Colorblind, Christian Courtship (pt. 1 of 2)
I try and write about seasonal things when I can. We had MLK day last month. And this month, we have Black History month and Valentine’s Day. So, I thought I would do a series on interracial dating, specifically in the church. But you know me, I like alliteration… so, I call it Colorblind, Christian Courtship. Honestly, I think it’s long overdue. In general, being a follower of ANY religion provides opportunities to marry other people of all racial backgrounds from that faith tradition. That’s true, but churches in America don’t really have a good track record of race relations (i.e. slavery, White Supremacy, Segregation, etc.), and I fear they’re misinterpreting what interracial relationships in their congregations mean, assuming they mean anything at all (I concede they may not).
In my experience, most churches that have some level of racial diversity are quite proud of it. Indeed, in light of the fact that most American churches are fairly [racially] homogenous, it IS quite the accomplishment to break that trend on some level. To leaders in these congregations, interracial marriages and romantic relationships are resounding proof that racism is an artifact of the past (Woah, wait a minute, buddy!). If it manifests in the present, it manifests outside the walls of the church. Within the church, on the other hand, God’s people can exist in a colorblind utopia where ethnic/racial background is of very little importance. Race/Ethnicity doesn’t influence how we see or treat each other, and it doesn’t really influence how Christians see, engage, or participate in the world at large.
In general, this represents a colorblind diversity ideology, and I talk elsewhere, here, here, and here, about how that undermines the inclusion goals that most churches say they’re committed to.
But I’ll get to my thesis.
I’m concerned this colorblind ideology contributes to some grossly distorted ideas of what interracial relationships may signal in congregations. Admittedly, we can boil this down to an ignorance of the topic of race relations. I think people, myself included, misinterpret things when they’re not thinking deeply and critically about it. To be sure, I don’t think these individuals have malicious intentions, per se… at least not most of them. I just think people aren’t being particularly thoughtful, and in this case, I think it may lead to sweeping conclusions that aren’t really warranted based on the pattern of interracial dating (assuming there is one).
Fortunately though, we have science to help us figure all this out. We’ll need a few different areas of research. From the dating perspective, we’ll need some of the work in the psychology of intimate relationships (sociologists and economists also study assortative mating, but I’ll lean primarily on psych work on dating). Importantly though, to understand interracial dating, we’ll also need to leverage the research in social psychology on race relations. Personally, I find it a little bit strange that the psych research on race relations has progressed pretty independently of the research on dating, but that probably speaks to the notion that most people see these as separate topics when, in fact, they’re related in important ways.
There’s been a unique framework that’s been emerging to study Race by Sex identities in the field of psychology: gendered race. The theory goes a little something like this. It’s no surprise that there are stereotypes associated with racial identities. There’s also no surprise that there are stereotypes associated with gender identities. But gendered race as a framework makes the unique point that race-related stereotype content isn’t gender neutral. For instance, Black Americans are stereotyped as being loud, aggressive, physically imposing, dominant, and even dangerous. If you notice though, the traits I listed are viewed by society as more appropriate and common for men (vs. women).
In other words, Black Americans have MASCULINE stereotype content.
Similarly, Asian Americans are usually stereotyped as being submissive, quiet, and small/weak. Again, you may notice that these traits are viewed by society as more appropriate and common for women (vs. men).
In other words, Asian Americans have FEMININE stereotype content.
Remember: we’re talking about stereotypes. I never said Black Americans are more masculine than other Americans or Asian Americans are more feminine than other Americans. These are stereotypes. Stereotypes are exaggerated beliefs about a particular group of people, whether positive or negative. And in the case of Black (Asian) Americans, the content of this stereotype tends to be mostly masculine (feminine).
In case you’re wondering, there’s a huge piece on culture, too, that I don’t have time to get into, but it’s true that some cultures may be viewed as more masculine vs. feminine as well, and that has implications for gendered race, too.
In short though, based on the theory of gendered race, both gender and race play an important role in how we perceive people and the level of femininity and masculinity that we ascribe to them. It’s hardly a novel concept for most people that gender influences how feminine/masculine that we’re perceived to be, but in the mid 90’s or so, most social scientists were surprised to hear that race played an important role in this process, too.
