[Faumpiggueria]

I'm serious. Here's the case I make:

Race is a "social construct", but with a biological underpinning. In other words the social construct is built upon at least some biological reality.

According to Wiki, mestizos constitute over 80% of the popluation in Latin-American countries, in total around 500 million people (and several million the US). I wouldn't bother if we were talking about a few mixed people here and there - but when we're talking about over half a billion people, living on their own continent, I think it's only fair to speak of a Hispanic / Latino race. That is the case for European (white) African (black) or Asian (yellow) - In other words when referring to the stereotypical person inhabiting those zones. So why not treat latinos/hispanics as a race in a similar fashion.


Just use the term mestizo!

Not a good idea. This term was originally coined for a person of a clean 50-50 mix of amerindio and european. The term simply doesn't meet the racial realities of modern Lat.Am where the admixtures vary a great deal. Harnizo, Castizo, Criollo - and a large number of other terms, for all possible combinations, were also invented. But even that isn't enough, mainly for 3 reasons:

A) The terms are outdated, and people genereally (non-hispanics in particular) are not familiar with them.

B) People don't walk around with their admixture written in their forhead. Most of the time they don't even known what they are. The only to go by is thefore phenotype, but that's not very accurate, and different people also have different concepts of what a "castizo" for instance is 'supposed' to look like.

C) Knowing how genetics function, you don't inherit in strict 50 / 25 / 12,5 / 6,25 portions. So even in a first-generation mestizo the outcome might be 60-40 in one direction. These old terms therefore become nothing more than rough estimations anyway.


Text book example of a Latina: Eva longoria.

Euro: 70 %
Native: 27 %
SSA: 3%




Why would the term "mestizo" not be accurate to describe her?

1) First of all, because strictly speaking - she's not. A meztiso in doesn't have 5 % black admixture. She could have had more, 10 or 15% and it still wouldn't necessarily be clearly visible. Many hispanics have SSA.

2) She's closer to a "castiza" than a "mestizo" in her admixture. That makes the term "mestizo" even less appropriate.

3) As mentioned, the terms "mestizo" - "castizo" - "zumbo" - "criollo" are simply not well known around the world. Ask any person in Scandinavia, Japan, South-Africa or some place for away from Latin America. At best they'll have an idea of what a mestizo is.

4) A general term is needed since people in Lat.Am themselves can't keep track of their admixture, let alone even afford a DNA-test in some cases.


So what is an hispanic or latino then?

Hispanic / Latino can be used as a very wide term that encompasses all the previous terms (such as harnizo, castizo, mestizo etc) - which really just reflected different degrees of admixture anyway.

My suggestion is that Hispanic or Latino be treated as racial concepts rather than exclusively a social, cultural or geographical terms.


*puts on flame suit*

Thoughts?


-------------------

Update (for more questions regarding the racial term):

But what about those who are 100% amerindio or 100% white

Then no further racial term is needed for them. They are obviously Native, or White (european). The same thing goes for Blacks and Asians living in Lat.Am.

[new-nickname-zanovo]

Who cares whether it is or isn't a race?

[YpbWF5Yo]

The Spaniards are the true Hispanics, they are the founder of the Hispanic America culture, we are only New World people made forma mix of them, African slaves in some countries and Native on other.

[ENCOSEARRALIA]

The admixture proportions vary too greatly among the myriad of ethnicities that compose the social construct otherwise known as Latino/Hispanic. I really can see specific ''looks'' though there are overlaps. If one takes into consideration that there are no ''phenotypical majority or minority strictly speaking'' in many places (exceptions: Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Central America and Mexico and Heavily native influenced countries) in Latin America it further complicates things as it is evident that art the intra national level there are significant differences where very different looking people are part of the same ethnicity.

No sir, Latin America is Multi ethnic and Multi racial. At the International level and even at the intra national level.

[Alliopeti]

Real latinos are European.

---------- Post added 2012-06-06 at 18:04 ----------

And I'm also not going to be put in the same category as a Negro.

---------- Post added 2012-06-06 at 18:05 ----------

And I'm also not going to be put in the same category as a Negro.

[kenowinnumberss]

The Spaniards are the true Hispanics, they are the founder of the Hispanic America culture, we are only New World people made forma mix of them, African slaves in some countries and Native on other.

"Hispania" was just a name given by Romans to the iberian peninsula. It was - as far as I know - never used by spaniards themselves. The term is useless to them now since they are from Spain and spainards. Hispanic means a person from Hispanoamérica in modern use, just like Latino is a short for Latinoamericano.

[CathBraun]

"Hispania" was just a name given by Romans to the iberian peninsula. It was - as far as I know - never used by spaniards themselves. The term is useless to them now since they are from Spain and spainards. Hispanic means a person from Hispanoamérica in modern use, just like Latino is a short for Latinoamericano.

Then if the Spanish can't use it, we can't use it even less, even less use it as a race.

