Trying to decide if I am hispanic...

[Lefty Doodle]

When I was applying to colleges, I always marked that I was white. My dad is a doctor, and I felt like the good things that could come from being a minority were for people who grew up under somewhat different circumstances. Plus, I am white ;-).

My dad is Mexican American, he was born in Mexico, to an American father and a Mexican mother. He moved to the US when he was 4 and learned English in Kindergarten although he still speaks Spanish to both of his parents. I feel in many ways more connected to my Mexican family than my U.S. extended family because my dad has tried really hard to get relatives up for visits, and for us to go down. Also, my grandparents now live in my hometown and I get to see them a lot and hear all the stories about Mexico.

As an adult, I also feel more proud and connected to that part of my heritage than I did before.

Anyway, does this qualify me as Hispanic for my applications? I definitely consider myself Hispanic, but feel weird taking advantages away from others potentially.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NontradatBeach]

I think you very much qualify as Hispanic. Based on your family background, you've undoubtedly been immersed in that culture and feel a connection to it. Med schools always tout the importance of diversity in the class... I'd think you'd definitely bring something to the table in that department. Had you said you didn't identify at all with your Mexican heritage and the culture of your family, then I'd say it was misleading and perhaps unfair to list it.

That said, that's just my personal opinion, not AAMC or an Adcom's.

 

[Lefty Doodle]

Thanks, that is true. Also, when I worked with an all-Mexican kitchen staff as a server in a restaurant, they all knew (word traveled fast!) about my heritage and were always so nice to me I think because of it, even though the words we communicated with amounted to "una ensalada por favor." I know Russian and German, but not Spanish...but that's a longer story...I was rebelling...

 

[AcclratngCharge]

You certainly seem to have a rich Mexican heritage, and I don't think there would be anything wrong with checking that box for the AMCAS. But...have you ever checked the White/Non-hispanic, or Caucasian box on other forms or documents that would be incongruous with what you are considering?

 

[LaFleur]

I would say that you do qualify as Hispanic, but is it going to be a problem if you haven't checked anything off as Hispanic previously and didn't identify yourself that way in college?

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk

 

[Lefty Doodle]

I really don't think there is some big system where they can tell what I've marked in the past. And I often do mark Hispanic when it's not like some big application or something. Thanks for the input guys ;-).

 

[shouldbemd]

White, Hispanic Origin.

 

[NaijaMed10]

Wait why don't you apply as bi-racial?? Most applications have a box like that nowadays. IMO, I think both should be embraced but I'm curious as to what made you decide to apply as "mexican" for med school when you previously applied as "white"? IMO, you are ETHNICALLY Hispanic and American because you have Hispanic and American Heritage no matter what your particular skin color is (aka what people consider to be race).

 

[Lefty Doodle]

oh yeah def, whenever there are 2 boxes, I always check white and hispanic. When the only option for white is "non-hispanic" though, I tend to check hispanic...when there isn't and you can only check one box, I'll usually check white. But yeah for med I'll check both.

 

[MCAT guy]

the thread title is funny.

 

[NaijaMed10]

the thread title is funny.

*chuckle* yeah I thought the exact same thing...I never knew of anyone trying to "decide" if they were qualified for a particular race.

 

[EdLongshanks]

*chuckle* yeah I thought the exact same thing...I never knew of anyone trying to "decide" if they were qualified for a particular race.

Actually there are court cases on it going back to the Jim Crow days. At one point there was a "single drop of blood" standard. In Oklahoma here we argue about tribal blood the time. I knew a guy who spoke Cherokee, looked Cherokee, acted Cherokee, was Cherokee but was disallowed from selling "Cherokee" art because he doesn't have a roll number. A child who goes to my church is the son of a white mother who had a fleeting liaison with a man who was at least partly black. The child was raised by his white grandmother with his white siblings in his 100% white church with white friends. Is he black or not?

This question is going to become more and more common now that mixed race couples are common and approved. This is a good thing.

Of course, we could just try something revolutionary, like judging people by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin, but I suppose that's too radical for our enlightened society.

 

[Simplify]

Of course, we could just try something revolutionary, like judging people by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin, but I suppose that's too radical for our enlightened society.

If only we were so enlightened.

 

[eablackwell]

I was looking up Native American racial rules and it seemed the cutoff was 25%, sucks for me since I'm 12.5% and I don't get anything for being 50% Italian, lol.

So at least under most of those scholarship rules you'd be considered in that minority.

I think you qualify as Hispanic

 

[EdLongshanks]

I was looking up Native American racial rules and it seemed the cutoff was 25%, sucks for me since I'm 12.5% and I don't get anything for being 50% Italian, lol.

