Musa Mseleku says he wants to change people's perceptions of polygamy.
When she met him, he already had two other wives, so she says that she knew what she was getting into. Her grandparents had also been part of a polygamous family. Thobile far left says the women rarely have conflict and are "like sisters" But the show, which explores ameerican the four Mrs Mselekus balance their daily routine, careers which include business and government jobshousehold commitments and parenting duties, also shows the tensions within the family.
Ndela Ntshangase, a lecturer in the school of Zulu studies at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, says that the polygamous unions in South Africa began to wane in the 19th century when white missionaries preached that conversion to Christianity entailed divorcing one's "extra" wives. But can it work both ways? Would Musa Mseleku be OK with one of his wives taking another husband?
We chose him and him alone. All wivee stories are at bbc. Related Topics. Although there are some inconsistencies across national-origin groups, the pattern for several Hispanic subgroups suggests declining familism across generations. For example, among Mexicans, foreign-born householders are more likely to be married and less likely to cohabit or to be female family he than their native-born counterparts. Among the foreign-born, 72 percent are married, 5 percent are cohabiting, and 15 percent are single female householders; the comparable figures for the native-born of native parentage are 65 percent south, 7 percent cohabiting, and 22 percent single female householders.
In addition, the mean household size and the percentage of extended family households are higher among foreign-born Wjves than native-born Mexicans. For example, among the foreign-born, 10 percent of households are extended, compared with 7 percent among the native-born of native parentage. However, there are irregular or amrican patterns ameeican Cubans and wife Hispanics. When the educational distribution of household he is standardized each generation of american Hispanic subgroup given the educational distribution of the total non-Hispanic white populationthe generational patterns remain unchanged wjves shown.
Living Arrangements The structure and composition of households are experienced by individuals in different ways as they move through the life course. Some of the largest differences in living arrangements by race and ethnicity are found for children.
Again, the figures for Hispanics fall between the extremes represented by the experience soyth non-Hispanic whites 77 percent and non-Hispanic blacks 37 percentalthough Hispanics are generally closer to whites. As one would expect, Puerto Rican 46 percent and non-Hispanic black children 49 percent are the most likely to live in a mother-only family. There is less racial and ethnic variation in living arrangements in early adulthood 18 to 24 and the middle adult years 25 to However, several group differences are noteworthy.
In early adulthood, Cubans stand out for their comparatively low rates of household hehip and high propensity to remain in the parental home. Fully 62 percent of Cubans ages 18 to 24 live in their parent's household, compared with less than 50 percent for all other Hispanic groups. This americzn arrangement may facilitate the relatively high levels of education attained by Cubans in young adulthood.
The Best Places In Latin America To Find A Wife — My Latin Life
This pattern carries over to middle adulthood ages 25 to 64and in fact is one of the major ways in which living arrangements vary by race and ethnicity during the middle adult years. Doubling up with relatives may be an economic strategy that is employed under conditions of economic disadvantage. In particular, Hispanics are considerably more likely to live with other relatives and less likely to live alone than are non-Hispanic whites. These differences undoubtedly reflect both differences in economic resources and cultural preferences regarding the care of the elderly.
However, in Table we provide data for Mexican Americans on generational differences in living arrangements among children and the elderly.
The top panel shows a striking difference between children with foreign-born parents first- and second-generation children and children with south parents. Children in the former groups are much more likely to live with both parents 72—73 percent than children in the latter wife 56 percent. About 17 percent of first-generation children live with only one parent 14 percent with mother and 3 percent with fatheramerican with 24 percent of second-generation children and 37 percent of native-born children with native-born parents.
Thus, children of the foreign-born experience greater parental union maerican than children of the native-born. The situation of Mexican American elderly persons also varies by generation. First, foreign-born elderly persons are less likely to be the householder or the spouse or partner of the householder 54 percent than the native-born of foreign parentage 69 percent or the native-born of native parentage 63 percent.
They are also less likely to live alone 15 percent, compared with about 20—21 percent for the native-born groups. Instead, the foreign-born are considerably more likely to live with other relatives 30 percentsuch as their children, than the native-born of foreign percentage 9 percent and native parentage 14 percent. Overall, Hispanics exhibit higher levels of familism than non-Hispanics on most of the structural indicators examined.
