Who counts as mixed varies situationally, not by phenotype alone

Evidence

In the case of racial latinamericanization, I have hinted above, more complex significations are at work. The meaning of the term shifted both over time and from one situation to another. In the latter case, different people with similar profiles might find one characterized as mixed while the other would not be. But the same individual might equally be described as mestizaje/mesticagem in one circumstance or time but not in another, by one group but not by another, depending on the individual’s personal heritage and relations and of different levels of knowledge of such biographies. Most often, perhaps, the term would reference the offspring of perceived biological and cultural mixing. Colonial practice, however, sometimes would also mark as mestizo the Creole partner in the mixed relation (that is, the local-born European in the Latin American in contrast with the Caribbean context), usually the man if Casta paintings provide reliable evidence. Characterizing a white man in a mixed marriage as mestizo signals that he married outside of (really beneath) his standing, producing offspring accordingly always categorically outside the social norm if not social acceptability. — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race, 1164

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Clarifies that mestizaje is an indexical, situation-shifting term rather than a fixed racial category.
  • XREF: connects to: The same person is classified as different races across national contexts — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1171; Racial categorization of the same person varies by time, place, and context; Racial classification criteria vary wildly by culture and era — David Theo Goldberg, John Solomos, A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, 1564

Broader Connections