So at least under most of those scholarship rules you'd be considered in that minority.

I think you qualify as Hispanic

Each tribe has its own rules. If I remember it right, the Lakota are pretty tight, but the Cherokee are very loose. I know people with 6.25% who are getting benefits.

 

[Prncssbuttercup]

As an adult, I also feel more proud and connected to that part of my heritage than I did before.

Anyway, does this qualify me as Hispanic for my applications? I definitely consider myself Hispanic, but feel weird taking advantages away from others potentially.

Triage, 1, she hasn't done anything wrong, 2, she is within her legal rights to do so if she wishes, 3, pretty harsh, and judgmental, 4, how is she getting "caught" doing anything, as again, she has done nothing wrong, 5, hate to break it to you all but all of that stuff is confidential, and it can't be released to other schools because of that...

 

[Lefty Doodle]

Thanks SBB. My dad is white as I am, and a Mexican citizen... I am definitely not worried about anyone finding out sometimes I mark that I'm hispanic and sometimes I mark that I'm white--I will explain the situation and they will completely understand why. I'm not planning on hiding the truth. I don't speak Spanish, I grew up in an upper-middle class home, and I happen to have a Mexican father.

 

[Prncssbuttercup]

Skin color doesn't make the race in this case... that's why you can be a white Hispanic... I was in Mexico on vacation a long time ago, and remember seeing a pale white woman with blonde hair on the beach, she looked as Scandinavian as I am, and yet... nope, Mexican citizen, I would never have guessed that if I had seen her in the US...

Oh, and triage, all through history in the US people have tried to identify as white because it's an advantage not a disadvantage, so in a HS in northern MN for example, it would be about 10 million times easier to be accepted by friends if you're "white" and not Hispanic... If you were Hispanic, black, not white, in that area, guess what, you might get beaten up regularly, or harassed, because sometimes rural people are stupid and small minded... while that may not be the case here, I don't think any of us get to judge her situation without first being in it...

 

[Lefty Doodle]

Well, I understand the anger, thinking someone who has been more privileged potentially taking the advantages that a more underprivileged person could be taking. That made me sort of angry when we were headed to college and all of my surgeon's child friends who happened to come from non-white backgrounds were getting all of these diversity scholarships. But I think since then, the purpose of identifying ethnicity isn't to give advantages to someone who is disadvantaged (there is a hardship box or something) it's to make the profession more representative of the population as a whole, and there are a lot of people like me, who could check one or the other, and we add diversity too. My sister explained her entire situation to her law school and they were like "yep that's exactly what we're looking for" and they gave her a diversity scholarship. I do plan on being honest. I'll have to see how the boxes are arranged though, I hope I can check two ethnicities ;-).

I've just been reflecting on it a lot since my sister got that scholarship and I first posted.

 

[Evergrey]

The AMCAS application and most secondary apps do give you the opportunity to mark multiple races. I did, and in the one secondary I've filled out so far that annoyingly only allowed you to mark one, I left it blank. If the school is unenlightened enough to think that people can only identify as one race, then they don't get to know mine

 

[QofQuimica]

Anyway, does this qualify me as Hispanic for my applications?

Speaking as a three-year adcom member, yes, you qualify as Hispanic. Best of luck with your apps.

 

[AcclratngCharge]

Where have I said at all that she isn't within her rights to do so? I even stated in my post that she most likeley does qualify as Hispanic.

As for getting caught, it doesn't mean she must be doing something illegal. However, to me, if I were ADCOM, it would seem morally questionable to identify as white all your life and then try to gain an edge by identifying as Hispanic when you're clearly not because all your life you've identified as not.

I'm with Triage. The OP put in her post "all the edge I can get". It seems like an artificial, convenient classification she has selected. I just hope she doesn't get accepted over someone more qualified because of the box she happened to choose this time.

 

[mpHWizzKid]

I'm with Triage. The OP put in her post "all the edge I can get". It seems like an artificial, convenient classification she has selected. I just hope she doesn't get accepted over someone more qualified because of the box she happened to choose this time.

