"INTER-NATIONAL AND INTER-ETHNICMARRIAGE AMONG CARIBBEAN LATINOMALES AND NON-CARIBBEAN NON•-LATINONORTH AMERICAN FEMALES: A CASE STUDY"

By Mary Kirby Dias

This paper is to be presented at theCaribbean Stud*es Associationmeeting, held in St. Kitts,May 30, 1984-June 2, 1984. Theauthor is Assistant Professor ofSociology, Sociology-Anthropology Dept.,SUNI/Farmingdale, Farmingdale, New York.

This paper is one of the results of an on-going study of inter-ethnic

and inter-national marriage between Latino Caribbean males and now.Latino

North American females, living in the United States. The study uses volunteers

as subjects.

While compromise on cultural differences are important, the study -

on a preliminary level - reveals some interesting findings regarding men's

roles, women's roles, and social change, The question of who has authority

(machismo vs, the egalitarian ideal) seems to be related to (1) age of

the husband upon entering the U,S.„ rather than the length of time here,

(2) educational level of the wife, and (3) her potential (or actual)

career.

Since the study's statistical findings are still in a preliminary

level, we are here presenting a case study of one of the couples involved

in the study. Data were achieved through personal observation and discussion

and through the interviewing methOd. There were some questions, notably

Levingees Table of Marriage Goals 1and Socio.Smotional Performance,

2 which

the couple did not answer. This is significant, as will be shown later.

Data

The family interviewed for this case study lives in a suburban,3

all -white neighborhood on Long Island, They own their own one-family

home with a swimming pool and two cars. Socio-economically, they are in

the upper-middle class, earning well over $100,000. annual40 They are

a nuclear family, composed of the husliand, wife, and four children 0 a

boy and three girls. The oldest child is twenty years old; the youngest

child is two years old.

The husband is a dental technician, owning his own laboratory. He

has had three years of college(pre..met) and one year of technical training.

Married at age thirty, he is now fifty-years of age. He is apolitical, ant

a moderate (in philosophy), extremely devout, Catholic. He was born and

raised in a middle-class family in Central America, on the Caribbean Coast.

His parents were instrumental in the higher education of their sons,

managing to motivate all four to college. He is from a small village.

Racially, he is mestizo.

The wife is forty-three years of age, married at age twenty-three.

She is employed part-time, teaching music at a nursery school. She considers

her career to be "housewife". She is a native -born American, of French-

Germanparents„ of the working.-class. She too, is a philosophically

moderate, extremely devout, Catholic. She ttoo, is apolitical. She is a

high school graduate.

The children are three girls - twenty years, five years, and two years;

and one boy - eighteen years. The eldest girl is now attending business

school; the son is preparing to graduate high school. The younger children

are enrolled in pre-school, where the mother teaches. This family puts

special emphasis on the children. The entire family unit is achievement..

oriented.

All quotations, except where annotated, are directly from the spouses.

Direct observation has occurred over a period of ten years by the author.

This olose observation has resulted in private conversations between myself

and them. In the interviews,they would respond only "publicly", that is,

in each other's presence. They would not agree to a private, formal,

interviewing session. I took this to be a sign of their private role,

value, cognitive, conflict.

INTERNAL PROCESSES

AdantiVe Functions:

Task Performance both internal and external Instrumental tasks:

Repairs around the house HusbandDoes dishes (dishwasher) WifePays Bills WifeRelative Inter-Action (See Below) BothGrocery Shopping WifePuts out trash WifeInsurance, Insurance Agents WifeWrites Complaints to Cos,

Handles Sales transactions WifeGets information before buying

items BothVacation ideas & information WifeAny Housecleaning Wife ( Husband will not even pick up a

paper from the floor.)Laundry WifePool Maintenance Both (Depends on whoever has the time)Lawn Maintenance HusbandCara HusbandPainting, fixing WifePets - any task concerned with them WifeHouse Decorating WifeCooking WifeThe children, both internally and externally, are expected to pick up theirtoys, keep their rooms neat, make their beds.

