Ethnic‐Racial Socialization Through the Lens of German Young Adults of Turkish, Kurdish, East, and Southeast Asian Heritage

ABSTRACT

The present study explored how racially marginalized German young adults narrate their ethnic‐racial socialization (ERS) growing up in Germany. We conducted semi‐structured interviews with 26 German young adults of Turkish, Kurdish, East and Southeast Asian heritage (aged 18–32 years, M _age = 26.7, SD = 3.08, 16 women, seven men, and three nonbinary). Reflexive thematic analysis resulted in five themes: (1) family and community heritage culture socialization, (2) family survival vs. liberation‐based preparation for bias, (3) family mistrust toward the oppressing community, (4) school and neighborhood lack of support against discrimination, and (5) marginalized peers and siblings as sources of support against discrimination. The findings highlight marginalized peers as an important source of support and suggest the need for considering the complexity of racism and ERS for participants of minoritized communities within minoritized communities in Europe. The findings also inform interventions designed for families and schools to protect youth from varied forms of bias and discrimination.

Germany is an immigration society through multiple waves of migration since the end of the Second World War. Today, it is the country with the second highest immigration rate after the United States and 26.7% of the population, approximately 22 million residents in Germany, have so‐called “immigrant descent” (i.e., are either themselves immigrants or have at least one parent who was born without German citizenship by birth; Federal Statistics Office 2023; Fleck ²⁰²³). While German society accommodates a growing range of ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious diversity, racism persists and is rising (DeZIM German Centre for Integration and Migration Research ^2023a; Wieland and Kober ²⁰²³).

Navigating societies designed to create and maintain group hierarchies exposes children and youth to ethnic‐racial socialization, referring to the “behaviors, practices, and social regularities that implicitly or explicitly communicate information and worldviews about race and ethnicity to children” (Hughes et al. 2017, 255). Ethnic‐racial socialization (ERS) research emerged in the United States in the 1980s, saw a boom in published papers since 2016, and overwhelmingly centered family settings and parents (mainly mothers) as sources of ERS (Hughes 2023). ERS studies in Europe, specifically in the Netherlands and Germany, targeted mothers of children racialized as white (de Bruijn, Emmen, and Mesman ²⁰²⁴; Kaiser et al. ^2023 2024; Mesman et al. ²⁰²²) and mothers of racially marginalized children (Bostancı et al. 2022; Pektas, Emmen, and Mesman ²⁰²³; Yang et al. ²⁰²²). With a growing diverse population and persistent racism, there is a need to understand the ERS of racially marginalized youth in Germany and its various sources within and beyond family settings.

Therefore, the current study asks: How do racially marginalized German young adults narrate their ethnic‐racial socialization growing up in Germany? To address our research question, we listened to German young adults of Turkish, Kurdish as perceived Muslims, and East and Southeast Asian heritage who face disadvantages in education, health services, job opportunities, and the housing market through racialization based on their “not German”‐sounding names/surnames, religion, and phenotype (DeZIM German Centre for Integration and Migration Research ^2023b). We argue that hearing and differentiating experiences of multiple heritage groups whose experiences are often homogenized under the ascribed label of “immigrant descent,” it is necessary to create knowledge with them to amplify their voices (Rogers, Moffitt, and Jones ²⁰²¹). Listening to young adults' recollections of their life experiences allows us to explore ERS as a dynamic process and, thus, gain insights into how young adults take an active role in their socialization process (Rogers et al. 2021). We drew on ecological models on ERS (Hughes, Watford, and Del Toro ²⁰¹⁶; Rogers et al. ²⁰²¹), and the recent conceptualization of racial socialization (Perry et al. 2024) to analyze and interpret the implications of ERS in multiple microsystems (e.g., family, school) embedded in a macrosystem of racism (DeZIM German Centre for Integration and Migration Research ^2023a).

1. Ethnic‐Racial Socialization: Toward an Ecological Perspective

The transactional/ecological perspective on ERS (Hughes, Watford, and Del Toro ²⁰¹⁶; Hughes and Watford ²⁰²¹) posits that expanding the focus from families toward multiple settings, such as physical (e.g., schools) and nonphysical spaces (networks, situations), provides a better understanding of youth's socialization in multiple settings filled with racial dynamics, “including episodes of discrimination” (Hughes, Watford, and Del Toro ²⁰¹⁶, 18). Additionally, Perry et al. (2024) define racial socialization as the wide range of messages transmitted to children and youth to help them make sense of ethnic‐racial dynamics in a society and emphasize outside family settings (peers, school, media) as sources of youth's racial socialization. Perry et al. (2024) argue that racial socialization messages are transmitted verbally and non‐verbally (e.g., gestures), interpersonally but also through cues in the youth's surroundings. Indeed, the ecological approach on ERS and the recent conceptualization of racial socialization by Perry et al. (2024) align better with Hughes et al.'s (2017) broad definition of ERS, referring to multiple settings, agents, and transmission processes.

Furthermore, Rogers, Moffitt and Jones (2021) challenge the ERS literature for centering microsystems as direct and the most proximal force of socialization and macrosystems as indirect and the most distal. Alternatively, the m(ai)cro model centers the macrosystem as the “starting point” of ERS, questions the assumption of macrosystems as distant settings, and argues to blur the rigid separation between micro and macro systems (Rogers et al. 2021, 276). The m(ai)cro model defines macrosystems − racialized societal structures and policies, as direct sources of ERS. In addition, the m(ai)cro model argues that shifting the focus to the macrosystem lessens the responsibility of especially racially marginalized families in the ERS process by holding other contexts and settings (e.g., society, school, communities, media) accountable for ERS. Thus, in the current study, we follow the premises of the m(ai)cro model of Rogers, Moffitt, and Jones (2021) to center the macrosystem and complement this with an ecological perspective on socialization (Hughes, Watford, and Del Toro ²⁰¹⁶) and the recent conceptualization of racial socialization (Perry et al. 2024).

In the following, we first review ERS studies focusing on family and outside family settings in the United States. Then, by employing a m(ai)cro perspective (Rogers et al. 2021), we situate Germany as a sociopolitical context disadvantaging people of Turkish, Kurdish, and East and Southeastern Asian heritage. We then turn our focus to ERS in the Europe, specifically in Germany. Finally, we present the current study, discuss, and interpret the findings.

2. Family as a Source of ERS in the United States

Ethnic‐racially marginalized parents in the United States often conveyed ERS messages verbally and directly to protect their children against structural, institutional, and interpersonal racism in society (Aral et al. 2022). Consequently, family ERS literature identified four key contents: cultural socialization, preparation for bias, promotion of mistrust, and egalitarianism (Hughes et al. 2006). As the most prevalent socialization content regarding a child's own ethnic‐racial group among minoritized families, cultural socialization refers to transmitting information about the language, customs, and traditions of the ethnic‐racial group of the child. The other three contents refer to the dynamics among ethnic‐racial groups: preparation for bias (messages to elicit awareness of discrimination and providing coping strategies), promotion of mistrust (messages providing suspicion/caution of other groups), and egalitarianism (messages focusing on equal treatment of people regardless of their ethnic‐racial background) (Umaña‐Taylor and Hill ²⁰²⁰).

Although ERS studies expanded and explored various ethnic‐racial groups, Asian (Simon 2021) and Muslim (Zeitouni 2022) families are the least studied in ERS literature among families of color in the United States. The few studies report group‐specific family ERS content. For example, first‐generation Asian‐American parents focused on the acculturation of youth into the country of immigration and encouraged youth to appreciate and celebrate multiple cultures (Juang et al. 2016). First‐generation Chinese American parents also engaged in identity concealment, referring to messages concealing their ethnic identity as Chinese or their connection to Chinese culture to protect their children from rising Asian hate during the COVID‐19 pandemic (Ren et al. 2022). A study with Muslim Americans pointed out religious socialization as a group‐specific culture‐relevant socialization content among these families (Balkaya‐Ince et al. ²⁰²⁰).