I agree as well, but I think its great that the OP was plucky enough to ask the question and really consider this apparently controversial issue. In all honesty there are probably tons of pre-meds and college kids using their hispanic background or 6% Native American heritage as an advantage without actually being apart of that culture or larger "community"....most will not admit it though. My only concern in this case is that it doesn't seem quite fair to "decide" when to be hispanic. Most people who are/consider themselves a minority or a part of a disadvantaged culture can't really decide. I mean, surnames, skin color, geographical location, caste...all of this stereotypical stuff unfortunately doesn't turn off, so why should a person get to turn on/off what other people can't turn off? I can be indian and choose to check white on an app, but in the interview they will see 1) my name and 2) my look and say I'm indian anyway so its infair for some peopel to be able to choose and others not( ahhh but life isn't fair...iknow iknow)...again its not something you can turn off...Idk if that makes sense...I'm in physics class not paying attn..darn SDN addiction! LOL

P.S....tisk tisk OP for saying that for the "big/major" stuff you check white...

 

[UnlikelyDoc]

Where have I said at all that she isn't within her rights to do so? I even stated in my post that she most likeley does qualify as Hispanic.

As for getting caught, it doesn't mean she must be doing something illegal. However, to me, if I were ADCOM, it would seem morally questionable to identify as white all your life and then try to gain an edge by identifying as Hispanic when you're clearly not because all your life you've identified as not.

See, what's morally questionable to me is that people think that ethnicity is an indicator of competence as a physician. Dress it as you will, but even if it is only against white folk it is still racism.


p.s. flame away, I don't feed trolls

 

[TriagePreMed]

If adcoms are using it as an indicator of competence, I would completely agree with you. I think adcoms use it as an indicator of diversity in health care. Given how little access there is and minorities need a lot of these resources, it makes sense to have minorities practicing medicine. Some people, like it or not, prefer to have only those of their race, or certain races, treat them (e.g. white supremacists).

Could this be interpreted as racism still? Sure, which is why I'm split when it comes to this. Both sides have good arguments.

The important thing for now is how the system is currently and what it is to game the system or not.

See, what's morally questionable to me is that adcoms think that ethnicity is an indicator of competence as a physician. Dress it as you will, but even if it is only against white folk it is still racism.


p.s. flame away, I don't feed trolls

 

[sgtbrushes]

Put Hispanic. I guarantee you other people "on the border" (no pun intended ) are going to put it, and, as always, nice guys finish last. Realistically, it may not end up having impact on your application. There's no way to know.

This is coming from a pale white middle class yankee, and I have no problem "competing against" you.

 

[EdLongshanks]

See, what's morally questionable to me is that adcoms think that ethnicity is an indicator of competence as a physician. Dress it as you will, but even if it is only against white folk it is still racism.


p.s. flame away, I don't feed trolls

Now wait a minute. I'm a white guy and my conservative credentials are a matter of public record. But the diversity efforts aren't bad. If left as a pure meritocracy, the set of doctor's in the country would consist of the children of doctors - because they are the ones who have the time and money to make their applications look good. The children of blue collar workers, farmhands, and prison inmates would have little chance. Since most doctors in this country are either European whites or Ashkenazi jews then the next generation of doctors would also be lily white.

But America has a tradition of helping people who help themselves. Since minorities have to overcome more challenges before they even apply to medical school, the admissions committees give them a little bit (not very much) of a helping hand. This isn't discrimination, it's simply fair play

 

[UnlikelyDoc]

Now wait a minute. I'm a white guy and my conservative credentials are a matter of public record. But the diversity efforts aren't bad. If left as a pure meritocracy, the set of doctor's in the country would consist of the children of doctors - because they are the ones who have the time and money to make their applications look good. The children of blue collar workers, farmhands, and prison inmates would have little chance. Since most doctors in this country are either European whites or Ashkenazi jews then the next generation of doctors would also be lily white.

But America has a tradition of helping people who help themselves. Since minorities have to overcome more challenges before they even apply to medical school, the admissions committees give them a little bit (not very much) of a helping hand. This isn't discrimination, it's simply fair play

Your point is very well reasoned. While I'm not sure I could go as far as to call it fair play, as the child of a prison inmate I do identify with your logic.

 

[Dianyla]

But America has a tradition of helping people who help themselves. Since minorities have to overcome more challenges before they even apply to medical school, the admissions committees give them a little bit (not very much) of a helping hand. This isn't discrimination, it's simply fair play

Hell has officially frozen over, because I am wholeheartedly agreeing with EdLongshanks!

 

[EdLongshanks]

Hell has officially frozen over, because I am wholeheartedly agreeing with EdLongshanks!

Only when I express a liberal viewpoint. Now, can you match me by finding a conservative viewpoint to express, otherwise I get the open-minded browny points.

