When Raúl Juliá was cast as Gomez Addams in 1991's The Addams Family and its sequel, Addams Family Values, it turned the Addams into a half-Latinx family. The late Puerto Rican actor was the only Hispanic member of the cast, but many Latinx fans still felt represented knowing the patriarch is Latino. Back in February, it was announced that Tim Burton is working on a live-action Addams Family spin-off focused on Wednesday for Netflix, named after the character. And thankfully, us Latinxs are finally getting the Latina Wednesday we deserve.
YOU’s Jenna Ortega announced she will play the iconic young misfit in an Instagram post. “New chapter. Hope I can do Wednesday Addams justice. *snaps twice*,” she wrote. Ortega’s casting confirms that The Addams are supposed to be Latinx, and we can’t wait to see who’ll play Gomez, Morticia, Pugsley, and the rest of the family.
Netflix also shared the official logline, which reads, “The series is a sleuthing, supernaturally infused mystery charting Wednesday Addams’ years as a student at Nevermore Academy. Wednesday’s attempts to master her emerging psychic ability, thwart a monstrous killing spree that has terrorized the local town, and solve the supernatural mystery that embroiled her parents 25 years ago — all while navigating her new and very tangled relationships at Nevermore.” So basically, it’ll be a good replacement for Chilling Adventures Of Sabrina, that was canceled by Netflix last year. Netflix has yet to reveal the premiere date for Wednesday.
205 Comments
That seems like a whole lot of plot.
And very little comedy.
This just sounds like putting an established character into a generic CW show. I hate it already.
I guess I always assumed Gomez was Latino, which made it extra refreshing he was played by an actual Latino in the movies. Nice to see that get cemented a bit more with this casting. BTW, not sure what the editorial policies are over there, but the term “Latinx” drives literally every Latino I know personally up the wall. Myself included. Are they forcing you to adopt that terminology, or is that voluntary?
He absolutely is and always has been. Raul Julia & Oscar Isaac were great choices to portray himn.
Raul Julia IS Gomez in my mind. He brought so much to the character. He has left some ENORMOUS shoes to fill. They seemed to know this when deciding to focus on Wednesday.
I’m betting it’s because they are “progressive” and “Latinx” is trendy for progressives.
Much like how they have no problem calling black people “coons,” progressives don’t actually care what the people being slighted are actually saying, just what the progressives tell them to think and/or feel.
People tend to write Latinx in things as gender neutral just cover everyone officially. It’s kinda just been decided as a catch all, I think it’s cool to be inclusive and take that into consideration like using “their” instead of him or her for nonbinary people. You and people you know may not like it so don’t use it. There are different people out there that are Latin American that prefer using it. It’s not offensive.
It’s kinda just been decided as a catch all, I think it’s cool to be inclusive and take that into consideration
The problem is that Romance languages have gender built into their very structures and messing with that can make things very confusing. And that it seems to be English-speakers who don’t understand who are pushing the whole “Latinx” thing.It would be like in English if we switched from “waiter” and “waitress” to “waitx”.
I know people in the queer community from a Latin American background that prefer it and I get it. It’s not my fight, but I do know people that use it. Also let’s not compare this to a profession, it’s a tad different.
Bart Fargo’s analogy may be a short but he is making a critical point. Lets push it further:Is AV Club still using him/his? Her/hers? Or have they switched to non-gendered pronouns? Or perhaps, while they’re adopting language inventions, why not use ze/zir for everyone? Why is Spanish the only language being “fixed” by writers who are predominantly English speakers, writing in English, for English speaking audiences? Also curious – the LGBTQ people you know who embrace the terms – what do you mean they’re from a Latin American background? Are they from Latin America? Are they native speakers? Or are they second or first generation Americans, of Latin extraction, who speak more English than Spanish?
Is AV Club still using him/his? Her/hers? This argument makes no sense. For a single individual, you would use the pronouns they prefer. For a group of people of unknown gender, the correct grammar has been to use they/them rather than “he or she” for a while now. There have been numerous changes made to the English language to make it more gender inclusive.
It makes total sense. Just because you’re myopic doesn’t make it not so.
No, it doesn’t. Using a singular pronoun for an individual whose gender is known is totally different than using a group pronoun for people with unknown or mixed genders. You’re just being a combative ass.
Actually, no, you project pronouns until someone has declared a solid decision to be something they don’t appear to be. If you want to use ‘Latinx’, logic tracks that you should use ‘they/them’ for everyone until they have personally affirmed their gender.
Nah… That’s still not the same. Latinx is used to refer to a group of people with varying genders, not a single individual. If you were speaking of a single person who presents as male and called them Latinx rather than Latino, that would be comparable to calling everyone you meet “they” by default. Which is something that people already do in online forums where gender can be more difficult to determine.
Dominican, Puerto Rican, Mexican, Mexican-American (El Paso so like as Mexican American as you can get) and Honduras.
THIS IS FUN
You know server and waitstaff is a thing that is used right?
THIS IS FUN
Ze! Zirs!
Also let’s not compare this to a profession, it’s a tad different.
I know it seems that way, or that I’m being flippant, but I’m really not. Every adjective and noun in Romance languages has a gender. If you ask for an americano, you get a cup of coffee; if you ask for an americana you’re trying to find a woman with US citizenship. My point is that tampering with Romance words, even if it’s an attempt to be inclusive, messes with the very structure and comprehensibility of the language.
Waitix, lol(I kinda love it?)
When “PC” first became a thing in the ‘90s I remember people proposing “waitron”.
Everyone who has even ironically complained that the 21st century doesn’t have flying cars or jetpacks… this is why.
We should have embraced our sci-fi future when we had the chance.
“PC” first became a thing in the UK in the early 80s. Ah, America… Always late!
It would be like in English if we switched from “waiter” and “waitress” to “waitx”.You mean like how we replaced waiter and waitress with “server” or replaced steward and stewardess with “flight attendant”? Just two of many examples of people doing just that. Though I’ll grant you that Latinx isn’t the most elegant replacement.
No. Because those words make sense. And already existed.
