Here’s a query for the millions: Am I legally Hispanic (and eligible for “disadvantaged minority” benifits?)
This is all family “lore” as nobody seems to have any documentation on this, though it is all certainly true. My paternal grandfather, born in Odessa (Ukraine), came with his parents to the U.S. via Cuba in the 1920’s. Basically, they couldn’t get in the the U.S. directly because of the quota system of the 1920’s, so they then tried to get into Canada, but then had similar problems. But rather than go back to the wonderfully hospitable Ukraine, they went to Cuba where they lived, and presumably became citizens, for about five years. After this time, they again tried to get in the U.S. and they got in as part of the Cuban quota.
My grandfather passed away in the 1950’s, but his younger brothers can vouch for the story. And, as I said, nobody seems to have any documentation, and in what feeble searching I have done, I have not been able to track down any documentation, either.
Hablo espanol un poco, pero no muy bueno.
What’s the verdict? Ethical issues aside, am I legally able to call myself Hispanic. Can I beneift from Affirmative Action? Can my children apply for Hispanic scholarships? Can I pitch for the New York Yankees?
What I have learned is that being ‘Hispanic’ is hard to prove, legally.
Hispanics, as you are well aware, come in so many different colours and shapes. It can be impossible, by the eye, to point one of us out.
Me, for example. I look like my Dad. I had a Polish last name. When ever I check Hispanic I get ‘the look’. The difference from your situation however, is that my Mom is from Mexico and I can prove it.
Since you are not asking for ethical responses, I won’t give you one. Regardless, I think that if it comes down to it, you will have a hard time claiming to be a Hispanic, especially without any paperwork. As it stands, you have absolutely no proof. I also think you will have a hard time convincing groups such as LULAC.
I think there’s a difference between being Cuban and being Hispanic. Hispanic is a race, Cuban is a nationality. The Hispanic thing will not count, as you are a caucasian with Ukraine and Cuban national heritage. See what I’m sayin’?
What is the “legal” definition of “Hispanic” when it comes to qualification? Does a person have to be 1/2 “Hispanic”? Is 1/4 or 18 okay?
A friend of mine is from South Africa and when he was applying to law school, he wrote to the NAACP if he qualified as an African-American (he’s white). Their respnse (no joke) was that he could call himself an “African-American”, but he couldn’t call himself an “Afro-American”.
There may be a “legal” definition out there but it seems to me to be just a matter of opinion. If you think you are hispanic then you are hispanic, appears to be the general rule from what I’ve gathered from various human resources departments.
I looked at their scholarship section and didn’t see any specific requirements.
I also think that if this is that important, you’re going to have to look harder for proof. Otherwise, what’s to stop anyone from claiming to be hispanic?
Here’s the thing: there is none. There is no legal definition of race that can really be applied at all. So basically, its whatever you say you are and people accept you for.
The USA government doesn’t have a phylum for Hispanic yet. I was recently at the Military Evaluation Processing Center, and they had no box for that distinction. The proctor’s response to the question, “But I’m Hispanic!” was, “You are white in the governments eyes!” One guy was chastised for checking the African-American box to avoid checking the white box.
What you have riding on your “legal” definition may need to be addressed specifically by the requestor. I’d love to know what you are trying to receive or do based on your race.
Proof that they immigrated from Cuba should not be terribly hard to come by. But most (if not all) such documentary proof would list their places of birth (Ukraine) in addition to their last residence (Cuba).
I found my great-grandparents’ naturalization record on microfilm at the nearest branch of the National Archives and Records Administration. If you have a branch near you, that would be one place to start. The record does list place of birth.
My ancestors came in through Ellis Island in 1892, and I found their passenger records by searching at www.ellisisland.com (free registration required). The record lists the port of departure but not place of birth. Unfortunately for your purposes, it has a line for “ethnicity.”
Hispanic isn’t necessarily considered a “race” at all. According to many anthropologists (and this is a controversial area), most hispanics would belong to the Caucasian race. Hispanics are simply people who share a Spanish-speaking heritage.
Actually, most reputable physical anthropologists will say that race is a social construct, and therefore “Hispanic” can go under whatever category society agrees on.
