Foundational Black Americans: Lodisucio, The Anti-Latino, and Anti-Mixed-race, Black Americans

In segments of Latino social media on TikTok, X, and similar platforms, the term “Lodisucio” — drawn from Spanish “lodo sucio,” or dirty mud, referring to one's mind — has surfaced as a descriptive label for a perceived element within Foundational Black American (FBA) circles. Critics, primarily Latino commentators, use it to describe rhetoric they view as Black supremacist: claims of exclusive indigeneity, “we built America” exceptionalism, demands framed around native Black priority, and occasional anti-immigrant hostility even if they are considered of the same race. They argue this strain, paired with Democratic messaging seen as centering Black issues, contributes to Latino disillusionment and gradual movement away from the Democratic party.

The narrative frames Lodisucios as a growing internal problem that FBAs must confront, lest it fracture multicultural coalitions. Posts often tie it to specific clashes over identity, history, and resource allocation. Many Foundational Black Americans have exhibited extreme racial prejudice against mixed-race families which has exacerbated tensions with Latino communities.

Along with racialized rhetoric coming from prominent radical pro-Black politicians, broader evidence on Latino voter realignment in recent cycles points primarily to economic concerns, border security, inflation, education, and cultural priorities. The term functions more as a descriptor and an analytical category, spotlighting genuine frictions in diverse coalitions. Tensions over identity and politics exist across communities; attributing partisan shifts chiefly to any single “problem” faction oversimplifies documented trends.

Democrats Are the Black-Only Party: Why Latinos Are Fleeing Over Immigration, Economy & Race-Based Districts

For decades, the Democratic Party has positioned itself as the champion of minority voters, wrapping itself in the language of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Yet a closer look at voting patterns, legislative priorities, and public reactions reveals a stark reality: the party operates as the Black-only party. It mobilizes, legislates, and speaks most passionately when Black American interests are at stake—while treating Latino voters as an afterthought, a reliable voting bloc to be courted every four years with empty promises before being sidelined. This isn’t conspiracy; it’s observable in exit polls, Supreme Court battles, stalled immigration bills, and the everyday frustrations of working-class Latinos who hold moderate economic views and socially conservative values. The data and recent events paint a clear picture: Democrats care about maintaining Black loyalty for raw political power, but when it comes to Latinos, who now make up the largest minority group in America, they offer rhetoric without results.

Let’s start with the numbers that no spin can erase. In the 2024 presidential election, Black voters remained the Democratic Party’s firmly rigid base. Roughly 83 percent supported Kamala Harris, with only about 15 percent breaking for Donald Trump—a slight erosion from prior cycles but still overwhelmingly loyal. Black Americans have consistently given Democrats 80-90 percent of their vote for generations, making them the single most reliable demographic in the party’s coalition. This loyalty isn’t accidental. Democrats have built their identity politics strategy around amplifying Black grievances—through movements like Black Lives Matter, targeted rhetoric on systemic racism, and race-focused policies that deliver concentrated benefits to Black communities.

Contrast that with Latinos. In 2024, Trump captured a record 42-48 percent of the Latino/Hispano vote nationally, according to multiple exit polls and validated voter analyses from Pew Research and others. That’s up dramatically from 32-36 percent in 2020 and 28 percent in 2016. In states like Texas, Trump won 55 percent of Latinos. Among Latino men, the shift was even sharper—Trump won by double digits in some surveys. Young Latinos and working-class Hispanos in border regions swung hard right. Even in traditional Democratic strongholds like California and New York, the erosion was unmistakable.

Why the exodus? Latinos with moderate economic views—those worried about inflation, jobs, housing, and the cost of living—don’t see Democrats delivering. Polls consistently show these pocketbook issues rank far above identity politics for Latino voters. A 2025 UnidosUS poll found 60 percent of Latinos believed the country was heading in the wrong direction, with 70 percent blaming economic mismanagement under the prior Democratic administration. Yet when Democrats controlled the White House and Congress from 2021-2023, they passed massive spending bills that fueled inflation without meaningful relief for working families. Latinos, who dominate sectors like construction, agriculture, and service industries, felt the pain directly. Meanwhile, the party’s focus remained on expansive social programs framed through a racial lens that often prioritized urban Black communities over the broader working-class realities many Latinos face regardless of region.

