Well, there seems to be a severe double-standard in this case. The applicant “if Hispanic” would assume by the questions that he/she gets a preference, which in this case would probably be accurate, but if there really is no preference, why have the question in the first place. Another issue, is that if the applicant is “other than Hispanic” then they would immediately feel as if “they were not wanted” or their application is not needed, and the chances of them being hired is less-than-probable. What sort of message does that send?
It’s Discrimination – regardless of how you play it, some might call it reverse-discrimination, which is also a fair critique. Why is this allowed in this day and age of so-called “equality, inclusiveness, and fairness” to all? In this case it isn’t fair to anyone who isn’t Hispanic, in fact, it’s a sign on the door to go away unless you have Hispanic heritage. Now then, sure there might be a Hispanic person, either male or female who might be equally or more qualified for the job, that’s fine, in that case they deserve the job if they are more qualified and if equally qualified, more research is needed to pick the best applicant or candidate.
Minority Status argument is shallow for two reasons here. One, Hispanics are no longer the minority in Southern California, and two, it slaps in the face of everyone being “Equal Under the Law” which is where the whole “equality” motif is supposed to have originated. Why is it that academia of all sectors cannot understand this? You’d think they’d be preaching these self-evident truths from the highest tower of their audacious University architecture. Please consider all this and think about it when you are shelling out 10s of thousands of dollars for your kid’s college tuition or voting for your politically (correct) elected leaders.