ENGL 120R Barrios, A. Keyword: Inclusion

The podcast episode discusses the concept of inclusion and its evolution over time. The host, Amy Barrios, shares her personal experiences as a queer Central American living in the US and highlights the lack of representation and inclusion of Central American voices within the larger Latinx diaspora. She plans to study the meaning of inclusion and its application within the Latino framework, particularly in the context of Central American voices. Amy discusses three articles that focus on the marginalization of Central American Americans, the ambiguities surrounding the term Latinx, and the erasure of LGBTQ+ Central American identities in art. She emphasizes the importance of acknowledging diverse experiences and intersectionality in order to achieve true inclusion. Hola, hola. Hey, everybody. Welcome back to the Topics in Rhetoric podcast. I'm your host, Amy Barrios, pronouns are she, they, ella, and we've been doing a series right now on various keywords in feminist studies. And so today we're finally going to touch on the word inclusion. And I've heard that word a lot. I've heard it in my personal life, amongst friends and family. We talk about different ways we can be more inclusive of others. In academia, many of my professors share on authors and speakers and writers who are doing that work actively, writing about being more inclusive and highlighting voices. And in my professional life, we have these DEI frameworks, diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. So it's a very common word that we should all really understand. So in this episode, we're going to do a couple of things. We're going to look at the original definition, where it comes from, what it meant before, what it means now, and more importantly, why am I looking into this word? There's a specific reason. So let's get into it. Vamos. Let's begin by defining the word inclusion. Vamos a empezar. So the word inclusion comes from the Latin word inclusion, which means a shutting in, a shutting up, making a part of, a confinement. And this definition is coming from the Oxford English Dictionary. The earliest known use of the word was in the Middle English period. So imagínense, think the 1150s through the 1500s. And the meaning that we know now, which would be that which is included, or even bigger, the action or state of including or of being included within a group or structure, that originated in 1839. This is what we're coming from etymology online. So this word, we can tell, it's gone through a lot of changes. Ha cambiado mucho. The concept of inclusion has evolved over time. And it's associated with terms now of desegregation, integration, mainstreaming. In the U.S. alone, inclusion has referred to the integration of students with learning or intellectual disabilities into the larger learning community. But as we mentioned prior, more recently, it's been applied to diversity and equity practices. So this is a noun, and it's a noun of action. And that's really important to know, as we'll discuss it further on the podcast. The modern definition is now placement, involvement, participation, and contribution. And this is all coming from Researchgate and Open School BC. And why specifically am I wanting to study this word? It's a word that I hear a lot. I talk about it a lot. But I think where I'm having the disconnect, on the no estoy entendiendo, is I don't really necessarily see it in action for me. Por ejemplo, I'm a queer Central American living in the U.S. My parents are from Centroamerica. My mom is from Honduras. My dad's from Guatemala. I was born in L.A., but we're still Central American. That is our lineage. Even in the words that we use, there's a difference within the greater Latino diaspora. And so I often hear my experiences overshadowed by those greater conversations within the Latinx diaspora that usually focus on Mexican American experiences and Chicano experiences. And that's fantastic. The Chicano movement itself has made a way for my voices, voices of others from other parts of Latin America, to be able to now have a seat at the table. However, it is within those conversations that there are still examples of our exclusion, our silencing, and even sometimes our erasure. So I want to study this word inclusion. I want to study its meaning. And it's hard for me to do that when I don't see those examples. Even in media now, whenever I see somebody portrayed or somebody who is Latino on TV, usually they are Mexican American or they're portraying somebody who would be Mexican. And so that's where the challenge comes in. What does inclusion actually mean? How are we actually doing it actively? And so I'll be focusing on that specific piece of inclusion within the Latino framework, within the Chicano studies, and how it works in the context of Central American voices within Latinx communities. And so I have five articles that I decided to look into, all by Latino authors. And I want to just see the forms of inclusion within those Chicano Latino spaces, highlight those missing voices, hopefully, of Central Americans. And also, the call to action is that need for representation that is inclusive. And furthermore, how are we being inclusive? How are we using this word to its fullest potential? Vamos a comenzar. We're going to get started with