Specifically, for MEN, the research in gendered race shows the following:
Black men are perceived as extremely masculine, because they’re MEN, and the stereotype content for being Black is masculine.
Asian American men are perceived as extremely unmasculine (read feminine), because they’re MEN, but the stereotype content for being Asian is feminine.
White men, generally, fall in the middle… they’re perceived as more masculine than Asian men but less masculine than Black men.
The research findings also show the corollary for women:
Asian women are perceived as extremely feminine, because they’re WOMEN, and the stereotype content for being Asian is feminine.
Black women are viewed as extremely unfeminine (read masculine), because they’re WOMEN, but the stereotype content for being Black is masculine.
White women, generally, fall in the middle… they’re viewed as more feminine than Black women but less feminine than Asian women.
Unfortunately, the gendered race literature hasn’t investigated other racial groups, albeit I have some thoughts on what this may mean in other contexts (i.e. Hispanic Americans).
But if you’re particularly astute on this topic, then you’re probably already making some downstream connections: If heterosexual men (women) prefer a feminine (masculine) partner, does gendered race influence interracial dating? And the answer is a resounding YES. Although to the best of my knowledge this hasn’t been tested among non-White Americans, the theory has been used to investigate interracial dating among White Americans. Specifically, the researchers found that White men were significantly more likely to date an Asian woman than a Black woman, and White women were significantly more likely to date a Black man than an Asian man.
To be sure, this wasn’t simply a matter of correlation. They followed by investigating the mechanism (i.e. what explains the pattern found).
The researchers found that “preference for masculinity” drove their results. Specifically, White men with a lower preference for masculinity (read higher femininity) in their partners adjusted their dating related behavior accordingly. White women did the same: those who preferred more masculine partners adjusted their dating behavior.
So, one implication of that evidence is, YES, interracial dating IS on the rise… but there’s also evidence that stereotypes still play a particularly important role in interracial dating.
To me, that’s probably one of the more compelling pieces of evidence, although there’s certainly other evidence, collectively, that suggests more of the same. I’ll preface this by saying that what follows represents a synthesis of a larger body of evidence across different programs of research in different fields.
For the last 200+ years, sociologists have been studying various forms of structural inequality. That’s kind of what you do if you’re a sociologist… you study inequality… that’s, like, 40% of the field.
You may study it in healthcare.
Or you might study it in education.
Or you might study it in policy.
Or you might study it in organizations, or finance, or neighborhoods, or whatever… inequality is a very important topic in sociology. You care about the outcomes of inequality… but you also care about the antecedents of inequality. What things PREDICT inequality?
Consequentially, one of the things sociologists have argued is this notion of racial hierarchy. In other words, at this point, it’s not a revolutionary idea that America tends to be White-centric, favoring things that are White over things that are non-White. This has been demonstrated numerous times across different fields in the social sciences. But many sociologists believe there’s an added layer to that: there’s a racial hierarchy. Not all racial/ethnic groups in society are viewed positively (or positively at all, really). I think that’s certainly implied with language surrounding Asian immigrants as the “model minority”. Asian Americans are viewed as hard working, industrious, great at math and science, and having generally high aptitude (again, remember, these are stereotypes, albeit these are “positive” stereotypes rather than “negative” ones). Many Americans have similar thoughts about Jews as well.
Sociologists believe that this racial hierarchy contributes to stratification in American society. In general, White Americans (and other White passing racial minorities) are at the top, followed by Asian Americans, followed by Hispanic Americans, and Black Americans at the very bottom (I realize there are other racial/ethnic groups, but I want to stay true to the research in this area).
The question is, “If I’ve received implicit signals over the course of a 20, 30, or even 40-year lifetime that people of various racial/ethnic groups vary in their social standing, does it influence who I’m attracted to and who I’m most interested in dating?”
I think social scientists, across various fields of study, would answer with a resounding, “YES.”
Lots of American Christians though seem convinced otherwise. I think, for the most part, they’re well intended… but I also think the confidence is grossly misguided.
That’s like if I tell a woman, “I know sexism is real, and it’s played a big role throughout history, but it doesn’t influence ANY of MY attitudes or behaviors in any way, shape, or form.”