Notably, there are far fewer ERS studies including non‐parental family members. Grandparents are important sources of cultural socialization among Black and Asian Indian families (Chancler, Webb, and Miller ²⁰¹⁷; Charity‐Parker and Adams‐Bass ²⁰²³; Jackson et al. ²⁰²⁰; Subramaniam and Carolan ²⁰²²). Siblings are also significant ERS sources (Su‐Russell and Finan ²⁰²²). A qualitative study with undocumented Mexican American youth found that older siblings emotionally supported the younger siblings when one experienced or observed ethnic‐racial discrimination (Martin Romero et al. 2022). Furthermore, older siblings comforted the younger ones by creating alternative plans in case of their parents' deportation. Another qualitative study with minoritized youth (i.e., African American, Hispanic, and Asian) showed that siblings in good relationships with each other talked about their discrimination experiences, supported each other emotionally, and provided advice (Szweada 2013).

3. Schools, Peers, and Neighborhoods as Sources of ERS in the United States

Beyond the family, ERS studies focusing on schools, peers, and neighborhoods in the United States are growing. Schools have multiple facets that serve as sources of ERS such as school policies, climate, diversity composition, teacher attitudes and behavior (Byrd and Legette 2022; Saleem and Byrd ²⁰²¹). In terms of the content of the ERS in the school context, Saleem and Byrd (2021) identified cultural, critical consciousness, cultural competence, mainstream, and color‐evasive socialization in their conceptual model. Peers have a dual role when they are the source of ERS. While peers can be a source of support for racial discrimination, they could also act as the perpetrators of racial discrimination (Perry et al. 2024).

Neighborhoods are other sources of ERS as youth navigate between family, school, and peer contexts embedded in neighborhoods with various ethnic‐racial dynamics (Hughes et al. 2017). For example, a study with six Latinx American youth demonstrated that “home front” areas of the neighborhood exposed youth to intergenerational contact with same ethnic elders who engaged in cultural socialization. Other areas were “contact zones” which allowed people of diverse cultures to meet, which then either allowed cohesion or conflict (Moje and Martinez 2007, 217).

Most of these studies centered on a single context at a time instead of focusing on the multiple contexts that youth navigate simultaneously. Two recent empirical studies moved away from this single‐context focus. An interview study with 64 6th, 7th, and 10th grader Black students asked youth to share the moments in their life where race was salient without limiting its setting, e.g., to only family (Watford et al. 2021). This way, youth identified schools (most often), family, and public places as settings of ERS. Moreover, direct and vicarious (through stories of others and observations) exposure to discrimination was the most common content contributing to youth's racial knowledge and awareness, followed by direct racial socialization in the family. Peers (most often), strangers, teachers, and police were the perpetrators in discrimination stories. Thus, not limiting ERS to direct and verbal messages uncovered a wide range of settings and sources of ERS. In addition, broadening the focus from only family ERS to settings outside of family challenged the assumption suggesting parents as the primary source of socialization, at least during adolescence (Hughes et al. 2006; Hughes, Watford, and Del Toro ²⁰¹⁶; Umaña‐Taylor and Hill ²⁰²⁰).

Finally, a mixed‐method study with 98 adolescents from diverse ethnic‐racial groups (Black‐, Latine‐, white‐, Asian‐American) demonstrated how ERS occurred at the intersection of multiple microsystems (e.g., community and family) and at the intersection of micro and macrosystems (i.e., school and sociohistorical) (Sladek et al. 2022). Their analysis revealed that family cultural socialization was inseparable from ERS content in the community settings, peer, media, and school contexts. Therefore, the recent developments in ERS literature highlight the need for exploring how multiple settings and sources come together to inform the development of racial knowledge. Furthermore, another important expansion of the ERS literature is to look beyond the United States to identify universal and country context‐specific processes (Ruck, Hughes, and Niwa ²⁰²¹). As a country with the second highest immigration rate after the United States, we turn our attention to Germany.

4. Developing Racial Knowledge in Germany

Centering the m(ai)crosystem requires a critical lens to understand how racism is rooted in the societal context and lays the foundation for ERS in Germany. “Race” is a product of Europe designed to create hierarchies between people and uphold white Europeans as the “superior race” to justify colonialism and genocide (Ball, Steffens, and Niedlich ²⁰²²). The common approach after Second World War in European societies including Germany was to taboo this home‐grown pseudo‐biological construct which led to the genocide of Jews, Sinti, Roma, Slavic, African heritage, as well as disabled and queer people (Roig 2017). At the same time, as multiple waves of immigration occurred after Second World War (e.g., guestworkers after the civil war in Yugoslavia in the 1990s), other categories such as “foreign,” “immigrant” and “person with immigration background/descent” were created to differentiate the population, and as a consequence reinforced and maintained social inequalities in Germany through creating preconceived ideas of a difference (Vietze et al. 2022). Thus, racialization and racism continues based on phenotype, culture, language skills or accents, and religious background in Germany (DeZIM German Centre for Integration and Migration Research ^2023a). Turkish and Kurdish immigrants and their descendants are two of the largest communities in Germany (NAVEND 2022). Immigration of Turkish people started with the “guestworkers” generation when former West Germany recruited workers after Second World War between 1955 and 1973 due to a workforce shortage. In the following years, Germany has become a destination of immigration for Turkish people for economic reasons. Kurdish people were also part of the “guestworkers” but they also immigrated to Germany in the search for human rights and protection (Ünal, Uluğ, and Blaylock ²⁰²²). As a majority Muslim population, Turkish and Kurdish immigrants and their descendants are mostly racialized as Muslims in Germany. Religion is a key aspect of racialization in Germany through systematically distancing Islamic values as opposing the values of (Judeo‐Christian) Europe (Zick, Küpper, and Hövermann ²⁰¹¹). Being racialized as Muslims made people of Turkish and Kurdish heritage targets of racially motivated attacks (e.g., Solingen in 1993, National Socialist Underground [NSU] murders between 2000 and 2007, Hanau in 2020).

Despite being one of the largest communities, Kurdish immigrants, and their descendants as majority Muslims, have been invisible in Germany as their ethnicity is not recorded. Kurdish people primarily immigrate from Kurdistan, a semi‐autonomous region residing within the national borders of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran (Ammann 2005; Jasim ²⁰²¹). Kurds (as an ethnic group) and Alevi‐Muslims (as a religious sect) have been systematically marginalized and persecuted by Sunni‐Muslims and Turks (Coşkan and Şen 2024). Kurdish people could be a part of Sunni‐Muslim and Alevi‐Muslim religious communities. Importantly, anti‐Kurdish racism is a transnational issue. In addition to marginalization in mainstream German society, Kurdish people historically have been the targets of Turkish nationalists and extremists. Although the people of Kurdish heritage are perceived and racialized as Muslims in Germany, we separately name their heritage to challenge the invisibility of Kurdish identity and explore their distinct experiences that disappears under the ascribed labels such as perceived “Turkish or Muslim” (Jasim 2021).