According to Herbst's study in Australia 3b, this is a synoratic

division of labor, with each deciding when to do his/her own task. Using

Smith's study, the spouse performing the task controls the task. Following

Zelditch's study of segregation in internal and external tasks, this family

would certainly apply, with the husband doing the external, "masculine"

tasks; the wife doing the internal, "feminine" tasks, However, while they

are performing these tasks, they are also interacting with their four4a.

children. They are then, 11:4imensionally relating, that is, task-wise

and role-wise, instrumentally and expressively. This would agree more with

Levinger's statement that couples may segregate instrumental tasks, but

not socio-emotional ones. These are dependent on inter-action.

Expressive Roles - both Internal and External:

Expressively, both husband and wife share internal and external roles.

Both are very affectionate with the children. The husband, especially,

lavishes affection on the children and is also the family disciplinarian.

(See Socialization, below) The children, deeply loved, are one of the

uniting forces in the family, and function to hold the unit together. Each

spouse plays their traditional maternal/pategnal role with great enthusiasm. -

Externally, each spouse has responsibility for contacting his/her family of

orientation, with the wife handling any neighborhood inter-action.410

The children, too, have their expressive roles, and contribute much affection

and inter-action with the parents, peers, and neighbors,

Co-Ordinative Functions. (Decisions and Power)

,Power Structure in the family appears to be fairly evenly divided

(dyadic), according to Smith's definition of autonomic. 5 Each publicly

defines the power structure as "50/50", but, privately, the husband claims

it to be "75/25", with the "75" in his favor. Mixed traditional and

instrumental power structures prevail as defined by the family. The

husband sees his status as conferred instrumentally - by his role of bread•

winner and by tradition - by his ascribed sex role. The wife sees the

power as evenly divided between them both when asked privately and

publicly,

Individual power extends not only over those tasks which tkey each

perform, but over all areas of the marriage, including financial decision

making, socialization, childrearing, etc. Conflict over their respective

value systems prevents shared power or individual power in this area.

In fact, because of value discrepancies and role conflicts, any and all

power is literally wrestled with by the couple.

Decision-making in this family is generally instrumentally defined.

Using Herbst and Smith as my models, this couple, I would say, follows

their patterns, as each makes decisions about that task which they perform

or area in which they function.

Major financial decisions are shared, with the spouse having the

area expertise carrying decision-making weight (re. brand, type, etc.)

This is, by the way, right in line with Smith's findings. Regarding Kenkelle

study - revealing that males dominate dyadic decision-making doesn't

necessarily apply in this case. An example would be that the wife

voted"no" for a built-in sprinkler system purchased at one time. The

husband circumvented this by having one installed piecemeal. This is

very revealing. While it does indicate that he has power, it nevertheless

reveals that he doesn't use it obviously, but rather, through subtle means.

He has the plower, yes; 1211 glstismila. She doesn't object to his

piece-meal purchasing, as long as he doesn't do it at one time against

Agz decision. This is what I meant earlier by "shared power".

Most financial decision of a minor nature are made by the wife, who

manages the family's finances. She pays all the bills - although he tells

her to whom and when to pay them. She has complete freedom with all money

after bills are paid. (The husband has already subtracted the "house

allowance" and given it to her to pay the house bills.) Despite his Latino

background, however, he is not embarrassed by his wife's financial handling

of accounts. It is, apparently, an American custom which he has assimilated.6

Re also rationalizes it to his relatives by stating that he "allows" her

to handle the finances .6 the minor ones revolving around the house.

5

The wife does not see it this way. She sees it as proper — after all,

her mother, her female friends, her female relatives • all use this system,

all contend that they "run the house",

The children, by the way, do have some influence financially. It

was for them the house with swimming pool was purchased, for them the move

from city to suburban neighborhood with many children.

Value decisions regarding the children (childrearing) are made

together, with discussion, with each partner carrying equal weight.

