Careful of ‘Latinx’ term

Posted Dec. 28, 2021

Written for Dec. 9, 2021 print edition

By Tristan Hansen

Staff Editor

Although efforts to incorporate more gender-neutral language in the popular vernacular should be celebrated, we should be cautious about using the term “Latinx”.

The term “Latinx” emerged in the late 1990s to early 2000s among Latin American activists seeking a more inclusive alternative to gendered terms such as Latino and Latina. It began appearing in Puerto Rican academic literature in 2004 and has since become very popular in the United States. The problem? It’s overwhelmingly rejected by the Latino/a/x community and considered offensive by many.

A recent survey found that just 2% of Hispanic voters refer to themselves as “Latinx”, while 68% favor “Hispanic” and 21% use “Latino” or “Latina” (“Hispanic” and “Latino/a/x” are not necessarily interchangeable, but many Hispanic-Americans are Latino/a/x and vice versa). Moreover, 40% of respondents found the term bothersome or offensive to some degree.

With such results non-Hispanics should step back and reconsider their use of the term. While it may have some genuine utility, it seems problematic to, by default, refer to a group of people by a term they don’t use themselves. While “Latinx” may have its roots in the Latin community, the term’s most enthusiastic proponents seem to be white progressives. I suspect progressives will soon find it difficult to justify the use of a term that defies Spanish grammar rules and is increasingly becoming an act of cultural imperialism.

None of this is to say that Latino/a/x individuals should avoid using the term. If you do identify with the term it is my obligation to use it in reference to you. As a white person, it’s not my place to dictate to you which terms you may identify with. I am also in no way authorized to speak on behalf of the Latino/a/x community. For my fellow non-Hispanics, however, it seems clear that the term should be approached with extreme caution.