I was looking up the Immaculate Reception because of Franco just dying before the 50th anniversary. Wanted to see the take from Jack Tatum, whose excessive hard hitting caused the IR and also paralyzed Darryl Stingley.
There was a report on him where they say "Tatum himself is handicapped too. He recently had his left leg amputated from the knee down, because of complications from diabetes"
Is the word handicapped "allowed" in this type of case now?
The usage started in Latino/a/x communities in the first place. And America is a Hispanic community, or better described as a multilingual one, with English and Spanish by far the most common of our many languages. Stanford's students are a linguistically diverse community, and many have Spanish as a first or second language. Both the Latino/a and Latinx usages are commonplace among Spanish speakers on campus.
Mine? I'm not aware of any official policy we have on the matter, but would be very surprised if we did. Our administration is not very active on matters of that type, generally trusting the faculty to use our discretion. I should clarify in case it is unclear that I do not work for Stanford, though as an American college professor, I do have a vested interest in the discourse on higher education in the country.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
Are you trying to indicate that you think all native speakers of Spanish are brown-skinned and anti-leftist? I can't make sense of your point. You clearly don't talk to many college age hispanic folks of any nationality. I do speak Spanish, as do most of my students to varying degrees. They are a culturally and racially diverse community, and talk about and worry about the same sorts of things all college students do the world round.
In fact, recent national surveys of Hispanics/Latinos show that the term Latinx is highly unpopular. Influential media and advocacy groups have started dropping the term or even arguing against its use to avoid offending those who dislike it. It might have been intended to be more inclusive, but it actually can feel exclusionary to everyday people.
“The reality is there is very little to no support for its use and it’s sort of seen as something used inside the Beltway or in Ivy League tower settings,” said Domingo Garcia, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the oldest Latino civil rights organization in America. He made the comment in announcing the group’s decision to drop “Latinx” from its official communications because it’s so unliked by most Latinos. “LULAC always rep Jose and Maria on Main Street in the barrio and we need to make sure we talk to them the way we talk to each other.”
That decision came last week after a new survey of 800 registered voters of Latin American descent showed that only 2 percent described themselves as Latinx. The poll, conducted in November by Bendixen and Amandi International, a Miami-based Democratic firm, also showed that 68 percent prefer Hispanic and 21 percent favor Latino. A whopping 40 percent found the word Latinx offensive.
The political implications are considerable. Democrats, including President Joe Biden, have been deploying the word Latinx, apparently believing that a gender-neutral word that was born among liberal academics and progressive activists would appeal to Latinos.
Given the term’s lack of wide acceptance, Latinx could thankfully be on the way out. As the data makes clear, more and more institutions are pushing back against the pressure from small, vocal groups to apply a term of identity that most don’t identify with.
If there were any doubt that Latinx should be retired, Telemundo and Univision, the nation’s largest Spanish-language broadcast networks and experts in what their Spanish-speaking audiences like, have opted for Latino.
And yet the EHLI says to consider the term Latinx, instead of Hispanic. Shouldn't it be reversed, if the aim is to be considerate and sensitive? Instead of Latinx, use Hispanic or Latino! Makes me wonder where these people who wrote the EHLI and other writings get this stuff. Do they even do any research, or just sit behind a desk in their corner office and imagine hypothetical ways random non-white people could be offended? And these DEI adminstrators get large 6 figure salaries to come up with this kind of nonsense. Sheesh.
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.
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.
“The reality is there is very little to no support for its use and it’s sort of seen as something used inside the Beltway or in Ivy League tower settings"
If it's used most often by college students, seems like Stanford University, home to several colleges, ought to be paying attention don't you think?
No university decides policy based on national newspaper polls or political firms, that would be stupid. Stanford is not a member of nor beholden to the political interests of the Democratic Party, nor should it be. As a private university, they aren't even strongly beholden to the government as a whole. But they are beholden to the needs and wants of their student body, as are all universities. I presume you support capitalism in a general sense? Because one implication of caputalist governance is tgat schools can only remain financially solvent by attracting the voluntary enrollments of new students.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
No. But I know enough about it to know that it is gendered, and enough about it to know that 'Latinx' is an imperialist assault waged by white leftist imperialists (and some Latino academics).
The debate over gendered language is fairly similar among English and Spanish-speaking Americans, which is not surprising considering we are all neighbors and to a large extent share in a common culture. Yes, those who advocate for gender-neutral language are a minority in the US regardless of one's primary language.
I often find your opinions based in splen rather than logic, much less reality but here you’re playing really fast and pose with actual historical data
The Catholic Church is a couple of thousand years old and predates Spanish by about 1300 years.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
No. But I know enough about it to know that it is gendered, and enough about it to know that 'Latinx' is an imperialist assault waged by white leftist imperialists (and some Latino academics).
The debate over gendered language is fairly similar among English and Spanish-speaking Americans, which is not surprising considering we are all neighbors and to a large extent share in a common culture. Yes, those who advocate for gender-neutral language are a minority in the US regardless of one's primary language.
I often find your opinions based in splen rather than logic, much less reality but here you’re playing really fast and pose with actual historical data
The Catholic Church is a couple of thousand years old and predates Spanish by about 1300 years.
Spanish has gendered language because its predecessors did.