How does Latinx not “make sense”? It’s replacing the masculine O with a gender-neutral X. That makes plenty of sense to me. Maybe you’re being myopic.The term “flight” existed and the term “attendant” existed, but then someone chose to combine them to make a new term. That’s how language works. People make up new words and terms all the time. Prescriptivism is dead, grandpa.
“Prescriptivism is dead, grandpa.”Feelings about them to the side, inclusivity recommendations *are* prescriptivism.
Not in the linguistic sense. Prescriptivists are against changing language and grammar whereas prescriptivists describe the way that language evolves.
Yes, precisely in the linguistic sense, it is. (What other sense could we be talking about?)
Sure, creating and advocating for the usage of politically correct language can be a form of prescriptivism. But no one here is actually saying, “You need to use this word.” We’re simply noting that it exists and why, which is descriptivism. People like the person I responded to are acting like language shouldn’t evolve and old grammar rules must stay in place, which is a strict prescriptivist position. Does that make sense?
Yes, it does. You said it well.It is a kind of hair-splitting to note that contentious new norms are just as prescribable as dusty old ones, but the contention is worth noting. Some people like to discuss these recent changes like they’ve been brought down from Mt. Language carved on tablets, but their adoption is still limited enough that writers seem to catch as least as much flak for writing ‘Latinx’ as they would for choosing against it. This stuff is still very much being hashed out.
Absolutely. It’s still a relatively new term and it may catch on more broadly, stay contentious, or disappear completely. I don’t personally care either way. I’m just annoyed at people hyperbolically griping about white people ruining the Spanish language on an article written by a Latina. It’s really dumb.
It is interesting how we handle it in English, though. Sometimes we just use the base (traditionally male) word to cover everyone (nobody speaks of “authoresses” anymore and even “actress” seems to be on its way out), and sometimes we come up with another term entirely (like “wait staff” or “server” to cover “waiter” and “waitress”).
It would be like in English if we switched from “waiter” and “waitress” to “waitx”.That’s why we switched it to server.
This is the issue with Latinx:It is an invention of the English language, meant to “fix” the Spanish language. In Spanish, we already have grammar rules for groups of unknown gender as well as mixed gender. So applying an English language mindset to the Spanish language – and then butchering that language with clumsy and unpronounceable additions, imported from English – is incredibly offensive to me as a native speaker. I get it comes from a place of good intent and inclusion. But it also comes from a place of presumption, and superiority, and imperialism. If people absolutely cannot wrap their mind around the reality that Spanish grammar already exists to cover all gender types – male, female, mixed, unknown, and other – then the best alternative I’ve seen being used is “Latine”, which is far less grating on the ears than “Latinx” and, more importantly, was invented by Spanish language speakers.
I know people in the queer community that use it and prefer it, people from a Latin American background. Maybe they personally would have preferred “Latine”, I also saw “Latin@” proposed before a while ago a tad silly imo, but this one kinda stuck. I’m not nonbinary or trans and I don’t know you irl I just know people that are cool with it in circles where it applies to them. It’s not meant in an offensive way and if you know people that hate it don’t use it.
I appreciate the dialogue, I’m not trying to get in your face. It’s just something I’m passionate about. I also have many LGBTQ friends and I do whatever I can to make them comfortable and have their back. I also think the LGBTQ probably has a stronger representation in the academic and progressive circles where “Latinx” originated and flourishes, and they’ve been allowed to define a term that, on the whole, native speakers find confusing, offensive, and would rather it was not applied to us.
How is it offensive exactly here?
THIS IOS FUN
If people absolutely cannot wrap their mind around the reality that Spanish grammar already exists to cover all gender types – male, female, mixed, unknown,What would be the “mixed and unknown” equivalent of “Latino,” then? It’s just Latino, right? Or is there something I’m missing here.
It is Latino.
Right. But Latino is the male form of the word, which is the reason why people have come up with an alternative. Surely you can understand why “male is the default” rubs some people the wrong way.
Latino is the male form. It also applies to mixed and unknown. This is like changing the spelling of “woman” to “womyn”.
Latino is the male form. It also applies to mixed and unknown.Exactly my point. This is like changing the spelling of “woman” to “womyn”.Certain feminist groups have been using that spelling since the 1970s. “Womxn” has also come into use recently.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WomynIf you don’t like the term “Latinx,” you don’t have to use it. But acting like it’s an attack on Spanish-speakers and not something that’s been mirrored in English is just flat out wrong.
Your point is misreading what I’m saying. The the -o ending also applies to mixed and unknown, not that the masculine has supremacy or that any application is exclusively masculine. Regarding alternative spellings in English: Do you use “womyn” or “womxn”? Does any serious publication?
The the -o ending also applies to mixed and unknown, not that the masculine has supremacy or that any application is exclusively masculine.The o ending applies to mixed and unknown because the masculine is considered to have supremacy. C’mon, man… I get the grammatical rule, but you’re ignoring the implications of that grammatical rule. Regarding alternative spellings in English: Do you use “womyn” or “womxn”? Does any serious publication?I’ve seen womxn used recently in a few “serious publications,” actually. It’s not as popular as Latinx, but the grammar is a bit different because women is not a masculine term being used to describe non-masculine people. It just has an ending that is the same as its opposite word and has some etymological connotations that aren’t great. Regardless, as I said to Bart above, there have been numerous changes made to the English language to make it more gender inclusive, terms like “server,” “flight attendant,” “firefighter,” and “police officer” being given precedence over their gendered predecessors. It’s not that English speakers don’t understand that Spanish uses the masculine as a catch-all to cover gender-unknown groups as well. They understand that fully and some of them think it’s shitty. Your mileage may vary.
And you’ll notice that the media hasn’t dived right in to following the lead of the feminists who say “womxn” like they have with the word “Latinx.” Why do you think that is?
Because women doesn’t mean men? Simple right and for a bunch ungendered we say people.Latino is masculine, while Latina is feminine.
Because they’re racist against Spanish-speakers? Is that what you’re insinuating? I already explained in another post how the two words are different grammatically. Womxn is also less pronouncable and some trans people are offended by it because rather than finding it inclusive, they think it’s insulting to suggest that a special word is needed. They think that it implies that trans women aren’t women. Which is totally fair. Even if that’s not the intent.