East and Southeastern Asian heritage in our study refers to people who have heritages from geographic regions such as Vietnam, China, Hong Kong, the Philippines, and Malaysia. As one of the largest immigrant communities from Southeastern Asia, Vietnamese immigrants arrived in West Germany after the end of the Vietnam War in 1975 or as “contract workers” in East Germany from 1980 to 1989. East and Southeastern Asian communities were also the target of racially motivated attacks, such as the arson attacks on the buildings hosting asylum seekers and contract workers in Hoyerswerda in 1991 and in Rostock‐Lichtenhagen in 1992. In addition, people of Asian heritage in Germany have been subject to global stereotypes and racialization (e.g., model minority, perpetual foreigner; Suda, Majer, and Nyugen ²⁰²⁰). Recently, greater anti‐Asian sentiments and harassment emerged during the COVID‐19 pandemic (Suda and Köhler 2023).

5. Ethnic‐Racial Socialization in Europe

The European context lacks an established literature on ERS (Juang et al. 2022). However, studies on acculturation inform family ERS in the European context (Nauck, Schnoor, and Herold ²⁰¹⁷). For instance, some studies revealed the importance of intergenerational solidarity (contributing to household chores and respect for elders) and transmission of heritage language among both immigrant families with Muslim heritage (e.g., Turkish) (Phalet and Schönpflug 2001) and Southeastern Asian heritage (e.g., Vietnamese) in Europe (Röttger‐Rössler and Lam ²⁰¹⁸; Schwittek, Bühler‐Niederberger, and Labuda ²⁰²³). Specific to Muslim families with Turkish heritage, a study showed that parents engaged in religious socialization as a culture‐relevant aspect of socialization (i.e., attending the mosque for Quran classes, celebrating Ramadan, transmitting teachings of Islam) (Uygun‐Altunbas ²⁰¹⁷). In addition, a few acculturation studies revealed that parents encouraged their children to be an active member of society through speaking the dominant language and celebrating the festivities of the country of immigration, and modeling good relations with culturally diverse neighbors (Arfo 2022; Schachner, Van de Vijver, and Noack ²⁰¹⁴). In sum, acculturation studies already signal that marginalized immigrant families engage in both heritage culture and majority German culture socialization.

Similar to the premises of intersecting contexts of ERS (Sladek et al. 2022), heritage cultural socialization in the European context happens within families embedded in communities. Studies with people of Kurdish heritage in Norway and England revealed that parents exposed their children to their heritage culture through taking children to the events organized by the Kurdish diaspora, forming relations with other families of Kurdish heritage and visits to the region of origin (Arfo 2022; Karim ²⁰²⁰; Sulyman ²⁰¹⁴). East Asian parents also relied on community centers founded by and for migrant communities to preserve cultural, religious and linguistic heritage, thus East Asian parents took their children to these community centers on the weekends (Li‐Gottwald ²⁰²⁰).

On the other hand, there is relatively less knowledge whether racially marginalized families socialize their children directly regarding racialized bias and discrimination. One study showed that Kurdish fathers taught their children the political and historical symbols of the Kurdish community (e.g., Kurdish revolutions in the eras of Sheikh Seid), through conversation, books or through conversation held with extended family in homeland as the children grew older. Some Kurdish fathers said they wait for their children to be old enough (at least 15–17 years old) so they could start talking about the mass murders the community experienced in the homeland (Arfo 2022). Muslim Turkish mothers engaged in religious‐based bias‐specific messages by warning their children not to wear a headscarf while they were still at school (Uygun‐Altunbas ²⁰¹⁷). Parents of racially marginalized children who attend nurseries in Berlin engaged in activities to affirm their children's identities at home and helped them to understand racism experiences (Bostancı et al. 2022). There is still much we do not know about how exactly racially marginalized families in Germany communicate messages for resisting racism.

Beyond the family, what we know about racially marginalized youth's ERS in Germany relies on studies focusing on teachers (Civitillo et al. 2023; Karabulut ²⁰²⁰), peers (Kunyu et al. 2021), and “others” in general as perpetrators of (explicit, implicit) discrimination (Salentin 2007) and subtle forms of discrimination (Juang et al. 2021). Studies in Europe also identified classroom diversity climate approaches (i.e., cultural pluralism and equality/inclusion) as ERS content in school settings and peers as sources of ERS (Schachner 2019; Vietze, Juang, and Schachner ²⁰¹⁹). However, it is not clear whether schools or peers engage in conversations specifically about dealing with or preparing for discrimination. In addition, these studies aggregate all youth of immigrant descent or focus on youth of Turkish heritage as the most visible immigrant community in Germany. Thus, experiences of youth of Kurdish and East and Southeast Asian heritage remain invisible.

6. The Current Study

This study explores ethnic‐racial socialization among racially marginalized German young adults in a sociopolitical context that disadvantages Turkish, Kurdish, and East and Southeast Asian heritage immigrants and their descendants and asks: How do racially marginalized German young adults narrate their ethnic‐racial socialization growing up in Germany? We address the research question by interviewing young adults who were born between 1989 and 2003 regarding the retrospective reflection of their experiences of growing up in Germany. The interviews were conducted in 2021, during the COVID‐19 pandemic which heightened anti‐Asian racism (Scholaske 2022; Suda and Köhler ²⁰²³) and a year after a right‐wing extremist shooting at a shisha bar in Hanau on February 19th, 2020 killing nine people of Kurdish, Turkish, Roma and Sinti, Afghan, Bosnian, and Bulgarian origins (Windel et al. 2023).

We expected to find similar contents that were identified with marginalized communities in the United States (e.g., cultural socialization), but also German context‐specific contents as the process of racialization based on migration descent, heritage, and religion in addition to phenotype may differ. We also expected variations by heritage group as different ethnic‐racial groups may prioritize different ERS messages (Simon 2021). In sum, we expected ERS reported by young adults with Kurdish and Turkish heritage to overlap due to the historical and geographical proximity of the region of origin but also differ to some extent as people of Kurdish heritage have been marginalized in the Turkish‐Kurdish dynamic. As societal stereotypes and racialization for people of Asian heritage differ, we also expected some experiences of people of East and Southeast Asian heritage to diverge from people of Turkish, Kurdish heritage as perceived Muslims.

7. Method

7.1. Participants, Recruitment, Interview Procedure

As a part of a larger study that included young adults of Turkish, Kurdish, African, and East and Southeast Asian heritage, we conducted interviews with 30 young adults in 2021 aged between 19 and 32. In this study, we only use 26 interview data of Turkish (n = 10), Kurdish (n = 4), and Asian (n = 12) heritage young adults as they shared a common family structure of having two racially marginalized and first‐generation immigrant parents (except one participant who had a German father racialized as white/nonimmigrant descent, see Table 1 for demographic characteristics in detail). Most (three of the four) participants of African heritage did not have immigrant parents and thus they were not included in these analyses. The group of Kurdish‐German participants varied in their heritages and religious affiliations. They had Kurdish (Alevi‐Muslim), Kurdish‐Turkish (Sunni‐Muslim), Kurdish‐Êzîdi, and Kurdish‐Zaza heritages. Most participants were born in Germany at a time where they were not legally entitled to German citizenship by birth thus, they would only be able to get German citizenship through naturalization. Most participants (n = 23) currently self‐identified as bicultural (e.g., Vietnamese‐German), two participants of Turkish heritage identified as only German, and one only with their heritage culture(s).

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of study's participants.

