Trans-racialism way more prevalent than previously thought

[secular111]

34% of white college students lied about their race to improve chances of admission, financial aid benefits

US-focused (i.e 'college' = university) and the survey wasn't particularly scientific, consisting of Intelligent asking 1,250 white college applicants ages 16 and older if they lied on their application by indicating they were a racial minority.

The most popular racial minority to selfID as, was, perhaps not surprisingly, Native American, perhaps echoing the success that Elizabeth Warren had with this strategy. Identifying as Latino came second at 10% of respondents and selfID'ing as Black attracted 10%.

Seventy-seven percent of people who claimed to be a racial minority on their applications were accepted by the colleges to which they lied.

It would be interesting to determine if any equivalent UK-focused survey has been performed.

And that is only those who actually admitted it

These young people are heavily incentivised to lie. I doubt they actually identify in this way. My guess is that unless an outright fib, it is a far-fetched reach and goes something like "Hey mom, I'm doin my college application; wasn't great grandpa's brother in law native American?"
I'm surprised this kind of opportunistic lying would be referred to as transracialism. I'd like to see heavy penalties and measures put in place to make this virtually impossible. Maddening.

Eek, soz, just seen there is an actual link which I didn't read. Mind frazzled with Covid atm, so please forgive me.

Unsurprising that this happens given that, a) certain groups are subject to positive discrimination, and b) no objective criteria exist to determine membership of said groups.

Not that race isn't based on objective biological variation, but unlike sex, variation between racial categories truly exist across a spectrum, with no clear boundaries between races.

From the article:

Men are three times as likely than women to lie about their race on a college application. Forty-eight percent of male respondents claimed to be a minority on their college application, compared to just 16% of female applicants.

This is what happens when positive discrimination is applied as opposed to taking the candidates with the best grades.

But nobody would ever lie about their race to gain advantage.

These people are obviously genuinely transracial.

Acceptance without exception!

I am who I say I am…

And I’m the Queen of Sheba.

I think whether you call it a lie or not depends on your perspective. Is a student with one native American grandparent really native American? They may identify strongly with their heritage, but have they suffered discrimination as a result of their ethnicity?

Given that it is impossible to determine any of this objectively, colleges would be better off asking about things that are demonstrable (e.g. did either of your parents attend university?)

You don't actually have to look Native American to have Native American heritage though. So how would they know they are just saying it without them having admitted to the lie?
One of my best friends in the US looks as pale white as can be, as do her parents, yet she has paperwork and written proof of her, and her sister and her mothers Native American heritage. It's a very common ancestry there. She didn't use it to get into Uni though.
Her three kids are all of Latino descent, and range in looks from a blue eyed blond to a dark hispanic looking male.

This shouldn't be surprising. It is a completely human response when some groups and 'identities' are prioritised and incentivised while others are denigrated. Since it's all about 'feelings' with no objective criteria, then it's easy for people to take advantage of such systems and policies because ultimately a substantial minority will always look for personal gain in any situation.

These types of policies are inherently unfair and discriminatory - people know this, and will rationalise their actions to themselves.

Basing admission policies on fairly objective criteria such as grades is the best possible system in an imperfect world to ensure the brightest and competent students get the college places they deserve.

I'm not surprised. We live in the age of positive-discrimination where being anything other than white can actually be an advantage when applying for a college place or a job. Companies want to look good by being able to demonstrate they have a good diversity of races and a good percentage of women.

But if you are allowed to say you are a member of the opposite sex, which is clearly biologically impossible, and it is fully accepted by many, then what is the difference? The only thing not to have come up in the news is saying you're a different age, or wouldn't some of us be claiming our pensions early? All bollocks.

It doesn't surprise me. I was looking at some applications with my teenagers which made it very clear that 'diverse' candidates would be prioritised.

It was so tempting to tick one of the boxes. We didn't but the feeling that you would not get selected because of your race/sexuality or gender identity was very uncomfortable.

@MargaritaPie

I'm not surprised. We live in the age of positive-discrimination where being anything other than white can actually be an advantage when applying for a college place or a job. Companies want to look good by being able to demonstrate they have a good diversity of races and a good percentage of women.

It's against the law to positively discriminate (when you give preferential treatment to people with a protected characteristic rather than due to their suitability) in the UK.

In the UK we have positive action (Positive action is about taking specific steps to improve equality. A workplace will actively encourage applicants or groups to apply for job roles.)

I was filling in a form from my Union (Unite) which asked if I would describe myself as male, female or other.
The next question was which ethnic group did I identify as.
The third question was did I identify as disabled.
The wording of the last two was interesting to me - the difference between "describing" and "identifying" must be important to them or I assume all three questions would have been similar.
(It was a form about NHS pay rises although I doubt that is in any way relevant to the phrasing)