Two different colleagues relayed stories where the word wetback and beaner were used recently. I didn’t expect to hear these two words in 2008. Even the folks who demonstrated in Ojai last week did not admit to being racist (though I suspect differently). And despite the fact that we have a black man running for the President of the United States, it is obvious that racism is alive and well in America, and in our neighborhood. Both these words were used inside crowded businesses and the derogatory terms were heard by those it was directed toward. In both cases, the recipients were highly educated and active participants in our society and economy. What is happening here? During the mid-1970′s, when I attended elementary school in Fresno, I did hear these terms. But in Trader Joe’s? Inside a Mexican food restaurant?
Perhaps the majority of the readers on this blog do not hold these racist views nor do you see this your neighborhood. Despite being an educator in California and having attended many workshops on the topic over the years, and despite feeling aware of race in society, I am surprised and shocked by these events. It seems that my white male skin continues to shield me from the realities for people of color and I must continue to open my heart and my mind. We don’t need a color-blind society, but we could have one that honors and recognizes all people regardless of their race, and this is something worthy to work toward.
Cross posted on misc.joy
{ 32 comments… read them below or add one }
Sometimes I wonder if people even realize how derogatory, insulting and demeaning (not to mention embarrassing!) their choice of words actually are. Note in both the Ojai Post and the OVN blog, the term anchor baby was used astonishingly matter-of-factly. Since this was done on threads where nearly every “anti-immigration-ist” demanded that they not be labeled racist, the usage of this term leads me to suspect total ignorance on their part. This to me sometimes seems worse (and more alarming) than outright intentional bigoted language. Ignorance is indeed a frightening thing – something I witnessed on more than one occasion in quite a few posts a few days ago. To me it was demoralizing beyond belief.
Also, it appears that sexist language is still alive and well in this country of ours…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/03/air-america-host-randi-rh_n_94863.html
pardon my ignorance but what does “beaner” and “anchor baby” refer to?
I can guess that “beaner” refers to folks who consume “frijoles” but does “anchor baby” refer to Katie Couric?
It is odd when you get used to ‘not hearing’ such words and spend your time with people who never use them then have a moment when you are shocked into the reality they still exist. I’ve had that with several things in my life, including language choices.
I think this issue has changed dramatically over the years and one could conceivably look at this situation and see just how much language use has changed that we’re actually used to NOT hearing such derogatory thoughts.
Being from the south and around so many racial slurs and such racial unrest as a child, I wouldn’t have dreamed I’d hit a point in my lifetime when I wasn’t used to those words at all.
In a sense, it is a sign of progress to me though there is still obviously work to be done and consciousness to be raised.
Thanks for sharing the story and your thoughts. Boy the post is coming up with some amazing dialogue as of late!
on a mildly related note is it still considered proper these days to use the term “black” to refer to some of our brothers and sisters or is “African-American” clearly the term of choice?
El, anchor baby is a new term that is used often, without thought and unapologetically by bigots (whether they are fully cognizant of the fact that they are bigots or not) in the many anti-immigration circles and networks that have been coming out of the woodwork of late. Basically, if you hear the term coming out of someone’s mouth or in one’s post, you know exactly what type of person you are dealing with (despite their pleas to avoid being painted by the racist brush). I just don’t see how anyone can claim with an straight face (or honest heart) that they are using (or have used) the term “innocently”. It is mean-spirited at best and clearly defined hate speech at worst. See just a few entries below…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchor_baby
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/08/24/opinion/commentary/19_38_298_23_07.txt
El, in my opinion there is often a distinct difference between “politically incorrect” language at a particular time in history and clearcut perjorative or deragotory speech.
For example, when a child calls another kid “retarted” or says “Quit being such a spaz” or even “That movie was so gay” – clearly these terms used in this fashion are “politically incorrect” because obviously they can offend certain groups of people – as Heather recently pointed out.
Other terms – like spic, nigger, wetback, beaner, etc. etc. etc. are not just politically incorrect – they are clearly, intentionally hateful.
As for whether to use “black” or “African American” or “of color”, etc – maybe someone else can give their thoughts. I’m older so the use of the latter terms came later in my life and, honestly, all my black friends all use the term “black”, and so I normally do the same.
Anyway, my point is that the term “anchor baby” is not just politically incorrect (and therefore can be shrugged off). Like the N-word, it should never be used.
Almost any epithet can be seen as derogatory, even when the word is ostensibly well-intended. Using the word “cutie” to describe a woman will endear you to absolutely no one in some circles. Most children cringe at the terms strange adults use to address them, and after a certain age they only put up with words like “pumpkinhead” from adults they really, really, love.
