[krainboltgreene]

Words aren't an application, just because it's not generally used doesn't mean it's "not good for adoption". Further, where it's used and who it's being used by matters a ton when it comes to linguistics. Finally, latino was originally coined in the 40's while latinx is only what, 15 years old in some cases?

But none of this matters because your claim was: "latinx seems like textbook virtue [sic]signalling especially when most Latin-American people don't even like it".

[xmprt]

> But none of this matters because ...

None of what you said matters because you haven't said anything to disprove my claim that "latinx seems like textbook virtue signaling especially when most Latin-American people don't even like it"

> where it's used and who it's being used by matters a ton when it comes to linguistics

I agree. And the study showed that even within the younger, university educated populations who would be most likely to know about and use the term latinx, very few people use it.

[krainboltgreene]

You're making the claim, you have to prove it. I'm not doing your legwork.

[xmprt]

My claim is "Latin-Americans prefer just latino"

The study that you linked backs my claim. I'm not sure what more you want from me.