Socially conservative Latinos—those who value family, faith, traditional gender roles, and border security—feel even more alienated. Many are Catholic or evangelical, with strong views on abortion, education, and crime. Democratic messaging on “reproductive rights,” gender ideology in schools, and soft-on-crime policies clashes directly with these values. Yet the party rarely adjusts; instead, it doubles down on progressive priorities that resonate more with its activist base than with the average Hispano family in South Texas or Florida. It seems Democrats assume Latinos are a monolithic “people of color” bloc that will vote on racial solidarity alone. That assumption is crumbling as second- and third-generation Latinos prioritize opportunity over grievance.

The recent Supreme Court ruling on race-based districts drives this point home with crystal clarity. In April 2026, the Court struck down Louisiana’s congressional map in Louisiana v. Callais, ruling that the state’s creation of a second majority-Black district was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander under the Voting Rights Act. The decision limits how heavily race can be used in drawing districts nationwide, potentially affecting majority-minority maps in multiple states. Democrats and the Congressional Black Caucus reacted swiftly and predictably: this was framed as a direct attack on Black voters and democracy itself. Statements from Democratic leaders and civil rights groups emphasized the harm to Black representation, with little to no mention of Latino communities—even though Latinos outnumber Blacks in many states and have long sought greater representation in districts shaped by demographic realities.

Let’s be clear, the ruling touched on racial redistricting broadly, which could impact Latino-majority areas in California, Texas, Arizona, and Florida. Yet the Democratic response centered almost exclusively on Black harm and white supremacy. We must be honest. When Voting Rights Act enforcement historically created “opportunity districts,” Democrats highlighted Black gains far more prominently. Latinos, despite making up a growing share of the population (now over 19 percent of the U.S.), often get lumped in as secondary beneficiaries or ignored when the map-drawing benefits don’t neatly align with Black population concentrations. For Latinos who vote Democrat—still a slim majority in 2024—the message is clear: your interests matter less unless they overlap with the party’s most loyal bloc… Black America. Those Latinos who lean Republican or independent? They’re treated as non-existent in these debates.

This selective outrage extends to legislation. On immigration, Democrats have repeatedly promised comprehensive reform that would help Latino families—pathways to citizenship, DACA protections, border management. Yet when they held unified control, little passed. The 2021 U.S. Citizenship Act stalled. Bipartisan efforts collapsed amid progressive demands for amnesty without enforcement. Under Biden-Harris, record border encounters—over 10 million encounters since 2021—overwhelmed communities, strained resources, and empowered cartels. Many Latinos, especially in border states, supported stronger security measures. Polls showed growing frustration: Democrats talk compassion but deliver chaos that hurts legal immigrants and citizens alike. Republicans, by contrast, delivered on enforcement promises post-2024, shifting Latino sentiment further in their favor.

Economically, the pattern repeats. Democrats tout programs like expanded child tax credits or green jobs, but implementation often favors urban cores with heavy Black populations over rural or suburban Latino areas reliant on energy, manufacturing, and small business. Inflation under the prior administration hit Latino households hard—many in low-wage jobs saw real wages stagnate while costs soared. A 2025 Equis poll captured the sentiment: Latinos viewed Democrats as overpromising and underdelivering on the economy, with favorability ratings near even (45 percent favorable, 45 percent unfavorable). The party mobilizes massive resources for get-out-the-vote in Black communities during crises but treats Latino outreach as seasonal.

This dynamic makes sense through the lens of raw power. Black voters deliver consistent turnout and margins in key cities and states. Latinos are more geographically dispersed, ideologically diverse, and increasingly swing voters. Catering intensely to Black interests secures the base. When power is threatened, as in redistricting fights or election cycles, Democrats suddenly remember Latinos exist. But once the votes are cast, the focus snaps back. Socially conservative Latinos notice: family values, school choice, religious liberty get lip service at best, while progressive cultural battles dominate.

The data doesn’t lie. Pew Research shows Black partisanship remains rock-solid Democratic at 83 percent lean, while Hispanic lean has narrowed dramatically. Latinos aren’t abandoning shared values of opportunity and fairness—they’re rejecting a party that views them through a narrow racial lens that prioritizes one group’s narrative. For a Latino mechanic in Nevada worried about gas prices, or a South Texas mother concerned about border safety and her kids’ education, the Democratic pitch feels hollow, racial, and disconnected. It’s not about rejecting progress; it’s about demanding attention.

