Section 9.1: Social Change

Social Change 

Social change refers to change in society created through collective behavior or social movements (as seen in Section 9.2).  This change may also occur through external factors such as global advancements in technology or the changing environment. Changes in population due to shifting demographic factors such as immigration, different fertility rates across social groups, and interracial relationships.  The following are examples of demographic-related social changes that will have a significant impact on the Latin@ population as well as the entire United States.  

 

Demographic Change

The changing demographic composition of the United States will impact race relations and the experiences of the Latin@ population. According the U.S. Census projections, by 2060 the Latin@ population will increase to 29% (from 17% in 2014) of the U.S. population and the non-Hispanic white population is projected to drop to 44% (from 62% in 2014). Moreover, their share will be higher for children under the age of 18 (34%) will be nearly equal to the non-Hispanic white population - 36% (Colby and Ortman, 2015). On the one hand, the increase in the Latin@ population will increase their political power and increase their influence as a major voting bloc at the local, state, and national levels. On the other hand, Aguirre and Turner would argue that an increase in the size of a racialized people of color may increase the sense of threat by the majority group and may lead to holding on to negative beliefs stereotypes, discrimination, and racial tension.

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): Distribution of the Population by Race and Hispanic Origin for the Total Population and Population under 18: 2014-2060 (CC PDM 1.0; via U.S. Census Bureau (2015))

 

Multiracial families, Identity, and Racialization

Since the 1967 Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court Case (discussed earlier in Chapter 1.4), which overturned anti-miscegenation laws in the United States, intermarriage rates have steadily increased. Today, nearly 20% of all newlyweds are married to someone of a different race or ethnicity, up from 3% in 1967. Overall, about 11 million (about 10%) of all married people have a spouse of a different race or ethnicity. Asian-Americans have the highest rate of intermarriage among newlyweds (29%) and Latin@ have the second highest rate (27%) while African-Americans have the third highest (18%) and white Americans have the lowest at 11%. Latin@ newlywed men and women are just as likely to intermarry while African-Americans and Asian-Americans have significant gender disparities in intermarriage rates. With regard to educational attainment, Latin@ with a bachelor's degree have the highest rate of intermarriage (46%) across the four major racial/ethnic groups. And lastly, about 42% of all intermarried couples involve one Latinx and one white spouse and an identical percentage of all multiracial or multiethnic babies have one Latin@ parent and one white parent (Livingston & Brown, 2017).

Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\): "Can you believe less than 50 years ago our interracial marriage would have been illegal in 16 states?" (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0; Jennifer Borget via Flickr)

What does this mean for the future of the Latin@ population in the United States? According to assimilation theorists, the increase in intermarriage rates is a reflection of the integration of the Latin@ population into the mainstream American society. Theorists like Park and Gordon predicted that this would occur over time, although perhaps at a slower pace for certain racialized groups. However, other social scientists would argue that the increase in intermarriage and interracial babies does not necessarily portend or guarantee racial equality in the United States. For example, Kimberly DaCosta is skeptical that intermarriage will address the larger societal issues of structural racism and racialization:

"While the possibility exists that the greater visibility of multiracial families will lead to more acceptability of all kinds or relations across racial boundaries - beginning with intimate and familial ones and corresponding with spatial and social ones - this does not mean, of course, that the problem that defined America in the twentieth century - the color line - has not followed us into the twenty-first" (Da Costa, 2005).

Also, in their study using multigenerational survey data, Ortiz & Telles (2012) found that the children of Mexican-white marriages continue to have a Mexican identification or identity. Further, they also found that more educated Mexican-Americans experienced more stereotyping and racial discrimination than their less-educated counterparts and those who reported having greater contact with whites experienced more stereotyping and racial discrimination. They concluded that these "results are indicative of the ways in which Mexican-Americans are racialized in the United States." Their findings also challenge the assumption that interracial marriages or contact with the white majority will lead to racial equality or a more multiracial or pluralistic America.

 

 

Contributors and Attributions

• Ramos, Carlos. (Long Beach City College)
• Tsuhako, Joy. (Cerritos College)

Works Cited

• Colby S. & Ortman J. (2015). Projections of the size and composition of the U.S. population: 2014 - 2060. U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Reports. March 2015
• Da Costa, K. (2005). Redrawing the color line? The problems and possibilities of multiracial families and group making. In Gallagher C. (Ed.) Rethinking the Color Line (2018) 6th Edition. Sage.
• Livingston, G. & Brown, A. (2017). Intermarriage in the U.S. 50 years after Loving v. Virginia. Pew Research Center.
• Ortiz, V., & Telles, E. (2012). Racial identity and racial treatment of Mexican Americans. Race and Social Problems, 4(1).
• Samora, Julian. (1993). A History of the Mexican-American People. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Southern Poverty Law Center. (2020). Teaching Tolerance. Southern Poverty Law Center.
• Terriquez, V. (2015 August). Intersectional mobilization, social movement spillover, and queer youth leadership in the immigrant rights movement. Social Problems, 62(3), 343–362.