My authoritative take on the whole "Latino men supported Trump" is that it exposed that Latino men are actually a collection of highly diverse groups originally from Latin America masquerading as a single "ethnic" bloc.

[chema@social.sanfranciscan.org]

My authoritative take on the whole "Latino men supported Trump" is that it exposed that Latino men are actually a collection of highly diverse groups originally from Latin America masquerading as a single "ethnic" bloc.

Super Catholic Latinos of a mostly-Spanish ancestry have very little in common with Black "Latinos" or "Latinos" of a mostly Indigenous ancestry who might have only been speaking Spanish for a generation or two.

Forcing all of these different groups under one label ignores the obvious: they don't share the same history, culture, or political aspirations. And when they do align, it's often due to the colonial histories imposed on them, rather than any inherent unity.

Except misogyny. That's pretty much a universal for all men.

[chema@social.sanfranciscan.org]

The headline is "Latino men just didn’t want a woman president," and I don't doubt it's true—for U.S. Latino men who are likely voters.

But it's also important to highlight that nearly 90% of the votes cast in this year's presidential election in Mexico were for a female candidate, resulting in Mexico's first woman president.

Mexico remains a sexist, often violently misogynistic society, but the difference is that the political parties there understood this, campaigned with that knowledge, and successfully overcame it.

Was nobody up here paying attention or what?

https://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/juan-williams/4980787-latino-men-just-didnt-want-a-woman-president/

[docpop@mastodon.social]

@chema thanks for sharing this. I’ve been thinking about your post a lot tonight.