Will My Love Always Be Less Than Yours?
-
Marriage throughout history has always been a means of economic opportunity and, as such, is an institution that has been shaped by religion and law, with often the former influencing the latter. With the creation of new nation-states in North America, there needed to be concrete racial hierarchies to preserve a certain standard of superiority and forge identity. South Asian immigrants in the early 20th century often came without wives because of the strict immigration policies, and difficulty of the voyage (80). Their marriages between non-South Asian women created complexities in this racial hierarchy and were monitored and governed in North America.
Anti-Asian sentiments from the earlier migration of Chinese migrants intensified with the arrival of migrants from South Asia. Indians posed a fear of disrupting Canada’s supposed “White destiny”(83). I posit that a white destiny can only be preserved by either the assimilation of a group into that “destiny”, or their exclusion by returning them to their countries of origin. This placed interracial marriages between South Asian men, and non-white women as a fearful and unwanted development.
Legal and social structures of the early 20th century made non-Christian, polygamous marriages often illegitimate, going against the “chosen model” of marriage (11). The government attempted to delegitimize non-Western, and non-white forms of marriage. The case of Nami Singh created a legal dispute over the legitimacy of his children born to a Mexican woman who the courts deemed as a “concubine” (132). The state's control over marriage demonstrates the racial hierarchy embedded in legal structures, as white monogamous marriage was consistently positioned as the standard against which all other unions were judged.
The economic benefits of marriage between South Asians and Mexicans was paramount in facilitating their marriages. Many of the Mexicans in the Leonard reading already had children from a previous marriage (69). This meant that these marriages were mutually beneficial, granting both the South Asian men and Mexican women economic and a certain amount of social security. Although these marriages were often prevented from being able to transfer wealth, ensuring that property remained white-controlled (132). Additionally, many of these women face the possibility of losing their citizenship in their marriage with foreign men (132). The regulation of interracial marriage served to maintain white supremacy, both socially and economically.
Doing the readings for this week, I started to wonder how present-day governments have come to form ideas and laws of non-white interracial marriages. The quote about looking at the Black community, as one that is hated in the eyes of white people (69) made me think of how white dominance comes to affect marital relations between interracial couples today, particularly between immigrants. If governance in marriage in America and Canada was rooted in the “chosen model”, how has it impacted America and Canada’s contemporary ideas of love and marriage? If the North Americans' conception of love has been affected by the racist laws, even unintentionally, do “we” the diaspora then experience and understand love in a fundamentally different form than our ancestors? Possibly as an ”outsider” to love? Within the law, and the social landscape of the country I have found myself in, will my love always be valued less in their eyes in comparison to a white, monogamous, heterosexual, christian couple?