(This is discussed in greater detail in Socialization.) The children carry

some weight regarding their own socialization, such as peer group (with

parental approval) and

period (what games to play).•

Role Comnlementaritv is quite minimal (See table 1), Role conflict

is quite large, due to a value orientation discrepancy, between the spouses

which could eventually encompass the entire unit. Coercing, counter—

coercing, masking, as outlined by Spiegel7 are used. These role conflicts

are solved by.role induction, not role modification. Interestingly enough

though, each spouse insists before the other spouse that they are resolved

throng ole reversal and compromise,

Table No. 1 shows self-expectation, spouse's expectation of the other

spouse, and what and who the spouse really is .. as defined by the other

spouse, in private. This revealing chart perhaps explains why Levinger's

Nine Marriage Goals8 were not completed by this couple, Cognitive, goal,

and value orientation conflicts all exist here, simultaneously Churning

and agitating the relationship. Not only are they uninformed about their

mutual role expectations, but they also have (apparently) different goals

6

regarding their relationship. Their refusal to answer these1go sections,

namely, marital goals and socio-emotional performance, would indicate

avoiding a non-shared, non-adjustive response (a fight) or simply a shared,

non-adjustive response (pouting, sulking, etc.). The value orientation

discrepancy is an obvious one due to the international flavor of the marriage •

No role conflict has yet emerged in the children, as a result of the parental

conflict, yet, as one can see in our section on values below, and our tables

1 and 3, it could still come forth.

TABLE NO. 1 ROLE EXPECTATIONS AND PERFORMANgES:

What the Wife Expects a Husband to be:affectionate"American"affablequietgives her "free rein in the house"non-complainingcompliments her frequentlypromptfamily disciplinariangood fatherloyal to her and the children

What the Husband Expects a Wife to betgood mothersoftfemininequietagreeableboosts ego - compliments himloyal - and very loyal to himdoesn't argue with his especially

in publicgood cook

What the Husband Expects a Husband to be:he is the man - he has the powervery Latinoable to support his family comfortably

and "yet more so"responsiblepolitedoesn't yell at children or spousegood father

What the Wife Expects a Wife to be:maternal - a good motherfriendly, warmfrugalshares power with husbandgood cook"stands up for her rights"moral - teaches tha children

right from wrong

What He actually is to her;aggressivebossytoo strict with her and the childrenvery jealous of his powercomplainingdoesn't like to discipline the childrenprocrastinatesyells too muchgood provider; good fatherpolite, responsiblefaithfulnot affectionate enough with her

What She actually is to hiltstypical American womancastratingaggressiveyells too muchnagsfrugalgood motherfriendlythoughtfuldisagrees with him in public

INTEGRATIVE FUNCTIONS:

Marital solidarity , can beet by shown through the following lint of

indicators, as given by Levinger: 9

TABLE NO. 2 INDICATORS OF MARITAL SOLIDARITY

Sour9es Attraction:

1. itilis4841 Rewards chiprespect for spouse

2. Socio -Economic Rewards,home ownershiphusband's educationhusband's financial statussimilarity in social status

3. Same Faith'

Sources 91 Marital Strength!

1. Feeling's .at Obligatio4to childrento marital bondfloral Proscristionreligionjoint church attendance

3. External Pressures ,

Primary Group Affiliations(Kin - family of first orientation)

Community Stigma

At the present time, no sources of alternate attraction exist.ON 41.•

NO -

-

MID

Of these groups in Table No. 2, religion and a moral obligation to their

children are the most important factors.

Also binding them are mutual goals for the children which may alter

mutual'y as the children mature, due to cultural differences, as outlined

above.

Marital solidarity is constantly threatened by role, cognitive, and

goal discrepancies, not to mention value orientation discripanciTa. These

have been discribed in Role Complimenta and Family Norms and Values.

SOCIALIZATION • PARENT-CHILD SOLIDARITY . SIBLING INTERACTION.

Approaches and Results. Traditional gender roles are emphasized for

all the children: Alicia, who is twenty; Carlos, who is eighteen, Anna,

who is five, and Maria, who is two.

8

Alicia, called Alice, is extremely friendly and talkative. She is

highly imitative of her mother. She has been prepared for "the feminine

role" of wife and mother by her parents * according to each's ideal of the

role. Her mother believes that any higher education to be generally unnec-

essary for a female. Her father agrees, to an extent. He sees womanhood

as something which aglrl becomes — thus, he sees independent actions

on his daughters part as a necessary part of their growth. They also give

him chance to oppose his wife in a subtle way.10 He is more rigid, with

the girls because they are girls, than he is with Carlos (Charlie)

The mother, however, does not differentiate in her treatment of the

children. Alice, being the oldss+hild, does feel superior to the others.

