Between the study of Philosophy and subsequent study of Law I learned how important it is to make language as CONCISE as possible. Despite this reality, in the 21st Century a group of putative “academics” recommended the use of “LatinX” as a neutral term that they claim was, unlike actual Spanish, evidence of “gender” based on the use of O or A at the end (e.g. Latino or Latina as well as Escuela or Bano). In a race to volitional ignorance a small but vocal group of self-proclaimed “Latins” thought it was a solution to a false problem which ASSUMES the use of masculine or feminine terms is inherently problematic (like Escuela or Bano?). In their embrace of ignorance they missed every significant flaw in this new term and its intended use. To begin with, “Hispanic Heritage Month” was the result of a Presidential Proclamation by President George Bush in 1989. The timeframe for the month (September 15 to October 15) was predicated on the fact a number of countries resulting from Spanish Conquest celebrate their independence FROM Spain beginning on September 15. In my view the use of the term “Hispanic” is grossly misplaced. VERY few people in the Americas are Hispanic by choice.
Beginning with the arrival of Columbus, the Spanish Kingdom began a campaign to subjugate or eliminate the natives they’d encountered so they could plunder the new lands for their natural resources. Aided by diseases from which the natives had no protection the Spanish overwhelmed the aboriginal inhabitants of the “Americas” and colonized much of South America as well as a large part of North America. They were followed by other European nations however they were the first. Spain was also a Catholic nation and their soldiers married MANY native women to infuse their religion into the new lands. This task was furthered by the importation of missionaries who traveled the new lands to convert the “savages” to Christianity.
Despite actual history, the legislature and President of the United States opted to refer to the people who trace their roots to these conquered lands as being of “Hispanic” heritage. While the term is technically accurate it has never been a source of pride for me. My permatan, eye and hair color and other physical traits are traceable to my indigenous and NOT my “Hispanic” ancestors. While it is highly likely the people from whom my indigenous blood comes have been effectively exterminated as a people, many of their descendants continue to live on the “San Gabriel” mission lands. Even some of my Hispanic ancestors have been in this area since the 1830s and in “California” since the 1700s. Today, my home is situated on land “owned” by my Hispanic ancestors until at least 1848 which then was taken by Americans by deceit, theft or force.
In light of this all too real history of the Americas I believe it is easy to understand why one might resist the use of ANY term that tends to lump people into a catchall category without regard for more relatable and culturally meaningful terms. Add in the absurd idea that using an even broader term as a way of “identifying” one’s “self” and it’s easy to see how one could, in effect, get lost in an artificially large and increasingly meaningless class. My own cultural identity consists of two notable and clearly identifiable groups - Irish AND Mexican. While I first heard the term “Leprecano” to describe myself from a family member who does standup comedy, I liked it because it made me MORE unique, not less. The false idea that by including more and more individuals in an ever growing group somehow makes any member of such group unique borders on being a very serious mental health issue. The only large group to which I belong was named “Homo Sapiens Sapiens” and that’s the only really large group I’ll acknowledge as one to which I belong.
Trying to make an erroneously labeled large group “more inclusive” is, at best, a grave mistake and at worst an attempt to erase the many unique groups spawned by the Spanish invasion of the Americas. Costa Ricans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Mexicans, Venezuelans, Argentinians, etc.… are all examples of national groups. EACH of them has unique traits, however minor one might deem them, that are essential to understanding who and what they are (e.g. I LOVE properly prepared pinto beans but NOT black beans which some of the aforementioned groups prefer). Lumping them all together under a recently contrived term that, in the end, has NOTHING to do with one’s history or culture is the de facto cancellation of each of them regardless of intentions.
I also don’t believe the folks who coined the term had ANY intention of finding a connection among the inhabitants of lands conquered by the Spanish, rather they coined it to deflect and misdirect. If every “Hispanic” who carries indigenous blood were to come together under THAT common flag it is beyond certain many who call themselves “LatinX” would be excluded and, frankly, I think that’s a VERY GOOD thing. I am beyond tired of hearing folks who have NONE of my indigenous DNA and features try to convince me they understand anything about me, my experiences and my ancestors because they’re “like” me and every time they do it makes me angry, VERY angry and I can guarantee - they won’t like me when I’m angry. If you don’t have a permatan, dark hair and dark eyes then, bottom line, you are NOT like me nor will you ever be able to understand what it is to be me and that’s OK. When it comes to who and what I am rest assured - I’m the ONLY expert alive.