02. Negotiating Ethnic Boundaries

8/12/2019 02. Negotiating Ethnic Boundaries

1/24

http://etn.sagepub.com

Ethnicities

DOI: 10.1177/14687968040403292004; 4; 75Ethnicities

TomS R. Jim...nezEthnic Identity in the United States

Negotiating Ethnic Boundaries: Multiethnic Mexican Americans and

http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/1/75 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:EthnicitiesAdditional services and information for

http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://etn.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/4/1/75SAG E Journals Online and HighWire Press platfor ms):

(this article cites 11 articles hosted on theCitations

2004 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. by Serban Vaetisi on November 28, 2007http://etn.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://etn.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://etn.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://etn.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/4/1/75http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/4/1/75http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/4/1/75http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://etn.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts


2/24

Negotiating ethnic boundariesMultiethnic Mexican Americans and ethnic identity in theUnited States

TOMS R. JIMNEZHarvard University,USA

ABSTRACT This article examines the ethnic identity of the offspring of Mexican/white (non-Hispanic) intermarriages, or multiethnic Mexican Americans,using 20 in-depth interviews with multiethnic Mexican Americans in California.Interviews indicate that respondents gravitate toward a Mexican American ethnicidentity since it is the most salient ethnicity in their social environment. But asrespondents choose their identities, they confront ethnic boundaries, or sharpdivision between ethnic categories, that inuence the extent to which they feel freeto assert any one particular identity. They respond to these boundaries by taking asymbolic approach, a Mexican American approach, a multiethnic approach to theirethnicity, and a combination of these approaches.

KEYWORDS assimilation identity construction intermarriage multi-ethnicity

INTRODUCTION

The Mexican-origin population constitutes the second largest minoritygroup in the United States. The 2000 US Census counted 20,640,711 peopleof Mexican origin living in the USA, comprising 7.3 percent of the total USpopulation. Counted in this population is a large number of people whotrace their ethnic roots to multiple origins, Mexico being just one of them.These individuals are the offspring of one Mexican-descent parent and onenon-Mexican descent parent. Yet we know little about how the offspring of this population identies when they are not forced to make mutuallyexclusive choices because Census gures provide no information on how

A R T I C L E

Copyright 2004 SAGE Publications (London,Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi) 1468-7968Vol 4(1):7597;040329DOI:10.117/1468796804040329www.sagepublications.com

http://www.sagepublications.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://www.sagepublications.com/


3/24

76

the children of these unions identify. The identity choices that children of these intermarriages make have implications for how we think about raceand ethnicity in the US and for how we understand the inuence thatexogamy has on the assimilation of the Mexican-origin population (Alonsoand Waters, 1993).

This article examines the identity of multiethnic Mexican Americans the offspring of intermarriages between one white-non-Hispanic parentand one Mexican parent living in California. According to the US racialand ethnic classication system, people of Hispanic origin (Mexicans,Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Central and South Americans, and Spanish) can beof any race, including white. Thus, a person who is white-non-Hispanic isracially white, but not Hispanic, according to this system. For simplicity I

use the term white for white non-Hispanic.While research focuses on various dimensions of assimilation for theMexican-origin population, such as education (Bean et al., 1994; Ortiz 1996;Rumbaut and Portes, 2001), politics (de la Garza and DeSipio, 1998;Skerry, 1993), and residential/spatial (Massey and Denton, 1992), much lessattention has been paid to Mexican intermarriage (Murgua, 1982) andvirtually no scholarly attention centers on the identity choices of the multi-ethnic Mexican American population.

This research provides insight into the lives of this population by explor-

ing how 20 multiethnic Mexican Americans choose identities, and theconsequences associated with their choices. I nd that multiethnic MexicanAmericans gravitate toward a Mexican American identity because it is themost readily available ethnic identity in their social environment. However,when multiethnic Mexican Americans assert a Mexican American identity,they confront ethnic boundaries, or a sharp division between ethniccategories, that inuence the extent to which they feel free to assert anyone particular identity. I use Cornells (2000) conceptualization of ethnic-ity as a narrative to understand how encounters with ethnic boundariesshape multiethnic Mexican Americans ethnic identity. These encountersremind multiethnic Mexican Americans of the ways that their own narra-tive both departs from, and overlaps with, the Mexican American narra-tive. These experiences lead multiethnic Mexican Americans to take asymbolic approach, a Mexican American approach, a multiethnicapproach, or to combine approaches in forming their ethnic identity.

THEORIZING MULTIETHNICITY

Much of the research on multiethnicity in the USA is situated within abroader debate on immigrant-group assimilation. Linear conceptions of assimilation view intermarriage with the dominant group as the greatest

ETHNICITIES 4(1)

http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/http://etn.sagepub.com/


4/24

77

indicator of assimilation into the core structures of a society and theoffspring of these intermarriages represent the fading of distinctionsbetween the immigrant group and the dominant group in the host society(Gordon, 1964). In the USA, large-scale intermarriage among people of European descent has led to a symbolic form of ethnic identity that ischaracterized by a nostalgic allegiance to the culture of the immigrantgeneration, or that of the old country; a love for and pride in a traditionthat can be felt without having to be incorporated in everyday behavior(Gans, 1979: 9). Descendents of European immigrants may invoke one of their many strands of ethnic lineage as a matter of choice and these choicescarry few consequences (Waters, 1990). For example, someone who is of Italian and Irish descent might invoke their Irish identity only on St

Patricks Day and their Italian identity when they eat Italian cuisine, butchoose not to make either of these identities a central part of everyday life.In addition to intermarriage, the disappearance of large ethnically concen-trated communities and the lack of any subsequent large waves of European immigrants diminishes opportunities to celebrate these identitiesand reduces ethnic identity to its symbolic form (Alba, 1990).

A second line of research on multiethnicity departs from a focus onethnic identity as a dimension of assimilation and centers on how multi-ethnics choose their identities when confronted with mutually exclusive

identity choices. Much of this research examines psychological aspects of multiethnicity, focusing on the individual identity choices that multiethnicsand multiracials make. This literature argues for the creation of a socialspace in which multiethnic and multiracial individuals are socially and insti-tutionally recognized (Root, 1992, 1996).

