Is it discriminatory and hateful ...

[angus]

No.  It is by definition discriminatory, but it isn't necessarily hateful.  When I discriminate between nickels and dimes prior to rolling my coins, choosing nickels to fit into the fatter paper rolls and dimes to fit into the skinnier ones, it is not based on hate.  Same with noting hispanic:  unless I think everyone looks hispanics, then I am discriminating.  Hate is another issue.  And hate can be discriminatory or non-discriminatory.  I know some real assholes who hate everyone, for example.

Also, as an aside, it can be tricky to identify those who "look hispanic."  Have you ever been to Spain?  Lots of folks there are Hispanic--Like, 88 percent of the population, basically everyone except the African, Gipsy, and British minorities --but most of them are of the type you'd not probably not identify as "looking hispanic" I'd imagine. 

[angus]

If a person has the skin complexion of a Hispanic person, I say they look Hispanic.  I don't see what's hateful about that.

Nothing hateful.  Just confusing.  And confused.  "The skin complexion of a hispanic" sort of implies, for example, that Sammy Sosa and Jose Maria Castro Ceron, both being hispanic, have the same skin complexion.  The use of the definite article doesn't seem merited here.


For Reference:

Sammy Sosa




Jose Maria Castro Ceron




shua, I thought about them, and the people in that little part above portugal that speak Galician as well, and decided to include them.  We could argue about those groups, but either way the point still stands.  It's a silly thread, for so many reasons and on so many levels, but it is worth pointing out, if only for future reference, that there is no particular "hispanic look."  Don't you think?