Young adults (N = 26)
Gender identity	Age	Immigration generation	Highest educational degree obtained	Cities participants grew up
Woman (16) Man (7) Nonbinary (3)	Between 19–31 M age  = 26.7, SD = 3.08	Second (25) Third (1)	High school (7) Bachelor's (7) Master's (9) Missing (3)	Small towns to big urban cities, 64.5% former west‐German cities
Young adults' parents' countries of origin
Turkish heritage (n = 10)	Kurdish heritage (n = 4)	East & Southeast Asian heritage (n = 12)
Turkey (9) Italy–Spain–Turkey (1)	Turkey (3) Iraq (1)	Vietnam (7) China (2) China, Hong‐Kong (2) Philippines, Germany (1)

After obtaining approval from our university ethics board, we created flyers to advertise the study, contacted community organizations, posted the flyer on social media, and used snowballing as a recruitment strategy. We recruited widely to reach participants who grew up in different parts of Germany. To recruit participants with the target heritage groups, we used a short screening survey asking about the cultural group(s) participants identified with. In this screening survey, we also asked participants to indicate their preferred language of the interview (i.e., German, English, Turkish). After we confirmed the participant identified with one of our target heritage groups, we invited them to the interview.

Due to COVID‐19 restrictions in 2021, a majority (n = 22) of the interviews took place online via Zoom and few (n = 4) took place in‐person outdoors (e.g., at parks). The participants signed the consent forms before meeting for the interview and filled out a survey on their demographic information after the interview. After the 30 min to 2 h long interviews, we provided participants a list of therapists and psychological counsellors with expertise on migration, discrimination, racism, and trauma and compensated them with 30 euros.

We developed our interview protocol based on the ERS literature (see the Supporting Information). The interviews were semi‐structured, allowing for additional spontaneous questions. Semi‐structured interviews challenge the power structure between researchers and participants as it allow participants (1) to have a space for providing their expertise on their own life experiences and (2) to reflect and elaborate on how and in what way they interpret these experiences (Rogers et al. 2021). The interviews conducted in German and English were transcribed by a professional transcription company and those conducted in Turkish were transcribed by a native Turkish‐speaking research assistant. The transcriptions were proofread and checked for typos by research assistants and the interviewers. We also engaged in member checking which allowed participants to proofread their transcriptions, make changes, delete, and edit the interview text (Birt et al. 2016). Participants also chose their own pseudonyms which we used in the current study.

7.2. Qualitative Data Analysis

We employed reflexive thematic analysis as our method to engage in qualitative data analysis (Braun and Clarke 2022) because this method allowed us to incorporate our theoretical‐empirical knowledge (deductive, theory‐driven) and explore context‐specific patterns (inductive, data‐driven) for the coding process and theme generation. We engaged with the suggested six phases. First, all members of the coding and analysis team (authors, and two trained research assistants) read the interview transcripts and engaged in memoing (taking notes) to familiarize themselves with the transcripts. Second, the first author and two research assistants created data‐driven codes. We went back and forth between the familiarization and coding phases to revise the initial codes created deductively using MAXQDA 2022. We did not check for inter‐coder reliability. Instead, the first author and two research assistants discussed unclear codes and quotes until a consensus was reached. Themes and subthemes were constructed by both authors through iterative discussions and informed by theory.

7.3. Researcher Backgrounds and Positionality

Both researchers are cis‐women and first‐generation immigrants in Germany and trained in psychological science, quantitative and qualitative research methods. The first author is a postdoctoral researcher who identifies as Turkish, and she has lived and worked in Germany for 7 years. She conducted the interviews with participants of Turkish and Kurdish heritage. She is a native Turkish speaker, is fluent in English and advanced in German. Most of her interviews were held in German (10 out of 14), one completely in Turkish, three in English. Participants who spoke Turkish had the flexibility to switch to Turkish to communicate context‐ and language‐specific expressions although the main communication language remained German. The second author is a professor who identifies as Taiwanese (or Asian)‐American, and she has lived and worked in Germany for 15 years. She is a native English speaker and advanced in German and held the interviews mostly in German (9 out of 12). Research assistants who coded had a master's degree in psychology, and both were in their 20 s. One was a Turkish woman fluent in Turkish, English, and German and the other one was a white German woman fluent in German and English. Our coding team was diverse in terms of academic experiences, ethnic‐racial, cultural, and religious background.

8. Results

Our analysis yielded five themes (see Table 2 for a summary). Most themes captured shared experiences prevalent across heritage groups. We do not quantify the frequency of the themes. However, we highlight and interpret the distinct experiences identified across heritage groups by drawing on racialization and racism in the German context setting the ground for these differences to occur (Rogers et al. 2021).

Table 2.

ERS sources, themes, subthemes, codes, distinction across groups.

ERS Sources	Themes	Subthemes	Codes…	Distinction Across Groups
Family (parents, grandparents) and community	Heritage culture socialization	Cultural knowledge	Visiting country of origin, language learning, heritage culture values, moral values, history, cultural practices (food, holidays, festive, activities)
		Gendered	Messages that involved gendered expectations	Among women
		Religious	Teachings and activities on religion	Among Turkish, Kurdish
Family (parents, grandparents)	Survival vs. liberation‐based preparation for bias	Survival: Competence building and working hard(er)	Encouraging to speak German very well, study hard, get good grades, find “real/safer/respectable” jobs
		Survival: Integration	“Integrating,” forming friendships with white German peers and distancing from marginalized communities
		Survival: Minimization in response to discrimination	Invalidating, ignoring discrimination experiences, suggestions to take discrimination experiences as harmless, not to worry
		Liberation: Self‐advocacy in response to discrimination	Acts of speaking up against bias, discrimination, unfair situations	Among Turkish, Kurdish
Family (parents, grandparents)	Mistrust towards the oppressing community		Suspicion towards oppressing community of the family, avoidance, secrecy	Among Turkish, Kurdish
Schools, Neighborhoods	Lack of support against bias, discrimination		No support or protection against discrimination
Marginalized Peers and Siblings	Source of support against bias, discrimination		Support by marginalized friends, conversations with siblings

8.1. Heritage Culture Socialization at the Intersection of Family and Community

Participants across heritage groups provided examples of explicit messages and life experiences fostering their knowledge of their heritage culture(s) at the intersection of family and community. This theme consisted of two subthemes relevant to all participants (cultural knowledge, gendered socialization) and one subtheme which was mainly voiced by participants of Turkish and Kurdish heritage (religious socialization).

8.1.1. Cultural Knowledge

Teachings of values, norms, practices, language of the heritage group(s) were central to this subtheme. Although all participants mentioned their parents as the sources of the explicit socialization messages, extended family (i.e., grandparents, relatives,) and fictive kin (i.e., family friends) served as non‐parental socialization sources in Germany or through their visits to the heritage country. As Sude (Italian‐Spanish‐Turkish heritage, woman, 32) says, her Turkish grandparents enthusiastically undertook the responsibility of teaching Turkish language to their granddaughter and feel proud of their achievement: “[my Turkish grandparents] they absolutely wanted us to be able to speak Turkish. So even today, when I'm with my “babaanne” [grandma in Turkish], she says, “It's very nice that you can speak Turkish.” She just thinks it's great.” This finding was consistent with previous research in the United States demonstrating cultural socialization as the most prominent ERS content among marginalized families (Hughes et al. 2017; Umaña‐Taylor and Hill ²⁰²⁰). Similarly, it also aligned with studies identifying grandparents as important non‐parental family sources for cultural socialization among African‐ and Asian Indian‐American families (e.g., Chancler, Webb, and Miller ²⁰¹⁷; Subramaniam and Carolan ²⁰²²).

Also, along similar lines with the previous US‐based research, heritage culture socialization did not happen in a single setting, but at the intersection of family and community (Sladek et al. 2022). Participants described how their parents' involvement in the community centers (e.g., mosques, language schools, cultural centers) supported learning heritage culture, history, and language or being exposed to the conversation of guests hosted at home,

My parents both used to work in a Turkish association […] almost all the children went to Turkish [extracurricular] school and graduated. I learned a lot there, so we didn't just do history, we also learned a lot of language and culture.