Other research examines the cultural and regional context in which indi-viduals live as determinants of identity choice. Multiethnic individuals wholive in regions where there is a large number of multiethnic individuals,such as the US state of Hawaii, have a rich and commonly used vocabularyfor identifying persons of multiple ethnic backgrounds, and are thus morelikely to identify themselves as multiethnic (Stephan and Stephan, 1989).In these regions, multiethnics are accepted as full-edged members of eachof the individual ethnic groups to which they belong, regardless of whatthose other groups are (Davis, 1995; Spickard and Fong, 1995). In contrast,those who live in regions where unmixed groups predominate more oftenchoose a single ethnic identity because there is no ready-made language fordescribing their ethnic hybridity (Harris and Sim, 2002; Stephan andStephan, 1989). Furthermore, the exposure that multiethnics have to aparticular aspect of their ethnic identity inuences identity choice, as multi-ethnics feel more attached when they have more cultural exposure to thisaspect (i.e. food, holidays, music, lifestyle, and family) and less attachedwhen they have negative experiences with cultural exposure or whencultural exposure is limited (Stephan, 1991).

JIMNEZ NEGOTIATING ETHNIC BOUNDARIES



5/24

78

Students of multiethnicity and multiraciality have also focused on theexperiences of various multiethnic mixes, showing that the unique combi-nation of ethnic and racial groups to which individuals trace their ethnicbackgrounds shapes the experiences and identity choices of these indi-viduals in profound ways (Iijima Hall and Cooke Turner, 2001; Thortonand Gates, 2001). Harris and Sim (2002) nd that the patterns of classi-cation among multiracials vary depending on the distinct groups to whichindividuals belong. Whereas White/Indian youth are least likely to choosea multiracial category, White/Black youth are the most committed tochoosing multiple categories in various setting.

So too does the particular combination of white and Mexican shape theethnic identity of multiethnic Mexican Americans. Like European groups,

the Mexican-origin population has experienced high rates of intermarriage.Thus, the existence of multiethnic Mexican Americans may be consideredevidence of structural assimilation and, based on the European case, onemight predict the emergence of a symbolic form of Mexican ethnicityamong this population. However, high rates of European-origin intermar-riage took place after the end of large-scale European immigration, whichvirtually came to a halt after the Great Depression. In contrast, Mexicanimmigration and large-scale Mexican/white intermarriage are simultaneousprocesses. Despite high rates of Mexican intermarriage, Mexican ethnicity

remains a vivid part of the USs racial and ethnic landscape becausecontinued large waves of immigration from Mexico refresh it. Mexicanclubs, organizations, and neighborhoods are prevalent throughout the USAand Mexican cultural customs remain visible and are integral to the dailylives of many Mexicans in the USA. Thus, multiethnic Mexican Americanschoose identities against a social backdrop where part of their ethnicancestry remains vivid.

We know very little about the identities of multiethnic Mexican Ameri-cans. How do multiethnic Mexican Americans identify themselves? Whatare the factors that inuence the choices that they make? What are themechanisms and symbolic forms that multiethnic Mexican Americans usein asserting their ethnic identity? Finally, what implications do these ethnicchoices have for the future of Mexican ethnicity among multiethnicMexican Americans, for racial and ethnic stratication, and for howresearchers think about ethnic categories?

DATA AND METHO DS

Data for this paper come from 20 in-depth interviews 1 that I conducted inthe summer and winter of 1999 with individuals who have one white parentand one parent who is entirely of Mexican origin. I interviewed respondents

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



6/24

79

with this mixture of backgrounds (as opposed to, for instance, AfricanAmerican/Mexican American, or Korean American/Mexican American)because I am interested in how they choose identities and the consequencesassociated with these choices when part of their ethnic background is a vividcomponent of the larger racial and ethnic landscape and when the otherpart is not. Furthermore, white/Mexican intermarriage is the most commonintermarriage combination for Mexicans and there is a large populationthat is the offspring of these unions. All of the respondents live in SantaClara County (also known as the Silicon Valley/San Jos Area), located inthe southern portion of the San Francisco Bay Area. Santa Clara County isa sprawling metropolitan area with a total population of 1,700,976, of which24 percent was Hispanic in 1999 (State of California, Department of

Finance, 2003). I chose a single geographic location to ensure respondentsnegotiate the same general social environment. I also chose Santa ClaraCounty because it closely approximates the California state average forinterethnic/interracial births. In 1997, 14 percent of all births in Californiawere multiethnic/multiracial, compared to 15 percent in Santa ClaraCounty in the same year (Tafoya, 2000). I obtained respondents usingthe snowball sampling technique. After each interview I asked the respon-dent to identify other potential respondents. Snowball sampling is anefcient way to obtain respondents from a specic group. While there is

a risk of sample-selection bias, I made efforts to minimize any such biasby using several difference snowballs. The range of responses to my inter-view questions makes me condent that my sample did not fall prey to thisbias.

Interviews lasted between 45 and 120 minutes and were conducted in aplace of the respondents choosing, normally their home. I interviewed allrespondents once, except for two people with whom I conducted follow-upinterviews. I tape-recorded all interviews, transcribed them, and analyzedthem using ATLASti, a computer software package that allows users toattach coding categories to relevant parts of the transcripts and to comparesimilarly coded portions of text across interviews. I built my analysis basedon relationships between a set of themes that emerged from the coded text.Most of the people I interviewed fall between the ages of 20 and 30, andnone of the respondents were younger than 19 or older than 41.

Claims made in this paper should be treated as testable theoretical asser-tions and not as generalizable empirical statements. The respondents areprimarily middle class and most are college educated, which may limit theextent to which this research is generalizable to other populations. Themiddle-class status of my respondents may be an artifact of the very classmobility that often facilitates ethnic intermarriage in the rst place(Kalmijn, 1998). However, class and education should be tested as predic-tors of ethnic attachment among multiethnic Mexican Americans usinglarger, representative samples, such as the 2000 US Census.




7/24

80

CHECKING BOXES, CHOOSING IDENTITIES

Perhaps the most explicit way that multiethnic Mexican Americans chooseidentities is when lling out forms that require them to check a box thatindicates their background, such as a job or school application. I began eachin-depth interview by asking the respondent to state how they wouldidentify themselves on such forms. Respondents said that they are confusedwhen lling out forms because the given categories do not match their ownspecic ethnic background. Despite the perceived inadequacy of the givencategories, 14 of the 20 respondents said that they would check a box thatwould identify themselves as Mexican, Mexican American, or Hispanic.Some choose a Mexican/Mexican American/Hispanic label because theirnon-Mexican ancestry is so mixed that when it comes to percentages, [theMexican American background is] the biggest part (25-year-old male of Mexican and mixed European ancestry). Others who reported themselvesas Mexican/Mexican American/Hispanic do so even when they have nocognitive rule on which to rely when identifying themselves.