[cucceevevaind]

Mestizos aren't 80%. Maybe in places like Mexico and central America and chile they are. What about the whites, blacks, Asians, and Amerindians? Should we just say they're mestizo? I guess we can assume all British are white even though there are many non-whites there?

[Navzrrqt]

Real latinos are European.

They never use that term. Ever. It means "latinoamericano" even in Europe.

Then if the Spanish can't use it, we can't use it even less, even less use it as a race.

Would you mind actaully writing "why" you think that?

If they never use it - it's free to use. Hispania is an ancient name. Spain was from very early on called Las Españas and España has been the one in use for ages.

[rvadipoldkov]

Real Latinos were the inhabitants of Latium in Italy:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latins_(Italic_tribe)

[Vomazoono]

Would you mind actaully writing "why" you think that?

If they never use it - it's free to use.

Hispania is an ancient name. Spain was from very early on called Las Españas and España has been the one in use for ages.

Because the racial makeup of many Spanish speaking Americans are a blend of the Spanish with African and Native, who are different cultures to that of the Spanish, we are a different people and using that term is emphasizing on the Spanish ancestry and underrating the other two.

[blackjackiisre]

IF you go by what I have already stated, which is actually the most accurate reply so far, you will see that even the DNA tests validate my claim. For example, in the Oracle for the different calculators I am much closer to Moroccan Jews than to Dominicans or Colombians whose scores are different. In fact, in some tests I am as far from other latin americans as I am from Mediterranean peoples or even further. Genotypically the closes I am always placed to is in PR, then Moroccan Jews and Canarians, then Brazilians, then Spaniards.

[worldofwarcraft]

They never use that term. Ever. It means "latinoamericano" even in Europe.



Cool. You didn't understand the thread at all. Makes me happy. Proof that it wasn't too lowbrow.
(Besides, you claim you're native, so you wouldn't be affected anyway).



Would you mind actaully writing "why" you think that?

If they never use it - it's free to use. Hispania is an ancient name. Spain was from very early on called Las Españas and España has been the one in use for ages.

On the contrary I did. You want to lump everyone together.

[ElisasAUG]

What about the whites, blacks, Asians, and Amerindians? Should we just say they're mestizo? I guess we can assume all British are white even though there are many non-whites there?

I updated the OP in the bottom to answer your question. It's a good question that I suppose needed clarification.

Real Latinos were the inhabitants of Latium in Italy:

no. There isn't a person on earth who uses the term like that. Welcome to reality. Yes, the language was called "latin" and yes the continent of Latin America is named after that since it was the common demoninator between portugese and spanish (as romance languages) - But the term now is an abreviation for Latinamerican.

Americans hijacking the term 'american' for a US-citizen is a million times worse.

[TubOppomo]

Americans hijacking the term 'american' for a US-citizen is a million times worse. True.

[TOD4wDTQ]

Latino is not a race, get over it,don't ask me why because I asnwered already(alongside many on here)

[Lydiaswingert]

Thoughts?

Well some people do treat "Arabic" as a racial category so I guess in all the relative definitions of what "race: means you can fine one that could make nearly any group thought of as a "race" a "race". I think the "mestizo" part though is irrelevant because Mestizo's are still not the majority of every individual "Hispanic" or Latin American country. Latin America is an extension of Latin Europe, I don't personally consider it a "racial" homeland except for the indigenous peoples. I don't see why the mixed people of Latin America can't just be "mixed" (ambiguous mestizo?) and leave it at that. It just doesn't seem to matter much what arbitrary "racial classification" someone is given, in the end of the day, if they aren't "white" (I assume the majority of Latin America is "mixed"), it doesn't matter which non-White they are. Furthermore, it's their association with non-Whites, especially "blacks" that has created the "racial" notion of Latin Americans to begin with, at least in America, that and historical ignorance about swarthy people, Latino/Latina and non-Latino/Latina alike.

[floadaVonfoli]

We only have mostly linguistic and cultural relation with Spain, not much racial.

[iNYZgxNC]

no. There isn't a person on earth who uses the term like that. Welcome to reality. Yes, the language was called "latin" and yes the continent of Latin America is named after that since it was the common demoninator between portugese and spanish (as romance languages) - But the term now is an abreviation for Latinamerican.

Americans hijacking the term 'american' for a US-citizen is a million times worse.

It is a relatively recent distortion of language invented by foreigners (Frenchs I think) .That most people use a word wrong, does not make it correct.

I think it is wrong to include with the same name millions of people with widely separated cultures, different races, some even with languages which ​​do not even are derived from the Latin (Quechua and Dutch, for example) and that does not include the Latin-speaking Canada.

[AlexBolduin]

"Hispania" was just a name given by Romans to the iberian peninsula. It was - as far as I know - never used by spaniards themselves. The term is useless to them now since they are from Spain and spainards. Hispanic means a person from Hispanoamérica in modern use, just like Latino is a short for Latinoamericano.

España is the modern Spanish name for Spain, just the Spanish equivalent of Hispania since they speak a vulgar Latin dialect (Castilian). You're just saying it in English.