This week marks the 40th anniversary of Loving v. Virginia.
For non-Americans -- and, I don't know, Americans under thirty? -- Loving was the case in which the US Supreme Court decided that individual states could not prohibit interracial marriages.
Mildred Loving is still alive, and made a statement:
When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, DC in 1958, it wasn’t to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love, and we wanted to be married.We didn’t get married in Washington because we wanted to marry there. We did it there because the government wouldn’t allow us to marry back home in Virginia where we grew up, where we met, where we fell in love, and where we wanted to be together and build our family. You see, I am a woman of color and Richard was white, and at that time people believed it was okay to keep us from marrying because of their ideas of who should marry whom.
When Richard and I came back to our home in Virginia, happily married, we had no intention of battling over the law. We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn’t that what marriage is?
Not long after our wedding, we were awakened in the middle of the night in our own bedroom by deputy sheriffs and actually arrested for the “crime” of marrying the wrong kind of person. Our marriage certificate was hanging on the wall above the bed. The state prosecuted Richard and me, and after we were found guilty, the judge declared: “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” He sentenced us to a year in prison, but offered to suspend the sentence if we left our home in Virginia for 25 years exile.
We left, and got a lawyer. Richard and I had to fight, but still were not fighting for a cause. We were fighting for our love.
The Supreme Court's decision also makes for interesting reading.
Virginia is now one of 16 States which prohibit and punish marriages on the basis of racial classifications. The present statutory scheme dates from the adoption of the Racial Integrity Act of 1924... The central features of this Act, and current Virginia law, are the absolute prohibition of a "white person" marrying other than another "white person," a prohibition against issuing marriage licenses until the issuing official is satisfied that the applicants' statements as to their race are correct [and] certificates of "racial composition" to be kept by both local and state registrars...In upholding the constitutionality of these provisions in the decision below, the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia referred to its 1955 decision in Naim v. Naim as stating the reasons supporting the validity of these laws. In Naim, the state court concluded that the State's legitimate purposes were "to preserve the racial integrity of its citizens," and to prevent "the corruption of blood," "a mongrel breed of citizens," and "the obliteration of racial pride"...
Preserve integrity; prevent corruption and the obliteration of pride. Who could disagree? And "certificates of racial composition", so people could be sure.
Anyway. Before Loving, both Carlos and I would have been illegal in Virginia.
Brief googling shows that today about 7% of American marriages are interracial. That's up from less than 1% in 1970 and about 2% as recently as 1990.
Roy Loving died in a car accident in 1975. Mildred Loving doesn't give interviews (last week's statement was a rare exception); for the most part, she lives quietly, enjoying her children and grandchildren.
Posted by douglas at June 18, 2007 08:17 PMOh? What's your "illegality", Doug?
How did these laws interact with Native Americans, btw? That's something that goes back a pretty far. Did they count, as One Of Them Others?
I suspect that there were some native americans in my line and some rampaging mongols in Lyuda's, but the contributions predated the race laws there by a long time, I suspect.
You know, I saw Mrs. Loving's statement, thought about posting something about it, then realized that you probably would, better than I could. And you did.
Posted by: Carlos at June 18, 2007 11:28 PMWill
I believe Doug is an Octoroon, if such a word were still, uh, tasteful.
As for the Native Americans, well, it's a state thing, so it'd vary state by state. Presumably, the core of the 16 were the Old Confederacy, with probably TN, KY, MO thrown in for good measure. I'd guess the last two would be California and someone else. Alabama held onto its law until 2000
The Old Confederacy and its near neighbors would be more concerned with 'black bucks' and white women than anything else, but some of the other states might have something to say about Indians, if at all.
As for you and Lyuda, well, as long as it doesn't register visually, I doubt anyone will care.
I, meanwhile, am banking on Loving for when I move to Virginia with a husband. But I suspect I'm several heart attacks/rampaging deer short of said marker.
Posted by: Luke at June 19, 2007 04:25 AMHey, even _I_ know that story.
The record where "James Muir manumits Eliza and her two sons, Osmond and James Junior", should supposedly be available online, even though at the moment, I'm unable to recover it.
Carlos, of course, is half-Danish (AAARRGGHHH!), but I've eventually managed to bury my prejudices on that count.
