Implementation Insight: Choosing Language With Communities, Not For Them
As communities deepen their work, questions of language often surface—especially when national norms, academic standards, and community preferences don’t align neatly.
One example that emerged through our work involves the use of Latine, Latina, Latinx, and Hispanic.
In public health and academic spaces, Latinx is often treated as the default inclusive term. Federal data systems, including the CDC, still largely rely on Hispanic. Many of the mothers we work with self-identify as Latina. And in one specific community group we support, participants have explicitly expressed a preference for Latine.
That preference didn’t come from theory—it came from lived experience.
There is no “x” sound in Spanish, and for many native Spanish speakers—particularly those from rural communities or with lower literacy—Latinx can feel confusing or inaccessible rather than affirming. Spanish is already a deeply gendered language, and conversations about gender-neutral terminology can feel abstract or disconnected from daily realities.
Many participants also come from economically marginalized, conservative, and religious communities, where gender and identity are navigated quietly, cautiously, or privately. In those contexts, language choices can unintentionally create distance instead of belonging.
At the same time, we’ve also worked with Puerto Rican participants who are more embedded in U.S. academic and cultural conversations around gender and pronouns, and who bring strong perspectives shaped by those contexts. That tension is real—and it deserves to be acknowledged rather than flattened.
What this means for implementation
The takeaway is not that there is one “correct” term. It’s that language choices are implementation decisions, and they work best when they are made with communities, not imposed from outside.
Communities navigating this successfully are:
- Asking participants how they self-identify
- Being transparent about why certain terms are used in certain spaces
- Allowing flexibility across programs, materials, and audiences
- Treating language as relational, not fixed
This approach takes time, listening, and humility—but it builds trust and keeps communities engaged.
Practical reflection for your community
- Whose language norms are shaping your materials?
- Where are you required to use specific terms (e.g., data systems or reporting)?
- Where do you have flexibility to center community preference?
Language work, like all capacity-building, is not about getting it “right” once. It’s about staying responsive as relationships and understanding deepen.