 

[AcclratngCharge]

Now wait a minute. I'm a white guy and my conservative credentials are a matter of public record. But the diversity efforts aren't bad. If left as a pure meritocracy, the set of doctor's in the country would consist of the children of doctors - because they are the ones who have the time and money to make their applications look good. The children of blue collar workers, farmhands, and prison inmates would have little chance. Since most doctors in this country are either European whites or Ashkenazi jews then the next generation of doctors would also be lily white.

But America has a tradition of helping people who help themselves. Since minorities have to overcome more challenges before they even apply to medical school, the admissions committees give them a little bit (not very much) of a helping hand. This isn't discrimination, it's simply fair play

Fair play? So because someone's parents are doctors and they are more competitive, they should be expected to be better than average, and minorities/underrepresented can be a little less than average? I am from a poor and rural background, and first gen high school grad; and I don't agree with that concept. Children of doctors also have challenges, for one it may be harder for them to be motivated when they grow up having everything they need, which I didn't. Also, how can money make an application look good? And time is just as much a commodity to minorities as it is doctor's children. I know, if you're poor you have to work full time and have less time for shadowing/volunteer/research but it is possible.

I wouldn't want to think I was accepted to medical school based on anything other than my credentials. Otherwise it would be like they were doing me a favor, which I don't need. Anyways, I don't intend this post to be argumentative/confrontational, just adding to this very interesting discussion.

 

[EdLongshanks]

Fair play? So because someone's parents are doctors and they are more competitive, they should be expected to be better than average, and minorities/underrepresented can be a little less than average? I am from a poor and rural background, and first gen high school grad; and I don't agree with that concept. Children of doctors also have challenges, for one it may be harder for them to be motivated when they grow up having everything they need, which I didn't. Also, how can money make an application look good? And time is just as much a commodity to minorities as it is doctor's children. I know, if you're poor you have to work full time and have less time for shadowing/volunteer/research but it is possible.

I wouldn't want to think I was accepted to medical school based on anything other than my credentials. Otherwise it would be like they were doing me a favor, which I don't need. Anyways, I don't intend this post to be argumentative/confrontational, just adding to this very interesting discussion.

This is funny, me defending affirmative action - don't tell the Republican candidate for governor, she may throw me out of the campaign and I won't get to meet Sarah Palin and worship at her feet!!!!

Ok, here goes. A child of a doctor doesn't have to spend any time on SDN finding out about applications - daddy tells him. He doesn't have to search for shadowing opportunities, daddy's friends let him shadow. He already knows the director of admissions, his daddy introduced him 10 years ago. The first time that he had trouble with algebra he got a private tutor. He was groomed and helped along the way.

How do I know this? Because this is exactly how my grandchildren are going to be raised. And besides, when I go to applicant day, I meet these kids. I admire their parents. I don't resent it, but I do recognize it.

Now, let's say that you are an adcom and you have two marginal files in front of you. Doctor's kid has a 3.4 and a 30 MCAT. Kid from the ghetto has a 3.3 and 28. Isn't the kid from the ghetto a more admirable candidate. His 3.3 was gained with sweat, not private tutors; the MCAT was gained on pure guts, without all of the expensive prep courses.

I'm not saying that we need to reserve X numbers of slots for URM, but a privileged background ought to discount an applicant's scores at least a little.

 

[shouldbemd]

This is a very good discussion.

I must admit, OP, I was very put off by your initial post. As an underrepresented minority, it is very disheartening to see someone who is "using" the system to benefit them in certain situations. I have come across many people who are "hispanic" on paper, but when you meet them in person, the deny any claim of being hispanic. I appreciate your responses, but your approach is a little off-putting.

I appreciate your honesty, though, and it has led to a very interesting discussion.

 

[UnlikelyDoc]

This is funny, me defending affirmative action - don't tell the Republican candidate for governor, she may throw me out of the campaign and I won't get to meet Sarah Palin and worship at her feet!!!!

Ok, here goes. A child of a doctor doesn't have to spend any time on SDN finding out about applications - daddy tells him. He doesn't have to search for shadowing opportunities, daddy's friends let him shadow. He already knows the director of admissions, his daddy introduced him 10 years ago. The first time that he had trouble with algebra he got a private tutor. He was groomed and helped along the way.

How do I know this? Because this is exactly how my grandchildren are going to be raised. And besides, when I go to applicant day, I meet these kids. I admire their parents. I don't resent it, but I do recognize it.

Now, let's say that you are an adcom and you have two marginal files in front of you. Doctor's kid has a 3.4 and a 30 MCAT. Kid from the ghetto has a 3.3 and 28. Isn't the kid from the ghetto a more admirable candidate. His 3.3 was gained with sweat, not private tutors; the MCAT was gained on pure guts, without all of the expensive prep courses.