I think the real question is: “Is there a legal definition of Hispanic?” I don’t know about a gov’t scholarship, but we’ve gone over this a number of times in other threads regarding AA in schools. They don’t check and rely on the applicant to be honest. This is true for the designation of Black, which might be harder to fake than Hispanic. Don’t know about American Indian, as there are actually rules for determining if you’re part of a tribe or not. Still, at the academic level, no one would check seems to be the consensus.
As for pitching for the Yankees, well, at least the Great American pastime is still merit based. You’re on your own on that one, amigo.
His·pan·ic adj. 1. Of or relating to Spain or Spanish-speaking Latin America. 2. Of or relating to a Spanish-speaking people or culture. –
His·pan·ic n. 1. A Spanish-speaking person. 2. A U.S. citizen or resident of Latin-American or Spanish descent.
USAGE NOTE: There are a number of words denoting persons who trace their origins to a Spanish-speaking country or culture. Hispanic is the broadest of these terms, encompassing all Spanish-speaking peoples in both hemispheres and emphasizing the common denominator of language between communities that sometimes have little else in common. It is widely used in both official and unofficial contexts and is entirely acceptable, although like the term Spanish American, it has occasionally been criticized as unduly emphasizing the role of European influences in shaping ethnic identity to the neglect of indigenous cultures. Latino is also in wide use, but it is somewhat less formal in most contexts and is generally restricted to persons of Latin-American descent.
In common usage, “Hispanic” seems to be racially to refer to “mestizo” peoples. Think of what is meant when one says “He has Hispanic features”, “An unidentified Hispanic woman…” many Spaniards, Argentines, Uruguayans, or even some Chileans wouldn’t be considered Hispanic in those situations! But Hispanics can look like anyone, and a lot of black, white, or Asian people sort of resent the narrow definition many people have of Hispanic/Latino. To me, those words are entirely cultural and are as “Racial” as American, Canadian, or Australian (even though some people may wrongly associate those terms with a particular racial type as well).
As far as I know, it is not so much the “Race” or even origin but culture. For instance Mario Kreutzberger (AKA Don Francisco) was born of German Jewish parents who fled the holocaust and sought safety in Chile. Jacobo Zabludovsky (who’s sort of like Walter Cronkite in much of Latin America) was born in Poland. But because they are Latin Americans and part of the Hispanic culture, they are unquestionably Hispanic or Latino. Quite a few Cubans I know of came from non-Spanish Europe.
So if you spoke fluent or native Spanish, and maintained some degree of familiar connections with Latin America or Spain, I and many people in Latin America would deem you to be Hispanic - without even having to look at you. As far as LULAc, I would imagine that they would probably include as many people as possible, provided you were at least culturally Hispanic in some way.
What makes this quite unfair is that, once again as “Hispanic” is racialized, in America a brown skinned person named Fernando Garcia would not have to prove himself as Hispanic in the same way that a white looking person might have too. But the flipside is that in Latin America, there is often a preference for light skin and European features (just watch Latin American TV), and there you may actually be embraced as “Hispanic” more readily than a mestizo or Indian looking Latino.
Nothing, really. As I recall, various census people have noted around the time of the last two census (aside - neither of the first two dictionaries I checked give a plural form) that the U.S. government’s official stance is that people are of whatever ethnicity that they feel they are. Kind of a squishy proposition where entitlements may be involved.
But how would you quantify such, anyway?
And, without actually having any sort of form before me, it seems that forms I’ve seen in the past that ask one to denote ethnicity may list Black, White, Asian, Pacific Islander, etc,. but they tend to specify Hispanic-surnamed.
Whatever that means in the grand scheme of things I pretend not to know. But I’ll note that down here we’ve had a political wannabe who began life as a white male Euro-deriv and, after her sex-change operation, changed her last name to Perez and has run as a minority female candidate.
However, regardless of what anthropologists or SDMB members may say, what governs the distinctions of race and ethnicity are the state and federal EO laws.
The point of the OP is can they claim a Hispanic designation under the law and thus be entitled to a specific “protected class” of individuals. The current laws use specific race and ethnicity qualifications. If you meet the legal definition, you’re in. Period.
Dictionary and/or anthropologist definitions mean nothing, until the laws are changed to reflect any new defintions.
