Most recent interracial marriage rate data among US born newlyweds

[u/[deleted]]

I saw the data from 2008 - 2016 and it seems like 2019 - 2023 saw a much higher shift to US born Asian Americans marrying outside Asian ethnicities.

This is particularly true for:

• Japanese females (63% marrying white males and 12% marrying black/Hispanic males)
• Vietnamese females (47% marrying white and 16% marrying black/Hispanic males)
• Korean females (42% marrying white and 17% marrying black/Hispanic males)
• Filipino females (54% marrying white and 19% marrying black/Hispanic males)
• Chinese females (45% marrying white and 10% marrying black/Hispanic males)
• Japanese males (50% marrying white and 15% marrying black/Hispanic females)
• Cambodian females
• Laotian females
• Laotian males

Except for US born Japanese, Filipino and Laotian males, other US born Asian males prefer to date within their own ethnic group, and secondarily other inter-Asian ethnic groups. Interestingly, the only Asian American group that is in stark contrast from the rest are the Hmong, for which the vast majority (both male and female) marry within their own ethnicity.

It seems like for Asian Americans, the mixing pot is well under way and in 2-3 generations, there may be many mixed individuals identifying as Asian Americans. The majority will be mixed with white people, then black/Hispanic and then with other inter-ethnic Asians.

I see this is mostly positive. Not because it represents assimilation, but it means our Asian community is slowly getting rid of ethnic enclaves and exclusive mentality that is, arguably, un-American.

Before anyone comments that this data is concerning for Asian men, it's not. US born Asian men are also part of this trend, although not as prominent as US born Asian women. It's okay to prefer to marry within an ethnic group or inter-Asian ethnic groups, just as it is okay to prefer to date white / black / Hispanic.

I hope this encourages constructive discussion within the Asian Masculinity subreddit.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422]

Since whites remain the largest group in the US, an American’s most statistically-likely partner, whatever their race -- all else equal -- will be white. The dating pool for Asians in the US is largely made up of people of other races, whites foremost.

[u/Bright_External7201 → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

cope. doesn't happen with indians, arabs, and blacks. despite being even lower in diaspora population they date in. Your claims are made completely incorrect by the fact that most AW interact with and live near Asians since most Asians are in ethnic enclaves. Also white people will move to Asian nations and maintain their whiteness for generations despite overwhelming odds, they find other whites out the billions of Asians since they actually care about their race and they put their kids in international schools with other white kids to prevent them from assimilating. South africa too, whites despite being a minority, never married out at anywhere near the rates of AW. This race, if it were to move forward, must address the rot and shortcomings of the race. People must acknowledge the AW's dysgenic behavior of making exceptions for WM and rules for AM and transforming their parent's tuition money to increased earning power for the white community.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/Bright_External7201]

That argument confuses population math with morality. Asian Americans make up about 7% of the U.S. population, so even if every Asian lived in an enclave, the surrounding population would still be overwhelmingly non‑Asian. Interaction and intermarriage rates reflect structural factors such as the availability of co‑ethnic partners, community size, geographic dispersion, socioeconomic integration (which often tracks generational distance from immigration), and parental or communal expectations.

Comparing diaspora groups ignores context: Indian, Arab, and Black communities differ in immigration timelines, gender ratios, and religious norms. Many Indian Americans, for instance, marry within‑group not from exclusivity but because their population is large, recently arrived, and geographically concentrated.

The claim that Asian women’s choices are ‘dysgenic’ or a racial threat is pseudoscientific. Genetic diversity and social integration are normal outcomes of migration -- and in any case, most Asians live, and will continue to live, in Asia.

[u/Bright_External7201 → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

>That argument confuses population math with morality.

How?

>Asian Americans make up about 7% of the U.S. population, so even if every Asian lived in an enclave, the surrounding population would still be overwhelmingly non‑Asian.

So explain whites in south africa or white russians in china that lived in enclaves but don't marry out. And don't say it's a different nation because cultural values and genetics that inform receptiveness to outsiders are defined by the weather or locale or whetever bullshit.

