school.

So, I always just kind of stuck out.

I spoke Spanish.

Folks didn't kinda see that-- you know, they didn't believe.

I think being multiracial is this whole thing where we have to prove ourselves.

You have to prove your Blackness, prove your-?

Uh?

You know, Latina Latina kind of heritage.

- Latino-ness.

(Pilar chuckles) - And, what that means is different for folks.

And so, then fast forward.

I meet Richard, and we have children who are multiracial and I'm thinking, 'okay, how are we gonna make this better for them?

'Yes, the world is changing.

'Yes, the numbers are increasing, but they're still gonna face some bumps along the road.

I had that experience growing up, so I kinda took that on in our household.

Richard and I did a lot of talking about what our house was gonna look like, what our home was gonna look like, what products and what things we brought into the home in order to safeguard their identity.

We called it "culture proofing our home".

Where we childproof to protect them from injury, we culture proof to protect their identity.

And so, we made sure that we brought in products and books and movies, [voices in background] all that, that look like our family in an authentic, and um-- way that helped uphold the home we wanted, and what we wanted our children to see in here.

- I'm very thankful to you, both.

You are so fantastic, and thank you for our experts as well.

Sandy?

Do you wanna say any final things, any final notes?

And then, we close, because we're late!

- This was a terrific panel, and inspiring.

Many of us are doing portraits of interracial families in order to map the new multiracial, multiethnic California.

Thank you.

♪