on checking the "other" box

Are Brazilians latinos? I say we aren’t. Let’s start with the evolution of ethnic nomenclature. It used to be that Brazilians might feel obligated to check the “Hispanic” box. Maybe some kind of pan-American guilt or a sense of Latin American camaraderie might impel us to do so. Except, obviously, we don’t speak Spanish. Nor are we of Spanish descent. (And what about Guyana, Surinam, and French Guyana?? Brazil isn't the only country in South American that doesn't speak Spanish!)

But the bigger problem with “Hispanic” – as a general term – is that it is used to describe central and South American people who are probably more likely to be predominantly of indigenous ancestry as opposed to be European. I mean here’s an Argentine (the odious Cannigia) who can be described as “Hispanic”:






















Definitely of European descent, right? And here’s someone who might also be described as Hispanic – Evo Morales, president of Bolivia.





What do Morales and Cannigia have in common? Basically, these two guys share a language, and probably nothing else. So, “Hispanic” doesn’t describe ethnicity, it just describes the language you speak. Why should it not include Europeans who speak Spanish, then?

Beyond this definitional issue, it’s a bit irksome that there is a distinction between indigenous Americans and Americans of European descent – but that it only applies in the U.S. Once you're in Mexico or below, only language matters, I guess.

The personal issue I had with “Hispanic” was also that, even if I overlooked all of these problems, there would still be the fact that Brazilians were specifically excluded from the definition by national societies, especially for purposes of scholarships and other kinds of recognition. I will absolutely not have my accomplishments in any way counted toward a demographic group that has excluded me from any of the benefits available to its other members. (Would I capitulate if I could get something out of it? I don't think so. But I would be more happy to get a bit sloppy and sing, 'Who am I / to blow against the wind?')

“Hispanic” then became “Latino,” presumably to make the concept a bit more inclusive – and on the whole, “Latino” is probably more correct than “Hispanic.” But doesn’t it still suffer from a similar language problem? It means that you speak a language derived from Latin? Wouldn’t Italians and the French then also be “latino”? I can get behind Latin American – in fact, I can get behind American, because before the word was co-opted to mean a U.S. American (years before Miss Teen South Carolina immortalized the phrase) it meant, in general terms, both North and South America.

And again, even if I were predisposed to overlook these issues, there’s still the fact that, again, Brazilians are specifically excluded from the definition.

So, don’t hate the Doobie Brothers, and don’t hate Rita Lee. I'm not doing this because I'm finnicky - I'm doing it because we’re all Americans - U.S. American or other-American. Some of us like black beans, and some of us are Canadian, which is also a kind of American. Some of us play football with our feet, and some of us play a game of football that rarely involves touching a ball with one’s feet. No worries. Let’s be all European Union about this and just feel groovy about our shared American-ness, and let’s all start checking the “other” box as soon as possible, because in some way, I guarantee, you are not someone else’s idea of what makes an American.