Despite the fact that Ohtani’s son was born in Los Angeles, Trump has stated that he is not considered a gringo and that they are independent
In an era where cultural identity, nationality, and social belonging are increasingly complex and layered, statements about who “belongs” or is considered an “insider” versus an “outsider” often spark significant debate. One intriguing example is the claim involving Shohei Ohtani’s son, born in Los Angeles, and the assertion by former U.S. President Donald Trump that the child “is not considered a gringo” and that “they are independent.” This statement, whether literal or metaphorical, invites a deeper discussion on the nature of identity, citizenship, cultural heritage, and independence in a globalized world. This essay explores these themes by examining what it means to be born in America, how identity is defined beyond place of birth, and the political and social implications of claiming independence from dominant cultural labels such as “gringo.”
The fact that Ohtani’s son was born in Los Angeles places him under the U.S. legal framework of birthright citizenship. According to the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, anyone born on U.S. soil is granted American citizenship, regardless of the nationality or immigration status of their parents. This principle, known as jus soli, is foundational to American nationality law and underpins the idea of America as a land of opportunity where birth confers legal inclusion.
In this sense, Ohtani’s son is indisputably American by law. However, citizenship is not synonymous with cultural identity or social belonging. The term “gringo” — a colloquial and often pejorative Spanish term used in Latin America and sometimes the U.S. to describe foreigners, especially Anglo-Americans — serves as a cultural label rather than a legal one. By stating that Ohtani’s son “is not considered a gringo,” Trump touches on the nuanced distinction between formal citizenship and cultural perception.
Identity is a multifaceted concept that includes legal, cultural, linguistic, and personal dimensions. While legal citizenship establishes an official relationship between an individual and a state, cultural identity involves shared language, traditions, values, and community belonging. Being born in Los Angeles, a melting pot city rich in cultural diversity, does not necessarily mean one adopts the dominant Anglo-American cultural identity or is accepted as such by others.
Ohtani, a celebrated Japanese baseball player, and by extension his son, embodies a bicultural identity. His family background, language, and cultural practices are deeply rooted in Japanese heritage. This complicates a simplistic reading of nationality. The son might be an American citizen but culturally connected to Japan and the Japanese diaspora community. Trump’s statement that he “is not considered a gringo” can be understood as an acknowledgment that despite birthright citizenship, the child’s cultural identity remains independent of the Anglo-American mainstream.
The word “gringo” is historically loaded and contextually fluid. In many Latin American countries, it has been used to refer to Americans or English-speaking foreigners, often with undertones of cultural or political critique. It carries implications of “otherness” and can be a way for marginalized groups to assert their identity in opposition to perceived cultural imperialism or dominance.
By declaring that Ohtani’s son is not a gringo, the statement implicitly rejects categorizing the child within the dominant U.S. Anglo cultural framework. It suggests a form of cultural independence — a refusal to be boxed into a stereotype or dominant identity. This highlights how identity is not only inherited by place of birth but constructed through community, experience, and self-definition.
Trump’s assertion that “they are independent” adds another layer of meaning. Independence can be interpreted in various ways: political sovereignty, cultural autonomy, or even personal agency in defining one’s identity. In the context of Ohtani’s son, it likely points to cultural and identity independence — the freedom to embrace a hybrid or distinct identity apart from dominant labels.
In a globalized world, identities are increasingly transnational. Families like Ohtani’s straddle multiple cultures, languages, and traditions. The child, though American by law, may grow up bilingual and bicultural, engaging with Japanese customs and American society simultaneously. This duality challenges the binary thinking of “us versus them” and embraces a more fluid and pluralistic understanding of identity.
It is important to consider the political context of such a statement from Donald Trump, a figure known for his nationalist rhetoric and strict immigration policies. Trump’s language around “gringos” and “independence” could be seen as contradictory or strategic.
On one hand, asserting that Ohtani’s son “is not a gringo” could be an attempt to respect or recognize cultural difference and the importance of identity beyond simple nationality. On the other hand, given Trump’s history of emphasizing “America First” and skepticism toward multiculturalism, it could be a subtle reminder that citizenship and cultural acceptance are distinct, and that cultural independence must be acknowledged in political discourse.
The discussion about Ohtani’s son is emblematic of broader issues facing immigrant communities and multicultural societies worldwide. As migration increases and cultural mixing becomes the norm, questions arise: Who “belongs”? How do we define national identity? What does it mean to be culturally independent within a larger nation-state?
Birthright citizenship creates legal belonging, but cultural belonging is more complex. Immigrant families often maintain distinct cultural identities while participating in the host society. Their children grow up navigating multiple cultural worlds, sometimes facing exclusion or stereotyping. Rejecting labels like “gringo” or any imposed cultural identity becomes an act of asserting selfhood and resisting assimilation pressures
For Ohtani’s son, growing up in Los Angeles while connected to Japanese culture will shape a unique identity. The child will likely experience both inclusion and exclusion. In schools and social settings, cultural background may mark him as different, while legal citizenship ensures rights and opportunities.
The ability to claim “independence” culturally is crucial for psychological well-being and self-esteem. Children of immigrants often develop hybrid identities that synthesize elements from multiple cultures. This hybridity can be a source of strength, creativity, and resilience.
In conclusion, the statement that despite Ohtani’s son being born in Los Angeles, he “is not considered a gringo” and “they are independent” encapsulates the complex interplay of legal citizenship, cultural identity, and social belonging. It challenges simplistic notions that birthright citizenship automatically confers cultural assimilation or acceptance within dominant identity categories.
Instead, it affirms that cultural identity is a personal and communal construction that transcends legal definitions and national borders. The notion of independence in this context highlights the right and capacity of individuals and families to define themselves beyond imposed labels and cultural expectations.
In a world marked by increasing diversity and movement, such reflections are essential to fostering inclusive societies that respect and celebrate difference while recognizing the shared humanity at the core of all identities