(Havva, Turkish heritage, woman, 29)

[…] these friends I told you about [my parents were hosting in our place], that they were in exile in Germany. The man was an author and he was writing about like anthropology and about Kurdish culture, and dances […]. I think it's also when we grew up with them, my parents were like, okay they [our children] learn it not from saying but from being with these people, they just learn it. […] Like I think we didn't sit on the table and then they educated me about stuff, but the conversations that we got to hear when they were talking or stuff like that, I think that was important. And whenever I asked questions, I know that they were answered.

(Doja, Kurdish heritage, woman, 26)

8.1.2. Gendered Cultural Socialization

In contrast to participants who identify as men, those who are socialized as women often mentioned the domestic role expectations conveyed as a part of heritage culture tradition: “when we had visitors, I had to be at home and make sure that tea was always served and that the table was tidied, because that's what girls do. They also simply told us a lot about how things worked in our tradition” (Ege, woman, Turkish heritage, 28). Especially those who had brothers noticed these differential expectations: “Like cleaning and learning to cook a bit. My brother didn't have to do it, he didn't have to do it. He could just relax and play and that was it. And when I finished my household chores, I was also allowed to play” (Hanna, East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman). In addition to the domestic role expectations, they mentioned stricter rules around dating, and the hours they needed to be at home. However, many voiced their frustration with the gendered expectations embedded into the heritage culture values, norms, and practices, and consequently, these expectations sometimes put strains on participants' relationships with their parents. As Mymy (East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman, 26) explains,

[In] Vietnamese culture, parents are very, very strict. Women are treated differently than men, or girls are treated differently. Or daughters are treated differently than sons. […] the father was the head of the family or something like that. And I've had that ever since I can remember […] I didn't think it was good. And I felt very uncomfortable with all these family hierarchies. Expectation from a child in Vietnam that children have to be so, how do you say, so obedient and are not allowed to talk back and so on. I also argued a lot and got into a lot of trouble with my parents.

In sum, gendered aspect of the heritage culture socialization among Asian, Turkish, Kurdish families mirrored previous research findings in the United States pointing out domestic role responsibilities, expectations, and stricter rules around dating as aspects of family gendered racial socialization among Asian‐American women (Ahn et al. 2022).

8.1.3. Religious Socialization (Among Participants of Turkish and Kurdish Heritage)

Our analysis also revealed some distinct experiences across heritage groups in terms of heritage culture socialization. For instance, unlike East and Southeast Asian young adults who barely mentioned religion as part of their upbringing, participants of Turkish and Kurdish heritage often mentioned religious learning. Religious learning mainly took place with cultural festivals (e.g., Eid), food restrictions (e.g., “not eating pork”), and practices (e.g., “going to Friday prayer in the mosque” for boys). Activities in community centers (e.g., “Koran courses in mosques” and “attending events in Alevi associations”) were also often mentioned by participants as settings they often visited for learning religious teachings. Therefore, religious socialization as a part of heritage culture socialization aligned with the studies in the United States with Muslim‐American families (Balkaya‐Ince et al. ²⁰²⁰) and Muslim families in Germany (Uygun‐Altunbas ²⁰¹⁷).

8.2. Survival vs. Liberation‐Based Preparation for Bias in Family Settings

Participants defined varied ways their family members (i.e., parents, grandparents) prepared them for bias, such as how they talked to them about discrimination and taught them how to cope with it. By drawing on a recent conceptualization of preparation for bias messages as lessons of resistance to racism, we analyzed the preparation for bias messages as either survival‐ or liberation‐based. Survival‐based preparation for bias refers to the messages focusing on the “individual's need to survive in the face of oppression”(Das et al. 2022, 998). Liberation‐based preparation for bias refers to the messages focusing on “challenging the status‐quo” and racist bias (Das et al. 2022, 998). The two survival‐based subthemes we identified (competence building and working harder, integration) referred to proactive messages of the family members and were prevalent across all heritage groups. These messages addressed bias indirectly through the need to adapt and survive in society. The third survival‐based (minimization) and fourth liberation‐based (self‐advocacy) subthemes referred to family members' responses to discrimination and bias. While the third subtheme (minimization) was prevalent across all heritage groups, the fourth (self‐advocacy) was only identified among Turkish and Kurdish heritage groups. In sum, families mostly focused on the coping strategies that accommodate instead of challenge the sources of bias.

8.2.1. Survival: Competence Building and Working Hard(er)

Across heritage groups, the most common way families (parents and grandparents) prepared participants for bias was telling them to have advanced German language skills, do well in school, and work hard to get “respectable” jobs. Some of these messages underlined the lack of equal opportunities in Germany between white Germans and people from immigrant communities explicitly or implicitly. As Syd (Turkish heritage, woman, 31) explained: “my grandfather always said, we [Turks/immigrants] have to give 120 percent in Germany.” Implicit borders of “we [Turks] vs them [white Germans]” made the societal inequalities evident to participants. Thus, families encouraged participants to gain key competencies (being fluent in German), work hard, and acquire a good job as tools for combating inequalities so that participants could resist societal racism and discrimination as individuals.

Participants argued that these messages were mainly driven by their parents' and grandparents' experiences with inequalities and discrimination as first‐generation immigrants in Germany. In some cases, it was evident that participants' families tried to ensure that their children would not be restricted by the limited opportunities they have had as first‐generation immigrants. As Salih (Turkish heritage, man, 26) said, “My grandfather worked in very hard labor jobs, […] my family, especially my father, was like, “study and don't be a laborer like us […] don't go a vocational school to do a labor‐intensive job”, you know, they wanted us to study [at a university].” Parents encouraged participants to use their “chance” as second generations to become full members of society. As T (East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman, 28) said, “[My parents told me] ‘you are a person here, a part of this society, this country, contribute to it and don't end up like us. We have nothing, but you have opportunities, use them.’ It's something they've always given me along the way.”

For some parents of Turkish heritage, messages for language learning stemmed from the frustration resulting from parents' own discrimination experiences and subsequently the need for gaining respect. Thus, some participants were told that by “learning German even better than Germans” they would not allow “Germans to correct them” (Havva, Turkish heritage, 29) or undermine them during official matters at foreigners' and citizens' offices. As Sude (Italian‐Spanish‐Turkish heritage, woman, 32) said,

My mother said one thing to me earlier, she said, ‘If you are more German than a German, you can do anything in Germany.’ If you can be really “Alman” [“German” in Turkish]. I must say, when I think about it today, I find it very tuhaf [“weird” in Turkish]. But I know what she means. I realize when I talk to the tax office, citizen's office, the office of immigration and asylum, and, whether I have a Turkish name, Italian name, Spanish name, when they hear how I talk, they take me seriously. Then we are on the same level.

This subtheme was similar to Das et al.'s findings of hard work as one of the survival strategies Black mothers provided to their sons. Family members' emphasis on gaining and performing these competencies (working in a “good job,” speaking the German language at a native level) understood in the context of inequitable society disadvantaging people of immigrant descent implies the need for social mobility to avoid bias.

8.2.2. Survival: Integration

“Integrating” and forming good relations with white Germans to do so was important for parents which they then explicitly told to the participants. Parents thereby utilized the mainstream political and social narrative of “integration” in Germany. This narrative is heavily critiqued for its limiting and exclusionary view of who and what is “German” and its use for assimilation to the mainstream society instead of transforming the society collectively (Brubaker 2001). Participant quotes underscore the internalization of this narrative by immigrant families and its use as a tool for surviving in a biased society where “integration” is perceived as a requirement for immigrants to fulfill. As Anna (Êzîdi‐Kurdish heritage, nonbinary, 24) elaborates: “I remember that my parents were very, very, very keen for us to integrate. [They said] white‐German people were not an enemy […] We should be like them and hang out with white‐German people. Because they are good people.” In some cases, parents themselves tried to show to white Germans that they, as Vietnamese community, were “integrated” in school settings, as MyMy's mother did (East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman, 26),

I think there was another Vietnamese girl at the school, at the elementary school. And that's when my mom said, we're having a Christmas party for your friends so that we know that we belong. And I forgot that for decades and didn't understand it. And then at some point I understood what she meant. Exactly, so she said, “[we do this] so that they [white Germans] know that we can also do everything that they can do”, roughly speaking. And I didn't understand why that was so important to her. But now I understand.