the first article. Vamos a empezar con Arturo Arias' article titled, Central American Americans, Invisibility, Power, and Representation in the U.S. Latino World. So in this article, published in 2003, he's suggesting that Central American Americans are marginalized in both mainstream American society and the larger Latino community in the United States. So he notes that this overshadowing happens usually because of the well-known Mexican narrative, the Puerto Rican narrative, and even the Cuban narrative that are usually portrayed, and they often ignore or generalize who we are as a society, who we are as a people. He argues that this lack of visibility obscures the unique historical and cultural narratives of Central American communities. And it's important to note that because these countries have experienced trauma, violence, and relocation brought on by civil wars, that's very unique to Central America. He also notes that Central Americans face prejudice and marginalization from both non-Latino and Latino groups in the United States. So inclusion, specifically in this article in the context of the Latinx diaspora, is calling us to acknowledge diverse Latino experiences beyond the dominant identities. The second article, written by E. Cassandra Dane Griff, is titled, What Do We Mean When We Say Latinx? Definitional Power, the Limits of Inclusivity, and the Unreconstitution of an Identity Category. And this was published in 2022. And so in this article, she is noting the ambiguities surrounding the term Latinx. This term came about to challenge the gender binary found in Spanish grammar. Because usually when we say Latino, the O at the end is male identification. If we say Latina, with A at the end, it's female identification. But even when we talk in a group, like if we're trying to identify a group of Latinos, we default to the O, which is pretty common because of the patriarchy, right? So Latinx has been this new term, and even the other term Latine, with an E at the end, that's supposed to be more inclusive because the older term of Latino has always had that emphasis of machismo attached to it, and the patriarchy, and has not been inclusive to those of us who identify as queer. And so in this article, she's raising those questions about who gets to define Latinx identities, and whether the term Latinx accurately captures the range of experiences within the community. Some people, she notes, accept this new term as progressive. However, others criticize it as linguistically challenging or culturally alienating. And I've actually noticed that a lot in my own personal experiences. Por ejemplo, for instance, I use the term they-them for myself. And in English, I have no trouble really explaining that to others, or even understanding it for my own self. Pero, when I do it in Spanish, it's ella. And so that, if I were to say it in Spanish, there's this other term that we use that would say choca. It clashes. When I hear it in Spanish, it's not necessarily rolling off the tongue, so to speak. And so, it's been really challenging for me, personally, to try to use they-them pronouns in Spanish. I usually tend not to. Which, furthermore, speaks into this conversation of how are we now using words that are supposed to be inclusive, yet they are causing us to do a double-take? Is that really inclusion? And so, in her article, Inclusion in the Context of Linguistic and Cultural Inclusivity, she's requiring us to consider the language used within the community. We have to be aware of the words. Because even in my own context, for example, Mexicans, though, usually when they're talking about a straw, you know, a straw when you're drinking your drink, a straw for them, the term is bojote. That's how you say it in Spanish. But for me, growing up, that's not the word I used. I used the word pajia. So many other Central American countries and even South American countries use the word pajia, or a whole different word. So, it's really important to know that within the Latino diaspora, there's so many nuances in the language that how are we including all of those voices? Because when I see the TV, and you're saying bojote, and I'm Spanish-speaking, that doesn't represent me. So, moving on to the third article. This was written by Araceli Esparza, published in 2022. Her article titled, Latino? Chicano? Guatemalan-American? Queer Visual Artist? Alex Donacy's Intersecting Positionalities and Representations of U.S. Central Americans. And so, in her article, she's analyzing the overshadowed LGBTQIA plus Central American identities in the context of art. Alex Donacy, born in Guatemala, and experiencing a post-Civil War Guatemala, is an artist, a queer Guatemalan artist, and he is frequently cited within a chicanx framework, which erases the several identities he represents in his work. Art critics have substituted a Chicano or Mexican identity for his Guatemalan one, and a large portion of his work is influenced by his background in post-Civil War Guatemala. But, some who critique or like his paintings have claimed that the colors, style, or even the people he depicts are unique to Mexico, which again, speaks volumes to this term of inclusion. How are we being inclusive when we're defaulting to a dominant framework? So, inclusion in the context of art and queer creatives means that one