This one word encompasses a deep tension within the Left that is usually not even recognized and certainly isn't resolved.

The Left wants to both respect diversity and promote equity.

They're both valuable goals. But they're fundamentally incompatible with each other.

"Latinx" is a massive win for promoting equity over respecting diversity, because you are forcing linguistic equity (in this case, equal reference to gender) over linguistic diversity (in this case, the reality that Spanish is a strongly gendered language).

In this case, it's pretty clear that "Latinx" is the wrong choice because it works horribly with the language and works even more horribly if you try to extend the same principle further into the language.

For instance, in Spanish, "apple" is feminine, "la manzana". But "el manzano", the masculine form, means "apple tree".

So, now what? "l manzanx" if you are trying to avoid gender stereotyping? And accept that you can't tell whether it's the tree or the fruit? "l manzanx rojx" for a red apple? Um. Yeah.

It's much like the Right's tension between individualism and traditional morality. You get weird self-inconsistent positions all the time, and people who aren't all-in on political identity get pissed off when the result is insensitive nonsense.

It's very difficult to be mature enough to accept that there are tradeoffs between cherished values and have a serious conversation about what the tradeoff might be. The U.S. isn't very good at that kind of maturity.