So, I saw an interesting thread on twitter (https://twitter.com/MarcACaputo/status/1237043322776100866) about a recent survey that asked Latin-Americans in different states across the US what they preferred to be called:

Hispanic
Latino/Latina
Latinx
All of These

The margins are insane tbh: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESrp7rIX0AEuqdE?format=jpg

Basically only ~1% (!!) of the community wants to be called latinx. I had no idea it was *that* unpopular. (How has it even persisted so long with such disapproval??) I also find the regional effect kind of interesting; respondents in NC and VA most like being called Latino/Latina, in contrast to every other state's respondents (AZ, CO, FL, MI, NV, NM, TX, WI) who strongly preferred Hispanic.

Personally? I shied away from ever using latinx because I read more and more (on okp and elsewhere) that some find it offensive, and almost a form of... linguistic neo-colonialism I guess? I started trying to exclusively use Latin-American because 1) in contrast to hispanic or latino, latin-american is a corollary to an actual term in the spanish language (i.e. latinamericano/latinamericana); 2) It's basically gender neutral so avoids all the patriarchal and non-inclusive tones some percieve in the latino/latina terms; 3) It translates well geographically (i.e. there's no confusion as to what constitutes Latin America) and could easily suffice as an umbrella term for more specific ethno-national groups (eg. Colombian-American, Venezuelan-American, Mexican-American, etc)

Latin American wasn't offered as a choice in this survey, so no idea how it is perceived by folks in this community. And I saw one good defense of "latinx" in the thread's comments, saying that it's an effective way to make the latin-? term more inclusive for non-binary folks. Also interesting, in one of the earlier replies to the thread, to learn that EVEN IF latinx was an accepted term (which it's not), it should actually be pronounced "latinequis" not latin"x".

Anyway:

What term do you guys use?

Are you hispanic/latino-latina/latinx/latin-american? How do you feel about these terms, do you have a preference?

Link to full report (although I'm amused by their gratuitous use of latinx throughout, given their findings): https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d30982b599bde00016db472/t/5dd2f19f4415e676e2e66859/1574105509747/CA+Deck.pdf

thats some online progressive activist shit.

some people are now using Latine and Latines

https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/10/15/20914347/latin-latina-latino-latinx-means

--
Sometimes you have to look reality in the face and say 'No!'
-Ben (Reaper)

If you need any help, don't. Hesitate to ask.

thx for the link, I'm gonna check it out

i use it when im typing online and want to refer to the broad demographic. beats typing a/o after latin. i cant imagine myself saying it out loud, much less equis. i like your idea of using latin american, kinda long though. but yeah the fact that latinx is all inclusive is good enough for me.

i think i previously said my preference for me is
mexican
mexican american
latino
american

lol

strongly supported, tho they didn't cover it in the survey linked. Someone in that thread's comments referenced it tho.

I totally get your order of preference; makes perfect sense. I notice that you excluded Hispanic altogether, do you dislike that term? I wonder if there's a correlation with age when it comes to this, like perhaps older folks in the community are fine with Hispanic since it's been in use longest in the US... and younger folks are ok with latinx since the tend to be more progressive, inclusive, etc..

Also, since you're mexican, do you mind educating me a bit on how much weight other labels/groupings have like chicano/chicana, mestizo etc? Are any of them considered offensive? Or are they more like an in-group thing, where it's cool if folks in the community use it among themselves but not cool if someone from outside community uses it?



>i use it when im typing online and want to refer to the broad
>demographic. beats typing a/o after latin. i cant imagine
>myself saying it out loud, much less equis. i like your idea
>of using latin american, kinda long though. but yeah the fact
>that latinx is all inclusive is good enough for me.
>
>i think i previously said my preference for me is
>mexican
>mexican american
>latino
>american
>
>lol

>I totally get your order of preference; makes perfect sense. I
>notice that you excluded Hispanic altogether, do you dislike
>that term? I wonder if there's a correlation with age when it
>comes to this, like perhaps older folks in the community are
>fine with Hispanic since it's been in use longest in the US...
>and younger folks are ok with latinx since the tend to be more
>progressive, inclusive, etc..
i definitely dont like hispanic. although hispanic causing panic is pretty funny. definitely not a term i like. the worst is checking the hispanic/white box in forms. im not white bro. am i?? its too close to spic and although some people in latin america are proud to be part spanish im not too big on that history.

