Should the term "Hispanic" be banned and be replaced with "Latin American"?

[Dr. Dan]

we are way too hung up on genetics here.. We aren't scientists...we are talking about social, cultural, and poltical livlihood..and religion.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Nobody stops white Latin Americans from checking off "white". In fact, most Argentines do.

[Dr. Dan]

bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!?? 

This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!

As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!!  Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!

[Dr. Dan]

I repeat!

bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!?? 

This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!

As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!!  Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!

[briann]

From now on se shall make the following replacements:

Hispanics: IBM's (Itty bitty Mexicans)

Native Americans:  Casino Owning Alchoholics

Irish Americans:  Non-Casino Owning Alchoholics

Take Note of it.

[Sarah]

I don't understand the difference between the two anyway.

[Dr. Dan]

I repeat!

bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!?? 

This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!

As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!!  Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!

This is part of our fight against political correctness. It is also part of our fight against affirmative action since the label "Hispanic" is used as a determining factor of whether to use affirmative action discrimination.

By wanting to change the term is an act of political correctness.  Really, it's not helping.

[JTFFan]

The term Hispanic is fine in my opinion.  I just don't think Spaniards should be labeled Hispanic, because you have Spaniards from Spain label Hispanic/Latino under the U.S. census instead of labeling White/Caucasian.

[Dr. Dan]

I repeat!

bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!?? 

This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!

As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!!  Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!

This is part of our fight against political correctness. It is also part of our fight against affirmative action since the label "Hispanic" is used as a determining factor of whether to use affirmative action discrimination.

By wanting to change the term is an act of political correctness.  Really, it's not helping.

Trust me! Calling Dominicans and Puerto Ricans black would not be PC.   Getting rid of the Hispanic guise is a conservative ideal!

Personally if they are Spanish speaking and i'm not sure which country or region they are from I say Hispanic or Latino

If I know which area, then I say, "Carribean, Domnican, Mexican, Central American, South American etc etc etc... It's really not a big deal.

[Dr. Dan]

The term Hispanic is fine in my opinion.  I just don't think Spaniards should be labeled Hispanic, because you have Spaniards from Spain label Hispanic/Latino under the U.S. census instead of labeling White/Caucasian.

Spaniars are European...simple..done!

[JTFFan]

The term Hispanic is fine in my opinion.  I just don't think Spaniards should be labeled Hispanic, because you have Spaniards from Spain label Hispanic/Latino under the U.S. census instead of labeling White/Caucasian.

Spaniars are European...simple..done!

Exactly, that's why I think it's ridiculous when I've talked to some Spaniards that label Hispanic/Latino because they are Spanish speaking.

[Sarah]

We're all from planet Earth. The end.

[Scriabin]

We should call them all 'Spanish'.

[MasterWolf1]

There is nothing wrong with the word Hispanic. So No.

[MasterWolf1]

I repeat!

bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!?? 

This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!

As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!!  Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!

This is part of our fight against political correctness. It is also part of our fight against affirmative action since the label "Hispanic" is used as a determining factor of whether to use affirmative action discrimination.

By wanting to change the term is an act of political correctness.  Really, it's not helping.

Dan I agree fully, this is starting to become a bit silly.

[MasterWolf1]

Are we going to start calling Blacks "African American"?  This is leftist liberal lingo.

[Sarah]

Yacov if you used different topic titles, you could still discuss the term without people getting wound up about it being another banning poll.

[Dr. Dan]

The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.

Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.

I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.

This topic's original sentiment was with the intent of denouncing Hispanic as a "racial" term.  Hispanic is a culture (i.e. Anglo, Franco, Germanic).  The term African American (i.e. British-American, Korean-American) indicates line of descent which is consequently racial implying Negroid, Coloured ancestry.  Therefore, have categories like Spanish-American, indicating Caucasoid/White ancestry, Indigenous-American surmising Mongoloid/Oriental ancestry, and African-American implying Negroid/Coloured ancestry.  This is classic, righteous American sub-grouping. 

I have no problem with subclassing..however...

1. If we are going to subclass one group, we should subclass all groups.
2. Today most people are a mix of different subclasses.
3. If this is going to be a new way of identifying race in applications, for example, then an option of allowing picking more than one subclass shoudl be allowed.

