La Virgen de Guadalupe, Virgin Mary

News-Journal.com writer, Beecher Threatt, attempts to explain the myriad of descriptions we go by.  Chicano, , whatever.  I was surprised that it was actually quite accurate, usually this kind of mierda turns out to be … well…. mierda…

From News-Journal.com:

“QUESTION: What are the distinctions among the terms , , and Chicano? Is one preferable and why?

ANSWER: Each term carries a different connotation. Which one is preferable depends on the circumstances in which it is used and the persons to whom it refers. “” has the most straight- forward definition: a citizen of the country of . American citizens are not , but “-American” is acceptable if it refers to a descendant of citizens, but not someone with Spanish heritage. ,” used historically in reference to residents of Spain or Portugal, became widely used in the United States in 1980. The Census Bureau undercounted people of Latin American extraction in 1970, so it attempted to correct that in 1980 by including as a category. It was a catch-all term that included such diverse groups as immigrant Puerto Ricans, refugees, migrant workers and descendants of Spanish settlers in the Southwest. Its modern usage on government forms is a far cry from its historical, cultural origin. “Hispano” is preferred by descendants of Spanish settlers in New .

…”Chicano” has a political connotation. In the early 1900s, it referred to migrant workers in California and refugees from ’s revolution, with a discriminatory, negative intent. In the 1940s, young people living in big city barrios took the name as a source of pride, showing their rebellious side. Chicano became more respectable to middle-class -Americans when it became a political appellation in the 1960s. Chicano may be a combination of Chihuahuan and , or it may have derived from workers attempting to Americanize the word “” in their speech.”

Different stories behind ethnic terms



Tags: , , , , , , ,