She is easily the most social of the children. The girls are all quite

attached to their mother. Carlos Sr, has been attempting — all along —

to pull the children from the mother's over—protective influence, a corollary

found in Parsons.11

Charlie occupies a special postion in their nuclear family And in the

extended kinship group. Out of fifteen children, only five are males. These

ft'kfive are all quite (poiled because of this. ?A man is born a man, it is his

nature; a girl becomes a woman", says the Abuelito. This has been totally

internalized by the Husband/Father, Carlos. To his wife, the son is still

her boy. This has, quite naturally, led to parental conflict. She does,

reinforce however, the son's masculinity and the daughters' femininity,

which they internalize. Carlos, Sr., even when Charlie was as young as

three years of age, constantly reminded him that "he is a man and must

act accordingly", For Charlie, education is not only desirable, it is a

necessity, if he is to move upwards sociameconomically and to prove his manhood

9

instrumentally (See the value system, below). 41e is quite aggressive, and,

at the same time, friendly and polite.

There is very little sibling rivalry. Any sibling quarrels are

usually stopped quickly by the parents. The siblings use a coercing-

counter-coercing pattern. This is the same method used by the parents to

punish the children: coerce, then carry out the threat. (Incidentalbr e

those marital conflicts involving only both spouses whi4 have witnessed,

involved this same method.) All of the children are possessive. Generally

they do not play together, but in their own peer groups.

Anna, who is five years old, was born thirteen years after Charlie*

As might be expected, the child is quite the spoiled and indulged sibling.

The older siblings secretly referlo her as, "The Monster". Obese, loud,

and unpopular, she is quite a bully and doesn't hesitate to "knock-about"

her younger sister, Maria, who is two years old.

Maria, the youngest, is the family's adored one. Intelligent, pretty,

sweet of temperament, she is loved by her older siblings, and loved and

envied by Anna. She is a sweet, affectionate child, and her father's pet.

As previously stated, both parents are very expressive toward the chil-

dren. Parent-child conflicts are rare, chiefly because of the length of

marriage and the age of the eldest child. However, there is parental conflict ..

not parent-child conflict. Both parents usually try to discuss differences

in Child-rearing in private, though this is an ideal.

Discipline is usually reserved to coaxing (the wife) or coercing and

punishing (Carlos Sr.), Spiegel's first two steps in role induction*

Consistent to the point of rigidity, Carlos Sr. as family disciplinarian

is feared by the children when warned by the mother. They ofte+ 11 not

1 0

recognize othek(s, older authority figures unless told to do so by the

father. (1 am referring here, obviously, to the younger children.) Both

teach the children table manners, ethics, etc. Lateral Isolation

via peer group, prospective and current schools is extremely important. TheAND

neighborhood was specifically chosen for the children, middle-class

intrinsic and instrumental values are reinforced by the community.

Each spouse wants the children to be wholesome, religious, moral,

polite, respectful . but there are differences which will later show up and

cause conflict.

Pattern Maintaining Functions -

Family Norms and Values: The largest chunk of marital conflict in

this family unit is due to a value orientation discrepancy between the

spouses. Referring to Tables 1 and% it is obvious that a very large gap

concerning values and roles exists, without modification, by either spouse.

As can be seen by Table 3, the husband is decidedly more materialistic

than the wife, and his values are instrumentally determined, regatding

manhood. Some values, those with an asterisk (*), are retained "Latino"

traits in his character which, when confronted with the wife's values

provide ample cause for misunderstandings and conflicts. Assumed roles and

misappropriate clues do not help them, either. Conflicts are usually

non-adjustive in nature, with each spouse masking resolution or simply

pouting. (By masking resolution, we mean: lying, pretending,deceiving,

censoring.)

1 1

TABLE OF ROLES AND VALUES AS INSTRUMELALLY AND INTRINSICAWY DEFINED BYTHE SPOUSES ( THE IDEAL MAN AND THE IDEAL WOMAN)

CARLOS: "WHAT IS A MAN "

Able to support his familycomfortably within aspecific income bracket

aggressivepoliterespectful - particularly ofolder people*responsiblehad a good jobambitiousloyal to his parents &siblingshard-working"he has the power; he leads"*authority in the familyproudhas dignitynoblehas much machismo

MARJORIE: "WHAT IS A 44AM "

quietaffableagreeablepromptpoliterespects womenaffectionateloyal to wife and childrenmodesthonestemployed - "it helps""handy around the house"Conforms - "isn't different"understandingreliable

CARLOS: "WHAT IS A WOMAN"

MARJORIE: "WHAT IS A WOMAN"

politerespects a mangood maralsconservative - "not different"femininematernalsweet, soft, friendlypassiveneat and cleanfrugalgood cookloyal to her managreeable in public and in privatereligiousconsiderate"angelic"fragile"knows enough to keep her place""Doesn't compete with a man"

politefriendly"lady-like" (feminine)conservative - "not different"maternalsweetthoughtfuleconomicalgood at the domestic artscreative

*A specific cultural trait/ideal of the husband's country of origin.+ The model for the ideal woman in Latin America,remains the Virgin Mary.Women-are expected to model their behavior on her character.