I'm not saying that we need to reserve X numbers of slots for URM, but a privileged background ought to discount an applicant's scores at least a little.

My point Mr Longshanks is simply that being white skinned does not equate to being the child of a doctor. It seems to me that URM = not white. I would simply assert that any time you select against a person because of their race or pigmentation, whatever that race or pigmentation might be, it is racist, unfair, and wrong. Certainly nobody would argue that if the NBA were required to increase its percentage of short white guys the overall quality of the basketball they cultivate would suffer. Further, if you were advocating the selective exclusion of any other group besides caucasions, you'd be labled a bigot and stripped of any credibility you might have.


Here's the thing; we are all wonderfully different because we all have different life experiences and perspectives. This frankly is one of the greatest things about humanity. We all have something to teach, and something to learn from eachother. In this way do we not all add diversity somewhat equally?

Again, not trying to be inflammatory, I just don't think we can consider ourselves enlightened until we truly treat all people equally.

 

[AcclratngCharge]

Ok, here goes. A child of a doctor doesn't have to spend any time on SDN finding out about applications - daddy tells him. He doesn't have to search for shadowing opportunities, daddy's friends let him shadow. He already knows the director of admissions, his daddy introduced him 10 years ago. The first time that he had trouble with algebra he got a private tutor. He was groomed and helped along the way.

How do I know this? Because this is exactly how my grandchildren are going to be raised. And besides, when I go to applicant day, I meet these kids. I admire their parents. I don't resent it, but I do recognize it.

Now, let's say that you are an adcom and you have two marginal files in front of you. Doctor's kid has a 3.4 and a 30 MCAT. Kid from the ghetto has a 3.3 and 28. Isn't the kid from the ghetto a more admirable candidate. His 3.3 was gained with sweat, not private tutors; the MCAT was gained on pure guts, without all of the expensive prep courses.

I'm not saying that we need to reserve X numbers of slots for URM, but a privileged background ought to discount an applicant's scores at least a little.

Not all 'doctor's kids' are groomed via private tutor's, obviously I don't know how many are. Being introduced to an adcom director doesn't mean anything, at the end of the day your scores and activities are reviewed by the committee.

I think both of the students you described would be lucky to get into an allopathic program, without regard to their background. And the 3.3/28 with sweat and hard work may be just like the 3.4/30 (in terms of the amount of effort they put into those scores), there is no way that anyone besides the individual can know. And, if the 3.3/28 was attained with a ton of effort, I don't know how successful that ghetto kid would be in med school, or even if I would accept them as my doctor.

A privileged background should not discount results of any individual. Regardless of their prep, they earned the scores from their own ability and intellect; they should see the benefits of their ability, and not calibrated to match their background.

 

[EdLongshanks]

Let's look at the scenario you describe here in a slightly different light. Same two applications but the 3.4/30 is a white kid who grew up with no support from his drug addicted parents and busted his hump full time to support himself through undergrad. The 3.3 is an Asian female with two supportive parents, one a physician, the other a lawyer. Assume similar ECs and interview skills. I have seen that you often give advice on peoples chances, so I ask you EdLongshanks, which of these students is likely to receive the last seat? Now tell me again why that is fairplay...

....

Again, not trying to be inflammatory, I just don't think we can consider ourselves enlightened until we truly treat all people equally.

Firstly, Asians are usually not considered URM because they aren't under-represented. Many Asian cultures have such an emphasis on academic success that they beat the pants off of people from every other culture. So, they usually don't get URM treatment. A quick Ebsco search reveals that research publications are predominantly authored by Asians.

And, yes, because they work harder they should get the benefits of working harder. As a conservative individualist I like the idea of treating everyone as individuals, instead of members of representative groups. This is going to become easier over the next 2 or 3 generations, as racial mixing means that black is going to become like American Indian. Everyone is going to have a few drops of African blood.

But, until that day, we have a physician culture that is overly predominantly white (and Asian, of course). If the medical schools do not take an applicants race into account, then the culture will become even more white and Asian. This would be a bad thing. It would be bad for the black community, and, I dare say, it would be bad for the country as a whole also. Health problems that affected predominantly that community might not be noticed as quickly. The black patients would have a harder time trusting the legitimate physicians and "alternative" snake-oil predators would have a built-in customer base. Because the community would not have many physicians inside of it, the community knowledge of medicine would be lessened.