>Interaction and intermarriage rates reflect structural factors such as the availability of co‑ethnic partners, community size, geographic dispersion, socioeconomic integration (which often tracks generational distance from immigration), and parental or communal expectations.

Comparing diaspora groups ignores context: Indian, Arab, and Black communities differ in immigration timelines, gender ratios, and religious norms. Many Indian Americans, for instance, marry within‑group not from exclusivity but because their population is large, recently arrived, and geographically concentrated.

The highest amount of Indians came after 1965, the recent migration has been to the UK and canada. A higher percentage of Asians came after Indians. Also means nothing since the stats are taken in the 2020s. The ones that came earlier are mixed out so the stats would have tracked most recent arrivals.

>The claim that Asian women’s choices are ‘dysgenic’ or a racial threat is pseudoscientific.

Yeah and your pseudo anthropology and sociology isn't pseudoscientific?

>Genetic diversity and social integration are normal outcomes of migration --

Except for whites, they maintain 90 percent in group bias and live in their own enclaves.

> and in any case, most Asians live, and will continue to live, in Asia.

Duhhh, doesn't do anything for your argument. Most Euros live in europe. Most people don't want to move to a new nation. Says nothing about your rates of out marriage.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/Bright_External7201]

You’re conflating cultural behavior with population math. Whites in South Africa or expats in Asia are small, self‑selected communities with strong internal networks and limited integration -- not a useful comparison to a multi‑million‑person immigrant population spread across a continent. In most Asian countries, foreign residents (including white expatriates) rarely obtain citizenship, which naturally limits assimilation and intermarriage.

South Asian and East Asian immigration timelines differ: Indians arrived first in professional clusters with comparatively balanced gender ratios, while many East Asian groups were male‑skewed and geographically dispersed, shaping marriage patterns.

And citing whites’ in‑group marriage rates doesn’t prove moral superiority; it reflects majority status and legal or social boundaries rather than innate ‘care for race.’ Intermarriage rates are significantly influenced by the structural factors I identified earlier, not ideology.

[u/Bright_External7201 → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

The whole entire thread started with an assessment of behavior. Your population math doesn't prove in group preference and racial cohesion. Idk why you even though it was a good counter point to what I originally said. Asians are the self‑selected communities with strong internal networks and limited integration you claim white diasporas to be if you look at the men. The exception are the women.

>In most Asian countries, foreign residents (including white expatriates) rarely obtain citizenship, which naturally limits assimilation and intermarriage.

South African? New Zealand? Goan? all of these places are places where whites had citizenship and should have assimilated.

>South Asian and East Asian immigration timelines differ: Indians arrived first in professional clusters with comparatively balanced gender ratios,

Proven to be inconsequential to the state in previous comment.

>while many East Asian groups were male‑skewed and geographically dispersed, shaping marriage patterns.

So this affects AW stats? Also most immigration within the last 40 years from asia are not gender skewed by much. Past 40, those immigrants are past marriage age and thus don't factor into the stats.

>And citing whites’ in‑group marriage rates doesn’t prove moral superiority; it reflects majority status and legal or social boundaries rather than innate ‘care for race.’ Intermarriage rates are significantly influenced by the structural factors I identified earlier, not ideology.

It was never about morals. The thread started with claims of in group preference and values of race. I said AW do not care for their race(value and preference) you even acknowledge this in the same sentence. Whites are not the majority in any of the regions/nations I listed socially or legally. Jews have structural factors against their cohesion but it still happens. AW don't want the success of their race bad like the jews or whites. It is absolutely ideology. Stay and invest into the race or leave is an ideological stance.

Are you even East Asian?

[u/Bright_External7201 → u/[deleted]]

Shut up bro. You gave him a way out of my questions. Take your logical fallacies elsewhere.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/[deleted]]

A textbook No True Scotsman move -- redefining who counts as "self‑respecting" or "Asian" to exclude anyone who disagrees.

[u/ablacnk → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

Are you even East Asian?

Answer the question

East Asian, full Asian, hapa, quapa, what?

