you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]sallytomato 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Last year I was passing through a neighborhood that has had some issues between African Americans and the Afro-Latinos who reside there. In an effort to east tensions, someone put up a street mural stating "LATINX SON NEGROS". The irony of them forgetting to x out the o in "negros" was apparently lost on them.

On another note, "Woke" people from Latin American countries have been using Latine as a gender neutral term. It's a term that can actually be pronounced in Spanish and created from within the community, so why not use this term instead? Whenever I bring that up on social media, I hear crickets from the "Latinx" crowd.

My issue with this whole thing is if trans women are women and trans men are men then why the need for the X? If there's no difference between them and biological men and women then why do they need special words to be "inclusive"?

[–]EventideSky[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ironic indeed!

On you third point, I think 'latinx' was by/for the nonbinary types? But all this woke language is for luxury beliefs for people who don't know what real oppression feels like.

[–]sallytomato 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Even worse! There are even less people in the US who identify as non-binary, something like .5%. What percentage of that .5% are even Latinos? So we need to change the term Latinos to satisfy maybe 10% of .5% of people?! Maybe we shouldn't say terms like "high five" because of the small amount of people with six or more fingers. These people make my head hurt.