>
>Also, since you're mexican, do you mind educating me a bit on
>how much weight other labels/groupings have like
>chicano/chicana, mestizo etc? Are any of them considered
>offensive? Or are they more like an in-group thing, where it's
>cool if folks in the community use it among themselves but not
>cool if someone from outside community uses it?
i think chicano has to be earned. you gotta live the life and really be about it. definitely something that is odd if someone outside the community calls you chicano. i dont think offensive but youre trying too hard if you say it. one of the cooler terms though. mestizo is one i dont see much. keep in mind, this is just my experience. i dont think there is one single term that most mexican americans, and much less latin americans identify with.

in the end its not a big deal, to me. i dont like hispanic but im sure there are plenty of people that are cool with it.

>i definitely dont like hispanic. although hispanic causing
>panic is pretty funny. definitely not a term i like. the worst
>is checking the hispanic/white box in forms. im not white bro.
>am i?? its too close to spic and although some people in latin
>america are proud to be part spanish im not too big on that
>history.
>

Ya I was a bit surprised to see such strong, broad, support for Hispanic in the survey. I definitely see where you're coming from. I've never really liked the term myself bc it just seems manufactured or something. And imposed, rather than an organic term that connects somewhat to spanish language or communities from latin america.

>i think chicano has to be earned. you gotta live the life and
>really be about it. definitely something that is odd if
>someone outside the community calls you chicano. i dont think
>offensive but youre trying too hard if you say it. one of the
>cooler terms though. mestizo is one i dont see much. keep in
>mind, this is just my experience. i dont think there is one
>single term that most mexican americans, and much less latin
>americans identify with.
>
>in the end its not a big deal, to me. i dont like hispanic but
>im sure there are plenty of people that are cool with it.

Got it. Good points too, thanks for the knowledge drop. I have friends from latin america but they're mostly Salvadorena. 1 Chilean. They, like you, mostly just self-identify by country. They immigrated young, tho, and I also find they're not too wrapped up in the labels.

<--- Big Baller World Order

prototype

stand ur ground, believe in urself,
believe in love, prepare urself for love, remove the negativity from ur life, and accept the love u kno u deserve

The fact that ya'll think it's "wps" or "online activist shit" makes it plainly obvious who you DON'T interact with offline.
It's unpopular mainly because it's newer and from the academy/activist community.
People don't like change.
Black folks HATED being called Black when it was the newer term.
There's much, much, much smaller contingent of people who don't like it because it doesn't work well in Spanish. Which is a valid critique of them term.

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

But I've also used "Hispanic", "Latino/a" or even Latine - but I always defer to an individual's right to self-identify.

Also - the initial outrage at "latinx" was powered by a lot of conservative think-pieces that just despise the entire non-binary framework/identity.

What I've found interesting is that this is really only a discussion in Canada & the U.S. My family and friends in South America have never even heard of this narrative lol.


-->

identify? By country? That latinamericano/latinamericana term?

The latinamericano/latinamericana angle interests me because, just because a term exists in a language, doesn't necessarily mean its widely used.


>But I've also used "Hispanic", "Latino/a" or even Latine -
>but I always defer to an individual's right to self-identify.
>
>Also - the initial outrage at "latinx" was powered by a lot of
>conservative think-pieces that just despise the entire
>non-binary framework/identity.
>
>What I've found interesting is that this is really only a
>discussion in Canada & the U.S. My family and friends in
>South America have never even heard of this narrative lol.
>
>
>-->

>
>identify? By country? That latinamericano/latinamericana
>term?

My fam/friends in Colombia are very proud of their Colombian heritage and do not necessarily like to even be called "latino" or "hispanic" - let alone latinx - because it lumps them in together with all other groups in the South/Central American hemisphere. They prefer Colombiano or Colombiana.

I've found that in Brazil they prefer nation specific ethno-national identity as well.

This isn't to say there isn't solidarity among those with Indigenous heritage throughout the hemisphere - but I think it's very different than the dynamic in America - where you have a myriad of groups all identifying under a singular "Latino/a/e/x" framework.

I think this is yet another example of the uniqueness/challenge of identity in America - which of course is an entirely immigrant nation (except for Native Americans) - unlike so many other countries in the world.





-->

Ya I was just telling mista k5 up top that the few friends I have from the LAC region are salvadorena and chilean and mostly just self-identify by country. On a rare occasion I've heard one person identify as latina. But they're not super wrapped up in the labels.


