Miscegenation free essay sample

As an African-American child growing up in a single-mother household, in a predominately white neighborhood, it was important to my family that they lay a foundation of cultural pride for me. My mother and grandmother (whom lived with us) were very subtle in providing this education through codes in the form of Afro-American cultural phenomena of their respective eras (from James Brown to Roots the television mini-series starring Alex Haley). The other woman whom I contribute my raising was my Aunt, born, raised, and living in a black neighborhood—whose biggest fear was that I grow up to marry a white woman. She instilled in me a miscegenetic ideology through less subtle means. Her favorite catchphrase was â€Å"if she can’t use your comb, then don’t bring her home. † This poetically prejudice statement is a reference to the different textures of black hair, which has more body (versus other ethnicities—particularly white) and generally requires a bristled brush. We will write a custom essay sample on Miscegenation or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Thus, my aunt was saying that I should only bring home someone with the same physical ethnic features as me (aka a black women). My Mom and aunt were born in the early 60’s in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement. The 60’s were a time when the term â€Å"miscegenation† was on the tip of everyone’s tongue as it was controversially ruled â€Å"unconstitutional† by The Supreme Court in 1967. I wondered if growing up in this era shaped my Mom and Aunt’s view of black and white relations. In that era, was mixed marriage a matter of pride or prejudice? In exploring this question I chose to perform an analysis of trends related to interracial relations and miscegenation (pre-abolishment) through the New York Times. Comparing and contrasting a period of time well before the Civil Rights Movement (1908-1913) and one well within the Civil Rights Movement (1960-1965) provides fascinating insight on the influences and development of race theory in the United States, particularly in the use of racial propaganda, dueling racial paradigms, and the impact of social conditions on the church’s stance. One of the most blaring trends in both eras is the use of propaganda to introduce provocative perspective on mixed race relations. The most popular medium for such perspective was the theatre. In 1913, theatre critic William Winter made headlines for denouncing the â€Å"new theatre† which incorporated such taboo subjects as homosexuality, adultery, and religion. In this article, Winter points out the â€Å"degeneracy† of every current play grappling with what he considers â€Å"vile ideas disguised as dramatic art†, which ends up being quite the lengthy blacklist. Winter saves his most scathing criticisms for the play â€Å"The Nigger† of which he describes as â€Å"crude, pointless, tainted†¦a tissue of impertinent prattle about the terrible subject of miscegenation. Winter becomes most offended by an interracial relationship that he leaves the reader to assume has him all â€Å"hot and bothered. † He describes the relationship as â€Å"the struggle between ‘nigger’ and white woman† and calls it â€Å"one of the most revolting scenes that have been acted on any stage or before any audience. † Ironically, there are no brown people in this play. Winter lashes out at the mere allusion of an interracial relationship. The plot revolves around a Southern aristocrat who is encouraged to run for governor by another political figure. During the aristocrat’s tenure he signs a bill that puts the latter mentioned political figure out of business who then retaliates with allegations that the governor has â€Å"negro ancestry† which forces him to resign and leave his girlfriend, to her devastation. By 1964, theatre was the sole means of propaganda ushered in by World War II and the Cold War. Cultural commentary on interracial romance was no longer subtlety. Gone were the days of allusions of mixed relations among all-white casts. As indicated by journalist Lewis Funke, certain African-American actors and actresses became brown poster-children of cross-cultural popularity. This popularity became a platform for the palatability of anti-miscegenation to both white and Afro-American audiences. Though strides had been made with actors like Sammy Davis Jr. and James Earl Jones, lesser known actors and actresses awoke the sting of reality: the dominant southern white-supremist ideology. Funke uses Paula Wayne as an example, stating that her appearance in â€Å"Golden Boy† â€Å"opposite a negro† hasn’t been â€Å"without percussions† and resulted in hate mail laced with obscene language. Given the strides American theatre made with pieces that questioned the color line of love, it was the silver screen’s turn. Also in 1964, director Larry Peerce created the interracial drama â€Å"One Potato, Two Potato† about a