Feeling Different vs. Fitting in and Feeling Connected

As mentioned earlier (5.3.1), the feeling of integration and togetherness with their therapists brought feelings of hope for the participants. However, they also spoke about how not integrating because of their otherness made them feel as if they stood apart from groups, especially the dominant white majority. The experience of being different from the ‘norm’ was a thread that started in childhood, regardless of whether they were raised in the West or Asia and notions of belonging and acceptance have emerged as themes elsewhere in phenomenological research into biraciality (Gaskins, 1979) cited in Bradshaw (1992). There were also moments in the therapy room where the participants felt that either their therapists did not understand them at all (in Kim’s case) or were unable to fully grasp their experiences, thereby missing the full impact of what it means to be of mixed race.

In order to fit in, most of the participants (except for Lara) had at some point felt like

they had presented themselves as ‘honorary whites’ (Song & Hashem, 2010, p.291), a phenomenon known as ‘passing’ (Bradshaw, 1992). This seemed to be because they related more to the Western cultures where they had been raised and because of their lack of language or history of living in South East Asia. Song and Hashem suggest that this leads to an incorrect assumption that they are not able to assert their Asian identity but it may be more likely that they feel they will be rejected if they do. Miville et al (2005) says the ‘Chameleon experience’ (p.512) shows flexibility around social boundaries, which they imply enhances psychological functioning by developing increased cognitive flexibility and openness. However, I would say that is not the case when it feels it needs to be done in order to fit in. This ‘passing’ brought up feelings of guilt and shame in those who had partaken but this had not been fully acknowledged up to that point by some of the participants.

Shame researcher, Brené Brown (2008), refers to shame as ‘the fear of disconnection – the fear of being perceived as flawed and unworthy of acceptance and belonging’ (p.xxv) so If we think about this phenomenon in relation to these participants’ experiences alongside others we can see that ‘passing’ aligns to Piaget’s (1953) cited in Katz (1996) notion of ‘adaptation’ whereas racial categorization by dominant groups is similar to ‘organisation’ – both processes of which come about through the need to create equilibrium.

Taking a psychoanalytic perspective, Dalal (2002) claims the emphasis on difference is made in order to estrange and detach the ‘us’ from ‘them’, which results in projection becoming a way of generating difference. In addition, the splitting that occurs between those who are the subjects of racism and those who enact racism has been critiqued for assuming that similarity and difference are absolute states within themselves that act in opposition to each other. This view fails to recognize the link between them (Dalal, 2002) ie it is not the differences that cause racism - rather it is the assertion of specific differences and power that creates racism/race.

One can become disempowered because of such perceived differences, however the participant group in this study is particularly interesting in that they feel disempowered through the dual process of being seen as the same as well as being different. They want to be seen as ‘different’ but then at times ‘difference’ itself becomes a sub-category – a category that does not honour the lived experience.

Dalal acknowledges the need for an explanation of how ‘racism’ and ‘race’ have been made normative. Just as there is a split between the enactors and subjects of racism, there also exists a split between the social and psychological in analytic thinking. Through this lens the social and psychological are seen as separate entities rather than interlinked factors in the process of differentiation. We are born into pre-existing societies that have overlapping and conflicting cultures that are embedded in power relations - and all of these factors contribute to the formation of self – ie not only do we attach at an individual level but also we attach to certain socio-political categories. Dalal references Elias, the sociologist, for explanations: historically those who were more powerful determined what was thought to be ‘good’ or ‘bad’ to distance those who were perceived to be inferior due to differences in manners and customs – and these external social structures are echoed in the structure of the psyche.

This splitting process around the creation of race and racism mirrors the sense of splitting and separateness experienced by the participants when they felt hopeless:

therefore one could say that the splitting process in itself lacks hope.

There was also a subtle impact of intergenerational trauma for some of the participants. Lara spoke most clearly of the ‘oppression’, which her ancestors had experienced for generations before her. Others spoke of observing their mothers’

behaviour of being immigrants: Angela’s mother felt ‘lost’ in the British culture and Norina’s mother sought comfort in friendships with other Asian women who had married Irish men. This did not come up in my interview but I have often wondered about the impact of my paternal grandmother’s shame, in particular, around her adoption in China – something she only told her family on her deathbed. It is now known (due to eye colouring in my family) that she was the product of an interracial relationship and this was the reason for her adoption. Given I inherited her squint, which often draws attention to my unusual eye colour, I have often wondered whether the shame that has dominated my life was also, in part, inherited. In Danieli’s (1998) book on intergenerational trauma, there are chapters on the Holocaust and the impact of the conflict in former Yugoslavia, Japanese American internment and Indigenous Australians amongst many other chapters about racial

atrocities worldwide – but there seems to be a lack of literature on a more subtle form of racist trauma that may be transmitted such as that alluded to in this study.

Because of being ‘The Other’ with no clear social or cultural home, Mengel (2001) suggests that multiracial people, whatever their racial mix, inhabit a ‘third space’

(p.100), which is a panethnic space, separate to one that is shared by those of the same racial mix and those who are monoracial. Whilst I agree with Mengel that everybody who has mixed heritage shares some common ground, I feel that people who are deemed to be black according to the ‘one-drop rule’ have a different experience to those who are conversely, and incorrectly, often seen as white.

This ‘third space’ is similar to Williams’ (1992) idea of a ‘third culture’ and, along similar lines, Mahtani (2001) refers to a ‘mobile paradoxical space’, which takes its roots from feminist theory. This space acknowledges multiple dimensions that reach beyond the domains of the dominant subject – in the case of feminist theory the space allows women a place where they are not marginalised as the object. In terms of race, this ‘mobile paradoxical space’ goes beyond the notion of duality between the dominant white and ‘the other’, which is voiced so vividly by one of Mahtani’s research participants: ‘So your physicality, your whole body, totally, you know, challenges the idea that races shouldn’t mix, that this is the way things are, that these facts exist, that the truth exists in this way. Because if all this were true, then I wouldn’t exist. And I exist, therefore it cannot be true’ (p.181).

However hard it is for us to find an affinity with a group, I believe that it is in our basest nature to want to connect with others and so a shared space of fluidity and ambivalence is an important one to delineate. That said there exists a tension between this need to connect to others and our need to be separate (Fairbairn, 1952; Stern, 1985) and this tension was felt in the data through the participants’

desire to have their particular racial mix seen by others in order to acknowledge their family, heritage and cultural influences, whilst also wanting to belong to the majority group.