Body Language: How Nicknames Objectify Minority Women And Why I Don’t Care “How You Meant It”
24 April 2008, 4:30 PM. By Alex Alvarez
Associate Editor Alex Alvarez takes a look at how nicknames among minorities work to keep a good gordita down and why you, shorty, shouldn’t take it anymore.
Words, in and of themselves, are without power. Their potency comes from the relationship between the speaker and the listener. As any woman who has walked by a construction site will tell you, “Hello beautiful” is different coming from a strange man whispering in your ear than from your mother. It’s through these relationships that words can becomes tools, bridges, weapons or any other sort of melodramatic metaphor you want to use. If relationships are defined by power –who has it, who doesn’t, who wants it and who is in the position to bestow it–language, then, is a means of both establishing power in relationships and also of demolishing and subverting it. A “thanks, beautiful” aimed right back at a strange man is surprisingly effective.
While writing my response a few weeks ago to an article in “San Francisco Weekly” that “roughly” and incorrectly translates the Spanish word “negro” to the English word “nigger,” I realized most of the Guanabee readership already understands the nuances that appear in, yes derogatory, but complicated Spanish-language labels. And the same could be said for other ethnic minorities, (or at least the pockets of them that are represented in popular culture and media), who use certain pet names and phrases wrought with prejudice, but excuse them with a flippant, “This is how we are. And, besides, we don’t mean any harm by it.”
But “this is how we are” is not an excuse. Why? Well. It’s not how I am. So it’s not how we are. Adaptation is possible. It just takes effort and exposure to different ways of thinking, even if I have to drill it into you during family holiday get-togethers. It is not enough for us to merely explain — and thus, on some level, excuse — the differences between Anglo and Latino, or Black and White, or any other minority versus majority as they relate to potentially hateful speech. Instead, let’s take a look at why these differences exist and what, exactly, they result in accomplishing, based on history and cultural context. What does a language say about the people who speak it? And vice-versa? Let’s find out! Hokay? Hokay.
But, um, first: A preface of sorts. It’s important I make it known that I don’t feel I’m qualified to write about slang and language as it pertains to anyone who is not Latino or Anglo. As I alluded to above, anything I would have to say about the experience of any other group would be merely observational and the result of a sort of clinical detachment. It’s not my experience. I can’t offer anything except, “Well, from what I observe… this seems to mean this. And isn’t that interesting?” But it is interesting. And it is important to discuss these observations. So, that said, do let’s continue:
Such A Colorful People, No?: Nicknames Based On Appearance
Many terms of endearment in Spanish are based on appearance. “Cute” little nicknames like morenita, negrita and güerita abound. The diminutive “ita,” as it’s used here, translates to “little,” therefore effectively rendering it’s object to be both small and, presumbably, a possession belonging to the speaker.
I’m specifically using the feminine because it’s more common. You do hear women refer to sons and lovers (Interesting, that.) as their “negrito lindo” or whatever, but they don’t usually make a habit of shouting these out from their lawn chairs at strangers. At the more overtly sexualized end of this particular spectrum, there are adjectives like “thick,” often used in the Latino-American and/or Black communities to describe a woman’s body admiringly, while simultaneously working to keep her objectified and, thus, manageable. By reducing a woman to parts, she is made to be a thing rather than a person. She is her sex and her body. And not much else. Of course, it is important to note that such nicknames are rarely ever explicitly used as the result of some sort of calculating thought process; the most damaging aspect of such nicknames are the fact that they have been so deeply entrenched in common vernacular that they have become largely unremarkable. However, with the prevalence of stereotypically White, upper-middle class families and customs depicted in popular culture and the melding of ethnic and racial groups in neighborhoods, schools and the workplace, many minority women who would otherwise have been raised in a very insular culture are exposed to different relationships between, say, bodies and language. And vice-versa. More and more Anglo women are exposed to the idea that “thick” is a compliment and allows women to break free from the slim body associated with high fashion, high culture and exclusivity. In reality, this is merely trading one set of handcuffs for another. In the end, regardless of the intent, it all adds up to misogyny and using language as a way of demonstrating superiority over the female body. Case in point: This helpful guide to defining “thickness.” [NSFW]
“Gordo/a,” “gordito/a,” “flaco/a” and “flaquito/a” are also quite common. Quite literally, they mean “(little) fatty” or “(little) skinny.” Take the Univision TV series “El Gordo y La Flaca,” (see figure below) starring Raul de Molina and Lily Estefan. It would be odd, I think, for English-speaking, Anglo audiences to wrap their heads around a show in which the hosts were referred to exclusively by their bodies. It does seem, cultural difference aside, like a less professional title than, say, “”The Today Show” or “Live with Regis and Kelly.” On a personal note, I cannot tell you how much I wished my parents would have called me “sweetie” or “pumpkin” instead of “my little fatty.” Kinda stings when you’re going through puberty. To have complained about this, of course, would make me seem like an “acomplejada,” or like I had a complex about my weight and appearance. Which would have been pretty much exactly on the money. Growing up, I had always noted the difference between my family’s lack of barriers and delineations when it came to discussing bodies, particularly women’s, and the unspoken barriers among Anglo families on TV. And perhaps the most frustrating aspect of all this is that my family member didn’t mean anything by it. They weren’t actively try to make me aware of my body. They loved their gordita, after all. But, growing up in an increasingly multi-cultural world, I was exposed to different ethnicities’ relationships to their and others’ bodies. And I would have really preferred that verbal distance between my body and the world around it. Acomplejada as that makes me.