The reasoning that these respondents give for choosing a single categoryon forms points to the importance of ethnic markers, such as skin-color andsurname, in choosing identity categories. One respondent of Mexican andIrish ancestry chooses a white identity because he believes that he looksmore Caucasian. Another said that he chooses a white label because hisfather is white and he was told that he should choose his fathers identitywhen he is asked to make a choice. Still another respondent relies on hisSpanish surname when choosing an identity category, opting to simplify hisethnicity to Mexican American because he believes that his Spanishsurname identied him as such.

Other respondents did not like the limitation of choosing a singleidentity category and said that they would choose the other category orthat they would check all of the boxes that represent their ethnic back-

ground. The comments of a 26-year-old female of Mexican and Irishancestry typify the sentiments of these respondents:

If it only says check one, I pick other because there isnt one that says Mexicanand Irish or Mexican American. Its always Hispanic. Or they have [a] milliondifferent terms for Mexican and then black or whatever. But theres never onethat says half this and half that.

By choosing other or checking multiple boxes (i.e. white and Mexican),multiethnic Mexican Americans attempt to manipulate the mutuallyexclusive categories in order to more accurately represent their ethnic back-ground.

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



8/24

81

CHOOSING IDENTITIES IN DAILY LIFE

Just as respondents must make choices when lling out forms, they mustalso select from readily available identities in interactive settings. Multi-ethnic Mexican Americans gravitate toward a Mexican American ethnicidentity more than they do a white identity as they choose identities in theirdaily lives. The strong presence of Mexican Americans and continual inuxof Mexican immigrants maintain and refresh Mexican culture, customs, andpractices in California, making Mexican American ethnicity the most avail-able ethnic option. As a 24-year-old woman of Mexican and Canadiandescent put it:

[L]iving here where I do, and its really a Mexican-like [city]. This town has alot of Mexican culture surrounding it, and you dont see shops ying Canadianags, yknow. Ive just had a lot more contact with my Mexican culture.

Respondents mentioned more specic avenues through which a MexicanAmerican ethnicity is made available to them, including school settings,travel to Mexico, and extended family. Schools facilitate exposure toMexican and Mexican American ethnicity by supporting Mexican andMexican American cultural customs through courses offered on MexicanAmerican history and culture, school-sponsored clubs and organizations,

and school-sponsored holiday celebrations (i.e. C inco de Mayo ). Schoolsalso provide a place where multiethnic Mexican Americans form friend-ships and social networks with Mexicans and Mexican Americans, as anumber of respondents reported that Mexican and Mexican Americanpeers and dating partners, in both high school and college, led them toidentify more strongly with their Mexican American background.

Travel to Mexico is another way that respondents are exposed to theirMexican origins, lending further strength to their preference for a MexicanAmerican identity. The close proximity of Mexico to the US makes travel

to Mexico relatively easy and a number of respondents have taken trips toMexico to study, for vacation, or to visit family.Likewise, the family plays a key role in reinforcing the importance of

Mexican American ethnicity in respondents lives. Having large and closeknit families both immediate and extended leads them to gravitatetoward their Mexican American ethnicity more than those who did nothave large or close knit families. They reported that frequent interactionwith Mexican American extended family members gives them a sense of family history and exposure to aspects of Mexican and Mexican Americancustoms and culture. Other respondents mentioned that the quality of interactions with their Mexican American side of their family ascompared to their non-Mexican American side of the family inuencesthem to have a stronger attachment to their Mexican background. Theynoted that gatherings and interactions with their non-Mexican side of the




9/24


10/24

83

exchange with a 24-year-old male of Mexican (mothers side) and mixed-European (fathers side) ancestry illustrates:

Q: Would you say that your fathers ethnic background is important to you?R: No. I would say that its important, but I dont understand why I would say

that because I dont know what it is. I could say that its white, cause it iswhite. But there are people who can go, Oh, Im one thirteenth Portuguese,one fourteenth Scotch-Irish. We dont know. The fty percent thatsMexican, I know what that is. Its from Jalisco and its from over here andthere. We know Michoacan I think is the other one And its all Mexican,no matter where it is. But the American side of the family, we dont knowwhat it is. Im part Native American. Im part this and Im part that . . . Butits an insignicant portion of the pie. And there aint nobody around toexplain.

The weak attachment that respondents express for their non-Mexicanbackground mirrors the ndings of research on later generation EuropeanAmericans, for whom the ethnicity of their immigrant ancestors plays onlya symbolic role in their lives (Alba, 1990; Waters, 1990).

Like multiethnics who trace their roots only to European ethnic groups,the multiethnic Mexican Americans I interviewed exercise a great deal of choice in how they identify; and ethnic markers, most notably skin colorand surname, inuence the freedom that they have in choosing identities.

Respondents who have light skin and who have no Spanish surname havethe greater freedom when choosing their identity. Without a Spanishsurname, these respondents are less likely to have others identify them aspeople of Mexican origin, and more likely to identify them as people of European origin. But even if they are identied as such, there are, at most,weak expectations for how respondents are to live up to any notions abouthow a person from a particular European ethnic group ought to exhibittheir ethnic identity. Furthermore, light-skinned respondents are able toexercise considerable choice because their skin color does not meet USnotions of what people of Mexican descent look like. While there is a rangeof skin color among people in Mexico (and all of Latin America for thatmatter) (see Montalvo and Codina, 2001), dark skin serves as a primaryidentier of people of Mexican descent in the USA. Because they do notpossess this surface trait, light-skinned respondents told me that people

just assume Im white. Darker-skinned multiethnic Mexican Americans,on the other hand, are often identied by others as being of Mexicandescent. But, even if they are identied as such, interview data do notreveal a stronger or weaker attachment to any particular ethnic backgroundowing to their skin color.

Even as respondents exercise choice in their identity, with minimalexposure to their non-Mexican American lineage and considerableexposure to their Mexican background, the latter becomes more available,




11/24

84

accessible, and meaningful to respondents as they choose their ethnicidentity when lling out forms and in daily life.