And a lot of Latin Americans think “Latinx” isn’t inclusive because it’s a word popularized by English speakers who think its their place to police the grammatical structure of another language.
it’s a word popularized by English speakers who think its their place to police the grammatical structure of another language*citation neededSeems to me that plenty of young Latinx immigrants like the one who wrote the article we’re reading right now prefer it, but I guess they don’t count because that doesn’t fit your argument. Let me know when the thought police shows up at your door and forces you to say Latinx at gunpoint. Until then, maybe let people use the word they want and stop acting like people trying to be inclusive somehow injures you.
Citation:https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/11/about-one-in-four-u-s-hispanics-have-heard-of-latinx-but-just-3-use-it/Seems like even among 18-29 year-olds only about 7% of the population uses the term and yet the English speaking media has decided to latch onto it and use it extensively. Is that not just a little odd to you? Almost patriarchal? As if we’re deciding for another culture that their linguistic rules need to be frowned upon and that it’s the white man’s burden to change it into something more inclusive?
I’ve seen that poll before. New terms take a while to catch on. It doesn’t prove your claim that English-speaking people are “policing” another language. I also disagree with the idea that “English-speaking media” has “latched onto it.” It’s still not widely used in general, media or not, and there are many Latinx people who work in “English-speaking media” who are using the term to refer to themselves. You know, like in this article that we’re reading. The word is designed to be inclusive for cis women, trans women, and nonbinary people, so the fact that a bunch of dudes don’t like it isn’t particularly relevant and certainly doesn’t prove that it’s “patriarchal” or that the movement to use it isn’t being led by Latinx people.
In general, it seems to me that we should be following the lead of actual POC communities as to what they want to be called, and when the documented majority of that community says they DON’T want to be called something it seems more than a little bit presumptuous to over-rule that and call them by that anyway, which is what you’re doing.
Did you actually read the poll you linked? The “documented majority” said they haven’t even heard the term (which doesn’t really support your notion that it’s widespread in the media, by the way). The poll doesn’t ask what they want to be called or whether they care. You’re aware that inclusive language takes a while to catch on, right? It’s not a shift that happens overnight? What percentage of Hispanic people have to say that they prefer Latinx until a journalist is allowed to use it? What about trans Hispanic people? They’re obviously going to be in the minority. I guess they don’t get a say? Can an individual Hispanic person refer to themselves as Latinx in an article like this one or do they have to consult Pew Research first? Apparently, the author being Latinx herself isn’t enough to stop the hyperbolic accusations of cultural imperialism. Obviously, a journalist who is paid to speak to a wide audience and think about the impact that their words have is going to be more careful to use inclusive words than a random person off the street. You really think that’s a bad thing? Who exactly is being hurt here?
Did you actually read the poll you linked? The “documented majority” said they haven’t even heard the term (which doesn’t really support your notion that it’s widespread in the media, by the way). The poll doesn’t ask what they want to be called or whether they care.Well, you clearly didn’t read it given that there was more than one question in the poll and you seem to have missed the large pie chart a little past the halfway point on the page which specifically shows that two thirds of Spanish speakers who HAD heard of the term did NOT think it should be used to describe the Hispanic/Latino population. When a large majority of a population is specifically telling you NOT to call them something but you decide you know better than them and call them that anyway that’s a pretty specific choice which communicates I know better than you how your language should be used.
Did you also notice the part where it said that young women were more likely to use it whereas men are the smallest group? Gee, I wonder why. Shouldn’t their voices matter more? What about the part where only 12% of the people who’d heard of it actually dislike it? You also didn’t answer any of my questions. What about trans Latinx people? I guess you don’t give a shit what they think? If it’s more inclusive and the majority of people either haven’t even heard it or don’t care, then again, who exactly is being hurt? What percentage of Hispanic people have to say they prefer it for it to be okay to be used in an article and how is it ever going to get there if no one is allowed to use it? You’re not thinking this through.
It shows that 5% of women rather than 1% of men use the term, yes that’s more, but either way it’s still only 5% of a population saying they want to be called something so I’m not sure why this is a hair you want to split. As for trans hispanics… what about them? If anything they probably want to be specifically called latino or latina depending on what gender they identify with more than most people and may especially dislike people obscuring their gender identity. As for what percentage should want to be called it before it should be used extensively by English speaking media… 51% probably works? At the very least this is something that the actual Spanish speaking world should decide for themselves and reach a consensus on before the anglo world decides to put their privileged fingers on the scales and decide for them.
You’re clearly misunderstanding the question about trans Latinx people. We’re not talking about individuals. We’re talking about a broad term used to describe a group. So in this case, you’d be referring to a group of people that includes both men and women, some of them trans women who are likely misgendered on a regular basis with a masculine term. You really don’t get how that could be offensive? Also, “trans” is an umbrella term that includes nonbinary people as well. Do I really need to explain the implications of you telling a nonbinary person that they have to be either a Latino or Latina? Shit, man. This isn’t rocket science. So again, how will the term Latinx ever gain acceptance if no one is allowed to use it? Based on your rules, can Tatiana refer to herself as Latinx in an article? Does she get a pass or does her status in the media make it illegal? What if one of her white coworkers follows her lead and decides to use the term as well? Should that person be chastised? What if the article is referring to Demi Levato who recently came out as nonbinary? Can they be referred to as Latinx or do authors have to wait until Pew Research and the language police say it’s okay? Here’s a crazy idea. What if all the cis Hispanic people and concern-trolling white people who don’t like it could take a step back, realize that it’s not about them and get over it? What if we could let people make good faith attempts to be inclusive without getting our metaphorical undergarmets in a bunch and ranting about Anglo people’s “privileged fingers.”