The shift isn’t complete—many Latinos still vote Democratic out of habit or specific policy overlaps. But the trend is unmistakable: the Black-only strategy is backfiring. As the Supreme Court curbs race-based map-making and economic realities bite, Latinos are demanding substance over symbolism. Democrats can keep pretending their coalition is unbreakable, or they can confront the truth: treating one group as the crown jewel while sidelining the fastest-growing demographic in America isn’t sustainable. For Latinos tired of being ignored, the message is simple—your vote matters, but only if the party stops acting like it’s Black-only. Change won’t come from waiting on Democrats. It comes from holding them accountable—or walking away. Personally, maybe we should walk away.

Lodisucio Exposed: The Anti-Latino Rhetoric In Foundational Black American Communities

A Lodisucio is a term used in some Latino communities about racial and ethnic tensions in the United States to label individuals, typically from within the Foundational Black American community, who promote inflammatory, exclusionary, and racially charged views targeting Latino immigrants and communities. In context, it can signify a pattern of rhetoric that frames Latinos as direct threats to Black economic opportunities, cultural space, and social advancement, often calling for aggressive measures like mass deportation enforcement or even violence against undocumented people to protect perceived Black interests. It highlights a zero-sum mindset where one group's gains are seen as another’s losses.

In contemporary American social and political discourse, particularly within Latino spaces focused on identity politics, immigration, and inter-minority relations, the term Lodisucio carries a specific meaning centered on a factional style of activism that prioritizes uncompromising Black lineage-based identity. It describes those who engage in what critics view as supremacist narratives, portraying non-Black minority groups—especially Latinos, Indigenous peoples, and recent African migrants—as competitors for jobs, resources, recognition, and historical validation. This usage paints Lodisucios as advocates of ethnic grievance politics taken to extremes, where everyday tensions over job displacement or neighborhood changes escalate into broad anti-Latino smear campaigns, propaganda efforts on platforms like TikTok and YouTube, and calls for Black Americans to align with institutions like ICE to confront "illegals" head-on.

The meaning extends beyond isolated statements to a broader ideological posture. Lodisucios are depicted as pushing an "othering" framework that rejects alliances with other communities of color. For instance, in heated debates around bilingualism, labor markets, or cultural representation, their rhetoric often dismisses Latino contributions while asserting exclusive claims to foundational black American experiences tied to chattel slavery descendants. This creates a lens through which mixed-race individuals are pressured to abandon Latino or Indigenous heritage in favor of a singular Black identity, framing such hybrid backgrounds as dilutions of authentic Blackness, which reveals their black fragility. The term thus functions as a shorthand for behavior that critics argue undermines multi-ethnic solidarity, instead fostering resentment that views Latino population growth as an existential encroachment.

Within these conversations, Lodisucio also implies a tactical element: the amplification of emotionally charged content designed to rally support by highlighting perceived betrayals or displacements. It captures a form of rhetoric that blends legitimate economic anxieties with inflammatory exaggeration, such as equating Latino presence with cultural erasure or resource theft. In practice, this label appears in critiques of online videos, social media threads, and public statements where speakers urge Black communities to reject integration with Hispanics and instead demand priority treatment based on historical lineage. The contextual meaning is a divisive dynamic in which such positions are seen not as defensive but as proactively hostile, contributing to fractured coalitions among minority groups navigating the same societal challenges.

Ultimately, in its applied sense, Lodisucio serves as a diagnostic tool in discourse for identifying patterns of racial manipulation that prioritize short-term ethnic power plays over long-term unity within black America. It evokes imagery of unchecked escalation, where personal or communal grievances morph into calls for exclusionary policies that pit one marginalized population against another. This usage highlights tensions in modern America’s demographic shifts, where competition for limited opportunities can harden into ideological battle lines. The term does not describe all Black advocacy but specifically those instances where advocacy crosses into supremacist territory, rejecting pluralism in favor of a narrow, adversarial racial worldview. Through repeated application in debates on immigration reform, affirmative action, and cultural preservation, it reinforces a meaning rooted in observable behaviors of division, resentment, and zero-sum competition, making it a potent signifier for those monitoring intergroup conflicts in the United States. Lodisucios are problematic, and we must recognize that for a plural society to exist, those advocating for one must root out these elements.