At the same time, to “integrate,” distance from the most marginalized groups was also encouraged by parents, even if they were also members of the group. Based on participants' comments, parents seemed to have internalized and perpetuated racialized group stereotypes in Germany referring to Turks, Africans, Albanians as “dangerous” (Allen, East and Southeast Asian heritage, man, 26). This seemed to be done with the motivation to “protect” participants from hanging out with people who are mostly perceived as “not well integrated” in the society. As Umut (Turkish heritage, man, 31) explained, “My dad said those [Turkish youth] who go to Hauptschule or Realschule [vocational and nonacademic school track], Turkish children are a bit naughty, don't look at them; look [aim] higher, look [aim] higher up.” Doja (Kurdish heritage, woman, 26) said, “[my parents] they wanted to be together with Germans, [they thought] let's just not risk it. Let's not be close to them [Turkish people]. That's why, before school started, they moved to this neighborhood [a neighborhood that is mostly white German]. […] my father always says I'm so like glad that my child was raised with [nonimmigrant/white] Germans.”

The subthemes (competency building and integration) as a survival‐based preparation for bias carry acculturative purposes similar to acculturation studies in Europe (Arfo 2022; Schachner, Van de Vijver, and Noack ²⁰¹⁴) and ERS studies with Asian Americans in the United States (Juang et al. 2016). However, analyzing these efforts through the m(ai)cro lens with a focus on societal racism revealed that motivation for “integration” might not be solely for acculturation purposes but also to help racially marginalized youth survive discrimination and bias.

8.2.3. Survival: Minimization of Discrimination

Many parents across heritage groups (although majority were Asian and Kurdish heritage) told participants to “ignore” and, take discriminatory experiences “as harmless,” and “not to worry about it” by trying to help participants not to dwell on these experiences.

I always talk to them [my parents] about it [when I thought about a teacher grading Turkish and Arab students lower because he is a racist], I say to them: “Look, I did this and that, but the teacher doesn't see it.” And I think it's the same with all parents, if you get a bad mark like that, you say it was the teacher, but all the parents say: “No, it's your fault, you need to study better”.

(Bahar, Turkish heritage, woman, 23)

Participants of Kurdish/Êzîdi heritage also mentioned their parents minimized the discrimination they experience in the German society in comparison to countries they immigrated from (Turkey, Iraq).

[A man in the market said something racist to my mother]. My mother didn't want to say something back That's kind of the worst thing. I have the feeling that my parents see themselves as Yazidi people, but they never really talk about their experiences of discrimination here. But I think it's because their experience of discrimination in Germany is so much better compared to that, or life in Germany is so much better compared to life in Iraq.

(Anna, Êzîdi‐Kurdish heritage, nonbinary, 24)

While parents seem to provide a strategy to survive racism by suggesting participants not to pay much attention to these experiences, participants perceived these messages as invalidation of their experiences and feelings. Participants reported their frustration with parents' messages justifying actions of the perpetrator by saying “they don't mean bad” or “you look different […] they want to be nice to accommodate to you and not to speak German to you but talk to you in English.” Participants mostly felt that their parents “could not really empathize” with them. As VP (East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman, 26) explained

But my parents have a completely different attitude towards racism because they are of the opinion, or I often hear: “Yes, that's just the way it is, because they [Germans] don't like us, because we came to their country”. And they [my parents] don't openly say that, but I know they mean that they are grateful that they are allowed to be here and that they have worked here and that they are here now. And they [my parents] are rather quiet, and they don't say anything because they know they don't really belong, but they also see that they are somehow not German, and that's why that's more okay for them than for me.

Our results displayed similarities with studies in the United States with Asian‐American parents suggesting minimization of race and racism as a common ERS content (Atkin and Yoo 2021). Studies argue that minimization as a prevalent socialization strategy among Asian families might result from internalized racism (Kim et al. 2023) due to general invalidation of racism experiences of Asians by the society (Wang and Santos 2023). Our findings displayed that minimization might also be observed across families of Turkish and Kurdish heritage. However, different than other families, the reason for the minimization of discrimination among parents of Kurdish descent was their harsher experiences with discrimination in their heritage country. Thus, their status as being the minoritized groups within a minoritized group (perceived Muslims) in Germany played an important role in the minimization of discrimination in the broader society.

8.2.4. Liberation: Displays of Self‐Advocacy (Among Participants of Turkish and Kurdish Heritage)

Participants of Turkish and Kurdish heritage reported incidences where parents or older siblings did not provide them with the “words” to advocate for themselves, but they “displayed” immediate reactions to discrimination, and thus prepared participants to resist racism. Alp (Turkish heritage, man, 19) said, “there was an art teacher who associated us, the Muslims, the Turks in general, with terrorism… [I told it to] my parents and they came to school about it the next day and spoke about it with the principal.” As Havva (Turkish heritage, woman, 29) said,

There was a big case in elementary school, the parents wanted it, well, it was an elementary school with a share of very, very few foreign children who wanted to divide the classes into foreign and German children and my mother just worked with others to ensure that it didn't happen and since then I've noticed, I think that's when I noticed for the first time, that there is a difference between German and non‐German. And my parents are very transparent when it happened. They tell me that or I tell [them] that I experience [something].

Anna (Êzîdi‐Kurdish heritage, nonbinary, 24) said, “My sisters also played a big part in my upbringing. My sisters [don't put up with anything]. So, for example, when they're in a store with my mother and they see that my mother is being subjected to racist hostility, my sister says: “I want to talk to the manager.”” Similar to Das et al. (2022) findings suggesting Black mothers supported their sons by providing them with various strategies to advocate for themselves in the face of oppression. However, slightly different than the Das et al. (2022) study which highlighted primarily verbal strategies for children themselves to confront racism, our findings mostly reflected how some parents or older siblings prepared participants by modeling verbal confrontations of self‐advocacy in the face of discrimination on their or their family's behalf.

8.3. Mistrust Towards the Oppressing Community of the Family (Among Participants of Turkish, Kurdish Participants)

Families of participants with Turkish and Kurdish heritage were vocal about whom not to trust which acknowledged the existence of racialized bias and being the target of it. The messages were in the form of mistrust and directed toward the oppressing community of the family. For instance, Sunni‐Muslim Turkish families were concerned about Germans being racialized as white as a group that historically harmed the Turkish community and as the potential perpetrator. As Syd (Turkish heritage, woman, 31) explained and mentioned that she mostly argued with her mother when she made these remarks while she was young,

We were looked at strangely on the street when we were out and about as a whole family. My mother already had a bit of an idea: “All Germans are Nazis; we'll never get equal rights here!” She was always very pessimistic about that. But my mother was always like: “This is a racist country, it will always be one, you just have to know that.” She raised us with that. […] We [my mother and I] talked about [Hanau] on the phone and I was able to talk to her about it, for example. She jokingly said:, “I have already told you before. There are right‐extremes in Germany, and you didn't believe me!” She said that about Hanau, even on the phone, that she could still remember how we used to argue about the subject.