Given that centuries old Spanish gramatical conventions suggest that “latino,” when used to describe a group, is not specifying a gender (kind of like saying “hey, you guys” to a group in English isn’t always gender specific). Using the word in that context is not gendering anyone one way or another, it’s just describing a group. At least until there’s some sort of consensus within that community that this grammar rule truly does need to be uprooted. If someone really strongly feels it would be distasteful to just say “Latino” then the words like “Hispanic” or “Latin” or “Latin American” which aren’t fundamentally trying to impose a new word on the Spanish language are readily available.Anyway, I never said no one is allowed to ever say “latinx” like it’s the n-word or something. My only argument is that us anglos should follow the lead of the consensus within that community rather than deciding on their behalf what they want to be called and let them fight this out amongst themselves before we jump on the bandwagon. In general I would think media outlets like the AV Club would have a style guide on the topic (as I suspect they do on various other topics of how groups should be addressed) and that this would be followed more or less consistently, though I will concede that Hispanic journalists operating in the English language media are a bit of a gray area in all of this and were I an editor I would probably give them a lot more leeway on the topic. As for Demi Levato… her having Latin American ancestry is news to me… not sure how relevant that would be to any article about her coming out. I suppose I would default to “Hispanic” or “Latin American” like I did up there. Options are available.
So all you’ve got is appeals to tradition and appeals to consensus. Not a very good argument. I’m going to let journalists do whatever they feel is appropriate, but you do you.
Oh, womxn is less pronounceable in English? So completely different from Latinx which is totally pronounceable in Spanish.
I’m just taking a stab at why one term seems to be more popular than another. I’m not making a value judgment. The fact that Latinx is hard to pronounce in Spanish isn’t really a point in its favor. Though then again, it’s not really a contest and, as has been stated numerous times in this thread, no one is going to force you to use it if you prefer a different term.
“Latsotros” – Desus Nice
Latinx was also invented by Spanish speakers. Its general first use is accepted as a Puerto Rican Psychological periodical paper about the lack of gender inclusive language pronouns in Spanish. And the current rules in Spanish for unknown genders and mixed gender are almost primarily “Just use the male term”, which is sorta the point. I get that you don’t like the word, I even get you know a lot of others in the community who do not. I personally know a lot of LGTBQ+ Latinx people who use and embrace it.
Yeah, I’m having a good chuckle at the idea that an “English-language mindset” is somehow more “imperialistic” than a “Spanish-language” one. I get the more recent national histories the OP is alluding to, I think, but the cultural/historical reasons Spanish and English are the #2 and #3 most spoken modern languages feel pretty similar.
I respect you don’t want to use Latinx. That’s fine. Ain’t no one forcing you. But I hate constantly seeing this bullshit about it being some invention of woke ass white people and how no Latinos use it blah blah blah. And newsflash, Spanish is an imperial language too.
Read these. They’re good primers on why Latinx isn’t some big bad language wolf.
The Meaning of Latinx and Why the Term Is Used (oprahdaily.com)
Signed – a proud xicanx 😜
Even just looking at the word “latinx” its ugly. And I usually like words with “X”s in them. It’s probably my favorite letter.
Latinx actually originated in Puerto Rico. Basically it was used in some niche Spanish speaking LGBT online communities way back when putting an X in words made them cool and rad and stuff. It wasn’t really meant to be spoken. It was dismissed by most of the Latin community outside of a few activists and some academics. They then thrust it upon well meaning, but woefully misguided white progressives. Then it spread to the media.
You get all the stars for this. Has annoyed me since I first saw it used (having studied Spanish enough to understand gender use) but I figured maybe some Latin American rights organization had campaigned for it or something. I got corrected by a Mexican co-worker when I tried to use it in a work document – she shared your sentiment and said everyone else she knows is also more offended by Latinx than by even misgendered words.
But why offended exactly? I know people that use it and prefer.
To be more inclusive, “Latin-g” would be better, as “G” is directly between “A” and “O.” “X” is just way out there, should be reserved for “Latins from another planet.”
The first instance I saw of someone using an “x” as a gender neutral alternative when addressing groups in Spanish was a Chilean rapper who would write things like “Hola a todxs” in her posts to her fans, back in like 2013 or so. That practice doesn’t seem very widespread and is probably not meant to be read out loud, but the x isn’t just an Americanized/English speaker thing.
You could just write “Latin”. Only a very small minority of the people “latinx” supposed to describe identify with it:https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2020/08/11/about-one-in-four-u-s-hispanics-have-heard-of-latinx-but-just-3-use-it/
Latin is a language. You can use Latin American perhaps, which I did because Brick doesn’t like Latinx, which I also use as advised by others who I actually know.
“Latin is a language”So is English, or French, or German, or Japanese, or Spanish, or Portuguese, etc.
Yes and?
You’re argument for why Latin can’t be used to adress people in a gender neutral way is dumb.
Solid rebuttal. Goodbye
What? Did you expect an essay? Your sole argument for why Latin can’t be a gender neutral way to refer to people is that it’s a language. There. Plenty of examples of how both a language and a people can be referred to by the same word.Maybe if your argument wasn’t so shallow or arbitrary it’d warrant a more in-depth response but I can only work with what I’m given here.
I said goodbye
About what I expected.A white American spends hours lecturing Latin people on their own culture and language and when pulled on their flimsy argumentation they’d rather just pack up and leave.Please remember this feeling in the future when you’re about to start lecturing others from your pedestal for the sake of cultural imperialism, and instead just walk away before you run your mouth.Have a nice priviledged life.
THIS IS FUN
Notice the shotmyheart… person using a horrible word that they shouldn’t have typed as a way to bash progressive people for some reason?
Yea I dismissed that piece of shit
From probably the most well known left-wing progressive message boards on the web.
Fuck off you stupid racist fuck.
The only reason I know about this Addams Family news is because people are losing their shit on Twitter over Latinx.The best part is every non-Latino weighing in and reminding people how offensive or not offensive it is. I love me some patronizing Twitter fights.
I think the character is suppose to be Spanish nobility originally. But since I grew up mostly after Raul played him and with the Saturday morning cartoon (which I think styled his mannerisms after Raul’s version). I definitely expected a Latino actor or style.
Paragraph 1: I assumed so too. Maybe Gomez’s mom is Latina and his dad is Anglo which is why he’s got a Spanish/English name.
Paragraph 2: They could at least pronounce it “latin-eck-ees”.
Well, I’d assume there was some Latin ancestry to have the name “Gomez”, but Addams is a pretty WASPy surname, so maybe only on his mother’s side?