Floridanismo's Green Twist: Building a Resilient, Self-Sufficient Florida Economy

In an era of climate volatility, supply chain disruptions, and economic inequality, Floridanismo emerges as a pragmatic force for Florida's future. This regional movement rejects overdependence on tourism and services, advocating a green economy rooted in self-sufficiency, advanced agriculture, and renewable energy. Grounded in Florida's environmental strengths, Floridanismo isn't mere idealism—it's a data-driven strategy to fortify the state against national headwinds.

Florida's economy, valued at $1.76 trillion in Q1 2025, has thrived on tourism, which drew 142.997 million visitors in 2024—a 1.7% increase—and contributed about 8% to the gross state product. Yet, this sector, accounting for roughly 13% of GDP, remains fragile to shocks like hurricanes or pandemics. Real GDP grew 2.9% in FY 2024-25, but projections show moderation to 2.3% in 2026, outpacing the national average. Amid U.S. GDP growth of 4.4% in Q3 2025 and forecasts of 2.2% in 2026, with unemployment at 4.5% and inflation at 2.7%, Florida must diversify to sustain its edge.

Green Floridanismo's core: a greener economy emphasizing food and water independence. Proponents push for hydroponic towers in indoor farms, yielding 10 times more produce per acre while slashing water use by 90%. This counters U.S. food supply vulnerabilities, as noted in a 2025 USDA report on weather and labor risks. Vertical farming integrates advanced manufacturing, creating jobs in tech-savvy agriculture. Communal gardens and rural-only communities foster local resilience, insulating against national disruptions that hiked costs 20% recently.

Water security is paramount. Florida's aquifers battle sea-level rise and algal blooms; Floridanismo demands capture-reuse systems and watershed stewardship. This aligns with economic necessity—resilient management averts crises in a hurricane-prone state.

Renewables propel the vision. Florida's solar capacity, providing about 10% of electricity and ranking third nationally, surged 300% since 2019, powering 1.5 million homes. Floridanismo calls for distributed solar with home batteries, cutting costs 25% and boosting grid resilience. Wind and battery manufacturing could spawn export hubs, with green investments yielding 2-3 times the returns of traditional sectors.

Financially, the movement urges regional banks to offer low-interest loans for solar panels, wind equipment, batteries, and farming tech. Smaller institutions, unlike national giants, tailor credit to local green needs, echoing national sustainable finance trends.

Governor Ron DeSantis bolsters this indirectly. His 2026-2027 Floridians First Budget allocates $1.4 billion for Everglades restoration and water quality, totaling $9.5 billion under his tenure. This includes $810 million to accelerate projects, $150 million for conservation lands, $60 million for alternative water supplies, and $65 million for algal bloom mitigation. DeSantis' deregulation and STEM focus dovetail with Floridanismo's tech-driven economy, though the movement demands explicit green incentives.

This isn't nostalgic agrarianism—it's forward-thinking. Florida's economy outpaced the nation by 2.3 percentage points over four years, ranking it the 15th largest globally. By merging hydroponics, renewables, and regional finance, Floridanismo offers a blueprint for resilience. In a U.S. facing 4.5% unemployment and persistent inflation, Florida's green pivot isn't optional—it's imperative for prosperity.

Floridanismo: The Rise of Latino Catholic Conservatism and Florida First Politics Under Trump

After expanding my research into Católicophobia and Floridanophobia, I’ve observed an emerging trend among pro-Catholic Hispanic communities under Trump: a growing call for a “Florida First” political approach grounded in a distinct regional identity. It intent is to support a central Floridano identity.

The Latino conservative movement is rising rapidly in Florida. While it was once dominated largely by Cuban voices, the expanding presence of Puerto Rican, Peruvian, Colombian, and Dominican communities has added new layers of complexity to the political landscape. Within this diversity, however, a shared sense of purpose is beginning to take shape. Floridanismo is an effort to formalize and strengthen that unity.

Floridanismo advocates for a more unified Latino community as a means of achieving political change that expands Latino businesses and their economic opportunities throughout the state of Florida. This vision of unity also includes linguistic cohesion, with support for English, Latin, and Spanish as official languages of the state, reflecting practical communication needs as well as cultural continuity, including the development of a more Latin- and Spanish- influenced form of English. For example, changing Floridian to Floridano/Floridana.

Floridanismo supports expanded access to free or low-cost healthcare through a combination of public and private initiatives. It also calls for stronger regional trade, military cooperation, and political alignment among the southern United States, the Caribbean, and Latin America, emphasizing Florida’s role as a regional bridge.

