To Latinx or Not to Latinx: A Question of Gender Inclusivity Versus Gender Neutrality

I first saw the word "Latinx" at an academic conference a few years ago. As a native Spanish speaker, my first reaction was to squint to confirm I was not making up an "x" where I expected an "o," "a," "o/a," or even "@," as I had seen before. It was not until the speaker clearly pronounced the final "x" (as in \luh-tee-neks\) that I realized what I had read was not a typo, but a new label used to describe people of Latin American origin or descent. Latinx began appearing in social media and on the Internet as a designation that visibilizes gender-expansive people (i.e., those who do not subscribe to the femininemasculine gender binary or who choose not to be defined by their gender), who are traditionally made invisible by the gendered structure of Spanish grammar.Despite heated discussions about its pros and cons,1 5 the use of Latinx in academia has grown dramatically. For instance, a PubMed search of the word Latinx yielded 755 articles, of which 71% were published in 2020 (Figure 1). Clearly, now is the time to answer the following question: Should we be using Latinx at all, and, if so, how? Here I tackle this question by reviewing the meaning of the term Latinx within the context of gender neutrality versus gender inclusivity. In addition, I examine the ways in which Latinx has been used in articles published in AJPH. I conclude by providing five recommendations about when and how to use Latinx so that it can live up to its inclusive promise.