NEGOTIATING ETHN IC BOUNDARIES

Interview data on how multiethnic Mexican Americans assert their ethnicidentity indicate that sharp boundaries between ethnic categories compli-cate respondents identity choices. They report numerous experiences inwhich they must negotiate boundaries between ethnic categories and thedifculty that they have crossing back and forth between them. It is through

this process of negotiation that the respondents choose, assert, and some-times shun a particular identity.Although the family facilitates greater familiarity with respondents

Mexican ethnic background, so too does the family make respondentsaware of ethnic boundaries. They noted being made fun of by extendedfamily members because they lack characteristics that are often associatedwith being of Mexican descent, such as dark skin and the ability to speakSpanish. In some cases, parents or extended family members stronglyencourage or pressure respondents to place more importance on a particu-

lar component of their ethnic background to the exclusion of another. Theboundaries between ethnic categories were especially clear for thoserespondents whose parents are divorced. The differences between theirparents backgrounds are often accentuated because parents use thesedifferences as a basis for disputes, leading some to see their ethnic back-grounds as compartmentalized, mutually exclusive components of theirfamilys ethnic lineage.

Likewise, peers simultaneously reinforce Mexican American ethnicityand ethnic boundaries. Peers often make respondents aware of boundariesbetween ethnic categories by pointing to their mixed ethnic backgroundand their lack of characteristics dark skin, a Spanish surname, being ableto speak Spanish, and knowledge of Mexican and Mexican Americanculture that inauthenticate them as Mexican Americans. Although manypurer Mexican Americans too lack these characteristics, multiethnicrespondents believed that their own inability to display them accounts forwhy they feel unwelcome with some Mexican American peers.

Peer interactions in clubs or organizations that celebrate Mexican andMexican American ethnicity such as MEChA 2 either in high school orin college are important sites of ethnic articulation. But membership doesnot necessarily signal acceptance for multiethnic Mexican Americans, whoare often rejected by the members or made to feel as an outsider at clubgatherings. These instances caused many respondents to doubt their ownright to be members. For example, a 27-year-old Mexican, Polish and

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



12/24

85

Russian man who once danced with a Mexican folk-dance group said thathe felt hypocritical for performing the dances. He explained, [I]ts partlybecause I tell myself that Im not really Im not full Mexican so I donthave the right to [participate]. Partaking in Mexican and MexicanAmerican cultural customs or joining clubs and organizations meansstaking claim to a Mexican American identity that respondents themselvesperceive to be only partially authentic.

Despite the fact that they are mostly middle class and college educated,the respondents did not mention their class status as a reason for theirauthenticity being challenged. Research on middle class African Ameri-cans has shown that class status is seen as a challenge to their AfricanAmerican ethnic authenticity (Lacy, 2000). However, similar evidence did

not emerge from my in-depth interviews. One possible explanation is thatMexican Americans of equal class and educational status, such as collegeclassmates, challenged the respondents ethnic authenticity. Whetherexperienced or only perceived, rejection from people of Mexican descentupon joining clubs and organizations deters many respondents from assert-ing a Mexican identity altogether.

These ethnic boundaries are perhaps most apparent when multiethnicMexican Americans encounter situations that require them to makemutually exclusive choices about their ethnic identity, as when deciding

whether or not to take advantage of afrmative action policies. Ethnicidentity carries material rewards in an era of afrmative action, and somerespondents feel that they do not deserve to benet from afrmative actiondespite the fact that they qualify. Some refuse to mark the Mexican Ameri-cans categories when lling out job or school applications because theybelieve that their middle class background and white skin preclude themfrom reaping the benets of afrmative action that come with marking suchcategories.

Since a valuable resource is at stake, ethnicity becomes a gatekeeper andpurer bearers of Mexican American identity are willing to slam the dooron their multiethnic cousins. For example, one respondent joined a highschool program designed to help high-achieving minority students entercollege, but felt that he was not accepted by the other students, and particu-larly by Mexican American students:

[E]verybody in the club was looking at me weird. Like I didnt belong there . . .This Mexican girl, she was like, What are you in here for? No, no you couldntbe [Mexican American]. And so I left. I never went back. (29-year-old Mexicanand Irish male)

Choosing a Mexican American identity on forms means claiming member-ship to an underrepresented and historically disadvantaged group. 3 Manyperceive that they have not experienced the same discrimination thatpoorer or darker-skinned people of Mexican descent have encountered




13/24

86

(Murgua and Telles, 1996; Telles and Murgua, 1990) and their beliefs areconrmed when respondents run into purer Mexican Americans whoremind respondents that they do not have the right biography to beconsidered a minority.

Other respondents do not experience this same dilemma and are quitewilling to claim a Mexican American identity in order to benet fromafrmative action programs. For example, a 26-year-old woman of Mexicanand Irish descent unabashedly claimed:

R: I used to play the Mexican side a little bit, you know, when afrmativeaction was (pause) . . . (laugh) Ill take anything, Im not proud.

Q: Tell me about that.R: When its obvious that they dont want a white girl or they are trying to

make their quota or whatever it is, yeah, forget the Irish (laugh).For these respondents, multiethnicity permits the claiming of benets thataccrue to a Mexican American identity without having to experience thediscrimination that many people of Mexican descent often encounter. Theydo not see their opportunistic use of ethnicity as making any strong claimsabout their own ethnic identity. Rather, they view themselves as simplybeneting in an instrumental way from that for which they legally qualify.

Boundaries also become apparent when respondents must make choicesabout their identity when interacting with non-Mexican Americans. Thesechoices do not take place against a neutral backdrop. Prejudice directed atpeople of Mexican descent is a feature of everyday life, but one that onlyindirectly impacts the children of these mixed marriages. Because most of the respondents can pass as white, they are often privy to the world of whiteracism and white privilege, hearing comments that many darker skinnedpeople of Mexican descent may not hear. A 24-year-old woman of Mexicanand Canadian background recalled her high school friends reaction toMexican immigrants who frequented the same shopping mall:

[I]f [the Mexican immigrants] looked at any of my friends, they would just starttelling them to fuck off and What are you looking at? . . . And that was hardfor us too, because it was like, what do you say? . . . [I]f they werent a reallyclose friend and they didnt know my background, and just from the way Ilooked they would just assume that I was totally white. And I would have thisgoing on inside me, like feeling like kinda sick to my stomach, feeling anxious,like what do I say, yknow? . . . Especially when its about you and your family,yknow. And Im like, my family looks like the people theyre making fun of,yknow?

Confrontations with racism remind respondents of their simultaneousconnection to multiple ethnic groups. Their white skin is not normallyassociated with American conceptions of what people of Mexican descentlook like and their experience as a white person allows them an insidersview of white racism (Frankenberg, 1993). This insiders view opens them

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



14/24

87

up to emotional and psychological injury, reminding them that they areMexican American enough to feel this injury.