Many supporters of Floridanismo emphasize the defense of the Catholic faith alongside Indigenous American religious traditions. They tend to favor socially conservative policies while supporting more economically liberal approaches, though with defined limits. This includes opposition to elective abortion and advocacy for high “sin taxes” on certain goods and services.

Advocates of Floridanismo generally view race as an inherently limiting framework and treat it as a secondary or descriptive detail rather than a defining political factor. When race is discussed, it often includes considerations of ethnicity and historical concepts such as the casta system. Within the movement, some supporters view “Latino” as a race, while others see it as an ethnicity; however, there is broad respect for the term as a clear and practical way to refer to the shared community.

Overall, Floridanismo is a response to longstanding social, political, and cultural pressures faced by Latino Catholics in Florida. It is not merely a call for electoral or policy change, but a broader movement oriented toward cultural cohesion, collective identity formation, and long-term communal advancement. Central to this vision is support for bilingual and trilingual communities, which are viewed as both practical tools for integration and symbols of cultural continuity.

Floridanismo calls for cultural expansion also includes structured cultural exchange with Japanese and Korean communities, framed as a means of fostering intercultural dialogue, strengthening social cohesion, and enriching the evolving Latino-Floridano cultural identity. Within this framework, the learning of additional languages—such as Japanese, Korean, and others—is not discouraged, but rather accepted as a complementary form of cultural engagement that broadens intellectual horizons while remaining rooted in a shared regional identity.

Católicophobia: Where Hatred of Christ Leads to Violence

With the recent events at Annunciation Church and Catholic School in Minnesota, Católicophobia is on the rise in the United States. The tragic event that led to the death of two innocent children and with the suffering of multiple injuries of 14 minors and 3 adults, it serves as an example of rising hatred toward the Catholic community. Yet, the question begs, why is this happening? Also, what is Católicophobia?

What is Católicophobia?

Católicophobia, or also spelled Catolicophobia, is the fear, distrust, hatred of, aversion to, or discrimination against Catholics or Catholicism. Like Christianophobia, Católicophobia (Catolicophobia), isn't a topic that is spoken a lot about as most progressive American communities focus on Islamophobia and other groups. However, with this rising trend of attacks on Christian communities, the discussion is rising in the United States. There have been multiple attacks in recent years on Christian churches that are tied to different people with vastly different political views. The most recent one was a Catholic church and school, but others include Abundant Life Christian School in Wisconsin (2024), the The Covenant School in Tennessee (2023 Nashville school shooting) and others.

As Christianophobia increases, so too does Católicophobia. Christians have faced prejudice in many parts of the world, but historically, anti-Catholic sentiment has been present in numerous communities, including the United States. A notable example is the 19th-century Know-Nothing movement, during which Catholic immigrants from Ireland and Germany were discriminated against and marginalized because of their religious and cultural beliefs. This history shows that Católicophobia is not merely a modern phenomenon—it has deep roots that continue to influence societal attitudes today.

Some anti-Catholic sentiment may stem from historical tensions with centralized powers, such as the Church of England, or from misunderstandings of Catholic traditions and institutions. However, this recent wave of Católicophobia in the United States has increasingly taken a violent form. Católicophobia affects all Catholics and can also harm other Christian communities, which is why it is imperative for both Christians and non-Christians to stand in defense of their Catholic neighbors and protect them from attacks or disparagement based on their faith.

To address Católicophobia, it is important for communities to educate themselves about Catholic beliefs and traditions. Promoting anti-discrimination policies and fostering engagement with Catholic communities can help combat prejudice and improve understanding and respect for Christians in general.

Black fatigue has recently taken the internet by storm, showing up in the comment sections of videos that highlight Black American behaviors. When viewers perceive these behaviors as reinforcing stereotypes, they often say they are experiencing “Black fatigue.” But what does that term really mean?

Meanwhile, Black fragility is an evolving concept, shaped by the presence of mixed-race individuals and international minorities sharing their cultures in the United States. In today’s discussions, the modern interpretation of Black fatigue often overlaps with—and even reignites—Blackalgia. Still, Black fatigue (sometimes described as Black frustration) remains a distinct and complex subject.

Can Black fragility, Blackalgia, and Black fatigue intersect? Absolutely. Yet Black fatigue stands apart because it highlights the way some people respond to what they view as negative behaviors and stereotypes within the Black American community.