(To be fair, not all Danes are fat and lazy chain smokers. Brrrr. Still, I don't think that I could breed with any of them.)
Cheers,
J. J.
Wow, good memory.
It is available online. Just not for free.
For completeness' sake, I should add that I got a detail wrong -- Eliza was James' mother-in-law, not his wife. This stuff gets confusing thanks to the family habit of giving the same names over and over. (Which we're still doing; my son Alan is the grandson and great-grandson of Alans, and I'm the nephew of another Doug.)
A family connection I have yet to tease out: Eliza and her daughter Catherine, James' wife, were named "Wedgwood". Family tradition says they were descended from Josiah Wedgwood.
I am skeptical. There's a gap of two or three generations there; the Wedgwood in question would have been a grandson or great-grandson of Josiah. However, the Wedgwood family tree is very well attested, and I have yet to find a male Wedgwood who would have been in the right place at the right time. So, probably just a legend.
Anyway, key point: two generations back, the Muirs went from being "light skinned blacks" to "dark skinned Scots". This was a deep family secret: my grandmother literally carried it to her grave. We only discovered it when we went through her papers afterward.
Probably deserves a post of its own sometime.
Doug M.
Hey, I'm a quaddane. If family photos are any guide, we're from the lanky, long-faced, dark-haired, melancholic Danish phenotype. Pipe smokers. People made for tweed or heroin chic.
Posted by: Carlos at June 19, 2007 02:34 PMDoug, as a fellow product of miscegenation (somewhere back there), I salute your post! Huzzah!
Posted by: Bernard Guerrero at June 19, 2007 05:07 PMI'm reasonably certain that I know the ethnicities that three of my grandparents would have self-identified as(FN1); I'm hazy on the fourth-- maybe Scotch-Irish, maybe something else.
On the other hand my Lithuanian grandmother and I (and my son) have what a geneticist that I happened to meet called "some vaguely east Asian facial features", so for all I know there's a Mongol in the woodpile or something. I'm also lactose intolerant and I have dry earwax, which if I recall correctly also very vaguely correlate with east Asian ancestry.(FN2) What's the reliability of those services that take a swab from your cheek and then tell you your genetic ancestry?
--
FN1: Full blooded-Irish(FN3), full-blooded German, full-blooded Lithuanian.
FN2: Maybe I was right all along-- the Irish and the Koreans really are the same race.
FN3: Actually, not that simple either-- one of the Irish ancestors got himself on the Schuylkill County, PA Molly Maguires and, as a result of the MMs doing various naughty things to said ancestor, said ancestor disowned the Irish race and thereafter, for several generations, that branch of the family described its heritage as "American" and never as "Irish".
Posted by: Dennis Brennan at June 19, 2007 07:45 PMAt what point in America did the "ick" factor in inter-racial (specifically, black and white) relationships go away? I guess, certainly by the 1990s you've got well-known black celebrities such as Denzel Washington, Michael Jordan and Halle Berry (admittedly, not the best representative example, maybe Naomi Campbell would be better) whom I would guess most white people of the appropriate sexual preference would consider "hot". What was the earliest time that a black entertainer had that kind of cross-racial sex appeal? Dorothy Dandridge? Grace Jones?
Posted by: Dennis Brennan at June 19, 2007 07:57 PMDon't look at me. Anyway, it's generational.
Let me throw out a completely spurious date for the beginning of the transition: when Quentin Tarantino saw his first Pam Grier movie. Call it 1978.
Posted by: Carlos at June 19, 2007 08:42 PMAs for you and Lyuda, well, as long as it doesn't register visually, I doubt anyone will care.
lol. They don't at all. They think Lyuda's Russian [1] and me? They think I'm just another pasty folk and if they care to guess which ancestry, they say German. When I mention the Italian[2] they get a little cross eyed, but...lol.
To me, I couldn't give a damn what they think. I just find the whole roots thing interesting and the historical attitudes to the subject. I think I've noted already what the interesting, if odd for me, POV of Ukrainians on the subject is.
Yah! Outbreeding! ;)
1. She's mostly forgiving, but can get bent out of shape now and again when she's had a bad day.
2. Yes, yes, Noel still pasty folk from your POV.
Posted by: Will Baird at June 19, 2007 08:49 PMGloria Hendry is credited on IMDB as the first black Bond girl (Live and Let Die, 1973), although I guess the first black Bond girl with a really meaningful part in the movie was really Grace Jones (A View to a Kill, 1985).