Such physically-conscious nicknames reduce the object to nothing but a body and, while innocuous to some, they are wrought with (somewhat) unspoken criticism, even if only in the sense that it makes one aware of their weight and form each and every time one stops to think about their nickname. Particularly for females.
Fine-Ass Females And Who’s To Blame
Speaking of which: Have you noticed that there seems to be an inordinate amount of men, especially young Black and/or Latino men, who use “female” as their default term for a woman? Why use such a strangely formal-sounding moniker? Especially in a casual setting like, say, a Burger King parking lot where all you want to do is go home, eat some French fries and not have to ponder why some people believe shouting what a “fine-ass female” you are is a compliment. In this context, the use of “female” is used to verbally exacerbate the difference between the speaker and the object. “Female” takes on a more clinical tone, as with some object of interest that is being looked at and studied. Appropriate, then, that such a phrase would be deemed fit to murmur into a stranger’s ear, as if she were nothing but a curious vessel for one’s study and enjoyment.
In talking about this with Cindy, she mentioned her observation that you don’t find “female” used in older TV programming or song lyrics, but that it seemed to slip into popular use with the rise of certain genres of rap. Which would seem to make sense. It’s almost a cliché at this point to say that certain types of rap treat women like nothing but money-hungry and a sum of easily-accessible holes. But hearing the same criticism like a broken record does not, again, excuse the language and imagery used in these genres. But, point is: We know it’s there. The question, then, is why? What systems are in place that keep this degradation going, despite this knowledge? In “Misogyny, gangsta rap, and The Piano” bell hooks places the blame not on the music industry or musicians, but on dominant culture:
“The sexist, misogynist, patriarchal ways of thinking and behaving that are glorified in gangsta rap are a reflection of the prevailing values in our society, values created and sustained by white supremacist capitalist patriarchy. As the crudest and most brutal expression of sexism, misogynistic attitudes tend to be portrayed by the dominant culture as an expression of male deviance. In reality they are part of a sexist continuum, necessary for the maintenance of patriarchal social order. While patriarchy and sexism continue to be the political and cultural norm in our society, feminist movement has created a climate where crude expressions of male domination are called into question, especially if they are made by men in power. It is useful to think of misogyny as a field that must be labored in and maintained both to sustain patriarchy but also to serve as an ideological anti-feminist backlash. And what better group to labor on this “plantation” than young black men.”
She continues by saying that this does not lift the blame from young, Black men most often associated with gangsta rap, but that making it simply a “Black male thing” is neglecting the larger picture in favor of pointing fingers at an easily identifiable - and socially acceptable - scapegoat.
Which goes back to my main point in this feature: Those in power use language as a means of ensuring that those without it know it. Take the name “morenita,” for instance. It refers to a dark-skinned girl. Dark skin is not safe from being exoticized in Latino culture, and connotes a certain level of eroticism and sexual availability that is also experienced in Anglo and mainstream culture. As such, the term is both a positive in that it is asserting a level of attractiveness and desirability, and a negative, not only because it reduces its object, but because it is also entangled in the belief that to be darker is to belong to a mysterious and forbidden lower class and lower social and economic stratum. Even lighter-skinned poor people who work outdoors are exposed to the sun and are therefore tanner than those who get to sit inside playing cards and eating pastry crafted of guava and tears.
Sexy Morenitas And Güeritas Lindas: Why Aren’t You Pissed Off Yet?
