A love match? That's so last century

New research into inter-ethnic unions suggests we're reverting to a less romantic idea of marriage

I grew up in a traditional Chinese household, where I was taught my future life partner must have an equal, if not better, upbringing than mine. That mentality is embedded in the ancient saying, "A bamboo door should match a bamboo door; a wood door should match a wood door." Essentially, what it means is you have to marry someone in the same social class if you want the relationship to last.

The Chinese are not alone in this worldview. Many Indians are still bound by caste and the arranged unions that flow from it. And acute class-consciousness is a persistent feature of British identity.

But in North America, it isn't cool to openly judge people by class; in courtship, we view prospective mates through the less discriminatory lens of "compatibility" instead. Yet, however varied are our criteria for compatibility – whether emotional, intellectual, social, physical or financial – one way or another, coupling comes down to class, whether we egalitarian-minded New Worlders like it or not.

Of course, we're in denial about this and cling tightly to the cover of romantic love that fuels our multi-billion dollar wedding industry.

The point – we're harder-edged than we like to admit when it comes to picking mates – was given some support recently by Spanish academic Dan Rodriguez-Garcia, a visiting scholar at the University of Toronto.

The social scientist from Barcelona's Autonomous University looked at how race/ethnicity, class and gender intersected in marriages in Greater Toronto (using data from the 2001 census) and uncovered some unexpected patterns.

The uncomfortable gist of his work: Visible minorities marry up by marrying down.

Of the roughly 710,000 unions in Greater Toronto, about three-quarters involve couples of the same cultural background – what scholars call "ethnic endogamy." That means about 25 per cent of marriages here are "mixed."

In those marriages, Rodriguez-Garcia found that visible minorities were more likely to marry whites even if whites were less educated and earned a lower income.

"Minority members have to compensate, or bring more educational and economic resources to the marriage market, when they marry someone from an ethnic group of higher social standing," concluded Rodriguez-Garcia's 57-page report, titled "Intermarriage Patterns and Socio-Ethnic Stratification among Ethnic Groups in Toronto."

Many – including some of my colleagues in the Star newsroom – find this proposition offensive. As one put it: "I can't imagine asking (someone) to participate in a story since it would mean that the person of colour married `down' in terms of salary but `up' in terms of colour, which sounds incredibly racist about the marrying white, and insulting about the lack of education."

But there's a surprising split in reactions between whites and visible minorities.

Whites tended to be outraged with the "status exchange" thesis, while all members of minority groups I interviewed agreed it bears a grain of truth.

Louie Gong, a vice-president of the Mavin Foundation, a Seattle-based advocacy group for mixed-race people, said we all choose mates based on many factors, including romantic love and status, which are not mutually exclusive.

"I personally don't find the study offensive because internalized racism and class can certainly have an impact on our choice of partners," said the 33-year-old British Columbia native, who is of mixed Chinese, aboriginal and European heritage.

"Pop culture has taught us to mate based on the idea of love, so admitting anything other than that would reflect very negatively on our character."

Elizabeth Abbott, a historian with the University of Toronto, said the notion of romantic love is a relatively modern aspect of marriage that emerged in the late 18th and early 19th century as individual freedom expanded.

However, our contemporary mate selection criteria are not really as different from our forebears' as we think. Abbott says our comfort level with another person very much depends on shared experiences that come down to socioeconomics.

"I don't think people are blinded by love," explains Abbott, author of the upcoming book, Marriage: Where We've Been and Where We're Heading. "We all take calculated risks. You may love a loser, but you will try to change them or it won't work."

Sociologist David Popenoe, director of Rutgers University's National Marriage Project, said he wasn't surprised by Rodriguez-Garcia's findings.

"Nowadays, people base their relationships on feelings, but everybody wants higher status," he said. "It's a touchy subject because it's not necessarily something we want to talk about in romantic love."

Rodriguez-Garcia, who is married to a Jewish-Canadian scholar, believes social class is a powerful factor when it comes to mate selection. Couples certainly don't enter into a mixed union based on conscious or calculated decision-making to advance themselves up the social ladder or to fill up their wallets, he says, "It's not so much about `What am I going to gain?' "The reality is much more complex than that."

"Despite the increased mixing, social differences and prejudices are very persistent. The association between minority status, which is historically inherited, and social status is difficult to make disappear. There will always be new statuses within the mixtures."

Nicholas Keung, of Chinese descent and university-educated, is in a mixed relationship with a Caucasian, who has a high-school diploma and toils in the restaurant industry. They believe they are in it for love, not status exchange.

In those marriages, Rodriguez-Garcia found that visible minorities were more likely to marry whites even if whites were less educated and earned a lower income.

I would not expect marrying someone with the same earning power to be the norm. Overall women have less expectation of contributing to a marriage in this area.

The article implies that minority women are marrying white men of lower class because they see his skin color as worth more than him having only a high school degree.
This could be a matter of minority women with masters and doctorates marrying white guys with 2 or 4 years of college because there are so few highly educated minority males.
The blame for that is affirmative action that rewards females and minorities, and especially minority females.
Another possibilitiy for the data skew is that professional minority females prefer somewhat less eduated men because they want to retain a higher status in the relationship; worship the ground I walk on - and white men, in general, treat women better.
And the article says nothing on the Clarence Thomas effect - black men being 4 times more likely to marry a white woman than the other way around.

They should divide the data by gender. Let us see who marries for status, female or male. Look at the single professional woman bemoaning where have all the good men gone syndrome. At class reunion these 30 to 40 something professional women are surprised that their blue collar or working women contemporaries are already married, and many to professional men (the ones the professional women want). The beautiful and pretty blue collar gals already grabbed the handsome professional guys as well as the average professional guy (the pro women ignore because they are very picky on looks until they hit their 30’s, by then it is already tooo late). I think status and looks play an important role in women’s choices, while guys it is basicly looks and lesser on status. Professional men will marry middle class gals, but professional women will not marry blue collar guys (unless he is drop dead handsome and got a body they cannot resist). That is why I like the see the data broken down by gender.

At class reunion these 30 to 40 something professional women are surprised that their blue collar or working women contemporaries are already married, and many to professional men (the ones the professional women want). The beautiful and pretty blue collar gals already grabbed the handsome professional guys as well as the average professional guy (the pro women ignore because they are very picky on looks until they hit their 30’s, by then it is already tooo late). I think status and looks play an important role in women’s choices, while guys it is basicly looks and lesser on status.

I agree with everything but the last part. It's not just looks, it's "does being with her make me happy?"

I think a professional guy would rather live with a woman who is enjoyable to live but doesn't earn as much as him, than a high-earning woman who is always fighting with him over something or other.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.