Yea to be specific I also assumed mixed ancestry.
Most of the identity of the Addams were codified by the 1960s TV series, which established that Gomez was Castilian (ergo Spanish).
BTW, not sure what the editorial policies are over there, but the term “Latinx” drives literally every Latino I know personally up the wall.You might want to check who wrote this article.I’m a white guy and so I’ve got no say in the matter. FWIW (which, again, is not much), I agree with your point. But the author even used the words “us Latinxs” to make it clear where she stands.
I noticed who wrote the article. That’s why I asked about editorial policies. It could be driving her bonkers.
Seems like she uses it quite frequently on Twitter, so I guess we can put that little conspiracy theory to rest. But I’m sure she appreciates your concern for her.https://twitter.com/search?lang=en&q=latinx%20(from%3Atatianatenreyro)&src=typed_query
So glad you stalked her to debunk my “conspiracy theory”.
Her public Twitter account is linked from the article. But sure. I’m a stalker.
And I asked a pretty simple, obvious question – does the term make her skin crawl like literally every Latino I know in real life, including myself and my family – and that somehow made me a conspiracy-peddling concern troll. Act like an asshole, get treated like an asshole. See how that works?
Presuming that someone is using a term that makes their skin crawl based on some secret editorial mandate IS acting like an asshole. You can’t claim that it was a legitimate question and not an unsupported assumption and then call me an asshole for answering the question for you. I mean, you can and you just did. But it’s incredibly diningenuous.
You don’t think the site has an editorial handbook or some kind of policies for how it refers to certain people, nationalities, countries, and so on? Almost every news entity has such a thing, or at least ties their writers to specific styles (AP Style, Chicago Style, and so forth). Forgive me, I thought you were being a a garden variety asshole. Seem like this is more of a Dunning-Kruger situation.
Right… I’m the stupid one. Not the guy who can’t seem to understand that many people who are not male don’t like being referred to with a masculine pronoun simply because it’s traditionally been the default. A guy who gets all bent out of shape over an attempt to use inclusive language and assumes based on nothing but anecdotal evidence that it’s some kind of Anglo conspiracy to ruin Spanish. Clearly you’re the smart one here. Thanks for setting me straight. Yes, I’d imagine that the AV Club does have some kind of style guide. However, I’m extremely dubious of the idea that they’d force a Latinx woman to refer to herself with a term that “makes her skin crawl” in the name of adherence to that style guide. And in fact, it turns out that they didn’t. She uses that term of her own free will. If your initial comment was in good faith and not you being patronizing and assuming the worst of others, then you would have given up this asinine quest to shame others for using gender inclusive language hours ago.
I came on here explaining why the term has colonialist overtones and is downright offensive to the vast majority of native Spanish speakers. And you’ve spent several hundred increasingly shrill words hysterically explaining Spanish grammar to a native Spanish speaker, that the Spanish language is “shitty”, and that Spanish needs to be updated to fit your specific definition of enlightenment. Yea I feel pretty good about who’s who here.
I’m not a native Spanish speaker, but I would tend to agree with you that ‘Latinx’ is an inelegant solution to a complex problem (I’ve always wondered myself why ‘Latine’ wouldn’t be better as well).
However, a better example than ‘womxn’ to use, here, would be any profession or word that uses -er or -or to encompass all genders. The whole reason we have ‘-ress’ suffixes, in English, is because the -er/-or forms were originally gendered male: something that derives from Latin. For instance, the Latin word for hunter ‘venator’, had a female form ‘venatrix.’ Likewise ‘doctor’ – from where we get the English word – also had a female form, ‘doctrix’, which would (I imagine) be ‘doctress’ in English, if we’d bothered to carry over the gender distinction there.It’s not quite the same thing since English isn’t so heavily gendered as Romance languages, and because it’s a characteristic that’s borrowed from those languages. But it’s also a case where we’ve grown thoroughly comfortable using the masculine form to apply to all genders, and isn’t fundamentally different from the problem of the Spanish ‘o’ ending.
If that’s what you “came here to explain,” you’ve done a shitty job at it. All you’ve done is tell everyone repeatedly how people using inclusive language makes you feel sad inside and project that onto every other Spanish-speaker on the planet, including the person using the term in this very article. What you can’t seem to get through your thick skull is that it’s not about “correcting” Spanish or colonializing anything. It’s about trying to recognize diverse groups that haven’t had a voice for essentially all of human history in any language. Not everything is about you, you regressive manbaby.
Well, 40-plus people like my explanation just fine, and you’re the only person who saw fit to personally attack me, so yea, I suppose everything isn’t about me. Seems it’s about you.
You mean other people also care more about grammar rules and maintaining the status quo than being inclusive and listening to underrepresented groups like trans people? Shocker. You’re the one who thinks you’re the arbiter of what words other people can and can’t use. You’re the one who thinks you own the Spanish language. All I’ve said from the beginning is that it’s not an attack on you and it’s silly to take it that way. You don’t have to like the word. You don’t have to use the word. But when you make a huge deal about someone using inclusive language, you’re an asshole.
You did attack me, Paul. I’ve been engaging civilly with everyone else on here — including you — until you suggested a perfectly normal, acceptable question that I posited (is the term’s usage in this case tied to a style guide) was me brewing conspiracy theories and being disingenuous. And you continue to wave away the notion that what a group of people calls itself, and is known as, is important. The “vast majority”, as I specifically said, not all as you continue to infer I said. When I read about my people in the press and writers are using a term that I and the vast majority of Latinos actively dislike, for the myriad reasons I’ve already cited – none of which have to do with marginalizing the LGBTQ community – where is my inclusion? Where is our inclusion? I’ve also said terms like Latine are acceptable and good old Latin is more than acceptable. Yet you persist on trying to frame me — and every other Spanish speaker I know IRL — as bigoted. And this entire exchange you’ve cherry picked what you’ve responded to (do you use womyn/womxn, in your everyday communication, yes or no?). We could keep this up for a few more days if you like. I can see the satisfaction of getting the last word is very important to you, and I’m frankly kind of motivated to deny you that. Or perhaps you’d like to apologize. Though any sense you’d approach any continued discussion in good faith is out the window.
