re: #re: #298 Charles

That’s right — I don’t believe there is such a thing as “white heritage.” That’s a racist position. You can talk about “Irish heritage” or “German heritage,” but once you start talking about “white heritage,” you’re in Stormfront territory.

267 Charles

I don’t think the term “white heritage” is the equivalent of “Latina heritage.” One is related to skin color — the other is cultural.

I agree with the first statement but disagree with the second. It’s a subtle difference I have personally experienced as a non-native English speaker: It’s hard for me to discern slight accents in the English (for example, how spoken Canadian English differs from standard American English) or how a mid-western accent differs from a California accent. I see only the similarities, whereas people steeped in an English speaking environment see the differences. Likewise, most east-Asian faces look very similar to me, though I’ve had Asian friends at university confess the same about European faces. We tend to perceive whole categories of qualities, visual, auditory, and sometimes cultural, in broad brushes if we are not familiar with them.

But just as there is no “white heritage” outside of the fever-swamps of Stormfront or other WN organizations, there should be no “Latino heritage,” strictly speaking, outside the rhetoric of groups such as La Raza.

There is Mexican heritage, Puerto Rican heritage, Honduran heritage, and so on, but I don’t think “Latino heritage” is an appropriate term — perhaps those not from Spanish speaking countries/cultures can naively employ it, as an example of painting the Other in broad-strokes — but it seems odd to me that for someone of Spanish speaking background to speak of “Latino heritage,” — just as inappropriate as the use of “white heritage” by someone of European descent.

I’m trying to make a fine point here, but I hope people catch my drift.