Is “Latino” useful? Diversity, commonality, and politics

Abstract

The Latino classification is distinct from all other racial or ethnic classifications employed in the United States as it is not based on shared physical appearance or geographical origin, instead Latinos are those who hail from a portion of the territories that once belonged to the Spanish Empire regardless of their ancestry or physical appearance. The diversity within the Latino classification means that it is unclear what is being measured when the Latino classification is used to conduct science. Regardless of the Latino classification's usefulness for science the Latino classification has been defended for its usefulness in helping redress the consequences of racism against Latinos. However, the ultimate cause of this discrimination is that most Latinos have a non-White appearance making the Latino classification a poor proxy for any effort to address racism. The solution is not to return to the classification system that existed prior to the creation of the Latino classification but to instead adopt more granular classifications employed in Latin America such as Mestizo and Mulatto. This will allow for a more detailed study of discrimination and the redirection of resources to those most in need.

What does racial ascription have to do with perception of Swedishness?

“…Moreover, the majority of immigration occurring in 1980s and the number of new immigrants are smaller compared to other immigrant groups today (Andersson, 2015). Secondly, the identity contestation of Latino faces might be due to the flexibility of the category Latino itself and the population that the category encompasses across different contexts (Licea, 2020; Peña, 2022). Even in a single context such as the US, Latino as a category is flexible due to its diverse racial and socioeconomic factors (Rodriguez et al., 2013) and mismatch in identifications are observed (Porter et al., 2016; Vargas & Stainback, 2016).…”

English Language Learners, Labels, Purposes, Standard English, Whiteness, Deficit Views, and Unproblematic Framings: Toward Southern Decoloniality

“…One only has to look at the racial and demographic profiling of ELLs -and other language learners -for one to realize to whom and to which racial demographics ELL labels and other language labels are often directed. As pointed out earlier, such learner labels are attributed mostly to Africans/Blacks; African Americans (also referenced as Blacks); Latinos/Latinx; Chinese; Japanese; Koreans; Taiwanese; Filipinos; Thai; Vietnamese; Cambodians; Asian Pacifics; Native Americans; Aborigines; and/or immigrant/refugee groups (Carey, 2014;Flores et al, 1991;Kubota, 2020;Kubota & Lin, 2006;Licea, 2020;McKay et al, 2020;Viesca, 2013;Von Esch et al, 2020). In fact, the list is endless.…”

“…Such learner labels are often applied to English language learners (ELLs) belonging to racial groups such as: Africans (often used concurrently with Blacks); African Americans; Latinos/Latinx; Chinese; Japanese; Koreans; Taiwanese; Filipinos; Thai; Vietnamese; Cambodians; Samoans; Native Americans; Aborigines; etc. (Carey, 2014;Flores et al, 1991;Licea, 2020;McKay et al, 2020;Mitchell, 2013). From another disciplinary angle, these…”