Tuesday, October 11, 2022

"Latinx" Is an Exclusionary Term: Another Reason to Do Away With It

Labels can be used to confine or limit, but they can also be used to describe someone or something. Finding a term to describe those of Spanish or Latin American descent has been quite the bumpy road. The terms Hispanic and Latin took some time in the 20th century to get used accustomed to, but it was not easy. Although used interchangeably in everyday speech, the words Hispanic and Latino refer to two different types of people. A Latino is someone who comes from a part in the western hemisphere that a) was formally colonized by Spain or Portugal, and b) where a Romance language, whether Spanish, Portuguese, or French, is predominantly spoken. Hispanic refers to someone from a Spanish-speaking country, whether that is Spain or a Spanish-speaking country in Latin America. So Latino is a geographical and ethnic designation, whereas Hispanic is more of a geographic and linguistic designation. 

If that did not make things murky enough, here comes the term Latinx. The premise behind the term "Latinx" was to create an inclusive option for non-binary and gender-neutral individuals of Latin or Hispanic origin. The term emerged in 2004 and was primarily used amongst academics and Left-leaning activists. The usage of the term started to increase in 2014 (Salinas et al., 2017) and became an entry in Webster's dictionary in 2018

There has been considerable pushback to the term "Latinx." Earlier this year, the mayor of Buenos Aires issued a public statement banning the use of "Latinx" or any other gender-neutral variant because it violates the rules of the Spanish language. The Uruguayan government released a similar memo in December 2020. In 2020, the Real Academia EspaƱola, which is the institution considered to be the gatekeeper of the Spanish language, called it alien to Spanish morphology. There have been initiatives in Peru and some states in Mexico to ban gender-neutral language in schools. 

While the term "Latinx" has been around for almost two decades, it still remains unpopular. In 2020, Pew Research pointed out how a quarter of Hispanics have heard of it, but only three percent use it. Earlier this year, Gallup estimated that 4 percent of Hispanics use it as an identifier. In December 2021, NBC pointed out a poll that shows that only 2 percent of those of Latin descent use the term "Latinx." Compare that to the 40 percent in the same poll that find the term "Latinx" offensive. 

It does not surprise me in the slightest. In 2019, I wrote a scathing piece where I took multiple issues with the term "Latinx." One of my main issues stemmed from the fact that the suffix "-x" does not grammatically or orally correspond with the Spanish language. Even if it were created strictly for a U.S.-based audience, it does not make sense to create the term "Latinx" because English has gender-neutral terms to describe this demographic: Hispanic and Latin. Also, after acquiring a major in Spanish, spending time in Spanish-speaking countries, using Spanish in a professional context, having multiple Spanish-speaking friends, and even having previously been engaged to a Hispanic, I can tell you that Spanish-speakers prefer their country of origin as a form of self-identification over a generic term such as Latino, Hispanic, or the obnoxious "Latinx." 

Last week, I read an article from The Conversation that was in Real Clear Policy. It was entitled "Stop using 'Latinx' if you really want to be inclusive." Not only do I have issues with the term "Latinx" because it is unnecessary, linguistically improper, or condescending. This article highlighted another reason to despise the term: its exclusive nature. Here were some gems I found in the article:

  • If the term is truly inclusive, it gives equitable weight to vastly diverse experiences and knowledge; it is not meant to be a blanket identity. 
  • Furthermore, if the goal is to be inclusive, the "-x" would be easily pronounceable and naturally applied to other parts of the Spanish language. 
  • Individuals who self-identify as Latinx or are aware of the term are most likely to be U.S.-born, young adults from 18 to 29 years old. They are predominantly English speakers and have more college education. In other words, the most marginalized communities do not use Latinx (Pew Research). 

First of all, the term "Latinx" goes against the very concept of inclusivity. If you are going to use a term this broad to describe a group of people, it has to represent all of those individuals, not only some. More to the point, the inoperability of "Latinx" in the Spanish language excludes millions of Spanish speakers throughout the world. The suffix "-x" does not correspond to the Spanish language. Therefore, people cannot use the suffix in everyday conversation or written correspondence. By the way, the millions of Spanish-speaking individuals cannot use the suffix "-x" also includes the vast majority of the non-binary and gender-neutral individuals for whom "Latinx" was created. This would explain why the term "Latinx" is used by a small, elite subset of Latinos: the ones with a college education and high English proficiency. Part of why language evolves organically is because any modifications made over time would need to fit within the given language. The term "Latinx" fails at that spectacularly. In attempts to be more inclusive, the term "Latinx" ends up being significantly more exclusive. 

To quote Joaquin Blaya, who is a co-founder of the Spanish-speaking TV network Univision, in his objection to the term 'Latinx': "It's too weird. It's dumb. It's foreign. It's not Spanish." Blaya is correct on all fronts. The suffix "-x" is English-language speakers imposing an Anglophone norm onto the Spanish language, which is culturally and linguistically inconsiderate. The term "Latinx" is even clunky in English. Language is meant to be clear when communicated, which the term "Latinx" cannot accomplish in English; even more so in Spanish. In short, the term "Latinx" dishonors the Spanish language and its speakers while excluding way many more people than it includes. In case there were not enough reasons to relegate the term "Latinx" to the dustbin of history, the exclusiveness of the term is another one to add to the list of reasons why "Latinx" is a linguistic bastardization that needs to be discontinued. 

No comments:

Post a Comment