On the other hand, Kurdish, Alevi‐Muslim, and Êzîdi families mostly fled the oppression and destructions of Turks, and/or Sunni Muslims in their homelands. These parents provided messages to “avoid” people of Turkish and/or Sunni Muslims heritage. For example, Anna (Kurdish‐Êzîdi heritage, nonbinary, 24) noted: “[My parents] didn't like it when I hung out with Muslim people a lot. [My parents] were like, don't do that. There was constant commentary that Muslim people are bad. And that they are not good company.” At the same time, these comments were not helpful, instead they put participants in emotional distress, as Anna continued,

I think ten years ago my parents were worse than they are now […] but I used to say every time beforehand, a Muslim friend is coming, please don't comment. So, I always made announcements beforehand. And I was like, please don't do anything wrong. Or I made sure that my grandmother wasn't there. Because my grandmother said much, much worse things.

Secrecy from the historical oppressors of the family was another type of strategy. For example, Lisa (Turkish, Alevi‐Muslim, woman, 28) who is Alevi‐Muslim, a group historically marginalized by Sunni‐Muslims said,

When I played with the neighbors, with the children who came from [Sunni‐Muslim] families, before I went there, they told me “Don't tell everything.” I was allowed to play with them, it was never forbidden. I was allowed to go there, but I wasn't supposed to tell everything. We never hid who we were. But they told me when I was little “not to talk about [us, our family heritage] so much with them [Sunni Muslims].” Not anywhere else. But with them. […] but there is no hatred towards Alevi people [from Germans]. I have to say, the majority don't know Alevi people either. And if they do know them, then it doesn't matter. Are you an Alevi? [They say] okay, never mind.

These findings aligned with the promotion of mistrust, an ERS content identified with marginalized families in the United States (Hughes et al. 2006). Although mistrust messages are less often used by families compared to ERS contents (e.g., cultural socialization, preparation for bias) and are found to have negative consequences to youth's well‐being (Huguley et al. 2019), they are seen as “reactions to the long history of racism endured by the community” (Perry et al. 2024, 16). Our findings also show clearly the importance of “who” to mistrust varies depending on the specific sociohistorical context. And while secrecy from the historical oppressors of the family among Alevi‐Muslim families displayed a similarity with “identity concealing” messages among Chinese‐American engaged in during the COVID‐19 pandemic (Ren et al. 2022), this strategy was not in response to a “limited” period resulting from a pandemic, but rather as a result of a historical legacy of discrimination.

8.4. Lack of Support Against Discrimination at School and Neighborhood Settings

When participants talked about the ethnic‐racial socialization that they were exposed to outside of the family setting (at school and neighborhood), most of them talked about discrimination experiences resulting from being racialized (i.e., process of categorization often based on phenotypical or other characteristics) as an immigrant or as a person of immigrant descent. Participants were exposed to direct and vicarious blatant (i.e., explicit) discrimination, blatant referring to explicit, intentional insults or behaviors directed to ethnic‐racially marginalized people (Jones et al. 2016) and vicarious discrimination referring to experiences based on observations of discrimination targeting other people. The following quote illustrates how participants were exposed to vicarious discrimination experiences through hearing stories from family members and observing their parents or other racially marginalized friends being discriminated against. As Albert (Turkish heritage, man, 29) elaborates,

I've noticed in all kinds of everyday situations how my parents have been insulted. So once my father parked his car and then someone from behind said “drive a little further forward so that I can also park.” And my father said, no, “you go in this gap” and then the man said, “[a racial slur].” Or at the [supermarket] at the counter, that you are treated very unfriendly. And the Germans who come after you are treated very well. Or at the office, at an authority,

Furthermore, participants often mentioned stereotypes referring to biases held about their ethnic‐racially marginalized groups (Fish and Syed 2020) and foreign objectification as a type of subtle discrimination (i.e., microaggressions) referring to automatic acts of exclusion of ethnic‐racially marginalized people by perceiving them as a foreigner regardless of citizenship, generational status, or self‐identification (Armenta et al. 2013). In sum, schools (teachers, peers racialized as white), and neighborhood (strangers) were the settings where participants learned racialization through experiences denying their equal status to white/nonimmigrant Germans and their right to identify as German.

However, despite the various accounts of discrimination experiences at school, participants reported mostly lack of support as the most common response to discrimination incidents of the actors at school. Therefore, school settings with majority white teachers, peers as perpetrators and as sources who lacked awareness for racism left participants vulnerable. Participants mostly avoided reactions and confrontation against racist incidents while growing up especially in situations where they were one of a few racially marginalized students. Despite wanting to react, most participants did not “know what to say,” stayed silent to not “look aggressive”, could not find the “confidence to speak up” or just “laughed along”. As Umut said (Turkish heritage, man, 31): “I couldn't react at that moment, I didn't know what to say […] at the time. But I resented it [my friends' sentiments reflecting stereotypes about Turkish people], of course, I resented it a lot.”

In cases where teachers were the perpetrators of discrimination, participants were aware of the power teachers hold and did not believe that telling their parents could change the situation. As Octavia (East and Southeast Asian heritage, nonbinary, 25) said,

I had one teacher who was very sexist and also racist. (I: if the teacher said something racist, is that something you would have told your parents about?) Not my parents, but my friends. He would make fun of students who are not perceived as white German. I think among my friends, it was also pretty clear that this teacher was really not good. And I think it was also not really common that we [students] would also turn against the teacher and we were not really aware of [the fact that we could] actually say something against him.

When participants questioned and displayed reactions to discrimination, they were punished (e.g., being expelled from the school), not heard by their white teachers, peers, and thus their experiences were invalidated. Melanie's quote (Turkish heritage, woman, 21) displays this invalidation especially by white German friends in peer group settings, “I couldn't really speak about it with German friends because they couldn't understand, So, they didn't understand […] but Turkish, of course, they always understood me.” Participants also underlined phenotype as central to their discrimination experiences and assumed firsthand experience with racism would be needed for support. For example, Melanie (Turkish heritage, woman, 21) and VP (East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman, 26) mentioned that “Russian or Polish background” friends would also not understand what they go through as they were practically “white” friends or “German.” Participants' assumptions were reinforced as white German friends did not intervene with discrimination as bystanders. MyMy's (East and Southeast Asian heritage, woman, 26) quote illustrates the feeling of being left alone by white German friends,

I was the last one to get off [the bus] and walked past these kids, they just called me racial slurs. And that hurt me very, very much. […] my white friends also saw that […] they didn't do anything. I thought that was really bad. [They said] nothing, nothing at all.

In sum, this finding aligns with the discrimination research in Germany suggesting teachers (Civitillo et al. 2023) and peers (Kunyu et al. 2021) at school and adults in the neighborhood context (Salentin 2007) as instigators of discrimination. Although newer studies point out classroom cultural diversity norms (cultural pluralism, equal treatment) as ERS content in the German context (Schachner 2019), school ERS for youth who grew up in 1990s and 2000s reflects only a lack of support in response to discrimination. The lack of support in schools may reflect the broader societal climate in this time period. Racial attacks against those with Asian, African, and Eastern European or migrant heritage made headlines as neo‐Nazis engaged in violence and rioting (González Hauck, Paasch‐Colberg, and Pöggel ²⁰²⁴). How to confront this rising racist violence on a societal level was not clearly addressed in the schools (Mues 2023). Our findings on the lack of support from white peers in our interviews align with the recent studies highlighting the lack of awareness about racial inequalities among adolescents racialized as white/nonimmigrant descent in Germany. It also shows little improvement in the socialization of white/nonimmigrant descent youth for discrimination over the years (Schwarzenthal et al. 2024).