There is also the issue of “reclaiming” derogatory terms. What troubles me is that a lot of what I observe among minority women who define themselves by using “morenita” or “caramel delight” or some such is that, well. I’m fairly sure it’s not usually the result of a thoughtful exploration of race and sexism. I think it’s the result of women either not being exposed to or not being interested in discussions on racism, xenophobia and sexism. At least, that’s what a sparkling, animated .gif on a MySpace page says to me. I see a lot of complacency among Latina and/or Black women, with a variety of factors playing into keeping them that way. Glamorization of the “video vixen” culture, lack of resources promoting feminism and equality among minority women, family, machismo… but it all, ultimately, comes down to language. If we are who we say we are, but who we say we are comes as a result of what we’re called, then well, it’s a difficult system to break out of. I admit I’m saddened that we’re not more saddened. And I’m enraged that we’re not more enraged.
The fact is, Spanish, as with any language, is colored by many factors about which one can learn, yet not fully understand unless one grows up with these factors as “an insider.” Factors like, say, race relations among Hispanics, which is further complicated by the different experiences with colonialism and slavery found among Latin American countries and Spain. Class differences, linked with race relations, are also reflected in language and change from place to place. Machismo, too, colors the “language of romance” with undercurrents of misogyny. Spanish is a language that contains many slurs and derogatory terms, both overt and subtle, that aim to keep those with less power down. But the fault is not squarely on the Spanish-speaking and/or Latino community. This extends to all groups that are disenfranchised or minorities. At some point, historical and cultural contexts cannot be used to excuse self-inflicted harm and misogyny, racism, xenophobia and homophobia within groups. The Black community, both Hispanic and not, is subject to the same “assault by language.” It’s a phenomenon that exists within these groups, but whose origins have a long and complicated history which, ultimately, comes down to the use of language as a means of oppression, implemented by those in power - more often that not, the White patriarchy.
The notion of homogeneous, racialized groups can be problematic and a vehicle to keep certain people separate and apart, and often less than, the majority. But this idea can also work to create powerful, organized groups of people with the common goal of equality and a better quality of life for themselves and for one another. Groups are necessary because there is strength in numbers. But to define these groups by their “non-whiteness” or to discourage and weaken these groups from the inside by ostracizing those who do not personally feel inclined to limit or define aspects of themselves to adhere to some fabricated list of what, say, a Latino should or should not be is ultimately damaging if one’s ultimate goal is respect and equality.
Now, we used to attempt to maintain some semblance of cultural relativity, but, seriously? Fuck it. Just because something has been around long enough to be considered a cultural institution, doesn’t make it exempt from criticism, like traditional gender roles, or racist cartoons or toe rings. Or Florida. It’s important to question norms that, whether or not people consider it intentional, work to hurt and demean people. The language we use influences the way we process and express ideas, but it also has an impact on how we mold the thinking of newer generations. The argument “Oh come on! We do it out of love! It’s harmless” is just not viable when people are harmed. It’s not enough to “think before you speak.” You have to get others to think, too.
(20) 
Post Your Comment
Did you know you can now share a link, image or video?
Click to submit your own notas.
I think the use of “female” is a crossover from military culture. When I joined the AF in the early ’80’s, it was impressed on us when referring to the opposite sex that we use the terms “male” and “female” to avoid any sexually discriminative terms like “boy”, “girl” or even “man” or “woman”, which can be used in a put down sort of way. With the increase in military vets over the years, I think the term just fell into the civilian lexicon in certain American cultures. That’s how I first noticed the use of “female” as a throw back to my old military days…
blah… blah… blah… really couldn’t read the the whole thing…. I’m at work you know!
But in the spirit of Reclamation: I’m keeping morena & preita. Why? ‘Cause I’m sport the San Tropez tan in the middle of winter while living in a cave! Because it reminds me of all the women in my family. Because it IS what sets me apart.
-Do i have issues with integrating into main-stream culture and feeling accepted because my parents called me a cute pet name?
-Do I feel the stigma of being the “other” & not having a position of control so that some jackass can make me feel less-than because he called me a name?
-Does it turn me less on when my man calls me morenita?
FUCK NO.
And that is how you reclaim your own identity. With a simple phrase of empowerment directed at all the know-it-alls who think they know you.
Feel better?
@ lola: This feature, and all features posted on Guanabee, are meant to foster discussion. So, in that spirit, let’s discuss. And if Lola somehow misses my response or chooses not to reply to it, maybe someone else can feel free to give their take on the points she brought up.