12

Religiousity is a strong intrinsic value here, with both parents,

by choice * with their children attending church services weekly. As stated

above, this is a source of marital strength, adding to marital solidarity.

Despite their religious devotions, however, both are apolitical and generally

indifferent to national and local affairs .. legal, racial, social, political.

There is, thus, a norm discrepancy here — religious norms of consent and

privately held norms (personal) do not match.

Interestingly enough, Carlos Sr. * who is mestizo, denies the Indian

portion of his heritage. He sees himself as a whit:ji Central American"of

Spanish origin — "one of the conquerors, not one of the conquered!", If •

he did accept that part of himself which is Indian, he would be "less

Spanish, more Indian". Since this is also, to him, equal to poverty

and failure (he accepts the racial myth), he cannot accept it and still see

himself as a man. Perhaps this explains the emphasis he puts on manhood

as being instrumentally determined. This is another example of a personal

norm which, if honestly recognized by the community, would be a case of

externally defined deviance. As is, it is simply recognized by his family

of orientation as a felt deviance.

By this I mean the following: The members of his primary family

accept their racial status and are very proud of it. They are, admittedly,

in their society, not a deviant case. Carlos is, to them, personally, a

felt deviant case, and to their society, he is an externally defined deviant..

To his present neighborhood and community, however, he is not deviant ..-

he is' white — as they are - and is "just like them" in every way. He is,

of course, much more accepted in this communitylia. by his wife as a "Spanish

Central American". His wife would respect him less and play the superior,

racist, role, if he did acknowledge his Indian heritage. This is the tragedy.

13

I have heard, during heated conflicts, racial slurs being cast by the wife,

behind the closed doors of the house, away from the neighborhood's ears.

She usually plays the racial game that he plays: of an all•white„ Central

American, Spaniard, and accepts the status and prestige which it offers.

She has also declared publicly, several times, that he is not an Indian,

and is a "Pure" Spanish Central American.

Socialized into the trusted family of orientation, Carlos divides

his loyalties between his two families: orientation and procreation.

His wife, on the contrary, gives her family of procreation nearly wogof her loyalty, This, again, gives rise to conflict.

To help matters instrumentally, he has become an American citizen.

This, he believes, will provide the children with better material

advantages. This, plus his "non-Indianness", provide him with deep

conflicts and guilt. Be is constantly in conflict between appeasing

and soothing his hurt first family and appeasing his procreative family.

Perhaps this further explains his kin loyalties, much more intense than that

of any of the other sons and daughters in the family. That is, native

loyalty and guilt feelings about his heritage denial create a stron"r

loyalty for his kinship group.

TEE FAMILY AND EXTERNAL SUB-SYSTEMS

Polity rarely touches this family, affectively, despite.national

differences. Both spouses are, as mentioned earlier, apolitical, and

take Idittle interest in governmental affairs, whether local or national

or even international. Laws regulating marriage, divorce, abortion,

birth control, do not, they insist, concern them. Marriage to them is

14

an indissolvable contract, but they admit that, to others, there might be

a need for divorce, separation, annulment. Birth control and abortion are,

to them, terrible, because their religion proscribes it* They do believe,

though, that it is an individual matter, and sometimes, in some cases, it

is warranted. When asked, they responded with, "why worry?" "It doesn't

touch us."

The community is, for them, .a source of positive inter-action. They

are very close to their neighbors, but would function as well if they weren't.

They are the only international, inter-ethnic family in the area, though,

by their own values, they just international. The older children have

suffered some racial slurs; they have laughed them off. They regard them-

selves as living in an all•white neighborhood and they are white, too.