Qives notable exception is female family hehip, which is considerably more prevalent in all Hispanic subgroups than among non-Hispanic whites. At the amerian time, there is considerable diversity in the family characteristics of Hispanics by both national origin and generation. Although the findings are not entirely consistent across Hispanic groups, within-group generational differences generally suggest declining familism across generations.
This is especially the case for Mexican Americans, a group that exhibits lower levels of family-oriented behavior on every indicator among the native-born compared with the foreign-born. However, the social construction of race and ethnicity—and the complexities involved in racial and ethnic identities—are increasingly emphasized by contemporary social scientists. The dominant view is that racial and ethnic reflect shared social meanings, rather than biological differences between groups, and that social interpretations of the are tied to long-standing power differentials Waters, In addition, the fluidity of racial and ethnic identities across situations, over time, and across generations is stressed.
The prevalence of intermarriage is strongly influenced by two factors: the strength of preferences for endogamy and demographic factors that govern opportunities for in-group and out-group marriage e. Some studies of intermarriage have taken as their primary question the extent to which social boundaries exist between groups i. In this chapter, sohth aim is descriptive and thus does not require controlling for demographic factors.
Latin Brides, Latin Women, Latin Dating - Rose Brides
Our goal is to describe patterns of ethnic mixing in marriage, cohabitation, and parenthood. One important mechanism through which this potentially occurs is fertility. For instance, offspring with one Hispanic parent and one non-Hispanic white parent are likely to identify more weakly with a specific Hispanic subgroup or with the soutu Hispanic or Latino labels than offspring with two Hispanic parents, especially coethnic parents Duncan and Trejo, ; Hirschman, In Tablewe present summary information on ethnic endogamy 16 versus exogamy in marriages and cohabiting unions.
For marriages, there are differences in levels of ethnic endogamy across Hispanic groups, with Mexican Americans exhibiting a higher level of endogamy than all other groups.
Among married Mexican women, 84 percent have a Mexican husband; the corresponding figures are 74 percent for Cubans, 65 percent for Central Americans and South Americans, 62 percent for Puerto Ricans, and 55 percent for other Hispanics. The higher level of in-group marriage among Mexican Americans is undoubtedly influenced by the size of the U.
Mexican population, which allows for relatively high levels of contact with other Mexican Americans. The generational pattern with respect to ethnic endogamy in marriage is very similar across Hispanic groups.
Patriarchy, Power, and Pay: The Transformation of American Families, –
In each Hispanic subgroup, there is a marked decline in ethnic endogamy from the first generation to the second. Among Mexicans and Puerto Ricans, a decline is also evident between the second generation and the native-born with native parents; however, among Central Americans and South Americans and other Hispanics, roughly comparable percentages of second- and third or higher -generation women are married to partners with similar national origins.
The other side of endogamy is exogamy, and the data for americn Hispanic subgroup indicate that married Hispanic women who do not have a co-ethnic husband are relatively likely to be married to a non-Hispanic white. Exogamous marriages represent 16 percent — 84 of all marriages among Mexican American women; in such marriages, 78 percent The generational pattern with respect to marriages between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites is also important.
Latin brides: All You Wanted to Know
In each Hispanic subgroup, the percentage of women with a non-Hispanic white husband rises dramatically across generations. The second most common type of exogamous marriage involves Hispanic spouses from dissimilar americn origins. Marriages with Hispanic but not coethnic husbands constitute 15 percent 2. Table also presents information on cohabiting unions.
23 Badass Latin American Women Who Made History
With few exceptions, the overall level of ethnic endogamy is lower for cohabiting unions than for south marriages. Among Mexican Akerican, for example, 74 percent of all cohabiting unions are endogamous, compared with 84 percent of marriages. In particular, exogamous cohabiting wives are generally less likely to involve a non-Hispanic white partner and wwives likely to involve a Hispanic partner or a black partner than are exogamous marriages.
The figures for black partners are especially striking. Among Mexican American women, for example, about 4 percent. Similarly, among Puerto Ricans, 11 percent 4. Due to sample size limitations, the full array of generational differences in endogamy in cohabiting unions can be presented american for Mexican Americans. Among Mexican Americans, the generational pattern of endogamy is similar to, albeit stronger than, that observed for marriages—declining percentages in endogamous unions qives generations.
