Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Deadlines
Policies
Updating Your Submission
Accessible Presentation
FAQs
X (Twitter)
Search Tips
About Annual Meeting
This longitudinal ethnographic study (since 2009) about 1.5 and second generation Liberian American youth shows that their integration and identity formation are not only influenced by race, but also by context. Concretely, 1.5 and second generation Liberian American youth in Staten Island, NY have had to deal with a number of other sources of stigma, which has led Liberian American youth to disassociate themselves with their African/Liberian heritage. As the children of refugees they had to endure taunts associated with this label. “Refugee” for Blacks in the U.S. has often been equated with being terrorists, welfare abusers, and economic burdens. In addition, images of civil war that raged in Liberia are still dominant in the media when “Liberia” is mentioned; and this was only worsened by the Ebola virus outbreak in Liberia. Due to the war, many of the Liberian parents did not complete formal education, and thus many are illiterate, a fact that Liberian American youth are constantly reminded when they have to read to their parent and/or complete paperwork for them. The lack of education has forced many Liberian parents to work as home health aides; another source of shame for Liberian American youth. Finally, the geographical context also matters for Liberian American youth. Seeking to escape discrimination by African Americans in their neighborhoods, they have often embraced a “Black” identity, de-emphasizing their African heritage. But outside of their neighborhood, in greater Staten Island—the only New York City borough with a non-Hispanic White and Republican majority—being “Black” is another stigma.
In conclusion, the paper shows that context greatly matters how second generation Black immigrants are assimilating into America and makes clear that other markers—such as refugee status, class background, and geographical location influence the identity formation of the second generation.