8.5. Marginalized Peers and Siblings as Sources of Support

Considering parents' minimization of discrimination incidents, having strong mistrust, lack of support from white/nonmigrant teachers and peers, coupled with participants' wishes to not worry their parents (not to make a big deal) delayed participant's understanding of their experiences outside of home settings as discrimination. Lack of support in responding to discrimination left participants only with the option of seeking support from other marginalized peers who they believed could empathize. However, participants sought support from marginalized peers and siblings only later in life, such as after finishing high school. There were several barriers to seeking support. First, the schools they attended did not always enable peer support as they were mostly one of a few racially marginalized students at school. Second, there was a lack of recognition and attention to discrimination in the family and school contexts. Only in settings where participants were not the only marginalized person when they experienced discrimination, were they able to have conversations with their marginalized peers. For example, Bahar (Turkish heritage, woman, 24) mentions how racially marginalized peers supported each other after one of the classes during her vocational training. As Bahar said, “And after the teacher left [saying that she is afraid of Muslims beheading her], all of us people of color got together and [discussed what the teacher said]. You know, [we said to each other] don't worry, we always support each other.”

In addition, if participants had older siblings, they talked about discrimination with them, thus, older siblings took over the role to become the socialization source for younger siblings. As Dan (East and Southeast Asian heritage, man) said, “I would say that I didn't really talk about it at all during my time at school, until I finished [high] school. My [older] sister made me aware of it [discrimination] a bit and I then talked about it a bit with my sister.” As Anna (Êzîdi‐Kurdish heritage, nonbinary, 24) explained,

If something like that happened to me […] at least I, and my sisters too, try to at least communicate with our brothers about it. […] I would have liked my parents to do the same. But what strikes me is that we [me and my parents] didn't talk about it.

9. General Discussion

Drawing on ecological models on ERS (Hughes, Watford, and Del Toro ²⁰¹⁶; Perry et al. ²⁰²⁴; Rogers et al. ²⁰²¹), the aim of this study was to address how racially marginalized German young adults narrate their ethnic‐racial socialization growing up in Germany. Our thematic analysis revealed five overarching themes: (1) family and community heritage culture socialization, (2) family survival vs. liberation‐based preparation for bias, (3) family mistrust towards the oppressing community, (4) school and neighborhood lack of support, and (5) marginalized peers and siblings as sources of support against bias and discrimination.

Even though ERS is theoretically conceptualized as a process that involves many sources, most ERS research focuses on parents as socialization sources and only recently expanded to settings outside of family situated in a macrosystem of racism (Hughes et al. 2017; Perry et al. ²⁰²⁴; Rogers et al. ²⁰²¹). By not limiting our interviews to the parental context, our findings add to studies showing interactions between settings such as family and community for heritage cultural socialization (Sladek et al. 2022). We also offer evidence to expand limited research identifying siblings (Martin Romero et al. 2022; Szweada ²⁰¹³), and marginalized peers (Perry et al. 2024) as important sources of support against discrimination. In addition to the studies identifying grandparents as sources of cultural socialization (e.g., Chancler, Webb, and Miller ²⁰¹⁷; Charity‐Parker and Adams‐Bass ²⁰²³), our study also shows that grandparents engage in racial socialization through messages protecting youth from bias and providing caution towards communities historically harming the heritage community of the family (see themes survival‐based preparation for bias and mistrust towards oppressing communities to the family).

As discussed in the heritage culture socialization theme, religion was more often incorporated into cultural socialization among perceived Muslim families. On the one hand, religion could be more central to the cultural socialization of Turkish, Kurdish families. It is also possible that the societal context where Islam is strongly othered might have led Muslim families to emphasize religious practices as a part of their heritage culture. Whereas families of Asian heritage might have not felt the pressure of transmitting the values of their religion as religious affiliations of the Asian community are mostly similar to the dominant religion (i.e., Christian) and more socially accepted religious affiliations (i.e., Buddhism) compared to Islam within the German society (Pickel and Yendell 2017). Furthermore, for participants identified as Alevi‐Muslim or Êzîdi, it is harder to disentangle culture and religion as religion was central to the marginalization of these communities historically in their heritage country. In sum, these findings emphasize the importance of considering religious socialization as a form of heritage culture socialization among perceived Muslim families.

The families mostly tried to protect their children growing up by engaging in messages that required youth to cope with discrimination as individuals (survival‐based preparation for bias) or by promoting mistrust towards the oppressing communities. Although these were similar to the studies in the United States, our results unraveled some nuances for the motivation of Kurdish families. For example, the motivation behind the minimization of discrimination among Kurdish families in Germany was due to their harsher discrimination experiences in the heritage country. Finally, families of Turkish and Kurdish heritage transmitted mistrust toward the oppressing community of the family (e.g., Turks for Kurds, Sunni Muslims for Alevis, Êzîdis). Therefore, these findings show the need for identifying and understanding the complexity of racism and ERS for participants of minoritized communities within perceived Muslim migrant communities in Europe. Finally, some socialization messages (family integration and mistrust messages) were in contrast with one another showing that conflicting messages could co‐exist in a single setting (family). In sum, this finding highlights the multiplicity of overall socialization experiences.

9.1. Limitations and Future Directions

The current study had strengths such as centering and amplifying the voices of German young adults from underrepresented groups in psychological research (i.e., German young adults of Kurdish and East and Southeast Asian) and is one of the few studies exploring ERS in Germany. Despite its strengths, there are a few limitations to the study. Our results are limited to the experiences of second‐generation young adults (except for one third‐generation participant) who grew up with primarily first‐generation immigrant parents who shared the same/similar heritage cultures (except one had a white German father). Those who grow up in families with parents who have heritages with different groups (e.g., Turkish‐Chinese) might be exposed to ERS differently than those whose parents originate from the same/similar cultural‐religious heritage. Because mixed‐race families (e.g., white‐Asian) are increasing worldwide (Rocha and Aspinall 2020), attention to how parents and family members may reinforce or conflict in their socialization messages is needed to move beyond mono‐ethnic/racial theorizing of ERS (Atkin and Yoo 2021).

Also, second/third‐generation families may talk about heritage culture and racism differently than first‐generation parents (Juang et al. 2018). Different cohorts will experience different sociohistorical events that inform ERS. For instance, considering the years participants grew up, the common narrative during the 90s and early 2000s was about “hostility towards foreigners,” and their parents had to deal with more blatant forms of racism when they arrived in Germany. The current discussions about racism (with the effect of the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020), and racially motivated events (e.g., Hanau shooting) could shape ERS contents parents currently engage in and might have heightened transmission of both liberation and survival strategies (Thomas and Blackmon 2015). Future studies should investigate how racially marginalized families with young children are currently engaging in topics of racism. Additionally, participants' willingness to become socialization agents for their younger siblings and coalesce with other racially marginalized peers highlighted the need for studies on peer and sibling ERS. Finally, although we expected young people to mention messages they receive from media, this was not evident in the interviews. Future studies could address this by explicitly exploring messages of media.

10. Conclusion

The present study contributes to the ERS literature centering multiple settings of ERS by taking an ecological perspective (Sladek et al. 2022; Watford et al. ²⁰²¹). It expands the understanding of ERS in a European country context, Germany, through the lens of racially marginalized young adults centering the macrosystem of racism (Rogers et al. 2021). Our findings highlight marginalized peers and siblings as important sources of support. They also suggest the need for considering the complexity of racism and ERS for participants of minoritized communities within minoritized communities in Europe. These findings can inform interventions targeting families and schools to protect youth from varied forms of bias and discrimination.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

11.

11.1. Peer Review

The peer review history for this article is available at https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1002/jcop.23166.

Supporting information

Supporting information.

Data Availability Statement

The authors have nothing to report.