<p>I think we shouldn't be so quick to jump on the OP. I am also of Greek decent and being from a Mediterranean background can be a very different experience than being from a northern European one. I, for one, am a very dark skinned person (relatively) and I tan really easily. Because of this, I can't tell you how many times I've been mistaken for Hispanic or even Middle Eastern. Additionally, I have other characteristics that set me apart from other White people. While the vast majority of Whites have either straight or wavy hair, mine is extremely curly. It's not kinky, though it does look very similar to Marcus Aurelius' hair. </p>
<p>So the dark skin + my curly Greek-fro makes me stand out a lot from the fair skinned, straight haired Northern Europeans and because of this I'm usually reluctant to call myself white. So putting down other would seem perfectly acceptable and I think that colleges should take specific "subgroups" into consideration.</p>
<p>There's an interesting PBS special on race that I saw recently. It showed how various ethnicities were legally considered non-white early in the 20th century. Eventually, the Supreme Court ruled on it, concluding that essentially someone could be non-white even if they are technically caucasian. The race lines were a lot more vague then a lot of you think, based on your flippant responses. And yes...there is and was institutional racism against some ethnicities--not just the traditional URM ethnicities. Basically, it is in proportion to how far the ethnicity is from white, anglo-saxon protestant. Pardon the pun, but it's not black-or-white but a series of gray areas. </p>
<p>But like I said before, at this point of time Greek is considered caucasian. However, what the OP has suggested is in no way dishonest, since he would be disclosing what ethnicity he is. It's not even a lie of omission. There would be no advantage to it, though.</p>
<p>URM means underrepresented minority. So how would you know that people of Greek origin are underrepresented? Maybe there are disproportionate numbers of them at a particular college campus. I'm sure there a a lot of Scandinavians at St. Olaf's. This could backfire. Should there be subcategories that break down each race/ethnicity group into nationalities, such as Lithuanian, French, Swedish, Indonesian, Malaysian, Singaporean...? How is that different from Greek? The point of asking for one's race/ethnicity is not to emulate the Olympics or the United Nations. It's to give some affirmative action to members of groups that do not traditionally go on to college.</p>
<p>It's not going to matter. Adcoms don't care THAT much about balancing a class, besides the obvious URMs (african-americans, hispanics, native americans, etc). They don't spend time going, "Hey, we don't have a Greek student this year!"</p>
<p>By the way, here is an interesting excerpt from Wikipedia about the start of a well known Greek organization:</p>
<p>The AHEPA was founded as a fraternity in Atlanta, Georgia in July 1922 following growing attacks on Greek Americans and Greek American businesses by the KKK and others. Its initial mission was to promote the image of Greeks in America, assist them with citizenship and to fight against the KKK attacks."</p>
<p>tptshorty: *URM means underrepresented minority. So how would you know that people of Greek origin are underrepresented? Maybe there are disproportionate numbers of them at a particular college campus. I'm sure there a a lot of Scandinavians at St. Olaf's. This could backfire. Should there be subcategories that break down each race/ethnicity group into nationalities, such as Lithuanian, French, Swedish, Indonesian, Malaysian, Singaporean...? How is that different from Greek? *</p>
<p>The difference is that white, anglo-saxon protestants (Norwegians, Swedish, French, etc.) did not experience discrimination, whereas Mediterranean ethnicities (Greeks, Italians) did. It was nowhere on the level of African Americans, obviously, and the decimation of Native Americans is similarly unique in the extreme nature of their oppression. However, the treatment of latinos/hispanics was not that different from Greeks or Italians. In fact, I don't believe latinos/hispanics were originally included in AA back in the 60's when it was introduced. I could be wrong, but I don't think so. Also back in the early 1900's, Mexicans were legally considered white whereas many ethnicities (Indians, Chinese, Japenese, Armenian) were not. The Supreme Court also wrestled with whether Mediterranean ethnicities were truly caucasian. This was important because you had to be white to be able to get citizenship (assuming you didn't already have it.) They were especially frustrated by case of an Indian who applied for citizenship. As you might know, despite having dark skin they are technically Caucasian. The Supreme Court essentially decided that "whiteness" was whatever they decided it was and that Indians therefore could not obtain citizenship by naturalization. There was a fear in the early 1900s that the U.S. was being flooded by "undesirable" minorities. Anyway, that is why the OP's query is not silly and why Swedish and Greek ethnicities meant vastly different things.</p>
<p>It's true that no one knows whether they are underrepresented or not, but the fact no one cares about them is irrelevant. It would make sense if they were, considering several generations were discriminated against (if you buy the arguments that discrimination against previous generations causes financial hardship, and this handicaps future generations.) The fact that no one cares enough to see whether they are underrepresented is not really relevant. Ironically, I suspect the reason that no one cares is because they are *too much *of a minority--there is just not enough of them.</p>
<p>^Colleges do give immigrants and first-generation descendants of immigrants a "boost" in admissions, as they do racial minorities. Why? Because these people ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST NOW. Just like your great-grandpa was back in the way. It's not about what your great-grandpa's life was like or what biases he overcame, it's about you. YOU CAN'T INHERIT DISCRIMINATION. Those people who benefit from AA live with discrimination everyday. </p>
<p>This is just ridiculous. So the United States now owes a debt to the descendants of anyone who was discriminated against, to be paid off by a boost in college admissions? Almost ethnic group was discriminated against at some point in the past. With Affirmative Action, we recognized that certain racial (NOT ethnic) groups had been victimized by systematic oppression for CENTURIES. And now people take it this far.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The difference is that white, anglo-saxon protestants (Norwegians, Swedish, French, etc.) did not experience discrimination, whereas Mediterranean ethnicities (Greeks, Italians) did.