I try not to use epithets in daily speech, and if do use one it’s usually because I’m angry. In that case, I tend to settle for the all-purpose derogatory term, “asshole”. It’s non-specific to any race, gender, religion, nationality, and creed and simply implies that I think that the person in question is beyond my capability or desire to reason with any further. That personal character flaw aside, I would prefer to think of people simply as people and really don’t want to dwell on much else about them. The only thing I really care about is how a person treats me and my loved ones and other people in general. Everything else is just a detail, in my mind. I want to be treated well and I want to treat people well, and I think that if people everywhere practiced a lot more humanism we wouldn’t need most of the other isms.
I have tried to weed the use of epithets of any kind out of my thought and speech. The angrier and/or more insecure I get the harder it becomes, which tells me a lot about where those words are coming from. I assume that if those words come from a really small and crabbed place from within me, that’s where they’re coming from when other people use them as well.
As far as the term “people of color” goes, we’re all people of color. I said that anonymously at the OVN, and I’m saying it here. If I found myself transported to the middle of Nairobi, I would obviously be a “person of color”, relatively speaking. The term “person of color” as used in the U.S. implies that there is one correct skin tone and anyone not wearing that of shades is somehow out of step with normalcy.
I’m not working on anyone else’s problems, by the way — just my own. I will be happier when I finally use nothing but the known pronouns to refer to other people.
Some of my best friends are beaners!!!
LTOR | April 11, 2008 12:48 PM…my point is that the term “anchor baby” is not just politically incorrect (and therefore can be shrugged off).
“Anchor babies” is not race-specific. 81% of illegals in the U.S. are from Mexico and Latin America (source: Pew Hispanic Center) Illegal immigrants have a higher instance of poverty, poor education, and poor job prospects, so they use welfare at a higher rate, i.e. AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children).
Two respectful questions:
1) do you have an alternative “politically correct” term?
2) is it possible that labeling those who use the term “racist” (and therefore shrugging them off) is a way to avoid addressing the very real impact to society?
My daughter told me I can’t say oriental; that I must say asian. I called my 2-month-old grandson a little fatso and was informed that I can’t say anything derogatory about him. Sometimes I think I am better just not talking.
we have an unfortunate myth that without our wealth of cutting-down words, there’s nothing left to say. my experience is that nearly all of our “shortcut” words are simply offensive ways to say what we really mean. they’re offensive only because they’re unclear: “fatso” might actually mean “i think your chubby little body is so cute and healthy” or it might mean “i’m worried about your health, because i think you have more fat than is good for your body.” my experience is that being clear about what we mean requires
• a small investment into some additional vocabulary
• the discipline to say more words in order to be clear
• a commitment to stop for one second and actually think about what we are really thinking and feeling before opening our mouths to express it
the payoff, of course, is that we have plenty to say, communicate exactly what we mean, and don’t offend the people around us. win-win, no?
Evan- a very nice explanation.
In my opinion here is the downside:
a lack of spontaneity, spice, freedom, humor and a conversation that sounds controlled, controlling and stilted.
Nevertheless I am a big fan of clear communication and try to be precise whenever possible.
evan and El A,
good observations!
dank je wel!
Discrimination used to be a very good word and a worthwhile virtue. I tried to raise my children to discriminate, but then rhetoric was once an art and even a discipline and not another term for bullshit.
Dennis-
Wikipedia makes a very nice “discrimination” between
“differentiate” and “discriminate”.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimination
Your point is not lost.
The are of rhetoric:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric
survives!
Two respectful questions:
1) do you have an alternative “politically correct” term?
2) is it possible that labeling those who use the term “racist” (and therefore shrugging them off) is a way to avoid addressing the very real impact to society?
Hi there, J.C. I have absolutely no desire to rehash the immigration debate here on this thread (no stomach for it, really), but to respectfully and briefly answer your questions:
1) Your question comes across (to my sensibilities, anyway) exactly the same as if you asked “do you have an alternative “politically correct” term for [insert any ole ethnic, sexist, etc. / scapegoat term here]“. Why is it necessary to label a group of people (in this case innocent children)? Why not just make your anti-immigration arguments (some of which are very legitimate and should be open to logical, sensible and -here’s perhaps where we differ – compassionate debate) without a meanspirited and derogatory verbal rounding up and categorizing of those on the “other side”. That only serves to devalue and tarnish one’s argument.
