3 ms·

I completely agree with you, with the qualifier that the article is very much part of the problem. These sort of issues always start small and then the media p

I completely agree with you, with the qualifier that the article is very much part of the problem. These sort of issues always start small and then the media picks them up and splashes them on the front page purely as outrage bait. I have absolutely no reason to care about this issue. I'll bet 99% of the people reading the article have absolutely no reason to care. I don't care if I see Latin(o|a|x) on a form, if I was creating a form and someone asked me to include Latinx I'd say 'sure, why not'. This is an artificial culture war created by a click happy media.

gruez 5y ago
> I'll bet 99% of the people reading the article have absolutely no reason to care. but the article says >while 40 percent [of Hispanics] found it offensive.
- nineplay 5y ago
  The author's numbers are questionable. The study is linked - 800 participants, the actual question > Does the use of the term LatinX to describe the Hispanic or Latina(o) community bother or offend you? I'd say there's a difference between "bother or offend" and "found offensive". Breaking it down further > 20% "Yes, a lot" > 11%, "Yes, somewhat" > 9%, "Yes a little" 20% 'a little or somewhat bothered' is a lot different than 20% offended If we trust Wikipedia that Latinos are 18% of the US population and 20% of that population is "a lot" offended by Latinx, we get down to 3%. I'll grant that I was incorrect in my 99% assumption, but 97% isn't much better. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017d-81be-dee4-a5ff-efbe74ec0000 https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017d-81be-dee4-a5ff-efbe7...
  - leephillips 5y ago
    So the author’s claim is correct, that 40% of the population that the slur claims to refer to find it offensive. Although some of that 40% just found it "somewhat" or "a little" offensive.
    - nineplay 5y ago
      20% said it bothered them, somewhat or a little. I find "bothered" much milder than "offensive"
  - Kavelach 5y ago
    The issue with the 97% percent you arrived at is the implicit assumption that only people from the US read the article.
  - kcplate 5y ago
    Are we really arguing over the validity of a brand new activist word coined to describe a culture where some reasonable percentage of said culture find it bothersome/offensive, and is likely never going to used by 97% of the culture because the predominant language they use is grammatically gendered? This to me smacks of elitism and making the intention more important than the effect.

gruez 5y ago

> I'll bet 99% of the people reading the article have absolutely no reason to care. but the article says >while 40 percent [of Hispanics] found it offensive.

nineplay 5y ago
The author's numbers are questionable. The study is linked - 800 participants, the actual question > Does the use of the term LatinX to describe the Hispanic or Latina(o) community bother or offend you? I'd say there's a difference between "bother or offend" and "found offensive". Breaking it down further > 20% "Yes, a lot" > 11%, "Yes, somewhat" > 9%, "Yes a little" 20% 'a little or somewhat bothered' is a lot different than 20% offended If we trust Wikipedia that Latinos are 18% of the US population and 20% of that population is "a lot" offended by Latinx, we get down to 3%. I'll grant that I was incorrect in my 99% assumption, but 97% isn't much better. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017d-81be-dee4-a5ff-efbe74ec0000 https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000017d-81be-dee4-a5ff-efbe7...
- leephillips 5y ago
  So the author’s claim is correct, that 40% of the population that the slur claims to refer to find it offensive. Although some of that 40% just found it "somewhat" or "a little" offensive.
  - nineplay 5y ago
    20% said it bothered them, somewhat or a little. I find "bothered" much milder than "offensive"
- Kavelach 5y ago
  The issue with the 97% percent you arrived at is the implicit assumption that only people from the US read the article.
- kcplate 5y ago
  Are we really arguing over the validity of a brand new activist word coined to describe a culture where some reasonable percentage of said culture find it bothersome/offensive, and is likely never going to used by 97% of the culture because the predominant language they use is grammatically gendered? This to me smacks of elitism and making the intention more important than the effect.