You know what? I will admit that you are right on one thing. While I think that you are just as much to blame for that as I am, this conversation has gotten unnecessarily rude and hateful. There’s no point in arguing over who is more stupid or the bigger asshole. I apologize for my part in escalating things. I actually planned to cool things down in my next reply regardless and I’m glad to see that you came to the same decision.The quote function isn’t working, but in response to your claims that the vast majority of Spanish-speakers actively disliking the term, that’s not consistent with the polling that another commenter (one who’s on your side) posted earlier. Only 12% of Spanish-speakers polled said it actually bothers them. That’s my point, man. You’re assuming that you know how “the vast majority” of people feel about the issue when you don’t have any way of knowing that. But even if the numbers were different, as I’ve tried to point out in other comments, that’s normal. No one likes inclusive language when it’s first introduced. There’s always resistance to change. That goes for everyone, including English-speakers. I understand your objections. I really do. But you haven’t offered that same understanding back. The reason it feels bigoted is because rather than saying, “I just don’t like that term and prefer these alternatives” from the beginning, you’ve tried to make the case that everyone should just use “Latino,” and refused to accept that people have valid reasons for not preferring it and that those reasons aren’t “We are all white people who think we’re better and smarter than Latin people and are going to fix their mistakes.” It’s not about English or Spanish or any individual language. It’s about redressing wrongs in all languages. You clearly understand that on some level. But rather than giving people the benefit of the doubt that they have everyone’s best interest at heart and they’re not doing this without involvement from Latin people, you’ve assumed the absolute worst. Maybe Latinx will never gain acceptance. Or maybe it will and you’ll be the old man yelling at clouds while your kids and grandkids use it. I honestly, truly don’t care one way or the other. No, I don’t use “womxn,” for the reasons I mentioned in another comment that I won’t get into again. I don’t even use “Latinx” all the time. I have used it, but I’ve also used other words and I don’t feel really strongly about any of them. I get that you have more invested as a native Spanish-speaker, but I really don’t get why you can’t just say, “I don’t like it, but I’m a cis guy so it’s not for me. I’ll keep using the words I prefer and others can do the same.” Is that really such a crazy thing to suggest?
I appreciate the apology. I appreciate the de-escalation. I am sorry I got angry, also. When you have been called a “spic” and a “sand n*gger” to your face (I’m half Middle Eastern as well), and are a first generation American who doesn’t really seem to fit in any world fully, labels and identity can have charged meaning.If an LGBTQ Latino wants to us “Latinx” to refer to themselves, or if that’s the term the LGBTQ Latino community prefers for itself as a subset of the broader Latino community, I am fine with that. But when it is applied more widely, to all Latinos, it makes me feel like my culture is being “corrected” by outsiders, or at least by a tiny margin of my own community that does not speak for me. It would be like if the New York Times suddenly decided to start using “Negros” because a small but influential group of Black academics decided that was somehow more inclusive to refer to all Black Americans. I don’t really have much else to say. I’m going to continue to not use “Latinx” unless there’s a specific situation/case for it, like it become the label for the LGBTQ Latino community, and that’s going to piss some people off. You’re going to to continue to use “Latinx”, which is also going to piss some people off. We’re both coming at this with good intent and strong moral perspective. I’ve read your comments on numerous occasions (you have a very memorable handle) and find myself in agreement with 99% of what you typically have to see. I think that’s also why I felt so personally aggrieved when it felt like you were attacking me. Thanks for being able to dial things back, and be an adult.
I can’t like your comment because Kinja is being stupid, but thanks. I have a minor quibble still, but I’ll let it go. Glad we could come to a reasonable “agree to disagree” point. Enjoy the rest of your Wednesday.
Apparently you stalked her?
I’m honestly curious about that, as a good friend of mine who’s Mexican hates it too (yes, I asked him about it once). Is “Latinx” something that originated within the Latin community? Or is it just some sort of under-the-radar cultural imperialism created by white progressive academic types? Also, if the aim is to make a gendered language gender neutral, why not just go with “Latin”? That sounds significantly less silly.
I actually like Latin, and think that’s fine, and thought people had been using that. As for why – while pinpointing exactly how/where/who coined it is impossible at this point, it is improbable that it originated from within the community, certainly not within a community of predominately Spanish speaking native speakers. If you scroll down you probably already read my explanation, but copy/pasting myself here:It is an invention of the English language, meant to “fix” the Spanish language. In Spanish, we already have grammar rules for groups of unknown gender as well as mixed gender. So applying an English language mindset to the Spanish language – and then butchering that language with clumsy and unpronounceable additions, imported from English – is incredibly offensive to me as a native speaker.I get it comes from a place of good intent and inclusion. But it also comes from a place of presumption, and superiority, and imperialism.If people absolutely cannot wrap their mind around the reality that Spanish grammar already exists to cover all gender types – male, female, mixed, unknown, and other – then the best alternative I’ve seen being used is “Latine”, which is far less grating on the ears than “Latinx” and, more importantly, was invented by Spanish language speakers.
Sorry, hadn’t seen your other post. Yeah, “Latine” seems like a much better choice than either, given that it was created by actual Spanish speakers, it’s based on Spanish spelling rules and it’s pronounceable in Spanish…
‘Latin’ makes the most sense when writing in English and especially when used as an adjective like in “a half-Latinx family” from the article (because the noun isn’t gendered in English anyway).
‘Latinx’ really only seems to make sense when referring to individuals like the line “us Latinxs are finally getting the Latina Wednesday we deserve” (though there’s a separate grammar problem there: ‘us’ is not a subject pronoun).
About the Latinx? Right? I’ve never heard any person of Latin descent say they like it. And I know a lot.
I know a lot too and it’s mostly popular with younger folk and with those in the LGBTQ+ community, especially those who are gender queer or gender fluid. It’s not some anglo conspiracy, as the OP asserts, it’s an attempt for a marginalized community to be heard and recognized. There’s a reason the term broke into the mainstream after the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. It’s how members of that community referred to themselves. As others have said, you don’t have to use it if you don’t want to, but if someone from that community tells me that’s their preferred term, as the author of this article does, then I respect that.
