I remember an article a few years ago reporting that the number of people who wrote in their ethnicity as "Cajun" in Louisiana had gone down by a huge amount since the previous census. It wasn't until the end of the article that they mentioned that the question was phrased as something like, "What is your ethnicity? (For example: German, Irish, Native American, Cajun)" the first time, and then in the second one, "Cajun" was not in the list of examples, but "French" was, and the number of missing Cajun people was just about equal to the number of new French people.

I'm reading up on that right now, Plei. It looks like it's self reported, but they do give examples and instructions: [link]

The link to the actual questionnaire is a dead end.

How are you distinguishing between ticky boxes and self-reported (I've never been censed--I know not of how they work). I would imagine a number of but not all Montrealers would report as Quebecois.

The former would be formalized check boxes. The latter is a write-in.

I should ask my friend C how he reported, as a half-French Canadian, half Scots-Canadian living in Montreal and married to a Quebecois woman.

The latter is a write-in.

Oh, you mean where you fill in the description itself?

My only knowledge of the census is that a census taker refused to believe my mother's ethnicity and filled in their own stuff, so I have only a grain of skepticism from which to come at them.

The suggestions on the link Sue provided don't list Quebecois, but I can't see them being that easily stopped.

Aboriginal status carries a lot more legal implications in Canada than in the US, so I'm not surprised it's separated out.

More? Not sure, if you're counting status as tribal membership. Though it's possible to be Native American/Indian/[preferred designation here] and not be a tribal member, thus not entitled to any of the legal status associated with tribal membership. It's settled law that tribal status is a purely political designation, while ethnicity is, um, not, necessarily.

There are for instance plenty of people claiming Cherokee descent and living as part of the Cherokee community who are not legally tribal members; they may suffer from the same oppression as legal Cherokees, but don't get any of the benefits.

Anyway, my point being that there's a lot of complicated legal issues triggered by way of a USian being a tribal member; I don't know if it's more or less complicated than being a recognized First Nation member in Canada.

... I will shut up about federal Indian law now and go back to rewatching old SG-1 episodes.

I'm trying to remember if I was asked ethnic origin in the short form of the Census and I can't. (I never get the long form, damnit!)

I'm intrigued by the Jewish question. I'm not really finding much on it, but I did find a news report about declining Jewish population in Canada and they talk about the trickiness of ethnicity, and how some people identify as Jewish while other identify as from a specific geographic origin. [link]

In this chart comparing the different ethinicities that reported over the last few censi? censuses? They have Jewish as an ethnicity under Other European Origin, along with Slavic, Basque, and Gypsy (Roma):

[link]

The suggestions on the link Sue provided don't list Quebecois, but I can't see them being that easily stopped.

They are categorized in the tables linked in my last post as Other North American origins, and not in the French origins where the only two origins are Acadian and French. I'm sure that causes some snits.

I should get off my ass and go microwave shopping. Is there anything I should be considering? Just go for the highest wattage that meets my size restrictions?

Ha! 1000 people identified their ethnic origin as "Texan" on the 2006 census.

[link]

Was there ever a time when Zack Galafawhosis was funny? I liked him in Tru Calling, but every "joke" the man's involved with just thuds to the floor to die instantly.