"So imagine my dismay to open the New York Times app on my Android this morning to find an article in the science section containing the following misinformation: “Researchers have identified gene mutations that may explain why Latinos are almost twice as likely to develop Type 2 Diabetes as Caucasians and African-Americans. And in a twist, the quirk can be traced to Neaderthals.” Because this appeared in the NY Times, NPR naturally copied the story as though it were true. Dozens of other publications and news outlets followed suit.
This is pure idiocy.
There are many “caucasians” and “African-Americans” who ARE LATINOS; these groups are not distinct nor are they mutually exclusive. The high rates of diabetes seen among the populations the NY Times considers “Latino” in the United States are most likely linked to those Latinos with Native American ancestry, therefore making the genetic link, if it does in fact exist, a Native American one, not a “Latino” one. (Similarly high rates of Type 2 Diabetes are well-documented among non-Latino Native Americans as well.)
There is no Latino “race” and whenever reputable news organizations such as the NY Times print this lie it serves to further confound an already confused American public by conflating several categories that are not, in fact, analogous.”
What in entire the fresh hell is so hard to understand about this?
A Black person can be “Latino”. An Asian person can be “Latino.” A White person can be “Latino.” An Arab person can be “Latino.”
People of any and all ancestries can be “Latino.”
ANYBODY can be “Latino.”
"LATINO" IS AN ETHNICITY. A U.S. manufactured one anyways but that’s a whole ‘nother discussion. *gets up and leaves*—->
Cool. This is so interesting. I mean, why are the Spanish considered white and the Mexican Latinos? Also…why are Brazilians pegged as Latin when, if you do your research, they have very similar mixes as the “white” Americans? Are the French even considered Latino at all?