>
>My fam/friends in Colombia are very proud of their Colombian
>heritage and do not necessarily like to even be called
>"latino" or "hispanic" - let alone latinx - because it lumps
>them in together with all other groups in the South/Central
>American hemisphere. They prefer Colombiano or Colombiana.
>
>I've found that in Brazil they prefer nation specific
>ethno-national identity as well.
>
>This isn't to say there isn't solidarity among those with
>Indigenous heritage throughout the hemisphere - but I think
>it's very different than the dynamic in America - where you
>have a myriad of groups all identifying under a singular
>"Latino/a/e/x" framework.
>
>I think this is yet another example of the uniqueness of
>America - which is entirely immigrant nation (except for
>Native Americans) - unlike so many other countries in the
>world.
>
>
>
>
>
>-->

comes to this?? Because, ngl, that 1% approval for the term in the survey indicates it must be a very unpopular term.

But I could see your experience, which counters the survey's results, making sense if latinx is more accepted in certain groups more than others and the survey failed to capture that due to not stratifying their sampling.

And I agree with you re: terms not working well in spanish.



>The fact that ya'll think it's "wps" or "online activist
>shit" makes it plainly obvious who you DON'T interact with
>offline.
>It's unpopular mainly because it's newer and from the
>academy/activist community.
>People don't like change.
>Black folks HATED being called Black when it was the newer
>term.
>There's much, much, much smaller contingent of people who
>don't like it because it doesn't work well in Spanish. Which
>is a valid critique of them term.

I'm positive you will find a more favorable attitude toward the terms among the younger millenials and gen zers.
And again, the terms comes from activist circles and the academy -- as many new ideas do. And thus they're pushed outward to the larger society by a smaller group(who can often be seen as elitist or radical) and if you're not a part of that circle, it's gonna take longer to adopt the term or see it as valid.

If we weren't in the social media age, most folks wouldn't even know about the term yet. Like I think about terms like "white privilege" that has been in the academy since like the late 80s and has only recently entered the public domain. Social media has fast tracked "latinx" into non-academic circles and many people haven't necessarily been primed for it's usage. And at the same time, given the language limitations of the term, perhaps it entered the public domain before it was ready. Maybe in a different era, it would have shifted to Latine before it entered the public domain (AND people would have a problem wit that too). Latin@ is the the antecedent latinx, but it came before the social media age, a lot of folks don't even know it as the precursor.

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

actually. Perhaps the ~1% approval doesn't necessarily indicate a total rejection of the term, but that a lot of respondents may not have been familiar with it.

Thanks for that.



>I'm positive you will find a more favorable attitude toward
>the terms among the younger millenials and gen zers.
>And again, the terms comes from activist circles and the
>academy -- as many new ideas do. And thus they're pushed
>outward to the larger society by a smaller group(who can often
>be seen as elitist or radical) and if you're not a part of
>that circle, it's gonna take longer to adopt the term or see
>it as valid.
>
>If we weren't in the social media age, most folks wouldn't
>even know about the term yet. Like I think about terms like
>"white privilege" that has been in the academy since like the
>late 80s and has only recently entered the public domain.
>Social media has fast tracked "latinx" into non-academic
>circles and many people haven't necessarily been primed for
>it's usage. And at the same time, given the language
>limitations of the term, perhaps it entered the public domain
>before it was ready. Maybe in a different era, it would have
>shifted to Latine before it entered the public domain (AND
>people would have a problem wit that too). Latin@ is the the
>antecedent latinx, but it came before the social media age, a
>lot of folks don't even know it as the precursor.

Like you're getting at, I would guess that if you're dealing with people over 40, or people who don't engage with the internet like we do, it's not actually a term they're very familiar with.

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

>The fact that ya'll think it's "wps" or "online activist
>shit" makes it plainly obvious who you DON'T interact with
>offline.
>It's unpopular mainly because it's newer and from the
>academy/activist community.
>People don't like change.
>Black folks HATED being called Black when it was the newer
>term.
>There's much, much, much smaller contingent of people who
>don't like it because it doesn't work well in Spanish. Which
>is a valid critique of them term.

im only speaking from first hand experience w/ hispanic people in our community and my soccer network. folks i've known from childhood. many college educated. it isnt pulled from thin air for me.

they might like it elsewhere but def not around my way.

