“Latinx” on the chopping block

The term aimed to promote gender inclusivity—now lawmakers seek to ban it

The neologism was added to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary almost five years ago, but politicians now are hot on its heels—or rather, its suffix.

Although its exact origins are unknown, the term “Latinx” emerged online in the early 2000s as a nonbinary alternative to “Latino” or “Latina,” which generally describes anyone of Latin American descent. “Latinx” was among several variations to surface in recent decades, including “Latine” and “Latin@,” that sought to expand the fundamentally gendered Spanish language and has since gained traction both in academic circles and on social media.

Now, a group of Hispanic Democrats in Connecticut’s state general assembly are seeking to prohibit usage of “Latinx” in official government documents. Geraldo Reyes Jr., the State Representative spearheading the proposal, said he found the term “offensive and unnecessary” to Puerto Ricans in the state, including himself, and pointed to the scarce usage of the term in Spanish-speaking countries. Other Democrats have claimed the term is white-washed and Americanized.

Across the aisle, “Latinx” has faced similar attacks on a different front. Republicans, including Arkansas

Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, have criticized the word as an act of “liberal wokeism.” In January, Sanders banned the term in state documents.

At Nueva, usage of “Latinx” and the opinions surrounding it vary.

Prior to joining Nueva five years ago, upper school Spanish teacher William Cheng was unfamiliar with the term.

“This is a very Americanized term,” Cheng said. “Outside of the U.S., such as in Spain and Mexico, do they understand what ‘Latinx’ means?”

Similarly, Natalie S. ’25, co-lead of Latine Affinity Group, grew up with the term “Hispanic.” To her, “Latinx” felt like it was being bestowed on the community by English-speakers as an allencompassing term.

“It was framed as this gift and a word that didn’t need a translation, but I don’t want this,” Natalie said. “I disagree with the push to make it a universal thing like, ‘this is our one-size-fits-all replacement tied up with a nice little bow for all of you.’”

Another primary contention is how the “x” ending of the term is not phonetically aligned with the Spanish language—it is not easily pronounced at the end of a word.

“There are better ways to have gender-inclusive language,” Natalie said.

For example, “Latine” is the gender-neutral variation that has emerged from within the Latin-American community and “follows the conventions” of the language more, Natalie explained.

Beyond the pronunciation, Natalie expressed concern that attempting to define an entire group of countries under an umbrella term could inadvertently erase individual cultural differences.

“Why would you refer to the region as a whole if you’re just from one country?” Natalie said, pointing out the region’s vast cultural diversity. She primarily identifies as Chinese and Hispanic, and added that “Latinx” would be towards the bottom of her list of terms she resonates with.

On the other hand, upper school Spanish teacher Yolanda Navarro Rajoy was more familiar with the term, having come to Nueva after living in New York, where “Latinx” was more widely used. She believes it is “essential and reflects the needs of society” to have options for people to identify, especially for those in the LGBTQ+ community.

“I don’t think someone has to identify with Latinx or Latine—one thing is to identify oneself with the term; another thing is to include the term in the vocabulary,” Navarro Rajoy said. “By not came as no surprise to Cheng, who even deemed it “political bickering.”

“It didn’t surprise me given how polarized the country has been,” Cheng said. “There’s no common ground or dialogue between the Democrats and Republicans—it’s just fighting back and forth.”

For Becerra-Hernandez, this bickering reflects a broader trend of politicians making decisions that disproportionately target and impact marginalized groups.

“The big issue I see is when Republican, white governors want to ban something that doesn’t affect them directly,” Becerra-Hernandez said. “The evolution of language should be coming from the Latine community.”

Leilani C. ’23, co-lead of Latine Affinity Group, worries a ban could make people less inclined to use people’s preferred language.

“The government has a lot of power over how people think on a cultural level,” they said.

One silver lining, Leilani said, is the attention the ban could bring to the oftenovershadowed intersectionality within the queer community.

“Latinx,” by the numbers:

23% of Hispanic adults in the U.s. have heard of "Latinx"

3% of U.S. Hispanic adults selfidentify with the term

A generational gap: having a term that includes nonbinary people, the queer community is excluded. What you don’t name, what you don’t say, what you don’t voice is as if it doesn’t exist.”

Echoing Navarro Rajoy, upper school Spanish teacher Francisco Becerra-Hernandez highlighted the power language can wield in promoting inclusivity.

“By having our name as ‘Latine Affinity Group,’” Becerra-Hernandez said, “we are sending a strong message that we are welcoming each and every person.”

Yet, when the ban was proposed, it

“It has drawn more attention to the fact that queer Latin Americans exist,” Leilani said, pointing to indigenous communities that have historically lived beyond the gender binary, such as the Zapotec people in Mexico.

Ultimately, Navarro Rajoy questioned if the bottom line stops at changing the language.

“The point is how we can be more inclusive so all identities are reflected in our language and our communication,” she said. “If we were in a society where everyone was included and respected equally, we might not even need to talk about inclusive language, because it would already reflect the reality of the diversity

42% of U.S. Hispanic adults ages 1829 have heard of the term

7% of U.S. Hispanic adults ages 65+ have heard of the term

Source: Pew Research Center (2019) of people.”

Natalie called out the “almost distracting” nature of the ban and how it could overshadow important conversations about the real oppression and discrimination faced by Latin

“It feels like it’s giving politicians too much of an excuse to yell at each other while doing nothing,” Natalie said. “It’s a lot easier to have a debate on semantics than a debate on how we’re treating

At the end of the day, Leilani said, it all boils down to personal preference and the terms people feel most comfortable using

“There’s obviously a lot of variation and it’s good to be mindful of the fact that not everyone feels comfortable with the same term being applied to them as someone else might,” Leilani said. “It’s nice to just let language evolve and let people use whatever terms they feel most comfortable with. A ban like this almost stigmatizes the word, which is not great For Navarro Rajoy, more discussions need to be held, especially with older generations that aren’t as familiar with the new terminology.

“This conversation is only the tip of the iceberg,” she said. “The real need is for everyone to be included, to be seen, and to be able to express themselves. We all need to fight for inclusivity. Conversing more and bringing more awareness is the seed for a better, more inclusive community.”