Posted by: Dennis Brennan at June 19, 2007 08:50 PMDear Dennis: I don't know if the "ick" factor ever went away, actually. I know that, from what I've observed living in Asia Pacific, most white men here would rather date and marry Asian women (language barriers and vast cultural differences notwithstanding) than moi. I think that many white men still consider a black woman to be too "other" to be a (serious) partner - as though we're only good for experimentation and fulfillment of sexual curiousity. The rich and famous, mentioned in your letter, are integrated on the basis of their wealth and beauty, but average women, like myself? I'm still the other.
PS: I am very pleasantly surprised to see this topic regarding "Virginia vs. Loving." Such an important part of our shared history. I'm gald my sister and brother-in-law weren't living in that era - I would have lost a very nice brother-in-law, who is both white and Jewish!
Just finished reading Adam Hoschchild's "Bury The Chains" about the 18th century struggle in Great Britain to end the slave trade. That slavery and official racism persisted until 1958 (and probably later) shows just how much of a slave society America was and how long it took to eradicate it (if it really ever was).
Posted by: Oskar at June 20, 2007 12:13 PMHow did these laws interact with Native Americans, btw? That's something that goes back a pretty far. Did they count, as One Of Them Others?
At least in the case of the law at issue in Loving, there was a statutory exception. Section 20-54 of the Virginia Code provided:
"Intermarriage prohibited; meaning of term 'white persons.' - it shall hereafter be unlawful for any white person in this state to marry any save a white person, or a person with no other admixture of blood than white and american indian. For the purpose of this chapter, the term 'white person' shall apply only to such person as has no trace whatever of any blood other than caucasian; but persons who have one sixteenth or less of the blood of the american indian and have no other non-caucasic blood shall be deemed to be white persons. All laws heretofore passed and now in effect regarding the intermarriage of white and colored persons shall apply to marriages prohibited by this chapter.' Va. Code Ann. Sec. 20-54 (1960 Repl. Vol.)".
Chief Justice Warren noted in his opinion that "The exception for persons with less than one-sixteenth 'of the blood of the American indian' is apparently accounted for, in the words of a tract issued by the registrar of the state bureau of vital statistics, by 'the desire of all to recognize as an integral and honored part of the white race the descendants of John Rolfe and Pocahontas ... .' Plecker, the new family and race improvement, 17 Va. Health Bull., Extra No. 12, at 25-26 (New Family Series No. 5, 1925), cited in Wadlington, the Loving Case: Virginia's Anti-miscegenation statute in Historical Perspective, 52 Va. L. Rev. 1189, 1202, n. 93 (1966)."
In other words, if the exception hadn't been in there, it would implicated half the elite families of Virginia...
In other words, if the exception hadn't been in there, it would implicated half the elite families of Virginia...
I'm more French than Native American, so I think - think! - that Noel's pronouncement I still count as one of the pasty ones stands.
Posted by: Will Baird at June 20, 2007 11:41 PMDear Double L: I don't know where in East Asia you happen to be, but there's probably no small element of selection bias among the expat community. Americans who choose to live in Asia are more likely to feel an affinity with Asian culture and Asian people. Not all of course, but rather more so that those who stay back in the United States.
Brendan was, I believe, referring to sexual intercourse rather than marriage ... I mean, what teenage boy ever fantasized about marrying Vanessa Williams? (I refer to the woman from the Cosby Show and Melrose, of course.)
As for marriage, I can tell you from my own personal experience that I haven't seen anything resembling an ick factor.
Posted by: Noel Maurer at June 21, 2007 12:37 AMIn answer to a question: while there were black people who some white Americans found attractive, maybe for decades, the idea of actual race mixing was problematic to some people well after Loving vs. Virginia; I blogged about it on June 12. And know that there are STILL black AND white people who think it's a bad idea.
Posted by: ROG at June 23, 2007 03:34 AMROG: that's true, there still are people who think it's a bad idea ... but they're more marginal every day. Unless your close friends or relatives fall into that group, their opinions aren't likely to affect your life very much.
"The difference between an ideology and an institution is that an institution affects your life even if you don't believe in it."
Posted by: Noel Maurer at June 23, 2007 07:43 PM