MULTIETHNIC MEXICAN AMERICANS A ND THE ETHNICNARRATIVE

A useful way to understand multiethnic Mexican Americans experiencesin choosing identity is to conceptualize ethnic identity as being rooted in anethnic-group narrative. Cornell (2000) argues groups of individuals select,plot, and interpret events that are common to their experiences. The result

of this process is the construction of a narrative that captures the centralunderstanding of what it means to be a member of [a] group(2000: 42). AsCornell points out, narratives help ethnic groups distinguish between usand them.

While the content and boundaries of a particular ethnic narrative arecontinually contested and negotiated, the Mexican experience in the USAis dened by a number of key conditions and events: conquest, immi-gration, poverty, discrimination, protest, and struggle. Multiethnic MexicanAmericans in this study respond to these core conditions and events as they

consider their own ethnic identity, but in ways that highlight their ambiva-lence.Their own biography departs from the Mexican American narrative. I

could appreciate [the Mexican Americans] struggle from afar, but I didntlive it, one man told me. Respondents perceive these differences mostkeenly when purer Mexican Americans reject them because they do notpossess the surface traits and characteristics that are often associated withpeople of Mexican descent: dark skin color, ability to speak Spanish, know-ledge of Mexican and Mexican American culture, Spanish surnames,blood-line and the like.

The dilemma that some respondents face with afrmative action illus-trates this point. Afrmative action programs are generally designed tooffset the effects of discrimination. These programs reinforce discrimi-nation as a central feature of the Mexican American narrative since anyonewho is of Mexican descent qualies for afrmative action. As multiethnicMexican Americans choose their identity on forms or in their daily lives,they must consider the extent to which they have experienced racial orethnic discrimination on the basis of their ethnic background. Often timesit is other Mexican Americans who police the extent to which multiethnicMexican Americans may claim membership in a Mexican American narra-tive. Recall the respondent whose right to be in a school program for high-achieving minority students was questioned by the other members. Hisright to be in the organization was questioned because his biography his




15/24

88

narrative was perceived to be different from that which is necessary toqualify for the program. This incident forced him to consider the extent towhich his experiences interact with the events at the core of the MexicanAmerican narrative. As is the case with many multiethnic Mexican Ameri-cans, he concluded that his experiences as a middle class individual withwhite skin preclude him from membership in the narrative. However,claiming ones membership is far less taxing when there is no MexicanAmerican audience to rebuff claims of membership to a Mexican Americannarrative, as in the case of the respondents who use their MexicanAmerican backgrounds when checking boxes or applying for jobs solely tobenet from afrmative action.

The experience of confronting prejudice also forces respondents to

consider their connection to the Mexican American narrative. Respon-dents can pass as white, allowing their non-Mexican peers to feel comfort-able enough to make prejudicial comments. On the one hand, they escapethe very burdens that afrmative action is meant to remedy and reinforcethe way in which their own experience departs from the legacy of discrimi-nation that many Mexican Americans know too well. On the other hand,hearing prejudicial comments strikes a chord with some respondents, asthey recognize that such comments are an affront to their MexicanAmerican family members and ancestors. Thus, respondents cannot

entirely ignore their connection to a Mexican American narrative.It is through experiences such as these that respondents come to feelmore like one of them than one of us. If, as Cornell (2000) argues, ethniccategories are categories of collective stories that dene what it means tobe a member of a particular ethnic group, there is no widely recognizedethnic category or label that depicts the set of experiences that is the multi-ethnic Mexican Americans narrative.

NEGOTIATING ETHNIC BOUNDARIES: APPROACHES TOETHNIC IDENTITY

The in-depth interviews reveal that multiethnic Mexican Americans takeseveral approaches to their ethnic identity in response to their encounterswith ethnic boundaries: a symbolic approach, a Mexican Americanapproach, a multiethnic approach, or a combination of approaches. 4 Theseapproaches are by no means mutually exclusive, as respondents combineseveral approaches, invoking the combination most suitable to a particularsocial context.

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



16/24

89

Symbolic identity

Many of the respondents describe an attachment to their ethnic identitythat is largely symbolic, characterized by a nostalgic allegiance to theculture of the immigrant generation, or that of the old country; a love forand pride in a tradition that can be felt without having to be incorporatedin everyday behavior (Gans, 1979: 9). For some, a symbolic identity stemsfrom their limited experience with and knowledge of their ethnic back-ground. These respondents primarily experience their Mexican Americanethnicity through ethnic cuisine and celebrating certain ethnic holidays. Forexample, some mentioned eating tamales during the holidays as a primaryway to experience their Mexican American heritage.

Others respondents described the enjoyment that they received frombeing of Mexican descent because it allows them to be something otherthan just white. As Waters (1990) points out, invoking a symbolic identityallows individuals to assert themselves as an individual, or as this respon-dent put it, her Mexican American background gives her avor. Yet,symbolic ethnicity also allows respondents to be part of a larger collectivethat does not have ethnicity at its core.

By invoking a symbolic ethnic identity, respondents do not push or crossethnic boundaries, and therefore mitigate the extent to which they mustnegotiate such boundaries. In so doing, they avoid the potential rejectionthat they experience when claiming a Mexican American identity, yet theymaintain some connection albeit symbolic to their Mexican Americanheritage.

Mexican American identity

A second is characterized by a strong afnity for Mexican American ethnic-ity. The respondents who take on a Mexican American identity see them-selves as Mexican American and assert that ethnicity strongly. These

multiethnic Mexican Americans actively seek out Mexican and MexicanAmerican cultural celebrations, clubs, and organizations, participate inMexican traditions, and are politically active in causes and movementsrelated to Mexican American ethnicity.

Despite the fact that some of these respondents reported experiencingrejection born out of boundary maintenance, they persisted in asserting aMexican identity. Why would some respondents assert a MexicanAmerican identity at the risk of being rejected or stigmatized? Two struc-tural changes provide potential explanations. First, there have been signi-

cant changes in the sociopolitical structure for Mexican Americans inCalifornia in the last 30 years. The post Civil Rights ideology of multi-culturalism in California allows and often encourages individuals tomaintain a connection to their ethnic roots, as a number of ethnic holidays




17/24

90

are recognized in school and in civic celebrations. Furthermore, MexicanAmericans occupy a number of local and state positions of political powerin California, contributing to the positive visibility of Californian MexicanAmericans. Thus, many respondents see a Mexican American identity as apositive ethnic option.