What is Black Fatigue? Black Fatigue Explained

Although the concept was originally defined in sociological circles as a recognition and critique of systemic power—and the exhaustion experienced across multi-generational Black American communities—its meaning has shifted in online spaces. On social media, “Black fatigue” is now often used in a very different way, prompting sociologists to reconsider how the term is understood in common usage. Linguistically, it can be more defined today as frustration or irritation toward perceived negative behaviors within Black American communities, with an emphasis on accountability rather than systemic critique.

Simply, Black fatigue, or Black frustration, is the irritation with perceived negative behaviors associated with Black American communities, emphasizing accountability. To emphasize, Black fatigue refers to recognizing certain social patterns within segments of the Black American community and feeling such strong frustration with them that it leads to a sense of fatigue or exasperation. The term is often used to call attention to behaviors or cultural practices that are perceived as needing improvement.

Is Black Fatigue Racist?

Since Black fatigue is focused entirely on black American cultural behaviors and often times recognizes that certain behaviors reinforce negative stereotypes, no—it is not racist. A black person, including a multi-generational Black American, can also experience Black fatigue. For example: A middle-class Black American walking through a violent Detroit neighborhood may feel drained and frustrated by recurring behaviors that reinforce negative stereotypes. Black fatigue can manifest in different contexts and affect a variety of individuals within and adjacent to the Black American community.

For instance, a mulato Latino moves into a predominantly Black American community and notices a generational divide. Older residents tend to be socially conservative, while younger residents are often more visible in street life. The mulato Latino may experience Black fatigue in response to the behaviors and patterns exhibited by the younger generation.

This mental weariness exemplifies Black fatigue. Black fatigue can be used to critically analyze or simply observe social behaviors within a community. It is not a reaction to genetic traits or racial backgrounds, but rather a response to patterns of behavior. The term focuses on social and cultural dynamics, not on inherent racial characteristics.

Black Fatigue Explained Simply

Black fatigue, or Black frustration, refers to the frustration or mental weariness experienced when observing negative or stereotypical behaviors within Black American communities. It is a response to social and cultural patterns, not to race, genetics, or inherent traits. The term can be used to critically analyze behaviors or simply observe them, often with an emphasis on accountability and improvement. Black Americans, Latinos, and other members of different communities can experience Black fatigue when they feel exasperated by recurring behaviors in Black American communities.

To explore more about the author of "What Is Black Fatigue? Understanding Black Fatigue," Luis Albert Rosales, visit his official profile or related works.

Septum Ring Theory Explained From a Cultural Lens

Septum Ring Theory, sometimes referred to as "Septum Ring Culture," examines the cultural stereotypes and behavioral patterns associated with individuals—particularly women—who wear septum piercings. This framework posits that such piercings are often linked to specific personality traits, social behaviors, and ideological inclinations. The theory highlights recurring characteristics observed in certain subcultural groups, distinguishing them from broader societal norms.

This sociological thought piece was written by Luis Albert Rosales, follow more of his work by following Rosales Legacy Group on TikTok.

Core Concepts of Septum Ring Theory

Septum Ring Theory suggests that individuals with septum piercings often exhibit nonconformist and rebellious tendencies. These individuals may deliberately position themselves outside conventional societal expectations, embracing a distinct identity that challenges mainstream norms. This nonconformity can manifest in various ways, including unconventional lifestyle choices, alternative fashion, or radical ideological perspectives.

Behavioral patterns associated with septum piercings include a propensity for substance use, ranging from nicotine to more potent substances like opioids or prescription drugs. Alcohol misuse is also frequently observed within this group. Additionally, some individuals may engage in self-harming behaviors, though this is less common than substance-related issues. These patterns are not universal but are noted as recurring themes within the subculture described by the theory.

Septum Ring Theory and Women

While Septum Ring Theory applies to individuals across genders, it is often discussed in the context of women, where specific behavioral and ideological patterns are more pronounced. Women with septum piercings may exhibit traits described in the broader theory, such as nonconformity and substance abuse, but their behaviors are often perceived as more chaotic or emotionally driven. These women may hold strong ideological views, including radical feminist perspectives or vocal support for marginalized groups, such as transgender individuals. However, the theory also notes a tendency among some to express distrust or hostility toward men, occasionally veering into misandrist viewpoints.