I see this in my sub-culture of a religious group. Because we do not have any physicians, all of these pathologies work on my friends. I have a distant friend who died of cirrhosis of the liver because his wife was a believer in "naturapathy" and decided his liver needed to be "cleansed". She ended up poisoning the man to death. She didn't have enough acquaintances to talk her out of what she was doing and her distrust of doctors prevented her from hearing anyone who did have a modicum of medical knowledge.

 

[shouldbemd]

Again, not trying to be inflammatory, I just don't think we can consider ourselves enlightened until we truly treat all people equally.

I appreciate your opinion. However, this is the problem. We still don't treat each other equally and this goes on both ends.

But, until that day, we have a physician culture that is overly predominantly white (and Asian, of course). If the medical schools do not take an applicants race into account, then the culture will become even more white and Asian. This would be a bad thing.

I agree with this.

My issue is that it is always assumed that white people are in positions based on meritocracy, and this is just not true. There are many that are in their position based on race. Non-minorities have been hired, placed in schools, and continue to be hired not based on any type of merit, but on who they know and their race. It is hard to see that since most white men run all of these organizations and there are many white male doctors, so it has been accepted as the norm. No one questions when another white man hires another white man, because that is the way it has been for so long. No one ever stops to think that he is just hiring this man because he is white; not based on his grades, not based his work experience. Let a minority be hired by anyone in a competitive position, and all hell breaks loose (where did they go to school, what is their experience?).

Again, I just find it to be very interesting, the promotion system that was in line way before affirmative action and still continues, can be based on race and it has nothing to do with non-white people getting ahead.

 

[EdLongshanks]

My issue is that it is always assumed that white people are in positions based on meritocracy, and this is just not true. There are many that are in their position based on race.

Now that I don't believe. The word "many" is simply not true. I've been around many years, I've interviewed people and made hiring decisions and I have, in several decades, never seen a white man get favored in a hiring decision on the basis of his race. I'm sure that it has happened, very occasionally, but not very often.

Now the good ole boy system is still in operation and that favors white men and women because "them as has gets," but very little outright discrimination happens anymore. The few bigots that are left are on the fringes of society and are not in the trusted positions of hiring people. This is especially true in academics. I doubt that a bigot could sneak into a medical school and maintain his reputation long enough to do any harm.

 

[shouldbemd]

Now that I don't believe. The word "many" is simply not true. I've been around many years, I've interviewed people and made hiring decisions and I have, in several decades, never seen a white man get favored in a hiring decision on the basis of his race. I'm sure that it has happened, very occasionally, but not very often.

Now the good ole boy system is still in operation and that favors white men and women because "them as has gets," but very little outright discrimination happens anymore. The few bigots that are left are on the fringes of society and are not in the trusted positions of hiring people. This is especially true in academics. I doubt that a bigot could sneak into a medical school and maintain his reputation long enough to do any harm.

I know that has been your experience, but everyone's experience is different. Some decisions are unconsciously geared towards those that they "feel" more comfortable around, and typically, in positions of hire, this is white men. (I have seen this in action, unfortunately). Outwardly, of course, this is often not spoken.

That is good you feel that there are few bigots left, and you believe that they are on the fringes of society and are not in any positions of hire. Again, this is your experience, and has not been mine nor many of my colleagues. One thing is sure, though, I doubt a person that makes bigoted decisions would consider themselves a bigot. Trust me, I have met them. They don't think there is anything wrong with what they have done.

My father is a physician and has experienced all types of racism in his profession, so unfortunately, the medical community is not immune from this behavior. So, it is very possible for bigots to sneak into medical school. We are living in a time where outward racism is not as prevalent as the type of closet racism that does exist, and is very harmful.

Again, I know everyone has had a different experience, and I understand people may have a different perspective.

 

[EdLongshanks]

I know that has been your experience, but everyone's experience is different. Some decisions are unconsciously geared towards those that they "feel" more comfortable around, and typically, in positions of hire, this is white men. (I have seen this in action, unfortunately). Outwardly, of course, this is often not spoken.

That is good you feel that there are few bigots left, and you believe that they are on the fringes of society and are not in any positions of hire. Again, this is your experience, and has not been mine nor many of my colleagues. One thing is sure, though, I doubt a person that makes bigoted decisions would consider themselves a bigot. Trust me, I have met them. They don't think there is anything wrong with what they have done.

My father is a physician and has experienced all types of racism in his profession, so unfortunately, the medical community is not immune from this behavior. So, it is very possible for bigots to sneak into medical school. We are living in a time where outward racism is not as prevalent as the type of closet racism that does exist, and is very harmful.

Again, I know everyone has had a different experience, and I understand people may have a different perspective.