If Blacks were to move into their neighborhood, they might move* (For

economic reasons, of course.) If they were to become personas non grates,

/notthere, for whatever reason, they state that they would/move, They are

"happy" in their neighborhood; they are settled there *

The economy helps to instrumentally determine Carlos' conception of

manhood* Part of being a man, he told me, is the ability to support his

family well and to have a good job* Be takes pride in his workone has

a large number of clients * The economy helps him to "be a man", and in

turn he gives the economy his best *

He has internalized this instrumental role and made of it an

important value in determining manhood. Without his job, without his

business,. without a good job, his self-conception of his manhood would

change, and internal conflicts would certainly rises. Because this value

is a personal one, I would say that the value system (both husband's and. wifete)

15

has the greatest effect upon this family. The discrepancy in values, roles,

goals, between this dyad prevents, along with an impotent means of conflict

resolution (in this type of situational conflict, role reversal and/or

role modification might be a better means of resolution and adaptation

than induction.).. He has internalized especially an instrumentally deter-

mined conception of manhood.

STABILITY AND COHESIVENESS AS A GROUP

Table No. 2, "Marital Solidarity", reveals that the spouses share the

following: mutual respect, religion, joint church attendINce, moral

obligation to the children, moral obligation to the marital bond, community

status, and their own home. They consider themselves to have a successful

marriage, based on the facts that they have four lovely children, their own

home, and are still together. Since their marriage, Carlos has risen,

socio-economically, from the yerking class immigrant to the upper-middle

class. Marjorie (his wife) comes from a working class background,and

Ui does feel, privately, that he has married very well. He has a wife

who has been able to help him become assimilated into his new country.

Thip is in line with previous studies on the inter-racial,

inter-national marriage. These studies state that the minority male

has more education than the majority female and is in a higher socio-

economic class.

+Their relationship is generall tatic with no general concern for

personal growth; it is an extremely pragmatic relationship. Each has

what he/she wanted. Mate selection was primarily concerned with

16

0/security, convenience, children, status, ant companionship, in that order.

Most emphasis is put on social acceptance and material values, by Carlos

(but in the opposifOrder); by Marjorie, most emphasis is on social

acceptance, status, conformity. They do adore their children and are

adored by them.

I believe that this is a cohesive marriage. Children and religious

beliefs can form an amazingly cohesive bond. Despite some rather large

communication-value-gaps, they still have enough cohesiveness to maintain

their marital bond. According to the study using Levinger's measure: 4

they have no sources of alternate attraction, as yet, and have a600d many

sources of marital strength and positive attraction.

CONCLUSION

I have attempted to show the inter-racial, inter-national family

through data arrived at via observation and interviewing of a specific

inter-national, inter-ethnic, inter-racial couple. The major sources

of conflict in this particular marriage are due to internal conflict+ia

role, cognitive, goal, and value discrepancies. Goals were refused

discussion )r the couple, which, with material on role, cognitive,

and value discrepancy leads the author to believe that such a goal

discrepancy also exists. This marriage is, however, despite perpetual

conflict, a "happyt union - because it is seen by the dyad as such, and

because enough of the marital indicators present would seem to imply a

relatively cohesive union,

Information on this couple was derived from notes on an on-going

study of intermarriage between Latino Caribbean males and North American,

non-Latina females. On a preliminary level, the study does reveal

some interesting findings about ments and woments roles. Needless to say,

further research is necessary,

17

FOOTNOTES

1. George Levinger, "Task and Social Behavior in Marriage", A Modern,Introduction 22, The Family, Revised Ed., 1968, p. 362.

2. Ibid., P. 359, 360.

3. See pages 11, 1.2, 13, of this paper for further discussion.

3b. Herbstls study of Australian dyadic coordinative functions.Herbst defined five types of power structures occurring dyadically. Syn-cretic Division of Labor refers to each spouse making decisions regardingthe task performed by that spouse.

4a. Zelditch's article does not mentiortbi-dimensionalality of internal -

external expressive-instrumental tasks. This is a concept of Solomon Chu's,

413. Morris Zelditch, Jr., "Role Differentiation in the Nuclear Family:A Nomparative Study", A Modern Introduction lane. Family, Revised Ed., 1968,P. 345.•354, This is in live with his argument that the wife does the expressing,the husband the instrumental. However, here the only expressive task whichthe husband almost performs is the external expressive - with regard to theneighborhood. So, even here, we are stretching it to fall in line withZelditch's argument.

