My current review of the literature has forced me to look at the issues of assimilation as a process of whitening, an idea propogated by many prominent sociologists such as Herbert Gans, as well as a few scholars in my home department. I find this equation to be highly problematic. In their recent book, Jennifer Lee and Frank Bean look at the racial identification among mixed race couples and their multiracial children. Their main finding is that there is greater flexibility for multiracial Latino and Asian American couples and children than for multiracial black couples and children. (Of course, the other spouse in almost every case considered in white.) Given this greater flexibility, the rule of hypodecent does not apply to Asian Americans and Latinos as it does to African Americans. Lee and Bean take this fact to demonstrate that the US racial hierarchy is now organized (or will be shortly) along a black/non-black divide.
Anyone who knows me, my politics, or my academic work, will know that I take issue with this. While I do not deny the systematic oppression of African Americans in both historical and contemporary contexts, I do not necessarily see the value in reproducing a dichotomous schema for understanding the racial structures in place in the United States. Racial hierarchies and oppressions are context specific. While African Americans may lay claim to be the "most" oppressed in aggregate, such aggregation provides little traction for effecting substantive progress toward social justice. As Cherrie Moraga reminds us, "The danger lies in failing to acknowledge the specificity of the oppression"...but I digress, because even if we take the aggregated oppression of African Americans as our primary measure to construct a black/non-black framework, the evidence provided by Lee and Bean is flawed.
In their discussion of hypodecent, the examples provided by Lee and Bean do not adequately take into account the role of phenotype in racial identification. While Lee and Bean rightly point out the racial identity is a complicated amalgamation of self-perception and ascription, they way and individual looks and how those looks are interpreted in social contexts remains important. Many of the individuals highlighted by Lee and Bean could be considered atypical within the multiracial community (i.e., a half-Japanese, half-white man with blonde hair and blue eyes). Lee and Bean also provide celebrity examples that bolster their point. Keanu Reeves and Cameron Diaz are both read as white by mainstream audiences despite their multiracial Asian and Latino heritages, respectively. Lee and Bean point to Halle Berry who is a biracial woman read as black by global audiences. The problem with bringing up these examples is numerous counterfactuals also exist. For example, are actors Russell Wong, Lou Diamond Phillips, Jessica Alba or Kelly Hu marketed as white? Are Rashida Jones or Mariah Carey always recognized as black? Furthermore, there is a history of "passing" within the African American community connected with the legacies of slavery and the ability to be percieved as a "free white person." Suffice to say, there is a lot of racial ambiguity in the multiracial population and what Lee and Bean point to, then, is the ability for some multiracial individuals to pass as a monoracial individual, be it black or white...or something else. But this option does not exist for all multiracial individuals, nor does it seem to evidence a black/non-black divide.
Returning to the story about my "Latino ass," there also limits to passing in terms of being "outed" as multiracial or as a different race entirely. If colorlines were truly shifting, such outings would not matter...being labelled white or black, or non-white or non-black would not matter. Simply being recognized as white does not provide a passing individual with safe haven if someone notices their family name or meets their parents or otherwise finds out about their true heritage. So, maybe my ass can pass for Latino, but as soon as I turn around...I am outed as Asian. There are limits to passing, oppressive limits (what legal scholar Kenji Yoshino describes as covering), and such limits must be recognized as we discuss any potential shifts in the American color line(s).