<--- Big Baller World Order

Nor do the ones I grew up with. Go promote Bernie somewhere with ur angry crying ass

I hate subliminal little fuckers on the internet, respond directly

prototype

stand ur ground, believe in urself,
believe in love, prepare urself for love, remove the negativity from ur life, and accept the love u kno u deserve

Ain't shit subliminal if you've been quoted.
That's really funny how you bring Bernie into this though when ain't nobody say shit about him. So tell me who's angry.

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

BITCH ASS

prototype

stand ur ground, believe in urself,
believe in love, prepare urself for love, remove the negativity from ur life, and accept the love u kno u deserve

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

prototype

stand ur ground, believe in urself,
believe in love, prepare urself for love, remove the negativity from ur life, and accept the love u kno u deserve

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

>That's really funny how you bring Bernie into this though when
>ain't nobody say shit about him. So tell me who's angry.


-->

but i've been peeping 'em and these Biden Bros are a trip.

--

"You can't beat white people. You can only knock them out."

locally on social media. ive never heard anyone use it in person. not saying it doesnt happen. id be pretty hard pressed to find white people locally using it in any setting, it is really just people from latin america that use it here. not saying its widespread though.

More than half the people I know and are are around are Mexican. I'm half Mexican, I'm not saying that shit.

I've seen a few people use it on social media. mostly white and a couple black but all super woke types

Coworker and I did ask another coworker about it a few months back. Younger Latina, i mean latinx. She seemed to defend it somewhat, and seemed slightly annoyed by us old ass genxers being resistant

And your gen-x clash with younger coworker over latinx seems to support my hypothesis there's an age effect at play here too.

Also notice that you, like Mista K5, self-identify by country-of-orgin first.



>More than half the people I know and are are around are
>Mexican. I'm half Mexican, I'm not saying that shit.
>
>I've seen a few people use it on social media. mostly white
>and a couple black but all super woke types
>
>Coworker and I did ask another coworker about it a few months
>back. Younger Latina, i mean latinx. She seemed to defend it
>somewhat, and seemed slightly annoyed by us old ass genxers
>being resistant

we prefer barrels.

https://www.miluana.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/el-chavo-del-8-en-vivo.jpg

in a conversation where someone will bring it up and the other person will be like wtf is latinx?? usually a conversation among mexicans over 35.

>And your gen-x clash with younger coworker over latinx seems
>to support my hypothesis there's an age effect at play here
>too.

definitely. i mean if it catches on then so be it. I don't want to be like the hold overs insisting on saying "oriental", but my guess is this will pass.

>Also notice that you, like Mista K5, self-identify by
>country-of-orgin first.

Cali thing for me, maybe. Also a bit of a gender dynamic. Most mex-american men i know will say mexican first, and the ones who even say latino first tend to be activist types. For girls/Women to drop latina first is much more common, but they'll also drop their origin country. Especially in Cali where everyone assumes they're mexican will be quicker to note if they're colombian, salvadorian, honduran, etc...

too new for me.

I still say Latino/a or just Spanish. lol

�If a fat guy falls in the woods and there is no one around to see it, do the trees laugh?

"Get ready....for your blessing....."
"Bury me by my Grand-Grand and when you can come follow me"

In my defense, this post only serves to add to the conversation based on the findings from that survey I linked. I was genuinely surprised to see the support was as low as 1%. That suggests latinx might be borderline offensive in a lot of circles.

me.
lol...



"Get ready....for your blessing....."
"Bury me by my Grand-Grand and when you can come follow me"

3) It translates
>well geographically (i.e. there's no confusion as to what
>constitutes Latin America) and could easily suffice as an
>umbrella term for more specific ethno-national groups (eg.
>Colombian-American, Venezuelan-American, Mexican-American,
>etc)

If Latin American were to be used as the racial term that also doubles as an umbrella ethno-national term then would you call someone from Colombia and has no ties to or residence in the US a Latin American? It seems like it can't be both of those things at one time.

Similarly, African American is strange to me when it's used as an umbrella term for B/black (I have no stakes in that debate) people/Africans or people descended from Africans. It seems like it's used interchangeably as a race and an ethnicity which doesn't make sense personally, like the Latin American example above. Seeing it as the only option of a race/ethnicity form is baffling to me. If I have to use it I tend to only use African American as a synonym of ADOS. So, my friend who has two Nigerian parents and was born in the US? Zero percent African American. Some of my wife's coworkers were apparently offended when she used the term black instead of African American which confused me to no end.

