If you watch a little kid with a pile of stuff, you’ll often see them sorting. They’re putting some things together and separating others. On Sesame Street they sing “Which of these things are not like the other … “, it’s the first step towards developing a sense of discrimination … and also the first step towards discriminating. Still, it seems like a fairly basic human activity, even when categories are contested. Therefore, I was amused to read two stories recently about eliminating these divisions:
In conservative Nepal, authorities recently granted an official citizenship document to 40-year-old Chanda Musalman which lists “him” as both male and female:
With elections approaching, government teams are currently touring the country issuing certificates of citizenship. One team came to Chanda’s village in western Nepal. Chanda, who has had no sex-change surgery, asked the officials to erase the words male and female, listed under gender. They obliged, and ascribed Chanda’s gender as “both”… It is unclear how this unique legal status will play out in practice – for instance, how it will affect Chanda’s marriage rights. [Link]
<
p>A similar desire to eliminate pigeonholes is sounded in the opinion column of the NYT today, by an author who calls for the abolition of racial categories on the census:
There seems to be an emerging consensus that the system of racial classification that has dominated national politics and the census for nearly two centuries is so fraught with imprecision — and so tainted by racist ideas that have been disproved by science — that it should eventually be dropped altogether.
This view has been percolating among census historians for years. But it has gained traction since the 1990s, when there was a pitched battle over a proposal that would have added a “multiracial” category to the 2000 census. A compromise allowed people to check more than one box for race. But that change only fueled the debate by revealing a conflict between the fixed racial categories that have long dominated American life and a different sense of identity that’s clearly on the rise among younger Americans. [Link]
My family has been caught betwixt and between racial categories before. Back in the early 1970s my mom cut her hand and had to go to the hospital. The two nurses there started to argue about whether to denote her as white or black on the intake form. The white nurse pointed out that my mom is light (she needs sunscreen, unlike me), while the black nurse argued that since she isn’t really white, she must be black. Finally my father demanded that they admit her right away, telling them that they could put her in whatever category they wanted once the doctor saw her. Still, this story doesn’t argue that there should be no categories at all, just that categories should be useful (and that classification should be secondary to medication). So personally, I don’t get the argument for the abolition of racial categories altogether as long as they remain socially relevant.
Still, maybe the anti-checkbox forces have a point. Any effort to define will lead to an effort to subvert. One of my favorite Amar Chitra Katha comic books told the story of Prahalad, the son of the Asura King Hiranyakashyap. 
Lord Brahma had given … [Hiranyakashyap] the blessings that no known man or animal born in the natural process could kill him, that he could not die in the day or in the night, on earth or in heavens, either by fire, water or by any weapon.
It was to kill such a tyrant and to remove him from the earth that Lord Vishnu assumed the form of Narasingh which was neither man nor animal, came out of a broken pillar, laid hold of the demon king by its teeth, put him up on his thighs and tore him up in the middle by his claws. It was evening time (twilight) – neither day nor night. [Link]
As a kid who was never into coloring within the lines, it just tickled me no end that there was an avatar of Vishnu devoted to the subversion of categories. So while I have no problems checking boxes (Male, SouthAsian) I have a little bit of sympathy for those who want to play Narasingh and mash them up.
The “end of racial categories” faction has always bugged me. I totally accept that there’s no biological basis to separating people by “race”, since the term is arbitrary and acts on inconsequentially phenotypic features elevated to high social importance for no reason. Yet the fact remains that these phenotypic features do impact how people are treated. If you have very dark skin it doesn’t matter where you’re from or what your heritage is, you are going to be treated in specific ways by social institutions ranging from schools to police to neighbors. As long as those social boundaries exist, it’s worth recording them.
I’m from europe so i don’t really understand…what’s the reason for writing down ones race? It doesn’t happen over here.
The main purpose of racial classification in the US is to allow the government to regulate racial discrimination in government and private-sector conduct. That is, given our history of race relations, the government wants to make sure that minorities are not discriminated against. But to do this effectively, the government has to be able to identify whether a person is a minority or not.
The intent behind racial classifications doesn’t bother me as much as the imperfection of most current categories.
