Introduction
Discrimination is one of the most common forms of human rights violations and abuses. It affects millions of people in their daily lives and is one of the most challenging phenomena to detect. Prejudice occurs when people are treated worse than others in a similar situation merely because they belong to a particular group or category of people. Individuals can be discriminated because of their age, nationality, ancestry, political beliefs, race, religion, sexual orientation, language, culture, and many other characteristics. Even though democracy leads the world, bias still exists, and not everyone understands the significance of tolerating every member of society.
Racial Prejudice as a Major Cause of Family Conflict
Numerous publications and films thoroughly describe the issue of discrimination, and Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner is one of them. Stanley Kramer’s picture was released in 1967, 102 years after the abolition of slavery in the United States (Giuliani 404). It is painful that the subject matter the director touches upon sounds provocative even a century later. He tells the story of the innovative and beautiful Joey, who returns home after a vacation and informs her parents that she is marrying a doctor. Everything would be satisfactory if he were not from the black population of America, which horrors Joey’s father. It is noteworthy that her dad has devoted his life to fighting for the rights of African Americans, but the power of stereotypes and the fear for the future of his grandchildren prevails. The plot would have looked straightforward, except that Kramer amplifies the conflict of fathers and children with social issues and provides it with a completely different sounding.
Although the critical events of this story take place in chamber interiors, it does not only touch upon the concerns of the two particular families. Stanley Kramer’s film was made more than half a century ago, in 1967, but it has not lost its resonance (Giuliani 405). Its central theme of interracial and international marriages is one of the most acute and painful even in a seemingly prejudice-free society. One can argue a lot about the equality of all people. Nevertheless, when it comes to the fact that a person of a different faith or skin color should appear in one’s immediate vicinity, panic immediately ensues.
The Historical Context of International Marriages
Numerous researches suggest that there are not and cannot be clear-cut boundaries between individual human populations. However, it cannot be denied that large groups of people on Earth differ in various traits. There is no biological obstacle to creating fertile offspring in a pair of Caucasoid and Mongoloid (Stevens 101). Mestizos, the offspring of people from populations of different ethnicities and races, do not suffer from mental disorders, increased morbidity, or mortality (Stevens 101). Despite debunked myths and stereotypes, people are still afraid of interracial marriage, although there is a positive dynamic.
The process of mass interracial marriage in the United States began in 1967 when the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the laws that prohibited such family unions. At that time, interracial marriages were considered illegal in 16 of the 50 U.S. states, and there was a taboo on them in American society (Stevens 103). Interracial marriages are on the rise, but white Americans, who once had a segregationist regime for Native Americans, are still the least likely to desire to start a family with a member of another race. According to the Pew Research Center, 71 percent of white Americans would marry someone of another ethnicity, compared with 90 percent of Hispanics and 91 percent of African Americans (Stevens 104). However, it is not uncommon for cross-national marriages to be encountered with misunderstanding and condemnation by others.
Current State of Discrimination
Neighbors, colleagues, friends, strangers, and distant relatives may criticize, discuss, and look for insincerity or material gain for one or both of the couples who have decided to legalize their romantic relationship officially. Rather frequently, even close friends and relatives oppose the union. Furthermore, parents consider the nationality and the class of the individual. Everyone comprehends that classes have had a powerful influence on the social life of society (Yang & Bohm-Jordan 89). It is believed that people in the upper class have more material possessions. Their children or grandchildren will attend exemplary and prestigious educational institutions and show excellent results. The kids of upper-class parents have a better chance of success than the rest, and it is these representatives that parents wish to see as a son or daughter-in-law.
Conclusion
Even though interethnic marriages bring nations closer together and improve relations between them, not all people are ready to accept their existence. From an early age, many parents impose their own opinion about the future marriage of their children to a member of the upper class and the same nationality. Such an opinion is direct discrimination against a person and is contrary to democracy. It is necessary to develop a tolerant society and remember that the harmony and strength of the family depend only on the care and love.
Works Cited
Giuliani, Marco, and Maria Serena Chiucchi. “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner: The Case of IC Reporting in Italy.” Journal of Management and Governance, vol. 23, no. 2, 2019, pp. 403-433.
Stevens, Gillian. “Marriage Vows and Racial Choices.” Canadian Studies in Population, vol. 45, no. 2, 2018, pp. 100-105.
Yang, Philip, and Maggie Bohm-Jordan. “Patterns of Interracial and Interethnic Marriages among Foreign-Born Asians in the United States.” Societies, vol. 8, no. 3, 2018, pp. 87-93.