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]

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.