A second factor has to do with demographic changes. A majority of theresidents in Santa Clara County and California are non-white. Therefore,asserting a Mexican American identity means claiming membership to themajority group in Santa Clara County. It may be the case that respondentspersist in choosing a Mexican American identity because they would ratherbe a part of the (numerical) majority. I can only speculate on how thesestructural changes inuence identity choices from the given data. However,

this line of research deserves further empirical investigation and theoreti-cal development.

The multiethnic approach

A third approach to ethnic identity is the multiethnic approach. In formu-lating his argument about ethnicity as a narrative, Cornell (2000) points outthat there is an emerging multiethnic narrative that is characterized by acommon experience of not tting the established categories. These are

narratives of connection, focused not on the boundaries on what sepa-rates people but on connection, on the intertwined patterns of descentthat muddy boundaries, fuzz differences, and create shared narrative space(Cornell, 2000: 50). The comments of many respondents are exemplary of the multiethnic narrative that Cornell describes. Some described a rejectionof the available ofcial ethnic identities, as those narratives do not accu-rately depict their own experience. Recall that others took a multiethnicapproach in choosing their ethnic identity when lling out forms, choosingto identify multiple categories or other so as not be placed entirely in onecategory. In so doing, respondents assert their connection to multiple ethnicnarratives.

For some, the multiethnic narrative is one that respondents fall back onin response to not feeling entirely Mexican American. In describing her peergroup in high school, a 24-year-old woman of Mexican and Danish descentnoted that she never felt entirely comfortable spending time with studentswho were completely of Mexican descent. Instead, she chose to spend timewith other multiethnic students, some of whom were also multiethnicMexican Americans. Respondents may also choose a multiethnic back-ground in reaction to pressure from their close-knit family to assert onlytheir Mexican background. One respondents father pressured her toidentify with her Mexican background to the exclusion of her French andItalian ancestry. This pressure effectively pushed her to embrace all of herethnic backgrounds as a way to identify with a larger multiethnic population.

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



18/24

91

For others, the multiethnic identity is an increasingly recognized,primary identity. Many respondents prefer to think of themselves as simul-taneously tting into a number of ethnic categories and as being part of anumber of ethnic narratives:

[M]ost people tend to want to make me only white or only Mexican. And Imlike, thats not who I am. You have to take in all of me. (24-year-old Mexicanand Canadian woman)

Others convey their simultaneous connection to multiple backgrounds bydisplaying ags, posters, or artwork representing each of their backgrounds.Just as the large presence of Mexican American peers inuences a numberof respondents to become more aware of their Mexican American identity,

the growing number of multiethnic individuals leads some respondents tobecome more aware of an emerging multiethnic identity.

Combining approaches

These approaches to ethnic identity are not mutually exclusive. Respon-dents often assert a mixture of identity approaches, depending on thecontext. They may assert a strong Mexican American identity when in thecompany of Mexican Americans, while presenting themselves as people of mixed ancestry when with a group of people made up of individuals fromdifferent ethnic backgrounds. When I asked a 20-year-old, female collegestudent of Mexican, French, and Italian ancestry how she would respondwhen asked about her ethnic background in different settings she said:

If I was with all Mexicans, I would be like, Im Mexican , but Im French andItalian too. But I think that if I were with a group of white people, I would belike, Im Mexican, but Im also French and Italian . I would emphasize that partto try and t in a little more.

Respondents believe that their multiple identities, despite the boundaries

that they often encounter, provide them freedom to associate and to t inwith many different ethnic groups. They see their multiple ethnic roots asconferring on them a social advantage that frees them from having toidentify with only one background. Even those who most strongly identifywith their Mexican background believe that their multiple roots are anadvantage when moving between social contexts, and they may employ oneor more of the three identity approaches accordingly. One respondent, whois quite proud of her Mexican ethnic background said: I mean that it givesyou a lot more choices in terms of who you want to be your friends. So youcan just choose yourself. You are not just put into a category.




19/24

92

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This exploratory research shows that multiethnic Mexican Americansencounter ethnic boundaries in many aspects of their lives. When lling outforms, most respondents simplify their ethnicity, calling themselvesMexican, Mexican American, or Hispanic. Still others choose to mark morethan one box or refer to their background simply as other. The people Iinterviewed believe that the responses that they give are generally acompromise because no category accurately describes their own back-ground. The dilemmas that they experience when lling out forms aresimilar to those that they experience as they choose identities in their dailylives. Multiethnic Mexican Americans must choose from ethnic identitiesthat are readily available. Mexican American ethnicity is readily availablein their social environment because of the strong Mexican presence in Cali-fornia and in Santa Clara County. Because some part of their own ethniclineage can be traced to a Mexican narrative, multiethnic Mexican Ameri-cans confront boundaries between their own multiethnic narrative andprevailing narratives of the Mexican population in the US. MultiethnicMexican Americans respond to these boundaries with one or moreapproaches to their ethnic identity: a symbolic approach, a MexicanAmerican approach, a multiethnic approach, or a combination of theseapproaches. This research has several implications for theorizing on ethni-city and policy.

The future of ethnic identity for Multiethnic Mexican Americans

Given the ndings in this paper, what is the future of ethnicity for multi-ethnic Mexican Americans? Intermarriage has traditionally beenconsidered the greatest indicator of ethnic group assimilation (Gordon,1964). However, intermarriage does not inevitably lead the minority group in this case Mexicans to adopt the identity of the majority group inthis case whites. Recent theorizing on ethnic identity among the secondgeneration points out that individuals may adopt a range of identities avail-able in US society (Portes and Rumbaut, 2001; Portes and Zhou, 1993;Rumbaut and Portes, 2001; Waters, 1999; Zhou and Bankston, 1998). Thesame may be true for multiethnic Mexican Americans.

