Scan barcode
A review by ebonyutley
Is Marriage for White People?: How the African American Marriage Decline Affects Everyone by Ralph Richard Banks
2.0
I was biased about Is Marriage for White People? before I began reading. The popular culture perception (round this way) was yet another black man telling black women that they should settle for something other than their desires in order to marry. I didn’t like the fact that another man is pimping, I mean profiting from black women’s relationship woes. I didn’t like that the brass ring is marriage (as if all all black women want is to get married insert eye roll and side eye). I didn’t like the fact that in media his message seemed primarily to be that the keepers of this elusive brass ring are white men (as if they don’t have control over enough already). So yeah, no high expectations here, but before I write my own marriage stuff, I had to survey the terrain and to my surprise, the book isn’t terrible.
It’s a good primer for the history of black relationships. It systematically walks down the black history aisle with data to support his key points. The anecdotes from his interviews make the book a livelier read. The arguments are pretty solid because they come from black women who believe them. I don’t have to agree but I concede there are women who feel this way. I thought his arguments about the structural problems that plague black marriages were right on. The argument follows that if marrying down creates black mixed marriages then why not marry out? We’re already mixing. It’s just that the last prescription for more black women to marry out so more black women can marry black seemed suspect. If the goal was to advocate for interracial marriage then why not let it just be that? Or is Banks really trying to save black marriage by dumping the outliers that make it difficult? The super successful ones should marry out (instead of down) so that the less successful ones can marry (up a little). The prescription is perplexing to me. But then I’m also not an advocate of everyone needs to be married to be happy. One would only care about the book as long as s/he accepted the premise that marriage is the relational ideal. Which I don’t. Which means there’s no need to get up in arms. Yes, there are lots of nonblack men to whom black women could marry if they wanted. Or they could marry black men. Or they could not get married at all. Options abound.
It’s a good primer for the history of black relationships. It systematically walks down the black history aisle with data to support his key points. The anecdotes from his interviews make the book a livelier read. The arguments are pretty solid because they come from black women who believe them. I don’t have to agree but I concede there are women who feel this way. I thought his arguments about the structural problems that plague black marriages were right on. The argument follows that if marrying down creates black mixed marriages then why not marry out? We’re already mixing. It’s just that the last prescription for more black women to marry out so more black women can marry black seemed suspect. If the goal was to advocate for interracial marriage then why not let it just be that? Or is Banks really trying to save black marriage by dumping the outliers that make it difficult? The super successful ones should marry out (instead of down) so that the less successful ones can marry (up a little). The prescription is perplexing to me. But then I’m also not an advocate of everyone needs to be married to be happy. One would only care about the book as long as s/he accepted the premise that marriage is the relational ideal. Which I don’t. Which means there’s no need to get up in arms. Yes, there are lots of nonblack men to whom black women could marry if they wanted. Or they could marry black men. Or they could not get married at all. Options abound.