In addition, exogamous unions involving Mexican American women and non-Hispanic white partners become more common in each successive generation.
This is also the case for unions with non-Hispanic black partners, but the overall percentage of unions with non-Hispanic blacks is small. Amerrican unions are of interest in their own right, but their consequences for ethnic boundaries are greatest when they produce children. We have seen that mixed unions among Hispanic women most commonly involve a non-Hispanic white partner. Because american unions both al and facilitate assimilation into mainstream white society, their offspring are likely to identify less strongly with their Hispanic national origins than children with two coethnic parents.
Although numerous factors wivee the size and composition of Hispanic groups e. In Tablewe expand our analysis by south interethnic mating among parents of children born inusing data from the Detail Natality File. As was the case in the table on union patterns, we organize the data by the mother's ethnicity and generation.
However, due to the limited information collected on the birth certificate, we are able to distinguish only a,erican foreign-born mothers and native-born wives. For mothers in each Hispanic subgroup, the percentages of births in which the father is coethnic, from a different Hispanic group, non-Hispanic white, and non-Hispanic black are shown. These percentages are based on cases in which the father's race and ethnicity are known; however, since missing information on wivse is problematic in birth certificate wiges, we also show the percentage of cases in each group with missing information on the father's ethnicity.
Focusing first on all births, there are substantial differences in intermating patterns by Hispanic ethnicity and generation. As was the case in our analysis of marital and cohabiting unions, the level of ethnic endogamy is higher among Mexican Americans than for other Hispanic groups. Moreover, for all groups except Mexican Americans, soutn of parents is considerably lower than coethnicity of married or cohabiting partners.
For example, among Puerto Ricans, 62 percent of married partners and 58 percent of cohabiting partners have similar Hispanic origins; however, only 52 percent of births can be attributed to amedican parents. The most striking pattern shown in the table, however, is that for generation: infants of foreign-born mothers are substantially more likely to have coethnic parents than infants of native-born mothers.
The percentages of children south to coethnic parents for foreign-born and native-born mothers, respectively, are 93 and 74 for Mexicans, 61 and 47 for Puerto Ricans, 70 and 38 for Cubans, 68 and 34 for Central American and South American mothers, and 68 and 46 for other Hispanic mothers. Exogamous unions producing children are highly likely to be with Hispanic fathers from american national-origin groups or with non-Hispanic white soutth, with one exception.
Mexican-origin women are considerably more likely to wife with a non-Hispanic white partner than with a non-Mexican Hispanic partner. When births are broken down by the marital status of the mother, several important differences in ethnic mixing are evident. First, considerably fewer births to unmarried Hispanic mothers involve partnerships with non-Hispanic white males than is the case for births to married Hispanic mothers.
Second, births outside marriage are more likely to involve a non-Hispanic black father than births within marriage. For example, about 8 percent of infants of unmarried Puerto Rican mothers had non-Hispanic white fathers, compared with 24 percent of infants of married Puerto Rican mothers.
South American Brides - Where To Meet and How to Date?
Children born to unmarried Puerto Rican women were much more likely to have a black father 15 percent than children born to married Puerto Rican women 8 percent. This pattern is similar across all Soith groups. Given the relatively high propensity of non-Hispanic whites to bear children within marriage and the relatively high propensity of non-Hispanic blacks to bear children outside marriage, these patterns appear to reflect the preferences and circumstances of fathers. In summary, several qives conclusions can be drawn from our analyses of ethnic mixing.
South American Bride
First, there are substantial differences across Hispanic groups in the level of ethnic endogamy in marriages, cohabiting unions, and parenthood. Second, in wuves Hispanic groups, there are marked declines in ethnic endogamy in marriage, cohabitation, souuth parenthood across generations. This is consistent with a large body of research that shows that intermarriage is a sensitive indicator of assimilation.
Finally, the most provocative findings emerge from a comparison of for marriage, cohabitation, and parenthood. In marriage, there is a higher level of ethnic endogamy than in cohabitation and parenthood.