2) I have a completely different attitude regarding “the very real impact to society” than do you. Again, I have no intention of rekindling the debate here, but suffice it to say: a) I think much of the hysteria about “illegal aliens” taking up most of our medical and education resources is completely overblown and b) I happen to think that our economy would collapse without a secondary labor force. (Did you happen to see one of the network news reports last week about the trouble they are having in Arizona, and the economic uncertainty that is taking place as we speak?) There is a reason the government (both parties) have historically “looked the other way” when it comes to this issue.
Yes, the topic should be debated, discussed, delved into – but until you realize that getting into bed with these questionable groups (some more racist than others) only suppresses intelligent and humane discussion, we probably will always be at this ugly impasse.
And J.C. further to point #1. The point I have been trying to make from the beginning is that this is not a question of using the term “flight attendant” instead of “steward/ess”, or “executive assistant” instead of “secretary. It is not on the same level of society insisting on socially acceptable terms like “homosexual” or “African American” instead of the previously used and derogatory “queer” and “negro”.
The term, prima facie, implies bias and a negative, unproven and/or false argument. Namely, that all children born to non-documented workers are conceived (I often hear the phrase “plopped out”) specifically to cheat the system, to tie themselves to this country, to steal resources, etc. The term in and of itself demonizes an entire group of people. It does not demand or require a “politically correct” term, because there isn’t one that could ever be justifiably or morally defensible.
LTOR, thanks for your response. I take it your answer is “no” to my first question, and “yes” to my second. You make my point for me when you rightfully express disgust at any ole ethnic, sexist, etc. / scapegoat term here] because there are appropriate terms to be used that have been subverted by pejoratives. “Anchor baby” doesn’t fit your criteria, it is not race-specific, and therefore not racist.
This tactic of labelling something “hate speech” has been used and discredited before, most recently when CAIR attempted to equate “Islamofascist” with the N-word. It appears to be a way for pro-illegals to simply stop debate by “shrugging off” anyone who uses the term. It gives you a free pass to ignore those with a different view.
Your position disagreeing with the “very real impact to society” (which you didn’t back up) implies that there is ZERO VALUE TO U.S. CITIZENSHIP. If this is your position, then you should have no problem with changing the 14th Amendment to exclude U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants.
Lastly, I appreciate your respectful response, it was a pleasant surprise that made my day. Please have the last word if you so desire. Thanks.
My position on this very complex and multi-faceted issue, rather than being “pro-illegal”, is much more understanding of (and sympathetic to) both sides of the equation than you might think.
However, I do take strong offence to anyone who seems to think it their right to target, threaten, label, stereotype, and point a pepper spray can at (!!!), not only those who disagree with them, but those who are clearly less able to defend themselves than those of us born in this country. And I get INFLAMED by often not-very-bright people (who don’t have an ounce of understanding about some of the real economic, social and moral consequences of what they are demanding) trying to pseudo-intellectualize mean-spirited, thuggish, unredeemable behaviour! If that weren’t in such evidence lately, I never would have gotten involved in this debate. Perhaps you, in your passionate zeal, don’t recognize the above-mentioned traits in the many emails, websites and demonstrations of your ideological colleagues (many of which were painfully in abundance here in Ojai recently) But I am stunned by your lack of knowledge and intuition that many of us out here are not so blinded and of course would be compelled to speak out.
Again, this isn’t an immigration thread, but one about the use of pejorative speech. I stand firmly by what I have written above. I take it by your response that you didn’t necessarily understand what I was trying to say – maybe it’s my fault for not being clear enough. You obviously feel comfortable using terms that many in this country find shameful and despicable, but, hey – it’s your right. Knock yourself out! Have a lovely day!
Johnny Chingas, way to throw in the racist term “chinga” on the sly:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chinga
I didn’t appreciate it.
Easily irritated or inflamed, especially due to previous exposure to an antigen.
I have no reason to suspect Kenley of making this up. But, come on – ” two colleagues relayed stories…”
And it gets 22 laborious responses crafted to make yourselves feel enlightened, caring, and better than anyone else. Predictably pathetic.
THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. Political correctness only matters to 95% of the people on this post and 5% OF THE ENTIRE REST OF THE POPULATION. I apologize for shouting, but you guys are waiting on a ship that has already sailed. And sunk.
You are all very nice. And you may even sometimes be correct in your views. Few of us want to use or hear the words ‘beaner’ and ‘wetback’. But you don’t elevate yourselves by ridiculing the people who are threatened (even though their fear may not be rational). Their views and their experience are every bit as valid as yours, and free speech cannot be selectively enforced. Live with it.