must recognize the importance of intersection rather than defaulting to a dominant Chicano or Mexican-American framework. The fourth article, Juan Carlos Narvaez Gutierrez, Seeking Community in a Global City, Guatemalans and Salvadorians in Los Angeles, de Nora Hamilton y Norma Stoltz Chinchilla, published in 2004 in a Spanish journal. So, in this article, he's analyzing how, unlike other Latino populations, Guatemalans and Salvadorians grapple with difficulties tied to histories of political unrest and forced migration. Just how we spoke earlier in a previous article, there is a unique historical context that we must address when speaking about Central Americans. And so, inclusion in the context of community building, because in this article, that's what they're analyzing, how are Central American people, specifically Guatemalans and Salvadorians, building community in L.A.? How are they doing that? How are they including themselves in this new story that also forces them to assimilate? So, inclusion in this context is an active process of creation. And this reminds me a lot of the critical imagination framework that we've discussed in class, because they have to be creative. They have to be creative when they come to this country. My parents had to do that in order to not only see themselves represented, but to create new identities. And so, this active process is something that I will touch on briefly at the end, as mentioned previously, because the term inclusion is a noun of action. So, how are we actively being inclusive? Not just saying the word and including, quote-unquote, those voices, but what are the actual steps that we see happening out in the real world? And then finally, the last article that I found was written by Denise A. Segura, and it's titled, Challenging the Chicano Text Toward a More Inclusive Contemporary Salsa, published in 2001. And so, in her article, she's proposing, excuse me, broadening the scope of Chicano studies to better reflect the diversity within Latinx communities. She does a fantastic job of critiquing the field's traditional focus on male-centric perspectives, arguing that it often overlooks the experiences of women, LGBTQ plus individuals, and non-Mexican Latinos, particularly those from Central America. She's advocating for an intersectional approach and calls for Chicano studies to evolve. That's really powerful. In my current knowledge, I don't know of any university that has any other study outside of Chicano studies that would be more specific. Maybe there's Latino studies, which is a general umbrella, and then we have the more specific Chicano studies. But I would love to know, and I could be wrong, I haven't done all of my research, I don't know. But I would be very impressed and moved if I saw a university that had those specific studies that advocate for my voice, advocate for other voices that are usually placed into these general boxes. And so inclusion in the context of intersectional identities is incomplete without diversity and representation. Bueno pues, we've looked at these various articles and their specific arguments and suggestions on the term inclusion in the context of the Latinx diaspora. But I just want to go back and broaden the scope to the general definition as a reminder of the word inclusion. Where it comes from, where are we now? If it's still in alignment with the definition that we find, and moving forward, what can we do with this term? So as a reminder, the definition for inclusion is a shutting in, a shutting up, making a part of, a confinement, it's a noun of action. But furthermore, now it's being defined more so as a word that is for involvement, participation, contribution, which is included. And so my call to action, my question to you all is, do you see the word taking that positive approach in your own lives? It's not enough to just include people at the table. We shouldn't even necessarily need to do that for people who already belong at the table, if that makes sense. So it's not inclusion, it's belonging, it's engagement. And so how do we move forward with this information? Because I think often the term inclusion, it's a word that is overused to represent minority groups, minority cultures that are often misrepresented or underrepresented. And it's not enough to just use this term and invite one voice to the table. Let's say a Chicano voice, and now you've covered your inclusion requirements. It's more than that. And so I think inclusion in the context of feminist rhetoric, we have to unpack it a little more. We have to take a more active approach. We have to unsettle the word. Because it's not enough to just include voices. We need to let these voices shine. We need to let them out. We can't just confine them. We need to release them into the greater conversations of diversity. All right. That was the episode. We talked about the key word inclusion. We defined it, looked at its origins, what it means now in the context of the Latinx diaspora. Hopefully you were challenged. Maybe you'll want to unsettle the word as well, redefine it. We want to thank our sponsors, the backstage squirrels. Siempre nos apoyan. They always support our work and our research. So we thank you. And again, this is the Topics in Rhetoric podcast. I'm your host, Ymi Barrios. And I hope you will tune in next time.