---------------------

http://www.last.fm/user/dagu85

>Similarly, African American is strange to me when it's used as
>an umbrella term for B/black (I have no stakes in that debate)
>people/Africans or people descended from Africans. It seems
>like it's used interchangeably as a race and an ethnicity
>which doesn't make sense personally, like the Latin American
>example above. Seeing it as the only option of a
>race/ethnicity form is baffling to me. If I have to use it I
>tend to only use African American as a synonym of ADOS. So, my
>friend who has two Nigerian parents and was born in the US?
>Zero percent African American. Some of my wife's coworkers
>were apparently offended when she used the term black instead
>of African American which confused me to no end.

Your friend is pretty much THE legit owner of the term African American lol... literally AND figuratively..


"Get ready....for your blessing....."
"Bury me by my Grand-Grand and when you can come follow me"

>
>>Similarly, African American is strange to me when it's used
>as
>>an umbrella term for B/black (I have no stakes in that
>debate)
>>people/Africans or people descended from Africans. It seems
>>like it's used interchangeably as a race and an ethnicity
>>which doesn't make sense personally, like the Latin American
>>example above. Seeing it as the only option of a
>>race/ethnicity form is baffling to me. If I have to use it I
>>tend to only use African American as a synonym of ADOS. So,
>my
>>friend who has two Nigerian parents and was born in the US?
>>Zero percent African American. Some of my wife's coworkers
>>were apparently offended when she used the term black
>instead
>>of African American which confused me to no end.
>
>Your friend is pretty much THE legit owner of the term African
>American lol... literally AND figuratively..

I prefer maintaining the specificity that, Nigerian American, for example would denote. Typing that out I realize that my assumptions about the levels of generational separation are vastly different depending on the country that come before "American" that I guess are tied to historical mass migration events. For example, I would assume that someone who is Irish American is at least a couple of generations removed from Ireland itself whereas I would assume that a Nigerian American has one Nigerian parent, similarly to a Vietnamese American. Some are trickier though, such as Japanese American which I can't decide on at this moment.

I have one Nigerian parent and one ADOS parent though so I just say I'm black. Nigerian American African American? Nigerian African American?

---------------------

http://www.last.fm/user/dagu85

>
>I have one Nigerian parent and one ADOS parent though so I
>just say I'm black. Nigerian American African American?
>Nigerian African American?
>

They have all sorts of weird conventions that don't make any sense for someone like you. I think they would call you 1.5 generation or something like that? I donno.

Personally, I use Black American to refer to ADOS so I would have (unless instructed otherwise) considered you Nigerian- and Black-American.. would you consider that offensive?

I also think you would be well within your rights to just identify by your race (eg. black, if so), and classify the ethnic identifiers as on a need-to-know basis. If I had multiple heritage lines like that within my one racial identity, that's probably how I'd roll tbh.

Look at you turning my post all academic! lol

American citizens are default American citizens..

So he's legit Nigerian American I'd believe...right?

"Get ready....for your blessing....."
"Bury me by my Grand-Grand and when you can come follow me"

that process hasn't been done, a child of Nigerian citizens would have to apply for a visa to go home just like anyone lacking such a connection.

>
>So he's legit Nigerian American I'd believe...right?
>

Well, he said he prefers to identify by his racial identity (black), so I would defer to that. But, personally, I definitely think anybody with Nigerian heritage has grounds to claim it as an ethno-national identifier. Even someone Black-American who discovers Nigerian heritage from centuries ago via DNA testing. It just seems like most Black Americans aren't crazy about doing so, which is entirely (and understandably) fair.

>American citizens are default American citizens..
>
>So he's legit Nigerian American I'd believe...right?

I usually say Nigerian and American for myself but Nigerian American for my friend who has two Nigerian parents. I think.

---------------------

http://www.last.fm/user/dagu85

>I think.
>

> Personally, I use Black American to refer to ADOS so I would have (unless instructed otherwise) considered you Nigerian- and Black-American.. would you consider that offensive?

I've never "corrected" anyone's labeling of me whether it be African American, Nigerian American, just straight Nigerian or Nigerian- and Black-American so I definitely don't get offended easily on this subject. I've lived on three continents so the labeling gets even more interesting when I talk to people who haven't spent a lot of time in American society.