I’m wondering if it’s a generational thing.I’m a white guy married into a family three generations removed from emigrating to the US. There’s a very pronounced distaste for “latinx” amongst the elders yet the few under-25s I talk to occasionally use it. One younger daughter of a friend said they use it online, but it’s not something you say (for her, at least).I ran into it on (of all places) the weird Gabriel Iglesias sitcom my wife loves. Even that episode passionately making a case for it left me with “Well, fine, kids love it, what does it hurt me” and not much else. It’s not like I have a lot of occasions to say “Those latinx folk over there” – it’s “Hey, George!” or “Wow, Aunt Lena”.
It’s both generational and also more used within the US diaspora (I have yet to see this used outside of United States). Folks I know from Latin America don’t use it because they see it as an imperialist imposition due to it being rooted in the US (although it was originated by Spanish speakers). And as stated before based on polls it is very rarely used (like 3% of the population would use it) Language changes all the time but personally I just find the term to be incongruent with Spanish language. I ‘d prefer using “Latine” and that seems to be picking up steam.
It’s both generational and also geographical. While it is used within the US diaspora I have yet to see this used outside of United States. I was born in Puerto Rico and folks I know from Latin America don’t use it because they see it as an imperialist imposition due to it being rooted in the US (although it was originated by Spanish speakers). And as stated before based on polls it is very rarely used (like 3% of the population would use it)Language changes all the time but personally as a Spanish speaker I just find the term to be incongruent with Spanish language. I ‘d prefer using “Latine” and that seems to be picking up steam.
You mean, Tatiana wasn’t … woke? How can that be?
She is also Latin American in background.
Please excuse me if this is a stupid question, but considering that we have Latino and Latina, don’t we also just have the word Latin? Wouldn’t that be both gender neutral and a word that actually exists and is pronounceable? Is there something I’m missing there? Asking honestly cause it seems so obvious to me that I assume I’m missing something just as obvious.
Not a stupid question, and I honestly think “Latin” is a totally fine term. It’s been used, and also seems like an obvious alternative to me as well.
The term “Latinx” is a solution in search of a problem, at the expense of an entire ethnicity’s right to self-identify.
I’m still not sure how it should be pronounced. Is it “Latin-ex?” or “La-tinks”
Isn’t “Latin” gender-neutral? Asking for a friend who is also me.
Like how no black people actually say “AAVE” outside of social media and sociology classes
“Latinx” is a term used in the US, a mostly English-speaking country where there are also a lot of people who speak Spanish, and where the term “Latin” is also used to describe people. If you live in a majority Spanish-speaking country, or a country where you don’t use the term “Latin” to describe anyone anyway (like I do), the term is going to be kind of meaningless.Quite frankly, I feel like “Latin” was sitting right there, but, hey, that’s language for you- it’s unpredictable and doesn’t follow rules, just common usage.
Latinx is an English-language solution to a problem that simply doesn’t exist in Spanish/Castilian. But then, the terms Latino and Latina themselves come with all sorts of baggage.
Oh yeah, she killed it on “You”. Should be perfect for that role. No doubt she can do the character justice. Hopefully the movie can, too. With his recent track record being what it is, it would be nice if Tim Burton could get one right again. We used to love him, didn’t we? And not without cause.
I used to get so excited to see Tim Burton attached to a project. I’m sad that doesn’t happen anymore.
His great former muse certainly hasn’t done him or his legacy any favors.
Maybe Danny Elfman will do the soundtrack…that would be radical
Jenna Ortega is great. Excited to see her in the new Scream, also.
She pulled off a rare feat, which is playing a precocious teenager as conceived by adult screenwriters who somehow didn’t annoy the living shit out of me. She was very good in the role.Also, it’s wild that her plotline involved becoming a target of sexual predation by a fictionalized version of Chris D’Elia, despite Chris D’Elia doing that literal thing in his actual life. Hope she was ok on set.
Christina Ricci for Morticia.
Aubrey Plaza! As much as I would love either Morticia seems taller than either of them. Although camera angles and boxes can work miracles.
You never see Morticia’s feet, you can put an actress in 6 inch heels if need be.
or, y’know, camera angles and whatnot
The Google image search I just did for “Mortica’s feet” would argue otherwise.
Quentin, is that you?
Ricci and Plaza in a Vincent Adultman setup. They switch top/bottom every scene.
Honestly, The Addams Family is such a nutbar family I could actually believe that a white man and a white woman could give birth to a Latina baby.
After what we were all okay with regarding the genetics of the Munsters…
Right? How did a Frankenstein father and a vampire mother have a human daughter? Come on, man.
Their son Eddie was a werewolf. Marilyn was their niece.
The explanation involves Punnett squares.
How did a Frankenstein father[Adjusts glasses] Well, actually, the father is Frankenstein’s monst—Check that. I just had a great idea for the gritty, family-drama reboot.
A frankenstein is made of human body parts. A vampire is a human that got bitten by a dracula. Any kids they have will be human. Eddie is a werewolf because they’re terrible parents and he got bit by the neighbor’s dog.
But what if Herman Munster is a frankenstein with a werewolf dong? If you allow for that possibility, the science checks out.
So long as Herman has at least one werewolf testicle it all checks out.
They do what they want to do, live how they want to live, play how they want to play, dance how they want to dance …. blah blah blah … the Adams family!
Did I get those lyrics right?
Ah, got close. apparently it’s kick and slap a friend? still haven’t heard the song in decades but those few lines earwormed my way into my consciousness.
https://addamsfamily.fandom.com/wiki/Addams_Groove
Then again, his name is Gomez and was played by Raul Julia.
If they get Adria Arjona to play Morticia my head just might explode.
me: sounds like fun casting! yay!also me: … Tim Burton? siiiiiigh
I want Tim Burton to bounce back. Maybe it’s my nostalgia but I still have an affinity for the guy even after all his recent duds. My long sigh is the “superpowered” angle the show is deciding to go with for Wednesday.
Tim Burton is number one on my list of people I used to like that need to go away forever.
And he can take Johnny Depp with him!
Never a Kevin Smith fan, eh?