â€Å"negro† who marries a white woman with a white daughter from a previous marriage. This film was celebrated as â€Å"groundbreaking† for daring to depict the â€Å"traumatic effects of interracial marriage† and doing so with â€Å"fine taste†¦and artistry†Ã¢â‚¬â€a little too much taste and artistry. Weiler goes on to scorn the film for being unrealistic, seeming to contrive bigotry through the wife’s first husband coming back to the US from South America for custody of their daughter and succeeds. Though film was a critical tool in promoting anti-miscegenation, it wouldn’t exist without a propaganda movement that was so potent and instrumental that it attracted media attention all over the nation for years. The Cosmopolitan Society of Greater New York was developed in about 1906 under the premise of getting like-minded whites and African-Americans together to discuss solutions to the race problem in the US. In 1908, the society decided to hold a dinner forum for the purposes of â€Å"exchanging ideas on how best to help forward the colored people. The dinner was comprised of African-American and white guests and society members. The forum boasted speeches from scholars to clergymen on the topics of racial equality and interracial marriage. Though a journalist or passionate citizen eventually referenced most of the speeches, it was Hamilton Holt whose words elicited an immediate and overwhelming response. In his speech, Holt spoke of four ways to deal with the race problem in America: extermination, deportation, assimilation, and education. He went on to remark that extermination and deportation were not options, but wasn’t so quick to denounce assimilation. He stated that, â€Å"[intermarriage] if between white men and colored women and not between colored men and white women, would bleach the race. † He went on to claim that he â€Å"rejected it as a proper solution† but he entertained it as a solution nonetheless. Intentional or not, his entertaining of the idea of assimilation became the foundation for national media reaction and the unofficial theme of the entire event. The heated reactions to the dinner forum were just as diverse as the crowed that attended. The first response set the tone and dubbed the forum the â€Å"black and white dinner. † The article compared African-Americans to a contagious disease whose germs surely infected the whites they ate with. Furthermore, the writer viewed the event as a â€Å"socialist† waste of time. Another standout editorial came from Virginia’s Richmond Times-Dispatch calling the event â€Å"folly and degradation of a lot of soft-headed visionaries and socialistic diletantes. Maryland’s Baltimore Sun called the event â€Å"demoralizing and dangerous†¦and compels more serious consideration of the subject [social equality and mixed marriages] than might otherwise be necessary. † The most compelling of the responses came from a perspective different from the typical early 20th century fear of socialism and social order. It was from the perspective of an African-American woman in a letter to the editor. In her letter she expressed her gross opposition to the dinner and the speeches for their promotion of interracial marriage. She viewed interracial marriage as an attack on African-American cultural pride, stating, I consider an insult has been offered to every thinking woman of my race who has the good and betterment of her people at heart†¦I maintain that every true negro wishes not to have a bleached race but to have a race of black and women, who will vindicate their own manhood and womanhood and work out their own salvation Assimilation wasn’t an outrageous view of the time. A few years later, an African-American anthropologist from Clark University in Atlanta, Georgia, made the New York Times for his support of African-American â€Å"bleaching. He found it â€Å"absurd† that so much of society revolves around the â€Å"perpetual segregation of the negro† when humans were meant to evolve into one single human race. He goes on to call biracial people as â€Å"the gift to human civilization. † The anthropologist is a clear example of racial paradigm of the early 20th century viewing race as a scientific construct. The whole concept of the assimilation of the African-American plays into the idea of the US melting pot metaphor used later in globalization propaganda that was popular at the time. The metaphor references the concept that the United States is a fusion of diversity: different nationalities, cultures, and ethnicities. With the fusion of all of these identifiers it creates platform for the scientists to define race by genetics. One author of a New York Times article felt so strongly about the link between science and race that it was suggested that no â€Å"negro† be allowed to marry a white person without a State Eugenics Board Certificate, but only if the non-white party is less than half and â€Å"not less than 1/8 part negro blood. Such complicated