Beyond ideological stances, women with septum piercings are sometimes associated with unconventional relationship dynamics, such as polyamory or heightened sexual promiscuity, particularly outside gothic subcultures. These choices may contribute to emotional volatility, potentially stemming from accumulated emotional trauma. This trauma can reinforce a cycle of disdain for societal norms, traditional gender roles, or cultural expectations around purity and monogamy, fostering a sense of perpetual victimization in some cases.

Importantly, the theory describes trends within specific subcultural contexts, not definitive characteristics of all women with septum piercings. However, many women with septum piercings do exhibit some of these characteristics, reinforcing Septum Ring Theory as described.

Cultural Distinctions and Misunderstandings

Septum piercings have historical and cultural significance in various global traditions, particularly among indigenous communities, where they often symbolize cultural identity or rites of passage. Septum Ring Theory explicitly distinguishes these cultural practices from the modern subcultural phenomena it describes. For instance, an indigenous woman wearing a septum piercing as part of her cultural heritage may not exhibit the behavioral or ideological traits associated with the theory. Similarly, individuals within gothic subcultures may wear septum piercings as a stylistic choice without aligning with the broader patterns outlined.

However, the theory allows for individual variation. A person from any cultural background may still display traits consistent with Septum Ring Theory, independent of their cultural or stylistic motivations for wearing a septum piercing. This distinction ensures that the theory remains focused on observed behavioral patterns rather than conflating them with unrelated cultural practices.

The theory also faces misconceptions beyond cultural practices. Another common misunderstanding surrounding Septum Ring Theory is the assumption that it is tied to race or ethnicity. In reality, the framework is not concerned with racial identity or skin color at all. Instead, its primary focus lies in examining dynamics related to gender. The theory explores how gendered experiences, expressions, and expectations intersect and manifest, and it should not be conflated with conversations about race. While cultural symbols and practices can sometimes overlap with issues of both race and gender, Septum Ring Theory itself was never intended as a racial construct. Rather, it provides a lens for understanding gendered perspectives, behaviors, and societal interactions independent of racial or ethnic context.

Septum Ring Theory and You...

Since Septum Ring Theory is primarily concerned with the observation of behavioral traits within modern society—particularly in relation to women—it acknowledges that individuals may display some, all, or none of the characteristics outlined within the framework. The theory does not claim universality, but rather provides a lens through which patterns of behavior can be examined. Through anecdotal experiences and interactions with individuals who wear septum piercings, observers may begin to notice certain recurring tendencies or traits. When these observations are considered collectively across a broad range of people, they allow for a more neutral assessment of whether an individual’s behaviors align with the attributes described in the theory.

***

Support Luis Albert Rosales' work:
Purchase his latest book... Cor I (The Genesis Edition)!

Enjoyed this article? You might also like this article:
What Is Black Fatigue? Black Fatigue Explained

Is Latinx a Slur? Is Latinx Offensive?

By Luis Albert Rosales

To activists, Latinx is a gender-neutral term intended to be an inclusive alternative to Latino or Latina. It is primarily used by academics and social activists. Supporters of the term argue that it helps represent individuals who feel marginalized or not fully included by the traditional term 'Latino.' However, the term has faced significant backlash from much of the Latino community as some Hispanic-focused organizations have adopted the term to refer to all Latinos. Many of those same organizations have returned to use Latino or Hispanic due to backlash. As a result, many Latinos have rejected its use. For Hispanos who have heard the term, many feel as if the word is insulting or a mockery of their Hispanic culture.

Latinx: Its Purpose and Public Perception

The term Latinx originated from progressive activists and gained popularity primarily within academic circles through its use by scholars in studies and research, rather than widespread adoption among the general Latino population. It is intended to be a gender-neutral alternative to traditional Spanish gendered terms like Latino (masculine) and Latina (feminine). In Spanish, gender markers are typically indicated by the endings -o for masculine and -a for feminine nouns. Latinx aims to include individuals who do not identify within the traditional gender binary, allegedly promoting greater inclusivity. Their position is that the term provides inclusive language for Latinos who identify as ‘non-binary’ or with similar identities. Some argue that it is a necessity to deconstruct the masculine default that, in their perspective, marginalizes women and “non-binary people”. Some proponents view language as a powerful tool for shaping social reality. By changing language, they believe they can promote more inclusive and equitable ways of thinking about gender and identity within Hispanic communities and beyond as language evolves.