>Look at you turning my post all academic! lol

Ha, didn't mean too but it seems to happen whenever I discuss this which is most often with my wife who is Vietnamese American, although she tends to just say "Vietnamese."

---------------------

http://www.last.fm/user/dagu85

>Ha, didn't mean too but it seems to happen whenever I discuss
>this which is most often with my wife who is Vietnamese
>American, although she tends to just say "Vietnamese."
>
>

Oh no, thanks! Lol. I like that you did. This sort of thing is one of my favorite topics. Almost *because* of people/families like you and your wife. In my view, the "labels" haven't kept up with the rate of globalization. A lot of different identities and communities just sort of get muted, statistically, in gov datasets because of it. No bueno.

>If Latin American were to be used as the racial term that also
>doubles as an umbrella ethno-national term then would you call
>someone from Colombia and has no ties to or residence in the
>US a Latin American? It seems like it can't be both of those
>things at one time.
>

that if we think about it, no one American region - whether North America, Central America, South America - actualyl *owns* the term America... even tho the way the actual name "US of A" is constructed it would appear 'America' does. It doesn't. All the Americas were colonized, right? So there's still that shared history even if we struggle with how to address each other in more granular fashion lol.

Other thing is, I'm not a big fan of conflating racial labels (eg. black, white, indigenous/native am, asian, arab, etc) with ethno-national labels like Colombiano/Colombiana or Colombian-American, so I think I both understand your critique and disagree with it. I think, per your question, someone from Colombia with no ties to the US would *still qualify* as Latin American (even if they don't identify that way) by simple fact of being from Latin America (which is just a geographical label, like North America or Australia). Or, to give another example that's even more awkward but technically correct.. someone with Colombian heritage, born to Colombian immigrant parents in the US, who then migrated to Australia and lived as an Australian citizen for years/decades might identify as Australian (2nd nationality), American-Australian (dual nationality), or Colombian-American-Australian (ethno-national identifier + dual nationalities) and all would be correct in some way. In my perspective anyway. Now whether governments have gotten it together enough to accommodate such nuances when characterizing their populations statistically is a whole other chat (which I'm actually very interested in when not on okp lol).

>Similarly, African American is strange to me when it's used as
>an umbrella term for B/black (I have no stakes in that debate)
>people/Africans or people descended from Africans. It seems
>like it's used interchangeably as a race and an ethnicity
>which doesn't make sense personally, like the Latin American
>example above. Seeing it as the only option of a
>race/ethnicity form is baffling to me. If I have to use it I
>tend to only use African American as a synonym of ADOS. So, my
>friend who has two Nigerian parents and was born in the US?
>Zero percent African American. Some of my wife's coworkers
>were apparently offended when she used the term black instead
>of African American which confused me to no end.

Ya, see this is why I started using the term Black American to specifically refer to ADOS (and I acknowledge not every Black American necessarily identifies as ADOS). In that vein, since all black peoples are descended from Africa at some point in history, I believe African American could make sense as an umbrella term that includes Black-Americans, Nigerian-Americans per your example, (Black) Jamaican-Americans, etc. But I could also see the argument for insisting that "black" simply be the umbrella term, underwhich Black Americans, African Americans, Caribbean Americans, etc are seperate branches. One approach anchors everyone under the common ancestry, the other anchors everyone by skin color. I think I favor the former tho.

and how confusing that can be also. Is there a word for the denonym of United States in another language that is not simply "American?" Even in a language where the most commonly used translation of the country name, USA, doesn't include a translation of America, such as French with, États Unis, the denonym defaults to "américain." I wonder if that changed over time. A contrast would be Japanese with Amerika/Amerika jin for USA/American.