I don’t know for sure, but I can’t help but imagine a lot of women would find my overconfidence a bit concerning… like, if I’m that confident that sexism doesn’t affect my behavior in any way, shape, or form, it’s almost like that’s an indication that I’m not all that read on the topic… because anybody who’s well informed on the topic, even women, will tell you the effects are really wide spread and you literally spend a lifetime trying to unpack it… you think one thing about women, but everyday, you’re confronted with a really different reality in society… so, you can DESIRE to be equitable but still find yourself falling prey to various biases.
That’s how I tend to feel about people who are convinced that race, ethnicity, etc., doesn’t influence who they’re attracted to or pursue romantic relationships with in any way, shape, or form: Even if you are well read, if you honestly believe something as complex as how you see the world and people in it isn’t shaped or influenced by external forces as powerful as White supremacy, colorism, discrimination, prejudice, etc., then I can’t help but feel there’s still a big disconnect.
I want to be clear: I’m not here to beat up on other people. I’ve had my own journey with this, and it’s an ongoing process.
Elsewhere, you may recall me describing how, as a Nigerian immigrant, I was strongly encouraged throughout my youth to date and marry a Nigerian woman… if not a Nigerian woman, at least an African woman, they would say. That had some important downstream consequences.
The first big consequence was I was actually pretty put off from the idea of dating a Nigerian or African woman (this was several years ago; I’ve come around since). I don’t like feeling controlled. I don’t like feeling like my decisions are being made by others. The more I felt expected and encouraged to date a Nigerian (or African) woman, the more resistant I became to the idea.
For me, this rejection was an act of rebellion. So, based on that rebellion, you may have seen me in an interracial relationship and assumed I’m this progressive, multicultural person, but in actuality, I was just rebelling against this expectation to have an African partner.
But it gets really deep really quick.
You may also recall me talking about my journey with my heritage and culture over the course of my life. I grew up hating being Nigerian. I was teased all the time about my name. I was teased about my accent (or lack thereof). I was teased about food, culture, and literally anything and everything else, because I was African.
So, you may think that this mistreatment would have driven me to want to be with an African woman… I mean, surely an African woman would understand me, right? Ironically, it had the opposite effect. I had such a disdain for my culture, I actually wanted to distance myself from it as much as I could. Not surprisingly, that influenced who I saw myself marrying down the road.
I, literally, hated where I came from.
Why would I permanently hitch myself to a culture that’s done nothing but gotten me teased and ridiculed, I thought to myself. What I ACTUALLY need to do is ASSIMILATE.
Coincidentally, this is consistent with research in psychology on intergroup relations. This is a body of work that studies prejudice and discrimination, and one of the arguments that they make is that many racial minorities elect to assimilate to avoid being “othered” in society. By assimilate, I simply mean they suppress their racial/ethnic identity to draw less attention to themselves and be accepted by the dominant group, White Americans.
So, in my case, that meant that all I had to do is (1) marry a White woman or (2) marry a racial minority that had better social standing than an African woman (an Asian woman, for instance).
Again, although this hasn’t been studied in the context of romantic relationships, my impressions as I discuss with my friends who are 1st generation immigrants generally support the idea.
It seems that a lot of immigrant parents expect their children to either (1) marry someone from their own culture, or (2) to marry someone White. The former is generally preferred, and it ensures that your children will always remember where they come from. The latter, however, seems to be an implication of racial hierarchy. It’s really strange, but for a lot of immigrant parents in their 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, etc., it’s almost like the tell-tale sign of being a true American is if your son or daughter marries someone White. Admittedly, as an immigrant, that’s one of your biggest dreams: You want to be accepted by White people. You want their approval. You want their respect. You want them to view you as a peer. You want them to see you as one of their own, rather than being seen as a “foreigner”.
All of these are consistent with the argument on assimilation. It also means that interracial relationships don’t emerge purely at random, especially if there are influences in the background that have been implicitly, or explicitly, shaping who we should be with throughout our past (and perhaps present).
But it’s interesting though, because not only was I encouraged to date women of a particular racial/ethnic background when I was young, but I was also actively discouraged from dating women of particular racial/ethnic backgrounds.
I’ll be honest with you: I grew up in a household that had some anti-Black sentiment. Straight up.
