Anti Miscegenation History

The Anti-miscegenation History of the American Southwest focuses on how the dominant group makes laws based on their racial ideologies. According to the author segregation, anti-miscegenation, legislation, and denial of citizenship to many were part of the social policies that illustrate how racial ideology was legalized.
Miscegenation Laws that were laws that prohibited racial groups to marry outside their race. Enforcing miscegenation laws was very complex with Mexican Americans in comparison to other racial groups due to the historical racial formation of being a mixed race. Mexican Americans skin tone varied from white light skinned to Black. Mexican Americans who are black are considered Afromestizo, which is a Mexican with black heritage,
also called Mulattos, or AfroMexicanos. The anti-miscegenation laws were adopted in the U.S. with the purpose of maintaining a pure white race, which was problematic because anti-miscegenation laws were laws that prohibit racial groups to marry outside their race and with those laws in place Mexican Americans sometimes couldn’t marry within their own race. Anti-miscegenation laws stated that a racially mixed person could marry a white person if they had no African ancestors in the last three generations.
Depending on where they are geographically the anti-miscegenation laws varied but what they had in common was that they prohibited the inferior race to marry with the superior race which was problematic because Mexican Americans are a mixed race so there is a very large variation in skin tone from light Mexican Americans with a Spanish ancestry to Mexican Americans with African ancestry. The states attempted to fix this problem by passing anti-miscegenation laws stating that a racially mixed person could marry a white person if they had no African ancestors in the last three generations.
The third way that the dominant group legalized their racial ideology was through the denial of citizenship to many Mexican Americans on the premise that the laws clearly stated that people of African descent were not citizens, although black Mexicans were not slaves they were still considered to be legally black. On the other hand “white Mexicans” were treated better than mestizos, Christianized Indians, and afroMexicans and they continued to benefit from their citizen rights. While, Mexicans of color had many limitations like not being able to vote, hold public office, or practice law. “Not Mexican-American but Mexican”: shifting ethnic self-identifications among children of Mexican Immigrants article’s main finding was that respondents born in the U.S. are more likely to use multiple identity labels like Mexican American or Latino in comparison to the respondents that were born in Mexico. The author conceptualized ethnic identity as numerous aspects like feelings of belonging and being accepted into a group and self-identification. The author states that there are four types of ethnic self-labels, which are national origin, hyphenated identity like Mexican-American, American Identity, pan-ethnic or racial identity.
For Mexican Americans there are several self-labels they can identify as like Mexican, Chicano, Mexican-American, Latino, and Hispanic. How Mexican Americans choose to self-identify depends on cultural differences, life experiences, political climate, education and generation. Cultural differences and experiences of first generation compared to later generations led to sharpened boundaries, for example speaking or not speaking Spanish. Influences whether or not a respondent will self-identify with a national origin label, a hyphenated label, an American Identity, or pan-ethnic or racial identity. There are also generational differences in ethnic self-identification, first generation are more likely to identify with a national origin label like Mexicans and second generation respondents are more likely to identify with a hyphenated label like Mexican-American. First generation respondents are is less likely to change their ethnic self-label compared to second generation. Second generation respondents didn’t have a consistent label. The study showed that there is about 61% of the respondents that changed in how they self-identify as adults compared to when they were adolescents. There is a significant relationship between how adolescents self-identified and how they self-identified as adults. Respondents’, who first just identified as just Americans in eighth grade, shifted their self-identification to Mexican-American, Latino, or Hispanic. It was uncommon among the respondents to shift to an American self-identification as an adult.

Legally White, Socially “Mexican”: Politics De Jure and De Facto School Segregation in the American Southwest article focused on De facto Segregation and De Jure Segregation.
The author conceptualized De facto Segregation as a condition that occurs naturally by fact and is not required by law, and De Jure Segregation as a condition that is imposed by law. The author argues that segregation of the Mexican Americans is de facto segregation because it was the product of custom and local administration and the state government in the southwest never sanctioned it. Experiences of Mexican Americans are very complex. They are categorized as white legally but they don’t necessarily benefit by being categorized as white. Mexican-Americans experience school segregation and inferior schooling despite them identifying as white they continue to be treated as colored and their whiteness is used against them to prove that there are not being
discriminated.
Mexican Americans are not recognized as white because they are a mixed race, mestizos.
The racial categorization for Mexican Americans has changed several times through racial politics from Mexicans to whites in 1848; to citizen but not white in 1897; to Mexican race in 1930; to white in 1940; to separate class from whites in 1954; to an identifiable minority group in 1970. The racialization of Mexican-Americans has been very complex. After the Mexican American War not all Mexicans became citizens, and they were not all treated as whites due to their mestizaje and the wide-ranging variation in skin tone, despite being considered white in a legal sense because they lived in the land that the U.S. had gained from winning the Mexican American War but the whiteness of the Mexican Americans is meaningless because it is not recognized by Anglo Americans in the American Southwest.
The author of Negotiating ethnic boundaries examines the ethnic identity of the offspring of intermarriages because intermarriage with the dominant group is a good indicator of assimilation and how the boundaries soften between the immigrant group in the host society. The author utilized three different approaches the first approach to multiethnic Mexican Americans is a symbolic identity. Where the respondent has allegiance to the culture of the immigrant generation. A love and pride in a tradition that doesn’t have to be incorporated in everyday
behavior.
The second approach is a strong liking for Mexican American ethnicity. The Multiethnic Mexican Americans tend to choose a Mexican-American ethnic identity more than white. Families help create that sense of closeness with the respondents Mexican background.
The third approach is a multiethnic approach, which is the multiethnic narrative that is characterized by the common experience of not fitting the established categories. For some multiethnic narrative respondents don’t feel entirely Mexican. Peers reinforce Mexican American ethnicity and boundaries by making the respondents aware of the boundaries between ethnic categories by pointing to their mixed ethnic background and their lack of characteristics. Families help create that sense of closeness to with the respondents Mexican background but extended family members point out to them that they lack some physical characteristics associated with being Mexican. Boundaries become apparent when respondents must make choices about their identity when interacting with non-Mexican Americans due to sharp boundaries between ethnic categories that complicate respondents’ identity choices. As respondents choose their identities they have to confront sharp ethnic boundaries.
Respondents that have a multiethnic background allows them to claim the benefits that come with identifying as a Mexican American without being discriminated like people of Mexican descent encounter. Respondents believe that their multiple identities helps them fit in with different ethnic groups despite the boundaries that they often encounter.