I find it difficult to take your comment too seriously since you admitted to not reading the full piece. It’s both our loss, really, because you can’t come into this discussion fully prepared and I might be missing out on more that you might have had to say had you read this in its entirety.
I get the sense that you felt personally offended by my critique of women who use what is, in my firm opinion, racist and misogynist language to describe themselves. I’m wondering whether you evaluated your need to be defensive and if, maybe, it was because this critique hit a nerve with you.
And, if not… how can I get to you? What would it take for me to convince you to, if not agree with me, at least take what I say seriously and give it some thought?
@ Alex. Not everyone can agree with you. And I think this piece seems a bit ranty and hard to follow.
What really pisses me off is women in videos (now all over the place and not just rap) who are willing to shake all they’ve got. Or that everyone on tv, black, white, hispanic and asian has to be under a size 4, and anything bigger is considered “plus”. That being the case, a woman in the United States cannot be taken seriously if she is “plus” or different (not that pretty, disabled, can’t dress worth her life) unless she diffuses that bit of difference somehow, either as a tagline or by the press and media having to show how “she is still healthy despite her size.”
It is also in my opinion that sexiness in Latin America varies a lot more than in the United States, and the terms “negra” “morena” “gorda” “flaca” that you are trying to say are negative, help with that diversity. –Mi negra. –mi flaca. –mi gorda. . .do those sound misogynistic. Because you can easily hear –mi negro. –mi flaco. –mi gordo.
This is my opinion too. Black and hispanic populations tend to be more forgiving of others and their own lack of conformity. So you’re not skinny. So you’re short. So you have a third nipple.
It’s definitely not PC though. :-)
@ laura: I understand that not everyone can and will agree with me. But this is no reason to stop engaging people about these issues. This is what’s important to me. And activism is about enacting change through others. What good would it do for me to harbor beliefs and keep them to myself?
I totally understand your point that sexiness is different in Latin America. I agree. But different, to me, does not equal more enlightened or more thoughtful. I don’t think its even about being PC. It’s about stepping back and allowing misogyny to flourish and excusing it under the guise of “Come on; we don’t mean anything by it” or “this is our culture,” as if culture is some monolithic, unyielding entity that exists beyond the reach of the people it impacts.
We live in a patriarchal society. Pet names given to women, simply by existing within the context of this society, breeds sexism. It’s unequal - and that’s unfair. Women’s bodies do not have the same role as men’s. A comment about a woman’s appearance simply does not hold the same impact and meaning as it does when directed towards a man.
Your comment about my feature sounding like a rant, to be honest, hurt. I tried to keep my tone balanced. But if my article came across as angry or extreme, it may be a reflection of the fact I think that in order to combat sexism and machismo, it’s necessary to take what might be viewed as extreme measures.
Yeah, it seemed ranty to me, too. I read about half of it and lost interested because it was all, “Wah, wah, wah, I’m being OPPPPRRRESSSEEDDD.”
I didn’t want to spend any more time on it because I don’t like people who wallow.
I guess if I had to nickname someone–a nickname usually being a convenient way to describe and thus discern someone with a common name (unless you just personally prefer nicknames to Christian names)–I wouldn’t automatically consider appearance-based nicknames to be offensive. If I knew two people named Mary, and one was bigger than the other, then I might find it easier to just discern them by calling one (either privately or to their face) Fat Mary and Thin Mary. Obviously nicknames are different in Spanish cultures (everyone in my family has random, extraneous nicknames that I don’t question) but, out of the context of culture, I would find appearance-based nicknames to be the easiest and most efficient. Of course, that’s just if you take a nickname objectively.
Again, I’m detached from my “Mexican” relatives (I might as well be white), but I wouldn’t care if someone preferred me to call them “Blacky” or “Whitey” or “Fatty” or “Caramel Delight”. I wouldn’t choose to go by a nickname like that. I’d rather use my full name, short name, middle name, last name, or a bar code. But I’m used to using nicknames for a purpose, not just as a tradition or because everyone else has one.
That said: Alex, never call me by my Spanish familial nickname. I don’t understand how it applies to me and I’ll never be comfortable with it.
Actually, I do not think this piece was rant-y or hard to follow - in fact I thought it was very well written and I followed it completely.
I think the points in this piece are valid. Labels are labels, and who wants to be labeled? I just want to be me.
However I will concede that some labels do initially feel counter-cultural. Gordita sounds kinda nice what with living with the culture’s goddamn hand on your throat about being skinnyskinnyskinny all the time. Through the lens of America’s “white is right” culture, “negrito lindo” practically feels like a sigh of relief.
