This article really spoke to me. I suspect I've always had a tendency to flatten people into archetypes, which is maybe a reason I was drawn to identity politics in the first place—because I wanted to free myself of thinking of people as "the Asian guy" or "the one in the wheelchair". But I think the identity politics environment ultimately exacerbated that tendency without me realizing.
It's with that context that you can choose how to take my differing perspective on the "Hispanics hate 'Latinx'" thing. I looked for early usages of the term (~2014-2016), and it seems to me like there were plenty of native Spanish speakers using it as a self-descriptor. It was used to replace terms like 'Latino/a' in order to include *nonbinary people,* specifically. And of course that's only worth a bit of awkwardness to a very small minority of people (compare "xe/xir" pronouns). Spanish speakers, like English speakers, comprise a great range of people— from those who are going to automatically hate a neologism that smacks of gender inclusivity even if it weren't linguistically awkward (English doesn't usually do initial 'x'), to the small fraction of people who use nonbinary neologisms themselves.
And on a personal note, I'm nonbinary, and this thing where we're forgotten about in the very conversations where we're asking not to be forgotten about ... it's just a constant part of life. And I think that's part of what makes my relationship to "wokeness" so painful and fraught. I want the voice of nonbinary people to be louder. Outside of progressive spaces, and often within them as well, asking, "hey, could you phrase that in a way that doesn't explicitly exclude people like me?" is met with ridicule. I want the space, the possibility that I might be seen and heard. I want the possibility of love.
... Without feeling like my capacity to see people outside of Categories is being worn down. So let me reiterate that I deeply appreciate this essay. It makes me hopeful for the future, but more than that, it's helping me find the seeing and loving to nurture within myself. Thank you for listening to my perspective, and thank you for this essay.
Thanks for the response! I had forgotten that "Latinx" was specifically for the inclusion of nonbinary people, and you're right that this is an important point. I do also recall, however, that "Latine" is sometimes suggested as an alternative, because it's easier to pronounce in Spanish. After doing some reading, I see that you are correct that there are some native Spanish speakers who also use "Latinx" -- but it's still a bit complicated. For example, this Teen Vogue article includes a native speaker who says that the reason she gravitates toward "Latinx" is specifically because "Most of my conversations are in English."
The article also cautions people about applying terms when you're not from the community in question: “People outside the Latin community need to call people what they want to be called, whether it’s Hispanic, Dominican, Puerto Rican, Mexican, Chicano, Latino, or Latinx.” Which is to say, "Latino" may still be the correct term, a lot of the time, given that Spanish still uses the masculine to refer to mixed groups. However much I might philosophically favour not privileging the masculine in this way, there's probably a necessary critical mass of native speakers who need to adopt a term before it's appropriate for me to apply it from the outside. Since I don't speak the language, I don't really get to have an opinion on how it should work.
In any case, I really appreciated your comment, and I'm glad my article spoke to you!
Yeah, I definitely agree that "Latine" is how the wind is blowing for people who want that gender neutral term. I think that the whole "add x's to words to make them nonbinary/inclusive" thing is on the outs in general, which I have mixed feelings about, but more positive than negative. I really like that article, I feel like it does a good job addressing the various aspects of the issue.
> However much I might philosophically favour not privileging the masculine in this way, there's probably a necessary critical mass of native speakers who need to adopt a term before it's appropriate for me to apply it from the outside.
This makes a lot of sense, and there's definitely got to be a balance between that and the thing I'm talking about: you don't want respecting a group to de facto mean respecting those with the most power within that group (e.g. "spanking children is part of our culture"), but "these three people said it was okay"-style tokenism is also sketchy.
This article really spoke to me. I suspect I've always had a tendency to flatten people into archetypes, which is maybe a reason I was drawn to identity politics in the first place—because I wanted to free myself of thinking of people as "the Asian guy" or "the one in the wheelchair". But I think the identity politics environment ultimately exacerbated that tendency without me realizing.
It's with that context that you can choose how to take my differing perspective on the "Hispanics hate 'Latinx'" thing. I looked for early usages of the term (~2014-2016), and it seems to me like there were plenty of native Spanish speakers using it as a self-descriptor. It was used to replace terms like 'Latino/a' in order to include *nonbinary people,* specifically. And of course that's only worth a bit of awkwardness to a very small minority of people (compare "xe/xir" pronouns). Spanish speakers, like English speakers, comprise a great range of people— from those who are going to automatically hate a neologism that smacks of gender inclusivity even if it weren't linguistically awkward (English doesn't usually do initial 'x'), to the small fraction of people who use nonbinary neologisms themselves.
And on a personal note, I'm nonbinary, and this thing where we're forgotten about in the very conversations where we're asking not to be forgotten about ... it's just a constant part of life. And I think that's part of what makes my relationship to "wokeness" so painful and fraught. I want the voice of nonbinary people to be louder. Outside of progressive spaces, and often within them as well, asking, "hey, could you phrase that in a way that doesn't explicitly exclude people like me?" is met with ridicule. I want the space, the possibility that I might be seen and heard. I want the possibility of love.
... Without feeling like my capacity to see people outside of Categories is being worn down. So let me reiterate that I deeply appreciate this essay. It makes me hopeful for the future, but more than that, it's helping me find the seeing and loving to nurture within myself. Thank you for listening to my perspective, and thank you for this essay.
Thanks for the response! I had forgotten that "Latinx" was specifically for the inclusion of nonbinary people, and you're right that this is an important point. I do also recall, however, that "Latine" is sometimes suggested as an alternative, because it's easier to pronounce in Spanish. After doing some reading, I see that you are correct that there are some native Spanish speakers who also use "Latinx" -- but it's still a bit complicated. For example, this Teen Vogue article includes a native speaker who says that the reason she gravitates toward "Latinx" is specifically because "Most of my conversations are in English."
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/latine-vs-latinx-what-young-people-think
The article also cautions people about applying terms when you're not from the community in question: “People outside the Latin community need to call people what they want to be called, whether it’s Hispanic, Dominican, Puerto Rican, Mexican, Chicano, Latino, or Latinx.” Which is to say, "Latino" may still be the correct term, a lot of the time, given that Spanish still uses the masculine to refer to mixed groups. However much I might philosophically favour not privileging the masculine in this way, there's probably a necessary critical mass of native speakers who need to adopt a term before it's appropriate for me to apply it from the outside. Since I don't speak the language, I don't really get to have an opinion on how it should work.
In any case, I really appreciated your comment, and I'm glad my article spoke to you!
Yeah, I definitely agree that "Latine" is how the wind is blowing for people who want that gender neutral term. I think that the whole "add x's to words to make them nonbinary/inclusive" thing is on the outs in general, which I have mixed feelings about, but more positive than negative. I really like that article, I feel like it does a good job addressing the various aspects of the issue.
> However much I might philosophically favour not privileging the masculine in this way, there's probably a necessary critical mass of native speakers who need to adopt a term before it's appropriate for me to apply it from the outside.
This makes a lot of sense, and there's definitely got to be a balance between that and the thing I'm talking about: you don't want respecting a group to de facto mean respecting those with the most power within that group (e.g. "spanking children is part of our culture"), but "these three people said it was okay"-style tokenism is also sketchy.
Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful conversation!