80,000 has to be an undercount or stringent classification. I am sure there are that many in Vepery, Kilpauk and Purasawakkam in Madras alone. Or OK, include Bangalorean Anglo-Indians too. Still, my point is…something is not quite right with that number.

of course it is, and 99% of the time you’d be right.

You’re just splitting hairs then. it 98% of the time exposes it. Thats like saying “its stupid to cross a crosswalk when the light is red” because 1% of the time someone might run a red light.

I do think though, that it is probably relatively easier for an Indian male to marry a non-Indian than for an Indian female. That’s just a hunch at this point though.

its even. a statisitcally insiginficant advantage to the women:

http://www.asian-nation.org/interracial.shtml

I suspect Razib has the study bookmarked given how often he references it, but I seem to recall that the numbers bore out the opposite conclusion. Indian women are more likely to marry out than Indian men.

It’s stupid to assume that something that two things which correlate in 90% of cases are probably going to correlate for any given case you’re dealing with?

I really don’t see what’s worth getting your knickers in a twist over here. So we might be mistaken in a vanishingly small minority of situations. Woe is us!

she needs to be able to do the indian head shake

Ok, explain why the story was chosen as a blog-worthy story then ? If you read a wedding announcement “smith marries shah” are you telling me you’d equally likely think smith and shah were desi? Honestly, I would just think it was two people getting married and not give any thought about their backgrounds (Iranians share the last name Shah with Indians) . But I understand what you’re saying, it’s almost instinctive to associate names with certain cultures. I guess it’s blog worthy cause the author of this post has never met someone of X origin with a Y origin name or he thinks that most people would assume that Bird spent her life in the west whereas her fiance spent his in the east, but it’s actually the opposite: and his point was maybe that people shouldn’t have assumptions of people’s backgrounds based on their names… I don’t know his intentions, perhaps you should ask him, not me

But they do not occupy THE MAJORITY I agree, but it’s stupid to assume that someone’s name exposes their ethnicity, that’s all i’m saying.

Does being born and raised in Kolkata make her desi, or does she need something more?

Well, I think that depends. I know in my family, my dad is protestant, and my mom is catholic, but the traditional catholic idea is that the mother is responsible for passing the religion onto the child, hence I was raised catholic (not that that worked out, ha!) rather than protestant.

Also there are some (though probably less) cultures, even in India (mostly South India) where the family line is matrilineal, rather than patrilineal.

“But acceptance of Indian husband/non-Indian wife in the Indian community is not a pattern that just appears in India.” While there is some acceptance of this arrangement– I also think there is still a good amount of rejection of this situation, as well. It is not necessarily easy to get an Indian family to agree to this, in my case, it took a lot of time, but in the end it worked out. I think a lot more (in this case) Indian men would be marrying outside their culture if it was more acceptable… I know a lot of Indian guys in grad school who fell in love with an American and then felt pressure to give up the relationship for an in-community marriage. I do think though, that it is probably relatively easier for an Indian male to marry a non-Indian than for an Indian female. That’s just a hunch at this point though.