When you try to define identity with race, you have just entered into a really messy place. We are seeing this played out in the controversy and uproar with the George Zimmerman trial and verdict. Here’s what I mean.
George Zimmerman self-identifies as “Hispanic.” That’s because he is “Hispanic” by any definition you use. Census. Voter registration. Applications for financial aid for college. Family of origin. George Zimmerman is Hispanic.
George Zimmerman’s father is White, but his mother is Peruvian. If they were living in Peru rather then Virginia when George was born, then according to customs there, he could have “Jorge Zimmerman Mesa,” on his birth certificate. George Zimmerman is Hispanic. If you put a picture of George Zimmerman with boxes below that say, African American, White, or Hispanic, 100 people out of 100 will check “Hispanic.”
If you disagree with this, you also disagree with President Obama being identified as “African American.” His mother is White. If you put a picture of President Obama with boxes that say African American, White, or Hispanic, 100 out of 100 people will check “African American.”
Do you see how this goes?
Defining identity with race is dicey. The more people from different racial “categories” marry each other and have kids, it is going to be even more difficult to use racial identity as an absolute filter on the cultural and political landscape.
Let me make it even more confusing.
George Zimmerman’s mother’s grandfather was black. This makes George Zimmerman 12.5% black. Yet, since he is Afro-Peruvian, this just gets classified with “Hispanic.”
So, what do we make of all this? It doesn’t surprise me at all to hear about “White” racism, see blogposts that say things like “A Letter to White America,” and such. This is expected. It is status quo. But, how would the uproar play out if it had been Jorge Zimmerman Mesa on trial? We will never know. George Zimmerman is Hispanic, but that doesn’t fit into the neat categories of racial identity, racism, bias, and so on, being a black/ white issue.
For example, research on racial bias in “Stand Your Ground” law only takes into account white and black shooters and victims. I know this because our son has some expertise in “Stand Your Ground,” law specifically, as he does research on this for the Criminology department at his university. It seems the racial bias factors are only taking into account black/white shooter/victims. Here’s an excerpt from one such report of the Urban Institute,
“ In states with Stand Your Ground laws, 34 percent of white shooters did not face charges or have not been convicted after shooting a black person… Just 3 percent of black shooters got the same treatment after shooting a white person and making a Stand Your Ground claim…”
This difference in charges and convictions is certainly interesting from a justice standpoint concerning “Stand Your Ground” laws, and ought to be vigorously researched. However, currently this doesn’t really address the Zimmerman case. George Zimmerman is Hispanic.
Yes, using racial identity is confusing. If you look up a “Wikipedia” article for “George Zimmerman,” you will not find one. You will be redirected to “Shooting of Trayvon Martin.” On Monday in this article, George Zimmerman was called, “multi-racial Hispanic American.” Today, he is called “mixed-race Hispanic.” But, President Obama in his Wikipedia article is not “multiracial African American,” nor “mixed race African American,” on Monday or today. No, he’s just plain “African American.”
It will continue to be more and more difficult to keep a neat white against black racial meme going. But, presently, for much of media and social media, a Hispanic man killing a black teenager is still a “white thing.” Interesting…
If you want to hear what I actually think about the trial verdict, you can listen to this.