I thought they both went away forever? Pretty sure they both said “let’s go out on a high note” after Sweeney Todd and then disappeared into the London fog.
Utter horseshit. Casting Julia didn’t turn the Addams into a Latinx family, they already were. Gomez is Castilian. Do some research. You think he was named Gomez because mom and dad Addams liked the way it sounds?
You think he was named Gomez because mom and dad Addams liked the way it sounds?
His brother was named Fester…but yes, I think they were Latinx
Fester was, in the series, Morticia’s uncle, not Gomez’s brother.
Fester is only his brother in the movies. Originally he was Morticia’s uncle, but later changed to her brother, then Gomez’s brother for the movies (I liked it better that they were not related, just good friends).
Gomez also has a couple of brothers that are only mentioned, Pancho and another Spanish name I can’t recall.Gomez’s Castilian heritage also plays into his swordplay and dancing style with Morticia.
I did always wonder about that.
He is named Gomez because Charles Addams was asked by the producer of the tv show to give the cartoon characters names .The used the Addams last mane because his cartoons were famous.
Yeah, before the TV show, they were all nameless; which makes it even more hysterical.
Has Tim Burton not been canceled for something or other?
Alice through the Looking Glass.
I mean, I’m a little surprised Lisa Marie doesn’t have any stories, but I guess not!
She seems a little old for Wednesday. The tv show she was 6 or so and maybe 12 in the movie. I guess they are going to age the kids a bit which is fine.
“What if [interesting child character], but instead of her being a child, you could imagine having sex with her?” Hey Hollywood, I have a pitch that’ll work for at least 5 shows and maybe 7 or 8 movies.
Whitewashing gendered Romance languages is not progressive, just FYI.
This is great news and I’m now interested in watching. She is terrific!
The pitch for the show seems like some hot garbage (it sounds like a twee Chilling Adventures of Sabrina with a side of Riverdale… so like CAoS from season 2 onwards), but that’s admittedly great casting.
The Addams family were of course known for thinking murder is “monstrous” and always trying to thwart it.
Think of them like the Necromongers in “Chronicles of Riddick”. No one should die before their due time.
I make it a point not to think about anything associated with Chronicles of Riddick.
Not even the beloved Dame Judi Dench?
I’m pretty sure the beloved Dame Judi Dench also makes it a point not to think about anything associated with Chronicles of Riddick.
If it doesn’t premiere on a Wednesday in October, somebody needs to be fired.
I’m shocked that Wednesday Addams would try to stop a killing spree. Have the creators of this series not seen the movies or the tv show or looked at the comics.
Clearly it’s a territory thing. Another killer’s killing spree interferes with the killing spree she already has going in her town.
I must say I never knew it was Juliá not Julia, which means I have mispronounced his name for decades now
Ah fuck they’re Sabrina-ing Wednesday Addams. The best we can hope for is that it starts off strong enough that you hate-watch the rest of it as it slowly slides away from any kind of coherence.God. Fuck you, Sabrina.
ok am i the only one that has noticed netflix pretty much won’t air anything unless its overwhelming gay or feminine. i get why, but fuck guys ease off a bit.
If only there was as word like, ohhhh LATIN that already has existed forever that’s fully-inclusive. I hate that x so much. Latinxs? C’mon.
“sleuthing, supernaturally infused mystery”Translation: Hey, it works for CW!
“us Latinxs are finally getting the Latina Wednesday we deserve” – what the hell are you talking about? Who says this kind of nonsense? Grow the fuck up.
Well. I guess everything is right with the world now. That was close.
…they cancel Sabrina to bring us…Sabrina…
Latinx is the “irregardless” of the 2020s. It’s dumb and unnecessary but it will get used enough that it will eventually make it into the English dictionary. And for those say “language evolves”, it certainly does. However, spanish is not like English, where you have several dictionary writing companies adding or deleting words based primarily on popularity. The Spanish Royal Academy is the official curator of the Spanish language. The academy explicitly rejected Latinx because it does not follow Spanish grammar rules. 98% of Spanish speakers said they prefer Latino/Latina. A reasonable person would simply default to the terminology that the Spanish speaking world nearly unanimously prefers and would reserve Latinx for when the specific person being referred to says it is his or her preferred description. I doubt any Spanish speakers would take issue with that. Happy to call someone what he or she specifically asks (it’s easy, I get emails every day where people list preferred pronouns on the signature block- i.e. “she/her/hers”, it would be easy to add “Latinx/Latina/Latino” to the list if that is preferred). However, if you the default term for the Latino community should be the Latino community. Also, Spanish words ending in “o” or “a” aren’t necessarily assigned as masculine or feminine just because of the last letter in the word. For example, la mano (the hand) or el problema (the problem). So the LGBTQAI community could simply choose to believe that Latino or Latina is feminine/masculine/both when referring to themselves and there would be no need to create a fictional word that doesn’t make any grammatical sense. Of course, that would mean the onus would be on this small community of individuals to change their mindset instead of on the hundreds of millions of Spanish speakers who don’t have an issue with the language as-is, and we can’t have that.
Now just gotta figure out what to do about Burton…
Aww, young Jane is all grown up. 🥲
All of this sounds great, except for the Tim Burton part. He hasn’t done anything good in over two decades.
Yes, yes, all well and good but what outlandish hat/wig combo will she wear?
is every fuc*ing show about a magic kid at some place with other magic kids? It’s so boring.
Canonically, Gomez Addams is of Spanish ancestry. And while I’m no authority about the complex inter-related nature of Hispanic and Latino identities (knowing that Spanish people are Hispanic but not Latino, and often identify/are identified as white but some times don’t/aren’t), I just wanted to chime in with that before anybody storm(front)s in complaining about how the Social Justice Snowflakes are ruining the Addams Family.
Moreover, the one thing that’s always been true of the Addams Family is that they’re loving, accepting and embrace differences and what makes them and others unique. Even, and especially, when straight-laced white suburban people get freaked out by it.
TL;DR: this rules.
Good for her, but the show sounds fucking boring.
Valente Rodriguez better be Uncle Fester or I will lose it!
Frack not another school story. How about making something NOT set in a magical school?