DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**rorsvierwelia** · 03-25-2012, 12:13 PM

I was using 'Latino' to refer to people associated with Latin America or Latin base speaking European nations which is how many people define 'Latino'. But after re-reading your (Marllon) first and second post in this thread, you define it differently. You define it as someone with significant ancestry from a Latin base speaking European nation - someone who looks like a castizo or criollo. And that's why you instead prefer the nationality terms such as Asian-Brazilian or Asian-Uruguayan or Asian-Mexican. Okay that makes sense if we go by your definition . I understand where you are coming from now - that Latino is a colonial term, and according to you it should not be used for everyone in Latin America. Okay, I won't argue with you too much on that. I understand that the term 'Latino' may (to some people) unfairly rob a person of their other heritage whether it be Amerindian, African, Asian, or even other European/Caucasian heritages such as Polish, Lebanese, or Indian.

Thank you! That is my point precisely. To be honest, I don't even consider castizos as Latinos either, only people who are more than 90% Latin European in ancestry, but you got most of what I meant from what I meant by posts.

03-25-2012, 12:13 PM	#34
rorsvierwelia Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 491 Senior Member	I was using 'Latino' to refer to people associated with Latin America or Latin base speaking European nations which is how many people define 'Latino'. But after re-reading your (Marllon) first and second post in this thread, you define it differently. You define it as someone with significant ancestry from a Latin base speaking European nation - someone who looks like a castizo or criollo. And that's why you instead prefer the nationality terms such as Asian-Brazilian or Asian-Uruguayan or Asian-Mexican. Okay that makes sense if we go by your definition . I understand where you are coming from now - that Latino is a colonial term, and according to you it should not be used for everyone in Latin America. Okay, I won't argue with you too much on that. I understand that the term 'Latino' may (to some people) unfairly rob a person of their other heritage whether it be Amerindian, African, Asian, or even other European/Caucasian heritages such as Polish, Lebanese, or Indian. Thank you! That is my point precisely. To be honest, I don't even consider castizos as Latinos either, only people who are more than 90% Latin European in ancestry, but you got most of what I meant from what I meant by posts.
	Quote