The marriage of a mixed-race US citizen into the British royal family
would have been unthinkable a generation ago. Academic Chamion
Caballero says that opposition to mixed-race relationships has fallen
dramatically in Britain.
London - Meghan Markle describes herself as "half-black and
half-white." She has written about the casual racism she experienced
while growing up in Los Angeles and said she took "pride in being a
strong, confident mixed-race woman." Now she is about to become the
first member of Britain's royal family with African ancestry, at
least in modern times.
Chamion Caballero, an academic and a director of the Mix-d Museum
digital archive of racial mixing in Britain, believes the marriage
reflects rising tolerance, but she has doubts about whether it will
catalyse major changes in attitudes to race. The co-author of a new
book, "Mixed-race Britain in the 20th century," discusses Meghan and
the monarchy with dpa.
dpa:
What does the marriage of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry mean
for how the royal family is seen in Britain?
Caballero:
I think that, as has long been the case with high profile
interracial relationships, it will mean different things to different
people as the wide range of views so far from the media, public
figures and the public already indicates.
There are those who, like Jo Marney, the girlfriend of the former UK
Independence Party leader Henry Bolton, are disgusted by the
relationship, seeing it as tainting the lineage of the royal family.
They view the royals' lack of opposition to the pair as symbolic of
Britain's wider social capitulation to multiculturalism.
Meanwhile, there are others who have heralded the relationship as a
cause for celebration for the very reasons it has upset people like
Marney, such as the journalist and writer Afua Hirsch, who sees the
monarchy's acceptance of the relationship as indicative of a growing
recognition of diversity as an integral and ordinary part of British
life.
And then there are some who, generally finding the whole concept of
monarchy and celebrity irrelevant or tedious, simply do not care
about the royal family and what Meghan's addition to it means.
dpa:
And what could it mean for the status of African-Caribbean and
mixed-race women, and men, in Britain?
Caballero:
I think it is fair to say that, given the coverage so far,
there is likely to be increased public discussion of the status of
black and mixed-race women - and, relatedly at times, men - in
Britain, along with their visibility. For example, in addition to
Meghan herself, we've also seen her black American mother attract
significant attention and commentary.
But as for making any link between the relationship and any actual,
tangible change in the status of black/mixed-race women, I'm not
convinced. I think [writer] Sathnam Sanghera's comment about being
sure that "Meghan Markle will eradicate racism in Britain in the way
a black president really solved all racism problems in the US" is
probably on the money!
dpa:
If Prince Charles had wanted to marry a divorced, mixed-race
American 35-plus years ago, would it have been possible, socially and
politically?
Caballero:
As future head of the Church of England, it would have
been impossible for Charles to marry a divorcee in the 1980s before
the revision of the church's policy on divorce and remarriage, which
only happened in 2002.
For the monarchy to approve of a non-white, non-aristocratic family
to carry on the royal lineage would have been unthinkable,
particularly in a social climate in which opposition to racial mixing
was at times recorded as 50 per cent. Such attitudes, however, began
to decline rapidly in the late 1980s.
dpa:
Why is there so little opposition now?
Caballero:
As we discuss in our book, large generational differences
in levels of prejudice seem to be the driving force. This is not to
suggest that there is a simple correlation to be made between a
younger non-racist generation and an older racist generation -
indeed, when we look at Twitter and other public forum comments, it
is clear that racist attitudes towards interracial couples are not
the preserve of older generations.
Rather, the general shift in attitudes by cohort goes some way to
explaining why an impending interracial marriage at such a prominent
level in the royal family hasn't attracted the open level of vitriol
that it might have done several decades ago.
dpa:
What do you think of US journalist Keli Goff's claim that Meghan
would be less acceptable to the royal family if she had darker skin?
Caballero:
I couldn't say whether she'd be less acceptable to the
royal family, as I'd just be guessing their views.
But on a wider social level, I think it can be said with some
confidence that it is likely that there would be even more prurience
and racism visible in public discussions if Meghan had darker skin,
as this certainly chimes with research findings on colourism and
discrimination for darker-skinned women from black and Asian
backgrounds.