# Asian-American Interracial Marriage

H Кitano

Asian-American Interracial Marriage


HARRY H. L. KITANO WAI-TSANG YEUNG


LYNN CHAI


HERBERT HATANAKA


University of California, Los Angeles


This paper presents data on the rates of in- and outmarriage for the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans in Los Angeles and Hawaii. In 1979 in Los Angeles, the Japanese rates of out-marriages were the highest (60.6%), followed by the Chinese (41.2%) and the Korean (27.6%). The figures were reversed for Hawaii in 1980, with the Korean rates of outmarriage the highest (83%), followed by the Chinese (76%), then the Japanese (59%). Moreover, females of all three groups outmarried at a higher rate than males. A social-psychological model based on the ethnic group and its interaction with the dominant community was developed. Variables to be considered included historical factors, the family, the community, personal factors, and the receptivity of the dominant community.


One goal in a racially mixed society is that of racial intermingling so that divisions might be replaced by harmony. However, such a goal is difficult to achieve when there is a diversity of groups, each with their own brand of ethnocen-trism; group differences in variables such as power, prestige, wealth and status; the existence of barriers such as prejudice, stereotypes, discrimination, and racism. The problem in America is further complicated by the number and diversity of its groups so that history, race, class, color and nationality interact in ways that defy simple generalizations.

There are a number of models that attempt to explain and to predict the outcome of the meeting of our many groups. There is an assimilationist perspective, which believes that some type of amalgamation is found in all cases of interethnic contact when one group does not exterminate the other (Shibutani and Kwan, 1965:21). Park (1950) sees a race-relations cycle of contact, competition,

The research was supported by a grant from the Institute of American Cultures, UCLA. We would like to thank Dr. Thomas Burch, Chief, Research and Statistics Office of the Department of Health, State of Hawaii, for providing Hawaiian data.

School of Social Welfare, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90024.

and adjustment eventually leading to assimilation and amalgamation. Banton (1967) also describes a sequence of contact, acculturation, and integration as one of various outcomes of a race-relations cycle. Most social scientists writing from an assimilationist perspective see the amalgamation of different racial groups as an inevitable final step; and perhaps if the time span is stretched long enough, some type of racial intermingling will no doubt occur.

Pluralistic models disagree as to the inevitability or desirability of integration, assimilation, and amalgamation. Rather, pluralists believe that racial, ethnic, and cultural differences may persist for a variety of reasons. The impetus may come from the ethnics themselves. Under this model, ethnics choose the category that "allows individuals or racial and ethnic groups to work things out by themselves on the basis of freedom of choice" (Gordon, 1981:183). Corporate pluralism (Gordon, 1981:183), on the other hand, formally recognizes racial and ethnic entities so that political power and economic rewards are distributed on the basis of group rights and group membership. For example, affirmative action procedures are based on corporate pluralistic ideas whereby the government formally recognizes ethnic group membership. It should be noted that most of Gordon's examples of corporate pluralism focus on the advantages to be


February 1984 JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY

179


gained by ethnic group membership; it was not that long ago that such an identification was used to restrict access (i.e., antimiscegenation laws) to the American mainstream.

We propose another type of pluralism which we call conservative pluralism, wherein barriers are erected by groups to discourage ethnic interaction. The barriers may be informal or formal. Conservative pluralists recognize and strive to maintain their own ethnic group through informal means such as family sanctions and group pressure, or through more formal means such as legislative lobbying. The important factor in conservative pluralism is that of group power: the more powerful a group, the more effective it will be in maintaining its own autonomy. For example, antimiscegenation laws in effect as early as the 1600s were aimed at "conserving the purity of the white race" by restricting marriage between whites and blacks. Conservative pluralism also has been advocated by many of the ethnic minorities themselves. The picture of an immigrant family threatening to disown a son or daughter for "marrying one of them" is a familiar theme in American immigrant life.

The purpose of this study is to present data concerning the "outmarriage" of three Asian-American groups. Marrying out of the group is one of the most critical steps in intergroup relationships, for it would be difficult to maintain an ethnically pluralistic society when there is extensive mating across group lines. Specifically, we study the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans in Los Angeles County and in Hawaii in order to answer the following questions: (a) What are the rates of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean outmarriage? Have these rates changed over time? (b) What are some of the important differences among these groups? Have these differences changed over time?

METHODOLOGY

Los Angeles County was the site of the study. The County has a large number of Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. We selected every marriage license application having a Chinese, Japanese or Korean surname. Birthplace and surnames of parents provided further information to

aid in ethnic identification. The data were gathered by a team of Asians who were familiar with Asian surnames.

Our procedure missed the following Asians: (a) those who had anglicized their surnames, (b) those Asians born to non-Asian fathers, and (c) those whose surnames were not identified by our group.1 It is our belief that the missing numbers do not significantly alter results of our study.

Data provided by the Hawaii Department of Health also are included. Hawaiian statistics concerning ethnicity are systematic and comprehensive and provide an excellent source for cross-ethnic comparisons.

We defined outmarriage as any marriage where one partner was not of the specific nationality group, inmarriage as a marriage between the same nationality group, and interracial marriage as one where one marital partner was non-Asian.


FINDINGS


Los Angeles County

Outmarriage rates. Table 1 shows the in- and outmarriage rates for the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans in Los Angeles County for 1975, 1977 and 1979. Chinese outmarriage rates were 44.0% in 1975, 49.7% in 1977, and 41.2% in 1979. Japanese outmarriage rates were 54.8% in 1975, 63.1% in 1977, and 60.6% in 1979. Korean rates were 26.0% in 1975, 34.1% in 1977 and 27.6% in 1979.

In terms of overall rates, therefore, the Japanese had the highest outmarriage rate with a peak of 63.1% in 1977, followed by the Chinese with a peak of 49.7% in 1977, while the Korean rates were the lowest with a peak of 34.1% in 1977. We have no explanation why 1977 was the highest year for outmarriage in all three groups. Nevertheless, there is no apparent rising trend in outmarriages for the groups through the years under study (1975-1979), although these rates are much higher than data from several decades ago.

Sex differences. Outmarriage rates by sex also are shown in Table 1. For the Chinese, females outmarried at a higher rate than males did with a peak of 62.2% in 1975. Japanese females out-married at a higher rate than males, with a peak of 60.6% in 1977. Korean females also outmarried at


TABLE 1. OUTMARRIAGE RATES OF CHINESE, JAPANESE, AND KOREANS, TOTAL AND BY SEX, FOR 1975, 1977 AND 1979, LOS ANGELES COUNTY


1975

1977

1979

Group


n


Total

Male

Female


n


Total

Male

Female


n


Total

Male

Female

Chinese Japanese Koreans


569 664


250


44.0% 54.8 26.0

37.8% 46.4 36.9

62.2% 53.6 63.1


650 756


232


49.7% 63.1 34.1

43.7% 39.4 26.6

56.3% 60.6

73.4


716 764 334


41.2% 60.6 27.6

43.7% 47.3 20.4

56.3% 52.7 79.6


180

JOURNAL OF MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY February 1984


TABLE 2. INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE RATES OF CHINESE, JAPANESE, AND KOREANS FOR 1975, 1977 AND 1979, LOS ANGELES COUNTY


Total


Other Asian Spouse


Group


Marriages (n)


Chinese


Japanese


Koreans