EDIT: The very idea that the Catholic Church is somehow responsible for gendered language is just so preposterous it's yet another leftist nonsense that I can barely believe is a sincere belief.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
No. But I know enough about it to know that it is gendered, and enough about it to know that 'Latinx' is an imperialist assault waged by white leftist imperialists (and some Latino academics).
The debate over gendered language is fairly similar among English and Spanish-speaking Americans, which is not surprising considering we are all neighbors and to a large extent share in a common culture. Yes, those who advocate for gender-neutral language are a minority in the US regardless of one's primary language.
I often find your opinions based in splen rather than logic, much less reality but here you’re playing really fast and pose with actual historical data
The Catholic Church is a couple of thousand years old and predates Spanish by about 1300 years.
Spanish has gendered language because its predecessors did.
EDIT: The very idea that the Catholic Church is somehow responsible for gendered language is just so preposterous it's yet another leftist nonsense that I can barely believe is a sincere belief.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
No. But I know enough about it to know that it is gendered, and enough about it to know that 'Latinx' is an imperialist assault waged by white leftist imperialists (and some Latino academics).
The debate over gendered language is fairly similar among English and Spanish-speaking Americans, which is not surprising considering we are all neighbors and to a large extent share in a common culture. Yes, those who advocate for gender-neutral language are a minority in the US regardless of one's primary language.
I often find your opinions based in splen rather than logic, much less reality but here you’re playing really fast and pose with actual historical data
The Catholic Church is a couple of thousand years old and predates Spanish by about 1300 years.
Spanish has gendered language because its predecessors did.
EDIT: The very idea that the Catholic Church is somehow responsible for gendered language is just so preposterous it's yet another leftist nonsense that I can barely believe is a sincere belief.
The Catholic Church didn't exist when Latin was first spoken, either. Yet Spanish's gendered language clearly and unambiguously owes its gendered language to Latin and not The Catholic Church.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
No. But I know enough about it to know that it is gendered, and enough about it to know that 'Latinx' is an imperialist assault waged by white leftist imperialists (and some Latino academics).
The debate over gendered language is fairly similar among English and Spanish-speaking Americans, which is not surprising considering we are all neighbors and to a large extent share in a common culture. Yes, those who advocate for gender-neutral language are a minority in the US regardless of one's primary language.
I often find your opinions based in splen rather than logic, much less reality but here you’re playing really fast and pose with actual historical data
The Catholic Church is a couple of thousand years old and predates Spanish by about 1300 years.
Spanish has gendered language because its predecessors did.
EDIT: The very idea that the Catholic Church is somehow responsible for gendered language is just so preposterous it's yet another leftist nonsense that I can barely believe is a sincere belief.
The Catholic Church didn't exist when Latin was first spoken, either. Yet Spanish's gendered language clearly and unambiguously owes its gendered language to Latin and not The Catholic Church.
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.
And before that, Nahuatl words were linguistic colonialism too. What's your point? Doesn't change the fact that "Latin American" was a propaganda term outsiders tried to get native Spanish-speakers to think of themselves as, much like "Latinx" now.
I expressed no opinion about the racial makeup of the Latin American world. You made that up out of whole cloth.
You do that sort of thing a lot. You libelously claimed southernhybrid was "pretending to be somehow oppressed" when she'd done nothing of the sort; and then you had the unmitigated chutzpah to tell her "If you want to demand respect from other people, maybe consider extending it once in a while." Southernhybrid is one of the top ten most consistently respectful posters in the forum; your posts in contrast are well below average in that department. Try applying critical thought to your own words -- maybe if you figure out why you keep behaving the way you do you'll be inspired to reform yourself.
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.
It is a little amusing that people are told to use the preferred pronouns of trans people (be it they, xir, ze and about 94 other names I can't remember), but even though 97% of Latinos/Hispanics prefer the term Latinx not be used for them, the attitude among the progressive left seems to be, "sorry no, we'll keep using Latinx. We know better than you what is right for your people."
Is it really any surprise that Hispanics are leaving the Democrat Party in droves?
No. But I know enough about it to know that it is gendered, and enough about it to know that 'Latinx' is an imperialist assault waged by white leftist imperialists (and some Latino academics).
The debate over gendered language is fairly similar among English and Spanish-speaking Americans, which is not surprising considering we are all neighbors and to a large extent share in a common culture. Yes, those who advocate for gender-neutral language are a minority in the US regardless of one's primary language.
I often find your opinions based in splen rather than logic, much less reality but here you’re playing really fast and pose with actual historical data
The Catholic Church is a couple of thousand years old and predates Spanish by about 1300 years.
Spanish has gendered language because its predecessors did.
EDIT: The very idea that the Catholic Church is somehow responsible for gendered language is just so preposterous it's yet another leftist nonsense that I can barely believe is a sincere belief.
The Catholic Church didn't exist when Latin was first spoken, either. Yet Spanish's gendered language clearly and unambiguously owes its gendered language to Latin and not The Catholic Church.
When Spanish was "first" spoken is not a fixed date. Languages evolve; they do not spring, fully formed, from committee.
Spanish has gendered language because it evolved from a language that is gendered.
I suppose you think "The Catholic Church" is an institution that has also not evolved, and has existed exactly as "The Catholic Church" is right now, unchanged, for 2000 years.
I challenged the utterly nonsensical implication that the Catholic Church's "social policies" somehow generated or kept alive Spanish's gendered language. It's absurd. Gendered language existed long before the Catholic Church.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
