by Beverly Yuen Thompson
October/November 2000

The debate of a multiracial category on the U.S. census form had inspired a great deal of discussion and debate as the pros and cons of such a development were hashed out. Many mixed race organizations argued for such a category so that individuals who currently fall outside of the five monoracial categorizations could finally have a recognized identity and a box all their own to call home. Those against the multiracial box argued that monoracial minority groups would lose numbers and hence their "benefits" and that such a division could seriously challenge the racial understanding that has thus been established within the United States. However, as current racial categorizations stand on official documents, with the exception of the 2000 Census, individuals are required to reduce themselves to fit inside one out of five mutually exclusive and politically framed categories that are growing more and more obsolete and arbitrary. For example, what does it truly mean to be "Asian American" when this umbrella term, as all racial categorizations are, attempts to homogenize such a diverse array of people as those from Sri Lanka, China, Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, India, Thailand, the United States, etc., and first generations, fourth generations, and those of mixed race heritage also?

The pro-multiracial categorization argument attempted to articulate the point that these five monoracial categories are not inclusive of the entirety of the US population and therefore, with the addition of yet one more box, the multiracial box, we may solve the problem of racial categorization segregation. However, as a multiracial individual myself, I watched these debates with caution and analyzed whether I would feel more included or justified if I had yet another box to check. The new multiracial box that I may be presented with in the future also offers little meaning and is yet another umbrella category that can be stretched to the point of meaningless, as the monoracial categories already are drifting towards. Is the political purpose of multiracial unity the creation of another box? The original five boxes created the situation and conflict in which this new box seems necessary, and if a multiracial category is ever implemented, what other boxes will need to be developed in order to account for individuals who still remain marginalized?

You may ask yourself what I want then, which box can be created in which I will proudly check off and hold it up as an affirmation of who I "truly" am. What I desire is the freedom to exist outside of arbitrary categorizations that force individuals to contort themselves to fit inside constructions that do not mesh with the diversity and complexity of reality. I do not want my existence to be reduced to some static and mutually exclusive identity based categorization that will be considered a monolithic representation of my individuality. I cannot be reduced to my race, my mixed race, my gender, my sexuality, my age, or any other factor that ignores the rest of my person. I certainly do not want to be judged and stereotyped or considered "known" because I have marked one box over another which have been framed by a history, politics, and language that I did not create.

It is only when I have this freedom to exist and live outside of the box that I can begin the project of understanding what it means to me to be mixed race, begin to define myself on my own terms and my own language, and cultivate a society with others.

Also by Beverly Yuen Thompson

Return to The Abolitionist Examiner - Home Page

---

Copyright © 1999 Beverly Yuen Thompson. All rights reserved.

---

Add as favourites (57) | Quote this article on your site | Views: 2378

Be first to comment this article

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved