So do a lot of others. You probably simply don’t know the difference since your not as familiar.
Now that’s what we like to see - A polite recognition from someone that they were mistaken. We all get something wrong now and then :).
You are absolutely correct in this. Mexican culture has a number of unique facets, as do all Hispanic cultures, I’m sure. Similarity or relatedness shouldn’t imply they are mirror-images of each other.
- Tamerlane
I know that at one time, at least, “hispanic” referred more to the language than ethnicity. A long time ago I was filling out an application for something where I was asked to indicate my ethnicity, and they carefully defined “hispanic” as one having a heritage from any of the Latin American countries, or Spain! There was some kind of affirmative action program in place at the time, meaning that if they were going to choose between the King of Spain and myself, and we were running neck and neck, they’d have to go with Big John!
It’s cool, nisos. I can understand being grouchy about it…it’s certainly a word that can speak to miseducation. If that is in fact a word. 
LULAC drove me nuts in high school because they were pretty forward and stompy there. MEChA was in town, IIRC, but they were relatively calm. I remember the stink that LULAC tried to raise when they realized that, out of the entire body of teachers in the school, only 3 were Latino – the home ec. teacher, the art teacher, and the geometry teacher…and the latter two were a married couple.
So they scowled at the administration a lot, though they were going to have to find actual proof that the admin. was racist. Tricky, considering that the school board itself was quite minority-heavy. As I remember, LULAC representatives pulled the teachers out of class for an hour and tried to find any shred of evidence that there was Something Fishy Going On. IIRC again, the teachers mentioned to us that they’d been asked very leading questions.
“So, how differently are you treated by the students from the white teachers?”
“Not at all. They show us a great deal of respect.”
“Hmm. And how do the teachers treat you differently?”
“They treat us just the same.”
“And the administration? How have they --”
“The same. We’re treated just like everybody else.”
“Do you think there should be more Latino teachers in this school?”
“Only if they’re qualified.”
And considering the size of the school (miniscule) and the size of our budgest (smaller, if possible), teachers of any race were not exactly queueing up to get a position there…
With the vision of hindsight, I understand and support what LULAC was doing. They wanted to make sure that the teachers were not being treated poorly and that the hiring practices were non-discriminatory…I just think the representatives we had to deal with were a little too eager to find something wrong.
We had some other fun scandals too…there was the Satanism thing when I was in the 8th grade, and the 5 heroin overdoses in the four weeks after I left the town…
wanders off, humming the theme to Green Acres
Since this has turned into quite the informative thread, I have another question to pose. For most of my life I’ve assumed that Latino, which as we all know is derived from Latin American, included the Spanish speaking peoples of the Americas and Brazilians. I plugged in Latino into wordnet, however and got this.
This seems to mean that the term Hispanic is exclusive to Spanish speakers. Is this correct? Have I been wrong all these years?
brujo: I believe you are correct. Hispanic is generally used to refer to all Spanish speakers, regardless of their country of origin, whereas Latino generally indicates someone from Latin America.
Examples: It is incorrect to refer to Antonio Banderas as Latino, as he is from Spain, but he is still Hispanic. Anthony Quinn, born in Mexico, is both Hispanic and Latino. Jennifer Lopez, Puerto Rican via the Bronx, is a nitwit.
Also, see chula’s quote from Dictionary.com above.
I had 3 years of high school Spanish and I can still speak a little - does that make me Hispanic??
I agree with all of those examples, and would add the trickier category of Brazilians: you can usually call someone like Gisele Bundchen or Ronaldo Latino but not Hispanic, since their first language is Portuguese.
However, my girlfriend–who is from Sao Paulo–tells me that Brazilians don’t really like the term “latin” because of its similarity to the verb “latire” which (IIRC) means “to bark” (that is, like a dog). I’m not sure if all Brazilians feel this way about the term “Latino,” but that’s something to think about.
It’s a hijack, but…the phrase is “for all intents and purposes,” not “for all intensive purposes.”
You should have kept reading the thread, jayjay.
I know, I know… :smack:
On reflection, that was kind of a Gaudere’s Law corollary. I committed a common message board sin while complaining about one.
Only insofar as marrying a Mexican makes me Latina.
Although, there are some people who would argue that I am now “Latina by injection.” Ahem. They are trying to make everyone Latino, one person at a time, in any way they can.
I wasn’t irritated by your OP as others who DID know they’re facts were, but I WAS a bit annoyed by the TONE of it.
The “remember people…” part of it, seemed kindof snide.
Remember? I never knew all this information in the first place!!! I’m glad that so many people in this thread have good information, but thanks to forms which list “afro-american, caucasion, hispanic, and other” as the “usual suspects,” many of us don’t know that it’s considered insulting that we don’t know that “hispanic” doesn’t refer to people of spanish and mexican and latin american descent.
For my part, I sometimes get a bit tired of our not knowing something like this being considered as being “racist” or “labeling” or whatever.
It isn’t as if “Hispanic” is a derogatory term is it? Perhaps, when in correcting someone’s misuse of a word through their ignorance, the person doing the correcting can give them the benefit of the doubt and do it in a kind and TOLERANT way?
Thank you, CanvasShoes. I try, on this board, to do that with GLBT issues as well, but it can be difficult to get through to someone who seems homophobic through ignorance when there are a few posters here who prefer to attack every alleged slur with guns blazing.
Ignorance can seem like bigotry, if one doesn’t bother to ask questions first and take the answers given with a little bit of understanding.
In my limited understanding, only in so far as people want remove themselves from Spanish heritage and/or use a wider ranging label. Thus the term “Latin-American” or “Latino” for short, was coined – as it was originally meant to include all countries where Romantic languages are spoken. Thus including the old French colonies as well as the Portuguese and Spanish. In that vein, it wouldn’t be “wrong” to call a Haitian a “Latino.”
To confuse matters further, there’s a term used in Spanish (Brazilian/Portuguese?) that I don’t think ever caught on in English, and that is ‘IberoAmerican,’ meaning from Iberia, the peninsula containing both Portugal and Spain. It is considered by some to more inclusive than ‘Hispanic,’ albeit less so than ‘Latino’ for the reasons already given.
In the end, as I mentioned in one of my of my prior messages, I think it really boils down to individual preferences – as it well should be. But that is a stretch from what the OP originally proposed and what I objected to. Glad that’s been cleared up.
In closing, whenever possible ask people want they want to be referred as, but if you can’t, I think it’s safe to say that “New Spain” should never, ever, under ANY circumstances, be used to refer to the territories of Mexico, New Mexico or Texas. That’s just plain wrong
Romantic languages? I take it you mean Romance languages.
And you’d be absolutely correct. Thanks and my apologies. :smack:
Yes, but one with a very nice ass 
Latino is what (many of us) call ourselves, Hispanic is what the Census Bureau calls us. Under the standard usages of both words, it is correct to say Mexicans are Hispanic/Latino. AND a whole lot of them are indigenous (OK, and some are full-blooded Indians whose first language is not Spanish). It’s a diverse country.
HOWEVER, any Hispanic/Latino community can have some issues with how the words are used. “Hispanic” may be objected to IF it is used to have us treated under a one-size-fits-all Standard Issue Generic Hispanic template, w/o regard for relevant differences (which can be huge). In the case of Mexicans, that situation may be more aggravating since by sheer numbers and multigenerational presence they were the likeliest to get stuck with being treated as the Generic Hispanic. (Paul Rodriguez had a skit in which he said: “the difference between Hispanic and Latino is, Latinos have jobs”)
Well, first of all, the food has nothing to do with it.
Spain’s cuisine is largely Mediterreanean. Mexican food, on the other hand, uses a variety of New World spices, chiles, peppers, and grains that are NOT found in Spain, and which Cortez didn’t know from “Shinola”. The tamale, for example, is a New World invention, and one which no white folks can steal the credit for. In fact, one could argue that the native Americans had more of a cultural impact on their Spanish conquerors (in that area, at least). More than once, I have wondered how many Conquistadors spent days in the outhouse with Montezuma’s Revenge. Y’know, that could account for their bad temper and legendary cruelty…
“Ibero-American?” Geez. Sounds like the kind of term some college professor would think up so he could write a Sociology paper on it, publish it, and try to jockey it into achieving tenure… as opposed to a term most folks would understand, adopt, and/or USE…
And now, a brief disagreement re: the term “Hispanic.”
CITE: Harvest Of Empire, by Juan Gonzalez. Excellent book on the subject, highly recommended.
QUOTE:
Gonzalez goes on to say that “Hispanic” refers to ANY PERSON of any color, national origin, or genetic background… as long as one of their ancestors came from Spain. Theoretically, if you fit that bill, you’re Hispanic, period. Your language doesn’t matter, your culture doesn’t matter… only your ancestry.
Although, typically, in America, when we say “Hispanic,” we do mean people we would identify as being culturally Hispanic, ancestry being irrelevant. Most of us would consider all Mexicans to be Hispanic, although there are any number of Indians living there who have no Spanish ancestors, and don’t speak a word of Spanish. The same is true for, so far as I know, many South American countries (at least, the ones the Spaniards had their way with, so to speak).
Another quote from Gonzalez:
Quite so. My wife tells a story about an argument that erupted in a church, somewhere on the East Coast, a church where the majority of the parishioners were Puerto Rican in ancestry and culture… but were having to accomodate an influx of persons who were Mexican in ancestry and culture… and an argument erupted as to whether the church would permit an icon of the Virgen de Guadalupe, an image of the Virgin Mary revered throughout Mexico… but not in Puerto Rico. All of a sudden, they noticed a BIG difference, no?
By the exact same token, most Hispanics would call me an “Anglo,” the generic term for “white guy.” The term is short for “Anglo-Saxon,” which to most folks means “of English ancestry.”
Y’know, I could take great insult at that. My ancestry – of which I am quite proud – is Irish and Scottish… two cultures in which to call one an “Englishman” is a potent insult…
Wang-Ka,
As I said, the name never really caught-on in English, so it’s not surprising that you’d find it a bit er…strained? OTOH, it is of fairly common usage in Spanish with any number of business, universities, cultural centers, etc., sporting the name.
See for yourself: