As far as the rest of the list goes, I found many of the terms were absurd. I think the so called overly woke among us seem to be looking for a reason to condemn others based on the words that they use, even when some of those words and expressions have never had any negative meaning in our lifetimes.I used the word guys as one example. I also mentioned Latinx because earlier in the day I read that only 3% of people who identify as Hispanic or Latino want to be addressed as Latinx.
If you want to know why
Latinx matters to some folks and not others, perhaps instead of reading a poll of
Times readers, you should consider asking a trans Latinx person why they might favor this reform of the language. They might agree or disagree with the change. If it is truly an unpopular usage, it will drift away on its own, like "differently abled" did in the 90s.
Oh, that is one area where I have faith that common sense will prevail, even in America. "Latinx" is
literally nothing but the quintessence of white leftist linguistic colonialism, attempting to impose a term on someone else's culture and language. It will stagger off somewhere, looking vainly for a place to die.
Funny story about that. "Latino" itself is white linguistic colonialism. It's short for "latinoamericano", which comes from the Spanish translation of "Amérique latine", which was a pro-French propaganda term popularized by Emperor Napoleon III's government, when French colonialists were screwing around in Mexico because the Spanish colonialists had thrown in the towel and recognized Mexican independence. The idea behind calling the region "Latin" was to emphasize France's shared Roman Empire heritage with the Spanish and Portuguese speaking people of the Americas and thereby induce "Latin Americans" to see the French as "us" instead of as "them". What a surprise that "Latin America" and "Latino" and their derivatives are mostly used in the U.S. -- they never really caught on in Latin America.
Oh, my dude.
All Spanish words (and all English words) used in the Americas are "white linguistic colonialism". Every single one of them. Except insofar as "White" was not a concept that existed at all when the Conquista began - it is a modern term that is imposed on history very inconsistently. But English and Spanish are certainly
European languages, violently and forcibly imposed on the Americas.
Start here:
en.m.wikipedia.org
And you, like, Metaphor, seem to have some very weird and inaccurate ideas about the racial makeup of the Latin American world.
What ideas do I have about them?
You keep talking about "white liberals" and "hispanics" as though they were separable groups with opposing interests, rather than overlapping, non-homogenous groups with a complex nest of relationships and opinions.
No group is homogeneous; even cishet white men, who are united only by their common quality of being evil ;-p
Among white people in America without any Hispanic/Latino ethnic heritage, the use of the term 'Latinx' seems to be favoured among the leftist, Democrat-party liberals, and precious few others.
Among Hispanic/Latino people of any race or national background, in America, "Latinx" seems to be quite unpopular, except with Democrats. (I don't recall hearing AOC ever write or say 'Latinx' but I am certain she is the exact kind of person who would). I suspect it is even more unpopular within primarily Spanish-speaking countries than it is among Spanish-speaking people in America.