>>If Latin American were to be used as the racial term that
>also
>>doubles as an umbrella ethno-national term then would you
>call
>>someone from Colombia and has no ties to or residence in the
>>US a Latin American? It seems like it can't be both of those
>>things at one time.
>>
>
>that if we think about it, no one American region - whether
>North America, Central America, South America - actualyl
>*owns* the term America... even tho the way the actual name
>"US of A" is constructed it would appear 'America' does. It
>doesn't. All the Americas were colonized, right? So there's
>still that shared history even if we struggle with how to
>address each other in more granular fashion lol.
>
>Other thing is, I'm not a big fan of conflating racial labels
>(eg. black, white, indigenous/native am, asian, arab, etc)
>with ethno-national labels like Colombiano/Colombiana or
>Colombian-American, so I think I both understand your critique
>and disagree with it. I think, per your question, someone from
>Colombia with no ties to the US would *still qualify* as Latin
>American (even if they don't identify that way) by simple fact
>of being from Latin America (which is just a geographical
>label, like North America or Australia). Or, to give another
>example that's even more awkward but technically correct..
>someone with Colombian heritage, born to Colombian immigrant
>parents in the US, who then migrated to Australia and lived as
>an Australian citizen for years/decades might identify as
>Australian (2nd nationality), American-Australian (dual
>nationality), or Colombian-American-Australian (ethno-national
>identifier + dual nationalities) and all would be correct in
>some way. In my perspective anyway. Now whether governments
>have gotten it together enough to accommodate such nuances
>when characterizing their populations statistically is a whole
>other chat (which I'm actually very interested in when not on
>okp lol).
>
>>Similarly, African American is strange to me when it's used
>as
>>an umbrella term for B/black (I have no stakes in that
>debate)
>>people/Africans or people descended from Africans. It seems
>>like it's used interchangeably as a race and an ethnicity
>>which doesn't make sense personally, like the Latin American
>>example above. Seeing it as the only option of a
>>race/ethnicity form is baffling to me. If I have to use it I
>>tend to only use African American as a synonym of ADOS. So,
>my
>>friend who has two Nigerian parents and was born in the US?
>>Zero percent African American. Some of my wife's coworkers
>>were apparently offended when she used the term black
>instead
>>of African American which confused me to no end.
>
>Ya, see this is why I started using the term Black American to
>specifically refer to ADOS (and I acknowledge not every Black
>American necessarily identifies as ADOS). In that vein, since
>all black peoples are descended from Africa at some point in
>history, I believe African American could make sense as an
>umbrella term that includes Black-Americans,
>Nigerian-Americans per your example, (Black)
>Jamaican-Americans, etc. But I could also see the argument for
>insisting that "black" simply be the umbrella term, underwhich
>Black Americans, African Americans, Caribbean Americans, etc
>are seperate branches. One approach anchors everyone under the
>common ancestry, the other anchors everyone by skin color. I
>think I favor the former tho.

---------------------

http://www.last.fm/user/dagu85

the colloquial term "yankee" used (mostly?) by folks speaking (Nigerian) pidgin. But I think that's moreso a slang geographical label than a denonym (I could be 100% wrong lol, my understanding of pidgin's super rusty).

Really good point about 'Americain' in french (or even 'Americano' in Italian, right?). I imagine it permeates the romantic languages and less so the more eastern languages (as in your Japanese example).


>and how confusing that can be also. Is there a word for the
>denonym of United States in another language that is not
>simply "American?" Even in a language where the most commonly
>used translation of the country name, USA, doesn't include a
>translation of America, such as French with, États Unis, the
>denonym defaults to "américain." I wonder if that changed
>over time. A contrast would be Japanese with Amerika/Amerika
>jin for USA/American.

I have family members who say that and it irks me.

---------------------

http://www.last.fm/user/dagu85

than calling them spanish or an actual slur lol

Let’s just say I was friend zoned on the spot

Cussed me smooth out.

“I’m from PR. How dare you..”

Never did that again.

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

But I personally think it's a really clumsy word. I'm not sure what made that happen, maybe just because I only first saw the word come up in conversations about overly marginalized cultures within the video game community at a time a lot of prominent people in that space were coming out as non-binary/trans/etc.


Even now knowing what it's supposed to mean, every time I come across it I have to remind myself it's supposed to be a word covering a diaspora, not a specific group of gender transitioning/transitioned latin americans, which is the term I guess I land on. Probably 60/40 with hispanic.



~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

you also have to enunciate the shit out of spanish words



All the extra vowels to that taco order

_______________________________________

cuz.. patriarchy.

smh

depending on who I'm talking to, what I'm talking about and the context.

Most of the time, I'm talking to my dude who is Mexican/Salvadoreno. He prefers Hispanic.

I try to find ways around even saying anything unless I really know the person; the last thing I'm tryna do is offend and everyone is mature enough to have open convos.

know your audience.

IG: amadu_me

"...Whateva, man..." (c) Redman