But I’m not going to kid myself - it works both ways. Having my latino friends in h.s. calling me “white girl” from the sides of their mouths constantly still makes me grind my teeth. And this was from people who straightened and colored their hair yellow and wore actual FREAKING BLUE CONTACTS. WTF.
The point is that we do label people to compartmentalize them. And every term has its own history. I think Alex was right in that we need to constantly examine the words we use and not be complacent. The goal is to make the world a nicer place for ourselves and not let ourselves be marginalized by labels. Some might think that calling your bf “bitch/slut/whore/etc” is to reclaim those words, but those are words I choose to expel from my vocabulary because they don’t feel right in my gut. Because it’s bullshit. Because I know their history. Because it’s bullshit. So call yourself what you want, but be realistic about it.
So that’s my 2 cents. Oh btw - that website was ATROCIOUS.
@alex. I was referencing your response “Lola” where you did seem to want her agree with you. I think Lola did a good job at explaining herself, and you tore up her entire argument by implying this was something too “personal” for her; something she couldn’t step far away enough from to form an actual opinion. Or rather, come to the same conclusion as you.
My father’s family is apt to call him “flaco”, though he is far from it now, because he used to be “flaco” when he was younger. My mom has no pet name. My uncle’s wife calls him “gordo” because he has always been big. My cousin calls his friends “gueyes” (like buey, for ox, a castrated cow). Well. Does this mean there is also some kind of misandry in our culture?
And yes, Latino culture is different. And it might not be the most enlightened, or the one that treats women the best. But, few societies do. Yes, women’s bodies are different, with different functions, but both men and women have nicknames that describe some aspect. Saying nicknames should be different for women could be construed as sexist in itself. Terms like “negro/a”, “chino/a”, “flaco/a” are more about creating a nickname for someone than implying that there is something less about him/her. These “pet names” you refer to are a bit different than a business man calling his secretary “sweety” or “honey bun”.
I also think it these terms help diffuse prejudice, you acknowledge race, physical appearance, etc., without being hateful, or rejecting. Eres flaco. Eres gorda. Pero asi te quiero. Asi somos amigos.
I’m sorry saying “ranty” hurt, but you jumped from sexism, to racism, to latinos and blacks, to sociology without clear transitions or examples. IMO. Your piece lacked focus. Creo que te ahogas en un vaso de agua. Honestly, there are bigger and more powerful norms in Latino culture that could cultivate discussion. And if I don’t like my family to call me “gorda”, I’ll let them know. As I believe most people would, with whatever nickname they dislike.
More words for your list of unacceptables:
MACHITA in Costa Rica refers to a blonde.
FLACO/A in Peru refers to your significant other
WHITEY in the Carribean refers to a white person
I guess you are not going to buy a “Gordita” t-shirt from me?
Well spoken, well done and if you don’t know what she is saying you need to ask somebody.
Nicely done, Alex, thanks for initiating the discussion
I hated when people referred to me as gordita
and hate it even more when men are depicted (on TV, media) using these hateful terms in a sexual way–language of love? come on!
does that really turn women on? yeeshhhh…
A couple thoughts:
1. I’m surprised at the defensiveness of many of the people responding to this post, and I think it does have a lot to do with what María Elena brought up as a “sigh of relief.” While it’s true that inside Mexico (I can’t vouch for any other countries, but I think it’s fair to extrapolate) words like gordita and flaquita carry less weight (in their delivery AND more importantly reception), it’s precisely in the American context, where you have the collision of opposing cultural practices that you brought up, Alex, where such things become volatile. I do think that the lack of critical gaze directed at language in Mexico (or I suppose, its emphasis here) has to do with a general lack of emphasis on criticising cultural practises. Why? Maybe it has to do with the reign of the PRI, I don’t know. But I do think that the tradition America has of critically examining its own cultural practices (and the reactions against that trend) has its roots in the Civil Rights movement.
It’s why Memín Pingüín
is totally cool in Mexico, and so not cool here.
Why is Lola reacting so strongly against what your idea? Maybe it has to do with María Elena’s idea of embracing such (at least ostensible) cariñoso labels as a way out of an Anglo restrictive culture. Maybe it’s a form of emphasizing difference; the “in knowledge” that you brought up. By labeling oneself as morenita, we can say that a woman is at once insisting in her own sexualization (despite the problems that sexualizing herself in an objectifying way entails) and insisting on her participation in a select group. It’s just a shame that ethnic Pride gets articulated in straight-up sexist terms.