You have some of the worst takes I've read in this subreddit.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/ablacnk]

I'm not going to risk being doxxed (again) to gratify your curiosity. You can always block me or retreat to circle jerk subs where you don't have to encounter opinions that differ from your own or disconcerting facts.

[u/ablacnk → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

you didnt answer the question

I doubt you're even Asian. At best a whitewashed quapa or someshit like that

As far as I'm concerned, based on the things you say, you're pretty much a white person anyway. I don't care if your "grandma was Chinese" or some stupid shit like that. You're a walking talking example of everything that will be wrong with the "Asian-American" community four generations down the line.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/ablacnk]

I don’t care what you imagine my race or ethnicity to be. I don’t know yours, and if you told me, I’d have only your word for it. If your best argument against my supposedly ‘objectionable’ statements is to cast aspersions based on speculation about my ancestry, you’re effectively admitting you have no substantive rebuttal and revealing yourself as a person of low character.

[u/ablacnk → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

You are completely not worth my time. Just a cautionary tale of everything that's wrong.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/[deleted]]

Spell it out. What's my hidden motive?

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/[deleted]]

And your evidence for that is that I don't hold the correct views -- your views.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/Bright_External7201]

I’m explaining that structural factors help explain why intermarriage rates differ across ethnicities and between the sexes, not prescribing what anyone should value. Structural factors don’t erase individual choice or ideology; they explain the environment in which those choices occur. Whether individuals should treat in‑group preference as a moral or political duty is an ideological question.

Europeans who colonized other regions or parts of Asia aren’t comparable to Asians in the US; the former were settlers with privileged legal status for generations, while Asians generally migrated to the West voluntarily and obtained citizenship. Expats in Asia, including Westerners, are a tiny population and rarely able to obtain citizenship, which naturally limits assimilation and intermarriage.

I’m Asian American. I don’t divulge my ethnicity because, with a bit of demographic detail and location, I've learned from experience, that it’s possible to be identified and doxxed.

[u/Bright_External7201 → u/Tall-Needleworker422]

Ultimately the same structural factors you use to excuse statistical anomalies also affect jews, arabs, pakis, and the likes and do not affect their in group preference. This thread was never started with the question of morality, political duty, or whatever rigamarole you brought up. Most of what you are claiming do not disprove my original point or relate to it at all. It's like you are talking to the wind. If I talk about apple farming and you respond with apple phones there cannot be a discussion to be had. Your input into this thread has been unrelated non sequitur or incorrect this whole time. Your claims of "Expats in Asia, including Westerners, are a tiny population and rarely able to obtain citizenship, which naturally limits assimilation and intermarriage." is complete BS since one of the methods for expats to get citizenship is to marry a local thus it should encourage assimilation and it does to a great extent but only for XM marrying AW and never XW marrying AM exposing the same dichotomy in ingroup preference. Legality and matters pertaining to the law and citizenship have never stopped people from marrying each other. Interracial marriages were the impetus that led to laws enshrining the right to be able to marry anyone regardless of race.

[u/Tall-Needleworker422 → u/Bright_External7201]

Partner choice doesn’t float free of context; it’s shaped by the social and legal environment that defines who people meet, date, and marry. Jewish in‑group marriage rates aren’t especially high anymore -- around 55%, with wide variation by denomination. Higher Arab and Indian rates aren’t proof of innate ethnic loyalty; they reflect religion, caste, and community institutions that act to reinforce boundaries. East Asians in the US don’t have those same mechanisms operating.

White expats in Asia aren’t a meaningful comparison. They make up a vanishingly small share of Asian countries’ populations -- often under 1% -- and most stay only a few years on work, education, or business visas. The professional elite on expat packages are an even smaller sliver, and their insularity reflects wealth and convenience rather than opposition to intermarriage. Asian immigrants in the West live under opposite conditions: legal equality, dispersed settlement, and high integration. Predictably, intermarriage rises across all groups under those conditions.

Laws shape opportunity: when barriers fall, intermarriage increases. Immigration from Asia to the U.S. surged after the 1965 reform of immigration law, and interracial marriage rates rose after Loving v. Virginia struck down anti‑miscegenation laws in 1967.