Internal Integration & Identity Issues

Participants spoke of having the best of both worlds and integrating both the positive and negative experiences that have made them who they are in the present. The positive experiences gave them a greater understanding of what it means to be different whilst the negative experiences included those whereby they had endured racist comments and a lack of comprehension or awareness of their race and related experiences.

One of the greatest areas of dissonance for those of mixed race is the way in which they self-identify, which emerged in the data. Mixed race people are often

fractionalised due to descriptors such as – ‘I’m half-X and half-Y’ or ‘I’m part-A and part-B’ – and the dissection of their identity appears to mirror similar experiences both inside and outside the therapy room. Miville et al’s (2005) research into how a mixed group of Black-White and East Asian-White participants self-identified when asked to choose a ‘best single race’ showed that most part-East Asian respondents chose ‘White’ and most part-Black respondent chose ‘Black’. When they explored these results, they found that many of the part-East Asian participants had chosen

‘White’ as a category based on cultural terms and not racial ones. This was echoed by Aspinall et al’s (2008) research. However, when only the whiteness is seen in a mixed race person, whether it be by the self or by others, there is a sense that the white part is privileged and ranks higher in an unspoken hierarchy (Mahtani &

Moreno, 2001).

With ‘black’ and ‘white’ identity created in relation to ‘the other’, people of mixed race find it harder to identify with ‘the other’ because they bridge both groups. Most of the identity models and theories I found in the literature for those of mixed race (Poston, 1990: Helms, 1995; Renn, 2008) did not feel suitable for this particular participant group as their experiences of identity formation and discrimination are more complex that those who are part-black or monoracial (Parker & Song, 2001). In addition, they have grown up in more than one environment, which often leads to a sense of

‘cultural homelessness’ (Vivero & Jenkins, 1999). Standen (1996) calls for a stance on racial identity ‘on a micro level as fluid and malleable... rather than a stance that necessitates blood as racial identity’ (p.259). Accordingly, psychological therapists need to hold both the internal world and external worlds in order to understand such clients and I feel that the data that came out in these interviews went some way to unveil these separate worlds.

The language used to describe mixed race complexities requires careful thought as the language of race can define and oppress subjectivity and encourage silence because of the power of categorisation. Words can be wounding, which may be another reason why hope is particularly poignant in this arena. Humphrey’s (2007) work on the notion of hyphens in the insider-outsider researcher stance can help us conceptualise the potential meaninglessness of hyphenated terms such as South East Asian-White that illustrate the notion of fractionalised identity. Whilst I felt the need to use this term to clarify my participant group, we need to be aware that such

categories overlook the significance of the hyphen itself. The hyphen is a place between two worlds that can stand for uniqueness and allows an exploration of a fluid place between worlds that the participants seem to inhabit.

Language also plays a key role in a sense of identity (Williams, 1992), which some of the participants mentioned in passing in relation to not being able to communicate with their families in Asia. It seemed that the only participant who spoke both English and an Asian language was Lara and she said at times she had trouble getting her therapist to understand her because of this and so the implication was that, even though English was her first language, she was better able to communicate certain experiences in her second language.

The continual disbelief around their racial make-up implies that people of this mixed race group are ‘inauthentic dilutions of racial essences’ (Parker & Song, 2001:p.15) as the way they look raises a range of responses from ‘I would never have known’ to

‘But you don’t look (minority race)’ and so on. The findings in Aspinall et al’s (2008) study echo the participants’ frustration, anger and at times enjoyment, at their racial mix being unseen. Williams (1996) says such ‘What Are You?’ encounters reveal the social and racial disorientation of the person asking as much as it dislocates the person being asked – however she also acknowledges that this question offers the individual the chance to rethink their identity thereby illustrating race as a process of social interaction. These encounters were common to all twenty interviewees in Williams’ study and were raised by all but Lara in this study. This seems to be one particular area of shared experience for the mixed race group: however, this idea of being ‘special’ is at its best ‘fickle and at worst demeaning and alienating’

(Bradsawn, 1992:p.83) and if internalized, comes at a high cost to the individual’s identity.

Another point on identity that also emerged was the stereotyping of South East Asian women, which often angered them and made them feel objectified. Although it did not emerge during my own interview, I have had similar experiences, the most memorable of which was having my dictionary defaced at school with the words

‘Thai prostitute’. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown (2007) writes about the white men who

‘repelled... by feminist white women, turn to Asian women as ‘submissive’ and black women as ’whores’ and some are not afraid to let their fantasies hang out’ (p.10).

For all the data on the whole revealed experiences of feeling that the South East Asian part of the participants was invisible, it seems that when it plays to stereotypes and fantasies, some people are more than happy to magnify and misrepresent it for their own whims.

When stereotypes get activated and both client and therapist are confronted with the threat of judgment of the other they can activate the stereotyped transference/countertransference response that they wish to ward off. This precarious element of the therapeutic dynamic requires honest and compassionate scrutiny, which can open the opportunity for a meeting between client and therapist, which, in turn, can activate the myriad of experiences along the hope – hopelessness continuum.

Issues around identity formation are not the sole domain of those of mixed race and, in my opinion, we cannot overlook the impact of an individual’s inherent nature (Stern, 1985), however there is no doubt that a new identity model is needed for those who are biracial – one that is not linear but which takes into account all the factors that play into identity development for this diverse group Standen (1996).