Therefore, determining what the future holds for the ethnic identity of multiethnic Mexican American requires taking stock of the available ethnicidentities. If the prevailing established categories white and MexicanAmerican remain the most readily available ethnic options, then multi-ethnic Mexican Americans may continue to choose their ethnic identity inreference to these two categories and assert themselves as members of oneof these groups. Still, multiethnic Mexican Americans may have another

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



20/24

93

option: a multiethnic identity. As intermarriage rates continue to climb, acritical mass of people who do not t into the traditional categories of raceand ethnicity will grow. This critical mass may bring forth the emergenceof a new narrative and with it a new ethnic identity the multiethnicidentity. There is evidence that just such an identity is emerging, and thismultiethnic identity is gaining legitimacy within the larger US society. Inpopular culture, a number of celebrities, such as Tiger Woods, have begunto openly claim a mixed, or multiethnic identity, creating greater visibilityfor multiethnics and multiracials. Similarly, a number of student-clubs andorganizations that celebrate multiethnicity have emerged on college anduniversity campuses and various communities across the US 5 and anapproach to ethnic identity that embraces hybridity seems to be gaining

popularity (Harris and Sim, 2002).Perhaps the greatest evidence of the emergence of a multiethnic narra-tive can be found in the institutional recognition that an individual mayhave multiple racial and ethnic origins. The Executive Ofce of Manage-ment and Budget (OMB) Statistical Directive 15, which providesstandard for classication for record keeping, collection and presentationof data on race and ethnicity in Federal program administrative reportingand statistical activities (Executive Ofce of Management and Budget,1996), now permits respondents to check more than one racial category

when lling out federal forms, such as the 2000 US Census. Figures fromthe 2000 US Census suggest that a substantial number of people employthis option. In California alone 1.6 million, or 4.75% of that states popu-lation chose multiple boxes (US Bureau of the Census 2001). Changes inStatistical Directive 15 do not, however, directly affect people of Mexicanorigin. The category Mexican is considered an ethnic group under thegeneral rubric of the larger ethnic category Hispanic. So, while non-Hispanics are now free to choose more than one racial box (e.g. black,white-non-Hispanic and Chinese), people of Mexican descent still cannotchoose more than one ethnic category, such as Mexican and Cuban. Eventhough these changes in the Census have virtually no direct effect on theway that government agencies categorize people of Mexican descent, thechanges do mark an institutional recognition of a larger multiracial ormultiethnic identity. Combined, a critical mass of multiethnic individuals,celebrities who promote their multiethnicity, clubs and organizations, andinstitutional recognition of multiethnic and multiracials help to give themultiethnic narrative some currency in the larger society.

Directions for future researchThis research raises a number of important questions for consideration infuture research. A rst question relates to social policy. I show that multi-ethnic Mexican Americans ethnic identity develops not just in social




21/24

94

spaces, but also in a policy space. Respondents must make choices abouthow their own biography intersects with the narrative of disadvantage thatsocial policies, like afrmative action, uphold. These policies help to dictatewhat it means to be a member of a particular group and shape the advan-tages and disadvantages associated with being a member of this group. Asresearchers study the factors that determine identity choice, they shouldlook to determine how identity develops in these policy spaces as well.

A second question relates to how we think of the Mexican origin popu-lations place in the American racial and ethnic system. Some scholarspresent the Mexican origin population as a race, whose experiences aredened by systematic discrimination and blocked mobility (Acua, 2000;Ortiz. 1996). Yet others believe that the Mexican-origin population is an

immigrant ethnic group, with assimilation patterns that are on par withother ethnic groups (Chavez, 1992; Skerry, 1993; Smith, 2003). In adjudi-cating between these two polar understandings of the Mexican-origin popu-lation, scholars must also keep in mind the multiethnic Mexican Americanpopulation. What do the experiences of the multiethnic Mexican Ameri-cans suggest about the Mexican-origin population as a racialized group oras an immigrant ethnic group?

Finally, future research must look more closely at the role that gender,spatial location, and class play in how multiethnics choose identities. Does

gender inuence how multiethnics choose their identity? Likewise, does theparent-combination of racial and ethnic backgrounds differentially inu-ence men and women? Another important area of research is on howneighborhood racial and ethnic composition inuences how multiethnicsmake identity choices. Do multiethnics who live in mixed neighborhoodsgravitate toward a multiethnic identity? Social class may also be an import-ant determinant of identity choice, but one about which we know little. Themultiethnic and multiracial movement has been particularly vibrant oncollege campuses and among middle class families, but are middle classindividuals the only ones opting for a multiethnic or multiracial identity?How does class shape their choices? How do poorer multiethnics identify?Are they more likely to simplify their identity compared to their middle-and upper class counterparts?

These questions are central as scholars look to understand this newfrontier in the study of race and ethnicity.

Acknowledgement

This research was made possible by a grant from Harvard Universitys Multidisci-

plinary Program on Inequality and Social policy, funded by the National ScienceFoundation (grant 9870661) and by a grant from the Minority Affairs Program of the American Sociological Association. The author also wishes to acknowledgeMary C. Waters, Katherine Newman, Lawrence Bobo, Mario Small, Karyn Lacy,

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



22/24

95

Irene Bloemraad, Christopher Jencks and two anonymous reviewers for theirhelpful suggestions and guidance.

Notes

1 A copy of the interview protocol is available upon request from the author.2 MEChA is a student organization, which stands for movimiento estudiantil

Chicano de Aztln , or Chicano student movement of Aztln . MEChA wasfounded during the Chicano movement of the 1960s and 1970s and has chapterson high school and college campuses throughout the US. See Muoz (1989) formore a more detailed account of MEChAs rise.

3 Mexican Americans are considered underrepresented and historically disadvan-taged under US federal and some state afrmative action programs.

4 For an extensive discussion of the various approaches to multiethnicity amongmultiethnics and multiracials see Nakshima (1996).

5 For example, there are a number of websites that describe various organizationsfor multiracials and multiethnics. These include: The Association for Multieth-nic Americans (http://www.ameasite.org/) and Multiracial Family Circle (http://www.cdiversity.com/mfc/).

References

Acua, Rodolfo (2000) Occupied America: A History of Chicanos . New York:Longman.

Alba, Richard D. (1990) Ethnic Identity: The Transformation of White America .New Haven: Yale University Press.

Alonso, William and Mary Waters (1993) The Future Composition of the AmericanPopulation: An Illustrative Projection, paper presented at Winter Meetings of the American Statistical Association conference, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

Bean, Frank D., Jorge Chapa, Ruth R. Berg, and Kathryn A. Sowards (1994)Educational and Sociodemographic Incorporation among Hispanic Immigrantsin the United States. in B. Edmonston and J. Passel (eds) Immigration andEthnicity: The Integration of Americas Newest Arrivals , pp. 7396. Washington,DC: The Urban Institute.

Chavez, Linda (1992) Out of the Barrio: Toward a New Politics of Hispanic Assimi-lation . New York, NY: BasicBooks.