The problem with the unconscious racism charge is that it is impossible to refute. The one making the charge doesn't have to bring actual evidence, he just makes the charge.

It also has bad affects on the culture. I come from a long line of poor white crackers. I have no ancestral guilt to expunge. But by making a generalization that everyone who looks like me is guilty of "unconscious racism" the aggrievement industry hurts the cause of civil peace and it undermines its cause.

I am in favor of individualized affirmative action. But if you try to force me to confess to hidden racism before I can promote the cause of URM's then I change sides. Calling people racists, no matter how hard they try to please you, is an act of hostility. Now I realize that they are groups that need racial animosity to increase in order to raise money, but we shouldn't go along with them.

It is unwise to try to read people's hearts and tell them that they have evil hidden deep down inside of themselves. You aren't God and you can't read a man's innermost thoughts.

 

[Don Draper]

Now that I don't believe. The word "many" is simply not true. I've been around many years, I've interviewed people and made hiring decisions and I have, in several decades, never seen a white man get favored in a hiring decision on the basis of his race. I'm sure that it has happened, very occasionally, but not very often.

Now the good ole boy system is still in operation and that favors white men and women because "them as has gets," but very little outright discrimination happens anymore. The few bigots that are left are on the fringes of society and are not in the trusted positions of hiring people. This is especially true in academics. I doubt that a bigot could sneak into a medical school and maintain his reputation long enough to do any harm.

lol. What is nepotism? It doesn't need to be because of the race, but it can be because of the family. Which doesn't really change the dynamic.

 

[student1799]

I'd like to return to the OP's original question. OP, if you identify as Hispanic, put it down and don't let anyone else guilt you out of doing it. Other than for certain government or tribal benefit programs which involve monetary benefits, there are no "official" definitions of what constitutes membership in any ethnic or racial group in this country. We have always left it to individuals to decide how they want to identify themselves, and that's how I think it should stay. So make your own decision and don't feel you need anyone else's permission or approval to do so.

I've been a member of SDN for a couple of years, and I've seen many similar discussions taking place, almost all of which have ended in flame wars. An applicant will ask about whether they fit the definition of a URM, and many other people (mostly members of the racial/ethnic group with which the applicant wishes to identify) will brand them as being "inauthentic" members of the group and say that they "don't have the right" to call themselves such-and-such. I call BS. Any attempt to "legislate" who can call themselves a URM makes me shudder, because it reminds me of past injustices like Nazi racial purity laws, Jim Crow laws and apartheid. Why would we want to go down that road again? And considering how many challenges URMs still face--in the world at large as well as medical admissions--why waste valuable energy fighting when you could be giving each other support and encouragement?

 

[shouldbemd]

The problem with the unconscious racism charge is that it is impossible to refute. The one making the charge doesn't have to bring actual evidence, he just makes the charge.

It also has bad affects on the culture. I come from a long line of poor white crackers. I have no ancestral guilt to expunge. But by making a generalization that everyone who looks like me is guilty of "unconscious racism" the aggrievement industry hurts the cause of civil peace and it undermines its cause.

I am in favor of individualized affirmative action. But if you try to force me to confess to hidden racism before I can promote the cause of URM's then I change sides. Calling people racists, no matter how hard they try to please you, is an act of hostility. Now I realize that they are groups that need racial animosity to increase in order to raise money, but we shouldn't go along with them.

It is unwise to try to read people's hearts and tell them that they have evil hidden deep down inside of themselves. You aren't God and you can't read a man's innermost thoughts.

LOL. Who said this? Just like you have your experiences, I have mine. Just like you have your opinions, I have mine, and everyone has opinion, and they are like...

You cannot sit here and say someone has not experienced racism, just because they don't have physical proof. Are you serious? You seriously think that unless someone is burning a cross on the front yard, then they can't say they haven't experienced racism? Do you really think I need someone to call me the n---- word to experience racism?

Sorry, I really didn't want to go there, but it is incredibly insulting, demeaning, and rude for you to state or imply that it takes physical proof to prove racism. Incredibly insulting, especially if you haven't experienced it. And then to insinuate you have to be God in order to read man's innermost thoughts to do so? Please. I never said that I was calling people racists without any basis in any of my posts, so please don't put words where they don't belong.

I apologize for the off topicness.

 

[EdLongshanks]

I am for affirmative action as a counter-weight to "them as has gets." Currently, in our nation, the white culture has and the black culture has not. This is undeniable, but I will offer a single example. When I am in Denver the church that I attend is one of the largest black churches in Denver. The bishop kindly invites me onto the platform and asks me to address the congregation and he has asked me to preach there (has nothing to do with my argument, I'm just bragging). The church is in the poorest part of town. If there are any doctors or lawyers there, they are only a few. The church is in the forefront of the fight against the gangs. They are fighting for their children's lives.