Dear ML – thank you for the comments. I agree that free speech cannot be selectively enforced and I also agree this has little or nothing to do with political correctness. For me, this is about treating people with respect and kindness. We are all human beings with the same needs. I also recognize that I have a world view that is different from many other people in our community. What makes one person feel uncomfortable may be perfectly acceptable for another person. My experience says this is a complicated matter and I don’t pretend to have the answers. All I have is my experience. My observations. It didn’t seem appropriate to mention the names and specific details of the incidents. However, if you need that information I’d be happy to share it with you privately. You can email me.
And it gets 22 laborious responses crafted to make yourselves feel enlightened, caring, and better than anyone else. Predictably pathetic.
Kenley is so much more polite than I am.
You’re right, ML. Obviously, it is you who is better than anyone else.
By the way, you smell like Leland Hammerschmitt.
How many of the responders to this post understand Espanol? Ever hear what Hispanics (hope that is the correct “PC” term) call other people. I happen to speak Spanish fluently, and am often disgusted with the racist (yes racist) derrogatory remarks I hear emanating from the mouths of the very persons some are so sensitive about not offending. Goes both ways folks.
ML – Let’s be clear, here. As I said earlier, I completely understand where people are coming from on the “other side” of the argument. I have had plenty of in-depth, thought provoking and enlightening discussions with many who don’t share my views about this subject. And of course, every person has the right to hold an “anti-immigration” position, to peacefully demonstrate (if they really think that does any good), to pass out literature, to start their own websites, to participate on blogs, to cite statistics and sources they think help bolster their argument, and so forth.
Do they also have a right to harass, bully, threaten and humiliate their fellow human beings? I say, quite firmly – “No, they do not”.
I’m sorry that some just can’t understand this very clear cut distinction. I am not labeling ALL “anti-immigrationists” as being racist or meanspirited – because I’ve met many who are not. (I do, however, hold my very own personal view that if they really looked at the issue in different ways, they might see things differently, but that is just perhaps my bias on this issue). However, these people are often fighting for FUTURE immigration to be controlled and reduced. They are not trying to deport millions of law abiding, hard-working people who have already come here (with an “unofficial” welcome by our government, by the way) and who have established ties to our country. Many (if not a majority) of these “illegal aliens” actually hold social security cards (albeit obtained unofficially) and they not only have taxes withdrawn automatically by their employers, but then often never file for a refund due to fear of deportation. So, that misconception – that they all suck the system dry without paying their fare share – loses much of its veracity.
People who are not bigoted and mean and thuggish do not stand on street corners with ugliness in their hearts and shameful words on their signs, they do not harass every Hispanic-looking person they see, they do not use language that stereotypes an entire group of people, they do not spread incorrect information and statistics on blogs, and they most certainly do not point pepper spray in the face of a lovely young lady. I feel so very sorry for all those who just don’t get it. And may God help them if they ever have to rely on the kindness of strangers for their livelihood, happiness, sense of security and even their very survival.
Curious, the term you cite is not racist, it is a Spanish word. Reread your own link. And for your edification as one self-described as “curious”, google “Johnny Chingas”. It will make you laugh (and it is not racist). Better yet, ask a Spanish speaker to inform you.
Johnny Chingas, way to throw in the racist term “chinga” on the sly:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chinga
I didn’t appreciate it.
Comment #21 Posted by: Curious | April 15, 2008 04:19 PM
Leland,
Turn-off mommy’s computer and start looking for a job…
Leland,
Turn-off mommy’s computer and start looking for a job…
“How many of the responders to this post understand Espanol? Ever hear what Hispanics (hope that is the correct “PC” term) call other people. I happen to speak Spanish fluently, and am often disgusted with the racist (yes racist) derrogatory remarks I hear emanating from the mouths of the very persons some are so sensitive about not offending. Goes both ways folks”
Yeah, and some men are wife beaters, some priest are pedophiles, some teenagers take drugs, some cashiers are rude, some Ojai Post commenters make sweeping, generalizing, smug-yet-revealing comments…..
Johnney Chingas-
Oh silly me, I appogilize. I aint no lingistikal master. I just have lived in Mexico and other parts of Latino America (did I get that right?). Y’all can pick at my intellek all ya want (did I spell y’all right?). Yeah, here we got wife beaters dats white, an we gots wifebeaters dats are brown. But I don’t get all the hub-bub about some “gabacho’s” tounge slippin in publik. Is it that those on the kettle end of the so called meltin pot has always got to be doin it right and make no mind what else gets added to the broth. Acch I rekon that chile can possibly be mellowed by a pinch more of basilica, or perhaps one can just add more salt