The case against 'Latinx'

Started by Mono no aware, August 23, 2019, 08:10:54 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Mono no aware

Daniel Hernandez | The case against 'Latinx'

An informative essay on this bizarre and increasingly popular term.  I can recall the confusing transition from "Hispanic" to "Latino" in the 1990s, so it was always something of a mess, this continually sensitive terminology involving the complexities of race, culture, and nationality—and now gender, to complicate it further.  Pope Francis is technically 'Latinx,' though he is of Italian ancestry, and he would only be "Hispanic" linguistically.

"Latino," as the writer points out, is an Englishism in the first place.  Taking things to their logical conclusion, I suppose what the left will eventually require is a new language altogether, since both English and Spanish are tongues of the colonial oppressors.  Esperanto would probably not even suffice, since it was developed by a cisgender white male, and is based on European languages.  Elizabeth Warren used 'Latinx' in one of the debates, but apparently she mispronounced it, according to some.  They say it's supposed to rhyme with "lynx," but "latin x," if the term must be used, sounds much better.