<p>Tokenadult: "Quote:
*The difference is that white, anglo-saxon protestants (Norwegians, Swedish, French, etc.) did not experience discrimination, whereas Mediterranean ethnicities (Greeks, Italians) did. *</p>
<p>Where are you learning your history?"</p>
<p>I assume from the tone of your comment that you are being sarcastic and not asking for a source. I thought it was common knowledge that people of Mediterranean descent experienced more discrimination than white, anglo-saxon protestants. As I said before, some of what I've learned was from a PBS special on race. Some I have heard from relatives of Italian descent.</p>
<p>@GeoffreyChaucer: I'll post a longer response later. But I'll say now that I don't believe the discrimination against Hispanics now or in the past is all that different from Italians. What native Americans and African Americans went through is obviously at another level (and I believe I said so.) Also, I don't believe that people are owed something if their ancestors were discriminated against (and not themselves,) but it is an argument for AA that I have seen used.</p>
<p>@GeoffreyChaucer: I don't like AA, either, but your argument is seriously flawed. AA is not at all like what you describe, or a lot more Asians would be at Harvard, as they typically are "immigrants or first-generation descendants". They are certainly discriminated against now, yet they do not benefit from AA.</p>
<p>You know, there was a thread like this awhile back, the only difference being an Italian was asking whether they were a URM. It was met with a combination of ridicule and disgust. After a bunch of self-righteous posters made comments on how URMs have benefits because they are discriminated against and because they suffer from stereotypes, they started making jokes on how all Italians are in the mafia.</p>
<p>The way affirmative action works now is that it doesn't matter if your race or ethnic group was discriminated against. All that matters is that if statistics show that your group performs on average not as well on tests as in school as other groups.
Asians are completely deserving of affirmative action. As far as I'm concerned, they've experienced a lot more discrimination than Hispanics. Don't forget that Hispanics were never rounded up and put into internment camps. The only reason Asians don't get the AA boost is because statistically they are "smarter" than White children.
Basically, Whites are used as the benchmark of intelligence in college admissions to see who gets to benefit from AA and who doesn't. It's sickening yes, but I think the evidence is clear that this is how the system works.</p>
<p>No one's arguing that Greek should be considered a URM. It may be, or it may not be. The OP has no problem writing down Greek, it's 100% correct. The admissions officers will decide if Greek is URM in the college admissions process. There's no way an admissions officer will think that the OP is trying to dupe them or anything.</p>
<p>Here's the problem...Greeks are Caucasians, so it's not really accurate to check "other" even if you also write in "Greek." Even though you're not being untruthful, you will look silly. The thing to do is to emphasize elsewhere in your application what been Greek means to you. Are you involved in Greek cultural activities? Do you speak Greek at home? Are you interested in Greek history and literature? All of that could be interesting to adcoms. The mere fact that you are of Greek origin is pretty meaningless.</p>
<p>Since when is a Norwegian, Swede or French person considered a WASP (white, Anglo-Saxon protestant)? Anglo-Saxons are the descendants of Germanic tribes that invaded Great Britain. Many French and Germans are Catholic. About the only generalization you could make is that they are white, and that is no longer necessarily the case. Scandinavian, German, Irish or other Northern European immigrants have suffered from insults and discrimination in this country, too, as many came here as poor, uneducated farmers fleeing poverty and starvation. We're not talking about Heidi Klum. My point is a URM is someone who is not represented in higher education in proportion to the percentage of the general population. That is what URM means- historically underrepresented groups.</p>