Cornell, Stephan (2000) Thats the Story of Our Life, in P.R. Spickard and W.J.Burroughs (eds) Narrative and Multiplicity in Constructing Ethnic Identities ,pp. 4153. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Davis, James (1995) The Hawaiian Alternative to the One-Drop Rule, in N. Zack(ed.) American Mixed Race: The Culture of Microdiversity , pp. 11531. Lanham,MD: Rowan and Littleeld.

de la Garza, Rodolfo O. and Louis DeSipio (1998) Interests Not Passions: Mexican-American Attitudes toward Mexico, Immigration from Mexico, and Other IssuesShaping USMexico Relations, International Migration Review 32(2): 40122.

Executive Ofce of Management and Budget (1996) Statistical Directive 15, in




23/24

96

M.P.P. Root (ed.), The Multiracial Experience: Racial Borders as the NewFrontier , pp. 44114. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Frankenberg, Ruth (1993) White Women, Race Matters: The Social Construction of

Whiteness . Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Gans, Herbert J. (1979) Symbolic Ethnicity: The Future of Ethnic Groups andCultures in America, Ethnic and Racial Studies 2(1): 120.

Gordon, Milton Myron (1964) Assimilation in American Life: The Role of Race,Religion, and National Origins . New York: Oxford University Press.

Harris, David R. and Jeremiah Joseph Sim (2002) Who is Multiracial? Assessingthe Complexity of Lived Race, American Sociological Review 67(4): 61427.

Iijima Hall, C and T. Cooke Turner (2001) The Diversity of Biracial Individuals:Asian-white and Asian-minority Biracial Identity, in T. Williams-Len and C.L.Nakashima (eds) The Sum of our Parts: Mixed Heritage Asian Americans ,

pp. 8191. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Kalmijn, M. (1998) Intermarriage and Homogamy: Causes, Patterns, and Trends, Annual Review of Sociology 24: 395421.

Lacy, Karyn (2000) Negotiating Black Identities: The Construction and Use of Social Boundaries Among Middle-Class Black Suburbanites, unpublisheddissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Massey, Douglas S. and Nancy A. Denton (1992) Racial Identity and the SpatialAssimilation of Mexicans in the United States, Social Science Research 21:23560.

Montalvo, Frank F and G. Edward Codina (2001) Skin Color and Latinos in the

United States, Ethnicities 1(3): 32141.Muoz, Carlos (1989) Youth, Identity, Power: The Chicano Movement . London, NewYork: Verso.

Murgua, Edward (1982) Chicano Intermarriage: A Theoretical and Empirical Study .San Antonio, TX: Trinity University Press.

Murgua, Edward and Edward Telles (1996) Phenotype and Schooling AmongMexican Americans, Sociology of Education 69(4): 27689.

Nakashima, Cynthia L. (1996) Voices from the Movement: Approaches to Multira-ciality, in M.P.P. Root (ed.) The Multiracial Experience: Racial Borders as theNew Frontier , pp. 7997. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Ortiz, Vilma (1996) The Mexican-Origin Population: Permanent Working Class orEmerging Middle Class? in R.D. Waldinger and M. Bozorgmehr (eds), EthnicLos Angeles , pp. 24777. New York: Russell Sage.

Portes, Alejandro and Rubn G. Rumbaut (2001) Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation . Berkeley, CA, New York: University of Cali-fornia Press and Russell Sage Foundation.

Portes, Alejandro and Min Zhou (1993) The New Second Generation: SegmentedAssimilation and its Variants, Annals of the American Academy of Political andSocial Science 530(Nov): 7496.

Root, Maria P.P. (1992) Racially Mixed People in America . Newbury Park, CA: SagePublications.

Root, Maria P.P. (1996) The Multiracial Experience: Racial Borders as the NewFrontier . London, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rumbaut, Rubn G. and Alejandro Portes (2001) Ethnicities: Children of Immigrants in America . Berkeley, CA, New York: University of California Press

ETHNICITIES 4(1)



24/24

97

and Russell Sage Foundation.Skerry, Peter (1993) Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority . New York: Free

Press.

Smith, James P. (2003) Assimilation Across the Latino Generations, AmericanEconomic Review 93(2): 31519.Spickard, Paul R. and Rowena Fong (1995) Pacic Islander Americans and Multi-

ethnicity: A Vision of Americas Future? Social Forces 73(4): 136583.State of California, Department of Finance (2003) Race/Ethnic Population

Estimates: Components of Change for California Counties, April 1990 to April2000, March, Sacramento, California.

Stephan, Cookie White (1991) Ethnic Identity Among Mixed-Heritage People inHawaii, Symbolic Interaction 14(3): 26177.

Stephan, Cookie White and William Stephan (1989) After Intermarriage: Ethnic

Identity Among Mixed Heritage Japanese-Americans and Hispanics, Journal of Marriage and the Family 51(May): 50719.Tafoya, Sonya M. (2000) Check One or More . . . Mixed Race and Ethnicity, Cali-

fornia Public Policy Institute, San Francisco.Telles, Edward and Edward Murguia (1990) Phenotype Discrimination and Income

Differences Among Mexican Americans, Social Science Quarterly 71(4): 68296.Thorton, Michael C. and Harold Gates (2001) Black, Japanese, and American: An

Asian American Identity Yesterday and Today, in T. Williams-Len and C.L.Nakashima (eds) The Sum of Our Parts: Mixed Heritage Asian Americans ,pp. 93103. Philadelphia, PA: Tempe University Press.

US Bureau of the Census (2001) US Census 2000 Redistricting Data.Waters, Mary C. (1990) Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America . Berkeley,CA: University of California Press.

Waters, Mary C. (1999) Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities . New York and Cambridge, MA: Russell Sage Foundationand Harvard University Press.

Zhou, Min and Carl L. Bankston (1998) Growing up American: How VietnameseChildren Adapt to Life in the United States . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.


TOMS R. JIMNEZis a PhD candidate in the Department of Soci-ology at Harvard University. He is currently working on an ethnographicproject examining how Mexican immigrants inuence the ethnic identityof established Mexican Americans. Additionally, he, along with Mary C.Waters, is authoring a review of relevant literature on the immigrantexperience that will appear in the 2005 edition of the Annual Review of Sociology. Address: Department of Sociology, Harvard University, 517Lowell Mail Center, Cambridge, MA. [email: [email protected]]

Documents

02. Negotiating Ethnic Boundaries