This presents a complex dynamic between the scholars' intent to promote inclusivity and the term's reception within Latino and Hispanic culture. While the intention is to foster greater inclusivity, the term has also faced harsh criticism from many Hispanics who view it as an example of linguistic imposition, some have described it as “linguistic imperialism” or “linguistic colonialism”. Many Latinos have a negative view of the term. Some would highlight that, in Spanish, it makes no grammatical sense, and that it would be difficult to pronounce in Spanish. Others expand on that but also argue that if the concern is with the English language, there is no need for a new gender-neutral term since existing terms like “Latin American”, or simply ‘Latin’ or ‘Hispanic’, already serve as gender-neutral options to refer to Latino people or Hispanos. Ultimately, they affirm that Latinos who use the term may be disconnected from their Latino or Hispanics roots. Through this perspective, some view it as nothing more than an attempt at performative social justice with a strong misunderstanding of Latino culture. From a linguistic perspective, The Real Academia Española, which many view as the official arbiter on the Spanish language, has rejected Latinx and its use as a gender-neutral term for Latinos.

The Latinx Studies

Regarding the studies of Latinx and its use within the Latino community, Pew Research has conducted several studies on Latinx. In this section, we’re going to focus on Latinos who have heard of the term in a specific study from Pew Research titled “Latinx Awareness Has Doubled Among U.S. Hispanics Since 2019, but Only 4% Use It.” This study, with 5,078 adult Hispanics surveyed, was released in September 2024, but it was conducted in 2023.

According to the study, 53% of Latinos have not heard of the term. Of the 47% who have, only 4% use it to describe themselves. However, a supermajority of Latinos (75%) say that Latinx should not be used to describe the Hispanic or the Latino community. To add, 36% say that using the term more often is ‘bad’, while 38% are neutral in its use. Those who say that the term is good reflects only 12% of the Hispanic population while those who are unsure reflects 14%. It concludes that Latinos would more likely find the use of Latinx to be negative than positive.

When it comes to lesbian, gay or bisexual participants of this study, only 13% say they use Latinx to describe themselves. This group is the only non-racial group surveyed who uses the term more than any other.

For those who are educated, with some college, only 4% use the term to describe themselves. Those with a bachelor’s degree or greater, 7% use the term to describe themselves.

Overwhelmingly, over 70%, regardless of specific groups except for lesbian, gay or bisexual participants, say the term should not be used to describe Latinos. The total average contains the 75% referenced earlier.

Given what we know about this study, is Latinx a slur? Judging by this study alone we cannot conclude it is a slur, but we can affirm that most Latinos do not use the term while a third of Hispanics or Latinos who have heard of the term, generally view its use as a bad thing.

A Quick Informal Poll from TikTok: Is Latinx a slur?

Since there are no comprehensive studies on whether 'Latinx' is considered a slur, I’ve conducted a quick, informal poll on TikTok asking two questions that I believe are important for expanding our understanding of how Latinos or Hispanics view the term Latinx. Please note that this is not a scientific poll and should not be interpreted as representative of the broader population.

In this informal poll, there were 68 participants, and I asked two specific questions: “Is the term 'Latinx' considered offensive, insulting, or a mockery of Hispanic or Latino culture?” and “Is 'Latinx' a slur?”

According to my record, 55 participants considered the term ‘Latinx’ offensive, insulting or a mockery of Hispanic or Latino culture. This represents approximately 80.88% of participants. Respectively, 60.29% of participants consider the term a slur. Of those who consider the term offensive, insulting or mocking, 74.55% of them consider it a slur. The informal TikTok poll offers limited insight due to its small sample, but it suggests a significant portion of respondents view "Latinx" negatively, indicating a need for broader research.

During this informal poll, many commenters shared negative views about the term. They suggested that it lacked respect and was problematic in several ways. "Latinx is problematic," was a common theme among commenters. "Don't call me Latinx," was another sentiment expressed by multiple users. After the poll, some users who supported the term expressed that the results were "disappointing."

Latinx: A Failed Attempt at Inclusivity

While the intention behind "Latinx" may have been to promote inclusivity, the data indicates a significant failure in its execution and reception within the Latino community. The term is overwhelmingly rejected by Latinos, rarely used, and for many, carries negative connotations. It highlights the complexities of language evolution, cultural sensitivity, and the potential disconnect between well-intentioned initiatives and their real-world impact on the communities they aim to serve. Instead of unifying, "Latinx" appears to have become a point of contention and division within the Latino community, at least based on current data.