Tulip – since you’re from Europe, perhaps you ought to have taken the example of what happened in France last year. Officially pretending like racial categories are not real social constructions that affect people’s lives allow people to ignore how different demographics are impacted in different ways because of white supremacy. Of course, there is also no denying the complicated nature of dealing with these socially constructed categories on a forms.
grr, that was supposed to be “on forms”, not “on a forms”. And “allows”, not “allow”. Anyway. Heh.
so it’s for research purposes only?
so it’s for research purposes only?
It goes much beyond that.
In compliance with Federal and State laws and regulations, they require an Equal Opportunity Employment Data Form, and sometimes also eligibility for special assistance, and programs.
so it’s for research purposes only?
I’d say it’s actually for record-keeping and regulation purposes. It can also be for evidentiary purposes, of course.
As an undergrad, I worked in as a messenger boy in the hospital. One time, I had to update HR files – including mine. I remember leaving the race category blank when I joined, but when I saw my form, they marked down “W” for me – white. My Bengali surname name gave them no hint, since it is not Banerjee, Chatterjee, Das, etc.
racial categories on the census
racial categories on census determines one’s eligibility to programs that are for native americans (share holder in casinos), native alaskans (royalty for oil money from alaska), and many more.
It’s for enforcement purposes. Most European countries do not have a history of unequal relationships based on physical appearance at home, preferring to let that sort of thing fester in their colonies as well. The US, which has been a multiracial society from the beginning (albeit one with vastly unequal power relationships) has had to develop a way to talk about the history of interaction between the major groups. Since the inequalities here have largely been mediated by skin color, that’s where data is collected. And that’s the axis along which legal action and regulation has operated. Let immigration to European countries continue and you’ll see this kind of awareness developing there as well, though I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s preceded by many more tragic events like the French riots.
Clarification: when I say most European countries don’t have multiracial histories, I mean pre-colonial history. I suppose Spain would be an exception to this theory.
KXB, During the 70s they included South Asians as “Caucasian” because of apparent similarities they found in bone structure between South Asians and Caucasians (think “Aryan Race”). So one of my sisters is “caucasian” while I am listed (10 years later) as “asian.” Does anybody have any more info on this?
And what the hell do you tick if you are an iranian/sri-lankan like me? Other? Mixed Other? It really pisses me off when I’m faced with ticking the ethnic category boxes seeing as I feel equally as Iranian, Sri-Lankan and British. It takes all the fun out of just being me.
Germany did.
Ennis, You know I enjoy your posts, but c’mon !!! when was the last time you saw a category called “South Asian” in American forms?? All I ever get to chose is between White/Black/Asian-Pacific Islander ?? Why is there a f’ing category for Pacific Islanders?? Are there that many Islanders in the US ?? (except Hawaii)
Why is there not a “Central Asian” category?? Along with “West Asian” (for Mainly Iranians and Arabs)
It just goes to show how ridiculously imprecise these categories.
I NEVER check this stupid boxes.
Great piece ennis!
RC:I’d suggest you’d check a few more forms out. I am personally (happy and) surprised at the slowly increasing number of forms noting Asian American of South Asian, Sub Continent, SE Asian boxes. Also PI is important b/c Hawaii is a state, you cant just “except” them out. They population itself is one of, if not the, smallest minority but it is also severely under served by the govt. The least access to education, and within Asian Americans, the lowest income levels, in addition to a history of pure colonization and annexation (for HI) make their story more complicated. Many feel their needs are not at all represented by the Asian American politics which is currently dominated by the Chinese and Japanese (with South Asians running in an occasionally distant third).
As far as Tulip’s comment goes,I’m incredibly surprised at the insinuation made that race does not matter in Europe. It may not be counted in the census format (I honestly don’t know) but I feel its incredibly tangible in social/group relations and I don’t know many who’d disagree.
Last, about the boxes. Without them there is a great deal of information that would be lost that is currently used to bring light to the institutionalized racism in our government’s structures. its always important to explore the possible expansions and explosions of these limiting identifiers but i don’t think they should be eliminated just yet. let’s not fall into the trap so neatly exemplified by theories of “colorblind” and “genderless” law etc.
“Spain would be an exception to this theory.”