I don’t think that’ll come as a shock to any Black people, but I’m sure that’ll come as a shock to a lot of White people (and maybe some non-Black people, too). For a lot of you, Black Panther was your first inside look at the Black community. Although I could say much here about the film and how it pertains to anti-Black sentiment, I’ll sum it up with the following: African and Caribbean people know where they come from, and because Black Americans don’t, many in the former groups frown on those in the latter group. It’s complex, and wrong, and I’m oversimplifying it, but I’d be lying if I told you I didn’t have some anti-Black sentiment in my household growing up.
I did.
If you’re going to date someone who’s not African, you at least need to date someone with culture, they would say. They also mentioned some other things about Black people that I’m not going to put here. The implication was quite simple: don’t date Black women. It was both implicit and explicit, and it was quite vivid. I’m a grown man and I still remember.
If I experienced all of this in a Nigerian household, I know for a fact it happens in other households. Looking back on it, it definitely makes me sad.
As I came into my adulthood and I formed my own opinions about the person I wanted to be and how I wanted to view/treat people, I had to unpack a lot of anti-Black sentiment. And this is coming from someone who grew up in a mostly Black town and had mostly Black friends… you can be friends with someone and still see them as less then. That’s a whole different conversation, and I don’t even have time to get into that.
What’s most interesting about ALL of this is I’ve had a lot of things throughout my youth that would have spurred me to pursue interracial relationships, FOR ALL OF THE WRONG REASONS. And it’s interesting, because all of these ministers could use me as an example of how progressive their ministry is, or how I’m a great example of how to be “colorblind” when dating, and all this other stuff… and they may never stop for a second and ask the most obvious question: is interracial dating a good measure of the racial climate, or racial inclusivity, of a church congregation?
I think most social scientists, and even lots of people who aren’t social scientists, would answer that question with a resounding, “NO.”
For whatever reason though, lots of ministers haven’t gotten the memo.
Perhaps one of the most strange, unusual, and dare I say perverted aspects of all of this is what I describe next. Maybe this is just my general impression, but I feel like there’s this notion in the church that we need these people in interracial relationships to lead our diversity and inclusion efforts. Because these are people who “see both sides”. These are the people who have “conquered” their racial biases, or have at least made substantial progress in doing so. Never mind everything that I just shared indicating that people may end up in interracial relationships for LOTS of different reasons, including but not limited to White supremacy, stereotypes, prejudice, self-hate, rebellion, etc.
Again, I feel like this is a very ignorant pattern of thinking. And I feel like it’s particularly dangerous considering that the people who identify most strongly with their racial or ethnic group tend not to be the people who end up in interracial relationships anyway. In other words, you may be getting a subset of racial minorities that are in interracial relationships and don’t identify with all the lived experiences of their peers who ended up dating someone of the same racial background.
Again, I think using people in interracial relationships to champion D&I efforts is a bad idea for lots of different reasons.
There are so many other things on this topic that I’d like to mention that I clearly don’t have time/space for here.
I didn’t mention anything on colorism, but one of the artifacts of White supremacy is that lighter complexion skin is perceived as more attractive than darker complexion skin. This is a GLOBAL phenomenon, and realistically, it means lighter complexion people have more opportunities for interracial dating (and dating in general) than darker complexion people. Moreover, although colorism is a global phenomenon that effects both men and women, it disadvantages women more than it does men.
I also didn’t say anything about how people can fetishize and romanticize interracial dating, like it’s a popular restaurant and the entire world needs to know that you’ve been (or want to go). Again, I think people can step into this with some weird motives… I also think people can use interracial dating as a means of virtue signaling, but that’s a whole different conversation.
I also didn’t talk about how America generally celebrates culture, but Black culture is stigmatized and devalued because of racial hierarchy and anti-Black sentiment. Hair is viewed negatively. Speech is viewed negatively. Even being into Black culture can be viewed negatively. Again, this has downstream consequences for interracial dating, especially if you identify strongly as a Black man or woman, disciple or otherwise.
There is A LOT to unpack, and this is really just grazing the surface. To be clear, I don’t have any qualms with anyone who’s in interracial relationships. That’s awesome. I’m happy for you. Seriously.
My entire point with this piece was simply as follows: interracial relationships in a church aren’t really a great measure of inclusivity, racial equity, diversity climate, etc. I literally cringe when I see it being used as such. We gotta stop that, for real for real.
Your friendly neighborhood scientist,
Nnamdi