Explore the vast range of titles available.

Through interviews with three generations of Yalálag Zapotecs (\"Yaláltecos\") in Los Angeles and Yalálag, Oaxaca, this book examines the impact of international migration on this community. It traces five decades of migration to Los Angeles in order to delineate migration patterns, community formation in Los Angeles, and the emergence of transnational identities of the first and second generations of Yalálag Zapotecs in the United States, exploring why these immigrants and their descendents now think of themselves as Mexican, Mexican Indian immigrants, Oaxaqueños, and Latinos-identities they did not claim in Mexico.Based on multi-site fieldwork conducted over a five-year period, Adriana Cruz-Manjarrez analyzes how and why Yalálag Zapotec identity and culture have been reconfigured in the United States, using such cultural practices as music, dance, and religious rituals as a lens to bring this dynamic process into focus. By illustrating the sociocultural, economic, and political practices that link immigrants in Los Angeles to those left behind, the book documents how transnational migration has reflected, shaped, and transformed these practices in both their place of origin and immigration.

Meticulously researched and beautifully written, Fit to Be Citizens? demonstrates how both science and public health shaped the meaning of race in the early twentieth century. Through a careful examination of the experiences of Mexican, Japanese, and Chinese immigrants in Los Angeles, Natalia Molina illustrates the many ways local health officials used complexly constructed concerns about public health to demean, diminish, discipline, and ultimately define racial groups. She shows how the racialization of Mexican Americans was not simply a matter of legal exclusion or labor exploitation, but rather that scientific discourses and public health practices played a key role in assigning negative racial characteristics to the group. The book skillfully moves beyond the binary oppositions that usually structure works in ethnic studies by deploying comparative and relational approaches that reveal the racialization of Mexican Americans as intimately associated with the relative historical and social positions of Asian Americans, African Americans, and whites. Its rich archival grounding provides a valuable history of public health in Los Angeles, living conditions among Mexican immigrants, and the ways in which regional racial categories influence national laws and practices. Molina's compelling study advances our understanding of the complexity of racial politics, attesting that racism is not static and that different groups can occupy different places in the racial order at different times.

After losing her father at an early age, Tina Duran explores the rich history of her father, the story of her ancestors who migrated from Mexico to the United States, and the implications the Vietnam War had on the Chicano & Latino community.

Despite Mexico’s increase as a destination country (although < 1% of its population was born abroad, and most immigrants are U.S.–born minors of return migration), its Latin American immigrant population has increased considerably. Mexican ethnicity scholarship has traditionally focused on indigenous populations, but recent studies called for a better understanding of African descendants’ experiences. Integration and assimilation theories (for other contexts) highlight ethnicity’s role, but how migration and ethnicity intersect in the Mexican context is unclear. We study differences in labor market integration of Latin American immigrants. Using Mexican 2015 Intercensal Survey and 2020 Census data, we estimate OLS models to understand how Afro-descendant self-identification, migration, and birth country shape earnings. Results show higher earnings for immigrant populations, except for Central Americans, and an interaction effect of Afro-descendance, immigration status, and birthplace. Our findings suggest continued research on integration and racialization processes in Mexico and other Latin American countries.

CONTEXT Marriage before the age of 18, commonly referred to as child marriage, is legal under varying conditions across the United States. The prevalence of child marriage among recent cohorts is unknown. METHODS American Community Survey data for 2010–2014 were used to estimate the average national and state‐level proportions of children who had ever been married. Prevalence was calculated by gender, race and ethnicity, and birthplace, and the living arrangements of currently married children were examined. RESULTS Approximately 6.2 of every 1,000 children surveyed had ever been married. Prevalence varied from more than 10 per 1,000 in West Virginia, Hawaii and North Dakota to less than four per 1,000 in Maine, Rhode Island and Wyoming. It was higher among girls than among boys (6.8 vs. 5.7 per 1,000), and was lower among white non‐Hispanic children (5.0 per 1,000) than among almost every other racial or ethnic group studied; it was especially high among children of American Indian or Chinese descent (10.3 and 14.2, respectively). Immigrant children were more likely than U.S.‐born children to have been married; prevalence among children from Mexico, Central America and the Middle East was 2–4 times that of children born in the United States. Only 20% of married children were living with their spouses; the majority of the rest were living with their parents. CONCLUSIONS Child marriage occurs throughout the country. Research on the social forces that perpetuate child marriage is needed to inform efforts to prevent it.

This study examined trends in US obesity and overweight prevalence and body mass index (BMI) among 30 immigrant groups, stratified by race/ethnicity and length of immigration, and among detailed education, occupation, and income/poverty groups from 1976 to 2008. Using 1976-2008 National Health Interview Surveys, differentials in obesity, overweight, and BMI, based on self-reported height and weight, were analyzed by using disparity indices, logistic, and linear regression. The obesity prevalence for the US population aged ≥18 tripled from 8.7% in 1976 to 27.4% in 2008. Overweight prevalence increased from 36.9% in 1976 to 62.0% in 2008. During 1991-2008, obesity prevalence for US-born adults increased from 13.9 to 28.7%, while prevalence for immigrants increased from 9.5 to 20.7%. While immigrants in each ethnic group and time period had lower obesity and overweight prevalence and BMI than the US-born, immigrants' risk of obesity and overweight increased with increasing duration of residence. In 2003-2008, obesity prevalence ranged from 2.3% for recent Chinese immigrants to 31-39% for American Indians, US-born blacks, Mexicans, and Puerto Ricans, and long-term Mexican and Puerto Rican immigrants. Between 1976 and 2008, the obesity prevalence more than quadrupled for those with a college education or sales occupation. Although higher prevalence was observed for lower education, income, and occupation levels in each period, socioeconomic gradients in obesity and overweight decreased over time because of more rapid increases in prevalence among higher socioeconomic groups. Continued immigrant and socioeconomic disparities in prevalence will likely have substantial impacts on future obesity trends in the US.