Now, compare this to the larger white churches. In Tulsa, Asbury Methodist sits across from Union Schools (the best school system) the members are almost all doctors, lawyers, civil engineers, millionaires. They have a special white chapel reserved just for weddings. The church buildings are breathtakingly beautiful. (I haven't been asked to preach there)

Now if you are a young person in one of these churches and you want to go to medical school, which church do you think could provide mentors, or shadowing opportunities, or just good advice?

I'd say that a young person who has come out of the black church, persevered, stayed out of trouble, made good grades in college, I'd say that kid is to be admired and promoted. A kid from the privileged church - if he does well, that's to be expected. Given his advantages, he should do VERY well.

 

[EdLongshanks]

You cannot sit here and say someone has not experienced racism, just because they don't have physical proof. Are you serious? You seriously think that unless someone is burning a cross on the front yard, then they can't say they haven't experienced racism? Do you really think I need someone to call me the n---- word to experience racism?

Well, yeah. If racism is so understated that only unconvincing and unprovable examples can be given, then it's really not that much of an issue. If you're an American black (I don't know, you haven't said) then your grandparents or great-grandparents probably experienced the real thing and would have been glad to be living someplace where no one ever called them names or burned a cross around them.

We all have prejudice to overcome. As a pentecostal, I've been called a snake-handler many times. My wife, who dresses in a traditional pentecostal manner, gets publicly insulted on a regular basis. The co-workers who meet at the bar after work get promoted over me. I can guarantee that I have been mocked behind my back for being a "tongue talker" a lot more than a black co-worker has had his race mentioned. So what? These are pretty minor issues and hardly rise to the level of true discrimination. On marginal decisions it might make a difference, but when I'm a truly superior candidate, it doesn't prevent my rise.

For blacks today to cover themselves with the canopy of racism does no credit to the memory of their parents who dealt with dogs and fire hoses.

 

[shouldbemd]

Well, yeah. If racism is so understated that only unconvincing and unprovable examples can be given, then it's really not that much of an issue. If you're an American black (I don't know, you haven't said) then your grandparents or great-grandparents probably experienced the real thing and would have been glad to be living someplace where no one ever called them names or burned a cross around them.

For blacks today to cover themselves with the canopy of racism does no credit to the memory of their parents who dealt with dogs and fire hoses.

You can't quantify how one experiences racism. One either experiences it, or doesn't. I used the example above to illustrate the point that you don't need to have tangible/physical proof to experience racism in order to counter your point that one needs physical proof of racism for it to exist. Of course, the vicious displays of racism of the 1950s is not the same as the displays of racism of today; that is a given. This doesn't mean that one is less of an issue than the other. To say that racism of today isn't "real" racism is incredibly misguided, and again, insulting.

 

[EdLongshanks]

You can't quantify how one experiences racism. One either experiences it, or doesn't. I used the example above to illustrate the point that you don't need to have tangible/physical proof to experience racism in order to counter your point that one needs physical proof of racism for it to exist. Of course, the vicious displays of racism of the 1950s is not the same as the displays of racism of today; that is a given. This doesn't mean that one is less of an issue than the other. To say that racism of today isn't "real" racism is incredibly misguided, and again, insulting.

I think we're done. Why someone's subjective and unprovable experience of feeling discriminated against is a matter of public policy is incomprehensible to me. No further communication is possible.

 

[shouldbemd]

Why someone's subjective and unprovable experience of feeling discriminated against is a matter of public policy is incomprehensible to me.

...and it would be if you haven't experienced racism. The mere fact that you deem it unprovable shows you don't nor will ever understand, and this will just be a circular argument. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[EdLongshanks]

As a pentecostal, I've been called a snake-handler many times.

BTW, someone just asked, so I want to make it clear. No, I'm not a snake-handler, no, I'm not a snake-handler. There are only a couple thousand of them in the world and I'm not one of them --- I went to school and I can read.

 

[jackieMD2007]

I think this is a tricky subject...
1-If you do check Hispanic on your application, and then you get a minority or Latino/Latina faculty member or student as interviewer, are you going to feel ridiculous explaining to them your family situation if the question comes up?

2-If you don't check Hispanic on your application, could you write somewhere in a secondary about your family's unique set up and somehow parlay it to be about your greater tolerance for diversity?

Just some thoughts for you