2. That website was really disturbing, mostly because as the text went on, he started referring to sections of women by nonpossesive articles (the thighs/the midsection/ the ass) in a way that really gave the impression of talking about cuts of meat. About verbally butchering up a big tasty female. The impact of words, again, right? It’s not even his idea which is the most disturbing aspect of the site, it’s the language which he uses to express it.
3. It’s interesting to look at hip hop culture and all the sort of misogynistic aspects that come up in comparison to Dancehall culture in Jamaica (and beyond, I guess). You mentioned the video vixens, I think of the Dancehall queens. Again we have another example of women deliberately participating in their own objectification, and declaring it empowering. Is it empowering? I guess the question there is if it’s really possible to take back a form, a word, a context, while it is still operating. If the word “nigger” was still openly used, could “nigga” have been ‘taken back’?
4. In Brazil, “ter um pé na cocina”, a phrase which literally translates to “having a foot in the kitchen”, is colloquially used by white Brazilians to claim (distant) black ancestry. Now, to us, not being exposed to the phrase, its racist and sexist aspects are overwhelming. But in Brazil, it has been used so much that in a meeting with President Bush, President Lula claimed to have “um pé na cocina.” This is the PRESIDENT of a country. Could it be, fellow commenters, that we are so ahogados in our context that we’re failing to see something very obvious, and that it’s damn time we start talking about it?
“Could it be, fellow commenters, that we are so ahogados in our context that we’re failing to see something very obvious…”
All I see, and I say this as a woman, is women drowning themselves in a glass of water. Ahogando en un vaso de agua, as mentioned above.
Talking to hear themselves talk and all that’s coming out is the blub-blub-blub sound of someone flopping around aimlessly without being able to make much of an educated or educational point.
I think this issue is really important to the writer. I don’t agree with it. But you cannot chock it up to a bunch of flippant women trying to prove a point. That is denying someone their opinion on the basis of sex, even if the comment is coming from a woman.
There was a terribly sad story here in New York a few weeks back about a 13 year-old Brooklyn girl who commit suicide after her father refused to let her see her boyfriend. Obviously some very deep problems there. But what caught my eye in the article about her was that her identity on her MySpace page was “Sexy Dominican Bitch.” A 13 year-old girl… I think she had picked up on what Alex has been pointing to in this article: that these racial/ethnic nicknames can carry of deep strain of sexual degradation.
…On the other hand, let’s not throw the morena baby out with the bathwater here.
- Yo soy ardiente, yo soy morena,
Yo soy el símbolo de la pasión;
de ansia de goces mi alma está llena.
¿A mí me buscas? - No es a ti, no.
- Mi frente es pálida; mis trenzas, de oro;
puedo brindarte dichas sin fin;
yo de ternura guardo un tesoro.
¿A mí me llamas? - No; no es a ti.
- Yo soy un sueño, un imposible,
vano fantasma de niebla y luz;
soy incorpórea, soy intangible;
no puedo amarte. - ¡Oh, ven; ven tú!
–Gustavo Becquer
I think this essay goes a lil deeper than it needs to. Apodos based on appearance aren’t necessarily sexual, unless preceded by the word “sexy,” or followed by “bitch.” They’re just part of the descriptive, colorful language we use (that “ass matrix” link was just an offensive non-sequitur, IMO, like a ghetto dissertation. Dude, tranquilo!). Sure, I’ve been called bien gordita (which is a backhanded compliment, but whatevs) and triguena, but they’re just physical traits… or sometimes, lack thereof. I’ve known plenty of dudes named Flaco and Chino (see: West Side Story), and my favorite: back when I used to bartend, the busboys used to call the manager Pelon, cuz he was balding. Hell, it still makes me chuckle for some reason. (Hairy, haha)
I’m not. The privileged don’t like to have their actions or language restricted, even out of respect for other people or an attempt to build community. They think it’s impinging on their “freedom”, and that’s all that matters. Talk about whiny whiny Wallow Wallow!
Thank you Alex, for breaking it down into bite-size pieces that everyone - no matter how big their mouth! - can use.
I think at the end of the day, it’s all about who’s saying it to you (my sweetie gets slack, I don’t belong to el machismo en la calle, and “female” needs to be retired back to the military if that’s where it came from) — and whether everyone involved actually knows what they’re really saying.
Knowledge is power.
*offers Alex a girl pound*
@ littlem: Thank YOU.
And I return your girl pound.