measures of defining race by ratios only caused paranoia of accidentally getting involved with someone of another race. One humorous announcement on the front page of the New York Times reinforced that paranoia with a column entitled â€Å"Not Afraid of Negro Taint. † The blurb highlighted the engagement of Blanche Clamorgan, a white woman to a white car dealer, despite her sister being sued for an annulment of her marriage to her husband on the  grounds that she is â€Å"tainted† with â€Å"negro† ancestry. There was strong opposition to the science theory of race. One letter to the editor discredited the Clark University professor claiming a lack of scientific support for the evolution argument and reminds readers that an anthropologist is not a scientist. He also discredited the professor for his lack of experience, claiming that he can’t accurately be an authority for the race problem born and raised â€Å"free† being from Mas sachusetts. He closes his comments indicating the significance of skin tone within defining race, â€Å"the ‘black nigger’ is proud of his color and holds the ‘yellow nigger’ in contempt. †The writer’s opinion becomes more popular by the 1960’s indicating the start of a paradigm shift from race as a scientific construct towards race as a sociological construct. A lot of articles were appearing that highlight the harsh societal realities of skin color. Stories told are founded on the fact that race prospers by the society that perpetuates it, not so much by science. Racial intermarriage laws were a popular example of this in the 60’s, and how some states, such as Florida, focus on cohabitation for fear of by not doing so the state government was promoting â€Å"’negro-white’ intermarriage. † Further support for the developing social construct of race can be seen in the sociological theory that â€Å"white guilt† and â€Å"negro revenge are at the center of interracial problems. These numerous cultural barriers left some African-Americans feeling like colorblind love isn’t worth the hassle. A poll was taken in the mid-1960’s that surveyed 729 African-American families and 839 white families about miscegenation. The poll concluded that no African-American participants would encourage their child to marry white, and even then, only have of them would tolerate it. Though interracial marriage seemed to be on the decline everywhere else, the complete opposite was happening in New York. The New York Times dedicated an entire front page spread to interracial couples whose marriages have stood the test of time. In much of the article, couples spoke about the rise of subtle discrimination from both whites and African-Americans, and how color plays a defining role in their marriages. One couple speaks of the â€Å"theory of skin tone† stating that, â€Å"strangers both ‘negro’ and white almost actively seek a reason not to be prejudiced against interracial couples†¦sometimes†¦there is reason enough if the negro partner’s skin is light or†¦exceedingly well-dressed. † Skin color even becomes a variable when seeking a marriage at the Municipal Building. In order to obtain the license the each couple must identify themselves as a color. The color options are black, brown, yellow, white, and red. One must interestingly note that three months prior to the article written highlighting interracial couples, another one written announcing the US Air Force’s indefinite suspension of an identical color system troops were forced to use to identify spouses prior to deployment. Marriage licenses were also a significant topic of discourse in the early 20th century. One could find several announcements involving interracial couples gaining and being denied marriage licenses between the years of 1908 and 1913. There was one that stood out from May of 1908 involving a â€Å"colored† student from Jamaica and a â€Å"white girl† obtaining a marriage license. It went on to describe how both the groom and bride-to-be were â€Å"devout Catholics. † A Catholic Bishop was asked to make a statement, which included, â€Å"the church had no power to refuse to countenance a marriage between a â€Å"negro† and a white woman. † Unfortunately for many other religions, it isn’t so simple. The idea of shifting religious observances with the ever-turbulent social conditions of the United States can be an uphill battle. Congregations and religious leaders often have to pressure the folks in power, meaning one has to go through a time consuming chain of command before making any progress. The bright side of the latter is that it periodically resulted in clever manifestations of artistic demonstration, like the New Brady play of 1912 about mixed marriage from a Jewish perspective. The uphill battle of religion and interracial marriage remained true in the 1960’s. Though Catholics continued to â€Å"walk the talk† and be examples to other churches and religions, others continued to struggle through politics and due process.