5. Herbert Smith, "Husband-Wife Task Performance and Detisinn-Miking Patterns",in Perspectives Ig Marriage And The Family", J. Ross Eshelman, Allyn andBacon, Inc., 1969, p. 500-520. According to Smith, the autonomic patternis one in which there - is nearly a balance of task performance and authority,with some independent tasks. Here those tasks whidn I see as independent,such as cleaning the pool, playing with the children, etc., depend on whohas the time, not on who usually performs the task.

6. Carlos has here assimilated some American values, but is hesitantto openly admit this to his relatives. He has to appear to have the"macho" before his family, to allow her to have the money, rather thanadmit that it As the result of their major and possibly only role modification.

7. John P. Spiegel, "The Resolution of Role Conflict Within The Family",A Modern Introduction 1.1 the ,Family, Revised Edition, 1968, p. 4L6

8. George Levinger, "Task and Social Behavior in Marriage", A. Modern ,

;ntroduction 12 The Family, Revised Ed., 1968, p. 362, 360, 359.

9. .... "Marital Cohesiveness and Dissolution: An Integrative Review",Journal sa Marriage and the Family, 1965, 274. 102-110.

10. Norman W. Bell and Ezra F. Vogel, "The Emotionally Disturbed ChildAs The Scapegoat", A Modern ,Introduction .12. the Family, Revised Ed.,1968, p. 412-27. Scapegoating, whereby one spouse can uncounsciously orsubtly manifest hostility to the opposite spouse via a complaint of thechild's behavior is used here, in a small manner. There is no signwhatever of any emotional disturbance in the children - however, Carlosdoes encourage Alice's independence in order to unconsciously show hostilityto Marjorie.

Iglitzin, Lynne B. and Ruth hoes, Editors, Women, In the World: A Coanara-tive Study, Clio Books, Santa Barbara, 1976.

Kenkel, William, "Influence Differentiation in Family Decision-Making",Sociology/mg, Social Research, XLIII„ (9-10/1957).

Levinger, George, "Marital Cohesiveness and iJissolution: An IntegrativeReview:, Journal 21:Marriage and Saa Family, 1965, 27:p 19-28.

"Task and Social Behavior in Marriage", A Modern Introduction aThe Family, Revised Ed., p. 355-367. (1968).March, James G., "Political Issues and Husband-Wife Interaction", A ModernIntroduction the Family, Revised Ed., 1968, P. 235-241.

Mead, Margaret. Male and Female: A Studyof the Sexes An a Changing World.Dell Publishing Co., Inc, New York, 1949.

Miller, Daniel and Guy Swanson, 21.1 Changing American Parent. John Wileyand Sons, Inc., 1958.

Murguia, Edward. Chicano Intermarriage: A Theoretical and Empirical Study.T rinity University Press, San Antonio, 1982.

Nye, Ivan F, "Values, family, and a Changing Society", Journal sdMALEase

AzgLIJim. Family, 29 (5/1967), p. 241-148.

lose s Peter I. an and We: Racial and Ethnic Relations , la The United States.Second Edition. Random House, New York, 1974.

Rotberg, Robert I., Editor, The Mixing .0: Peoples: Problems AI Identity anEthnicity. Greylock, Inc., U.S.A., 1978.

Nash, June and Helen Icken Safe. Sea lad_ Class in Latin America. Praeger,New York, 1976.

Seeley, J.R., H.A. Sim, E. W. Loosley. Crestwood Heights: A Studs. str.Culture a Suburban 1=4, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1956.

Silva, Helga, "Scenes From Intermarriages", Nuestro, August, 1967, p. 45-47.

Smith, Herbert, "Husband-Wife Task Performance and Decision-MakingPatterns", "Perspective Ag. Marriage and the Family: ed. by J. Ross Eshelman,Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1969, p. 500-520.

Spiegel, John P., "The Resolution of Role Conflict Within the Family", ALModern Introduction a.m.,. Family, Revised Ed., 1968, p. 391••11.

Stuart, Irving R., and Lawrence Edwin Abt, Interracial Marriamp: Expectationsath Realities. Grossman Publishers, New York, 1973.

Stuckert, Robert P., "Occupational Mobility and Family Relationships", inA Modern Introduction 22 The Family, Revised Ed., 1968, p. 160-168.

Zelditch, Morris, Jr., "Role Differentiation In The Nuclear Family: A Con.parative Study", in A Modern , Introduction Lena Family, Revised Ed.,1968, p. 345-354.