[Dr. Dan]

The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.

Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.

I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.

This topic's original sentiment was with the intent of denouncing Hispanic as a "racial" term.  Hispanic is a culture (i.e. Anglo, Franco, Germanic).  The term African American (i.e. British-American, Korean-American) indicates line of descent which is consequently racial implying Negroid, Coloured ancestry.  Therefore, have categories like Spanish-American, indicating Caucasoid/White ancestry, Indigenous-American surmising Mongoloid/Oriental ancestry, and African-American implying Negroid/Coloured ancestry.  This is classic, righteous American sub-grouping. 

I have no problem with subclassing..however...

1. If we are going to subclass one group, we should subclass all groups.
2. Today most people are a mix of different subclasses.
3. If this is going to be a new way of identifying race in applications, for example, then an option of allowing picking more than one subclass shoudl be allowed.

Which mixes are you referring to?  Barack Hussein Obama has direct white lineage, yet he refers to himself as BLACK/Negroid.   This is our history, and if you all support the South as you say all should be hands off with the tradition of sub-grouping.  One choice is enough: CHOOSE WISELY !  

Multiculturalism should only be found within religion.  Most religions have followers from all around the world.  Therefore, if you want to adhere to a "multiracial" category just write in your faith/creed!

The there shoudl be a separate category for religion or creed from a racial one.. There is a difference between race and religion..can't mix the two.

Obam is half "negroid" and half "Caucesoid"..so if he were to check off anything, he should check off both of those..and then for religion, he shoudl check off Dirty Stinky Nazi Muslim.

[Tina Greco - Melbourne]

I just realized..... you can't spell Hispanic without writing PANIC!
His...PANIC
as in...."he's getting his panic attacks again"

lol I never noticed that 

[Rubystars]

Hispanic refers to people from Spain, of people of white Spanish ancestry. It also could refer to people of mixed heritage, partly Spaniard, which is how it is most often used today. It's not a slur.

I never dreamed when JTF was being described to me that it would be this PC.

[Dr. Dan]

The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.

Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.

I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.

This topic's original sentiment was with the intent of denouncing Hispanic as a "racial" term.  Hispanic is a culture (i.e. Anglo, Franco, Germanic).  The term African American (i.e. British-American, Korean-American) indicates line of descent which is consequently racial implying Negroid, Coloured ancestry.  Therefore, have categories like Spanish-American, indicating Caucasoid/White ancestry, Indigenous-American surmising Mongoloid/Oriental ancestry, and African-American implying Negroid/Coloured ancestry.  This is classic, righteous American sub-grouping. 

I have no problem with subclassing..however...

1. If we are going to subclass one group, we should subclass all groups.
2. Today most people are a mix of different subclasses.
3. If this is going to be a new way of identifying race in applications, for example, then an option of allowing picking more than one subclass shoudl be allowed.

Who said anything about "sub-classing"? Listing Hispanics by race rather than the imaginary Hispanic classification is no different than listing native-born Americans by race. We have whites, blacks, and Orientals. The same exists in Latin America. So why should we pretend that all Latin Americans are one imaginary race the second they arrive in The United States?

It's because latin americans are a hybrid of several races..and have become their own race..they are a mix of european, native american, and black...some are more pure of one race than the other.

THe thing here, yaacov, is that you obssess too much over race..it's bad..very bad.

Secondly, don't call Orientals orientals..they are asian..and if you want to be specific then just say far east asians...These people are not carpets.

[Rubystars]

Hispanic is an ethnicity (Spaniard blood), but because Spaniards conquered many areas of the world or had influence in many areas of the world, they left mixed populations in various places of the world such as in Latin America and Southeast Asia, thus the term gained a wider meaning.

Applying the term to those who are not descended from Spaniards is just confusion.

[Dr. Dan]

honestly if we are giong to be accurate about race, i like the terms caucesoid, negroid, mongoloid, australoid, etc...we should stick with that

And if we are talking about a causecoid, we say, he/she is a causecoid from Turkey...etc etc...

None of these subclasses are offensive.  Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.

[MassuhDGoodName]

No!

We should call them "chili chokers" or "beaners".

That way they won't be offended by being labeled as "Hispanic" or "Latino".