The uneven distribution of economic and social resources across communities often falls along ethno-racial dimensions. Few demographers have considered whether such axes of place stratification in a migrant-sending country relate to individuals’access to economic and social resources in a migrant-receiving country. Taking Mexico-US migration flows as our focus, we examine if having origins in an indigenous place, a primary axis of stratification in Mexico, is associated with migrants’ documentation status when crossing the border, a primary dimension of stratification in the United States. We rely on individual-level data from the Mexican Migration Project merged with municipal-level data from the Mexican Census. Using multilevel models, we find that migrants from communities in indigenous municipalities in Mexico are more likely to migrate undocumented than documented to the United States compared with those from communities in nonindigenous municipalities, net of the economic and social resources identified in prior work as useful for international movement. We discuss why indigenous places—marked by a set of correlated conditions of economic and social disadvantage—disproportionately channel migrants into an undocumented status. This study contributes to understandings of stratification processes in cross-border contexts and has implications for the production of inequality in the United States.

Research on Mexican migration to the United States has long noted how the characteristics of sending communities structure individuals’ opportunities for international movement. This literature has seldom considered the concentration of indigenous residents (those with origins in pre-Hispanic populations) in migrant-sending communities. Drawing on data from 143 communities surveyed by the Mexican Migration Project, and supplemented with data from the Mexican Census, this article uses multilevel models to describe how the share of indigenous residents in a migrant-sending community relates to different aspects of the migratory process. We focus on (1) the decision to migrate to the United States, and (2) the documentation used on migrants’ first U.S. trip. We do not find that the concentration of indigenous residents in a sending community is associated with the decision to migrate to the United States. However, we do find that people in communities with relatively high indigenous populations are more likely to migrate as undocumented rather than documented migrants. We conclude that the concentration of indigenous peoples in communities likely indicates economic and social disadvantage, which limits the residents’ possibilities for international movement.

The territory of Napa County, California, contains more than grapevines. The deepest roots belong to Wappo-speaking peoples, a group whose history has since been buried by the stories of Spanish colonizers, Californios (today’s Latinos), African Americans, Chinese immigrants, and Euro Americans. Napa’s history clearly is one of co-existence; yet, its schoolbooks tell a linear story that climaxes with the arrival of Euro Americans. In “This Land was Mexican Once,” Linda Heidenreich excavates Napa’s subaltern voices and histories to tell a complex, textured local history with important implications for the larger American West, as well. Heidenreich is part of a new generation of scholars who are challenging not only the old, Euro-American depiction of California, but also the linear method of historical storytelling—a method that inevitably favors the last man writing. She first maps the overlapping histories that comprise Napa’s past, then examines how the current version came to dominate—or even erase—earlier events. So while history, in Heidenreich’s words, may be “the stuff of nation-building,” it can also be “the stuff of resistance.” Chapters are interspersed with “source breaks”—raw primary sources that speak for themselves and interrupt the linear, Euro-American telling of Napa’s history. Such an inclusive approach inherently acknowledges the connections Napa’s peoples have to the rest of the region, for the linear history that marginalizes minorities is not unique to Napa. Latinos, for instance, have populated the American West for centuries, and are still shaping its future. In the end, “This Land was Mexican Once” is more than the story of Napa, it is a multidimensional model for reflecting a multicultural past.

We examined the relationship between continental-level genetic ancestry and racial and ethnic identity in an admixed population in New Mexico with the goal of increasing our understanding of how racial and ethnic identity influence genetic substructure in admixed populations. Our sample consists of 98 New Mexicans who self-identified as Hispanic or Latino (NM-HL) and who further categorized themselves by race and ethnic subgroup membership. The genetic data consist of 270 newly-published autosomal microsatellites from the NM-HL sample and previously published data from 57 globally distributed populations, including 13 admixed samples from Central and South America. For these data, we 1) summarized the major axes of genetic variation using principal component analyses, 2) performed tests of Hardy Weinberg equilibrium, 3) compared empirical genetic ancestry distributions to those predicted under a model of admixture that lacked substructure, 4) tested the hypotheses that individuals in each sample had 100%, 0%, and the sample-mean percentage of African, European, and Native American ancestry. We found that most NM-HL identify themselves and their parents as belonging to one of two groups, conforming to a region-specific narrative that distinguishes recent immigrants from Mexico from individuals whose families have resided in New Mexico for generations and who emphasize their Spanish heritage. The \"Spanish\" group had significantly lower Native American ancestry and higher European ancestry than the \"Mexican\" group. Positive FIS values, PCA plots, and heterogeneous ancestry distributions suggest that most Central and South America admixed samples also contain substructure, and that this substructure may be related to variation in social identity. Genetic substructure appears to be common in admixed populations in the Americas and may confound attempts to identify disease-causing genes and to understand the social causes of variation in health outcomes and social inequality.