Having been to Spain, I can assure you, Spain is not much of an exception–Spaniards don’t appear much different than other Europeans south of Scandinavia–a higher percentage of quick tanners and black eyelashes maybe, but other than that, you’d be hard pressed to see much difference. People have a lot of odd ideas about that country. Portugal too. I think I saw more [naturally] light haired people in northern Spain than I saw in England. Andalusians in the south are the more well known “dark” type. Persians (a Persian guy apprised me of this) actually constituted a lot of the “Moors” who were in Spain; also, Sephardic Jews were a major presence, as well as Berbers (especially) and Arabs. Still, their numbers were limited–they didn’t flock to Spain the way the English flocked to America for example. You do still have towns with Arabic names though. Anyway “middle east” peoples had an influence on other parts of Europe than just Spain. There is ancient “intercourse” to use an antiquated term, between the Levant areas and Europe. Cavalli-Sfoza’s work on “genetic distance” is one way to determine this stuff if you’re interested.
Wonderful post Ennis. And a great use of the story of Hiranyakashyap and Vishnu. That’s what we should do – use the old stories that we have and put them to good use in the plane of ideas – not as historical facts, which then leads to fundamentalism.
Categorization is intricately linked to attention. What do you see? The problem of outsiders: What seems a single entity from afar, isn’t actually so, if you take a closer look. I know friends who didn’t develop a taste for ‘western music’ – and they cannot differentiate rhythm and blues, rock and roll, hard rock, bluegrass, jazz, smooth jazz, country, heavy metal, pop, Chicago Blues. But there’s so much diversity within.
The problem of insiders: They are so immersed in their direct experience, that they cannot step back and take a broader perspective. When I saw Fats Domino’s situation during the Katrina disaster – I just couldn’t fathom how can people be so callous to the person who gave us Blueberry Hill. They just don’t have any historical consciousness. When some conservatives do their African-American bashing I just cannot understand how can they not be grateful to those who gave us jazz and blues.
As folks have mentioned, the collection of race-data goes towards many things, including ensuring program compliance, enforcement of equal opportunity provisions, funding for social programs, demographic research, information on voting districts, housing, and education, occasional access to special funding or programs, academic research. The list goes on and on.
I honestly think the “multiple box” idea is the best. Check all that apply. The biggest controversy with the “mixed race” box was not that people didn’t feel this was valid, but that some members of congress wanted to use this as a means to cut the budget for special programs. For example, why fund health outreach to the African American community if you can say that the population has decreased? (when in fact, it may be that many people who are of mixed descent identify as both African American and another race and still may need access to those resources).
I really like the disaggregation of the “Asian” box under the “Ethnicity/Country of Origin” section of the census. Especially in states like CA, where the API population is so large that it adds accuracy to studies to disaggregate.
“When some conservatives do their African-American bashing I just cannot understand how can they not be grateful to those who gave us jazz and blues.” oh well, some people just aren’t musical, are they? but then some people don’t like browns (hindus), who gave us the “0” and ayurvedic medicine, etc. Some people don’t like europeans who gave the world the functioning, mass producing printing press, etc. Some people don’t like the Chinese who gave the world porcelain and silk, etc.; some people don’t like the American aboriginals who gave the world corn farming and fodder for westerns for the next hundred years, etc.; a lot of people don’t like Americans who gave the world–well, bombs most recently, but stuff like automobiles and airplanes in the past. And the Constitution! And people really weren’t grateful enough to the Arabs who gave us sorbet, 1001 nights and religious tolerance (before they got defensive and fundamentalist.) Face it. The world is full of ingrates.
Well said, alu. The challenge is to remain positive.
There is a need for another ‘box’: ‘None of the above’ followed by ‘describe yourself’ – to include the Mongolian girl raised in Tibet.
Ennis, yaar, time for a glowing sikh post, paaji it has been a while…no?
We Americans – yeah, I am just as guilty – are absolute suckers for stats. From the height of the Statue of Liberty to the weight of Liberty Bell to baseball stats and calorie counts, we have to slice and dice every number to death.
Just open the demographic tables at http://www.census.gov and you will understand how the US Govt uses race stats. Racial demos can be very useful in marketing and other applications. Of course, the same data could be misused if one’s motives were racial. Insurance companies and realtors have been guilty of that.