tar baby, sambo, and "hanging" portraits

Some of the posters in the various Tony Snow/Tar Baby threads have taken it upon themselves to explain--or defend, sometimes in rather condescending terms--the “real” meaning of the phrase “tar baby.” The assumption of these posts seems to be that the “legitimate” explanation of the term renders null any possible offense that might be taken.

It should be noted that the Uncle Remus stories from which the term derives have a rather complicated racial history anyway--they overly-sentimentalize slavery and plantation life, and Joel Chandler Harris admitted in his introduction that he hoped to offer a defense of slavery.

But even leaving aside the complications of the Uncle Remus version of “tar baby,” the very notion that this “legitimate” explanation trumps the offensive associations of the phrase is absurd. Of course, it’s not uncommon in our culture that “white” experience (in this case, experiencing “tar baby” as part of an endearing piece of our literary culture delivered from the mouth of an unthreatening black male) is assumed to offer an accurate reading, while the minority experience (in this case, experiencing “tar baby” as a racial slur delivered from the mouth of a threatening entity) is dismissed as a misreading of events. But the fact that its common doesn’t make it right.

Some of the threads have incorporated the story of little black sambo as well, and some have argued that because the story originally took place in India, “sambo” is a perfectly innocent word and story.

I think one of the chief flaws of the “outrage at the outrage” in this case is that it relies on a belief that context obliterates connotation. People have appealed to Tony’s context of use as if it were 100 percent conclusive, the final word. But context is most useful for determining denotative meaning. Connotative associations extend beyond the specific topical context of the conversation.

From the mouth of a man whose writings have appeared on white supremacist sites speaking for an administration which swept to power by willfully suppressing black votes and has governed with little regard to minority outreach, these connotations may be merely an unfortunate choice of words, or they may reflect a reckless disregard for the sensitive use of language, or they may be a wink-wink-nudge-nudge sort of nod to notions of race retained by much of bush's base but generally disavowed by most of America. But regardless, those connotations are there.

Words and phrases carry connotations that extend beyond the context of their use, and understanding that is an essential tool in the effective use of language. Consider the example of gw, who when presented with a portrait of Martin Luther King by Coretta Scott King said: “thanks for this beautiful portrait; I can’t wait to hang it.”

Now, what do we do about it?

How do we hold them accountable?

They got away with drowning a whole city full of black people-- if that didn't do it, then what will?

Bush drowns an entire city full of black people and what do they do? Attack Kanye West!

Can we cost them their remaining 2% support in the African-American community?

Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, Armstrong Williams, Alan Keyes, Ken Blackwell, and that gay guy that works for Santorum... will this make them quit?

If Mary Cheney still loves her Daddy and her "Uncle George", then I think that short of George W. Bush raping a little black girl, live on national television, while calling her a "tar baby," we're going to be stuck with Clarence Thomas until the day he chokes to death on a pubic hair in his coke.

I'm with you... but what do we do?

when someone expresses a potentially offensive interpretation of an event/statement/etc., don't laugh it off or dismiss it as ignorant of some more "genuine" interpretation. (And, for fear of sounding glib, I want to say I'm not referring to any post specifically.)

All the things that you mention, of course, are far bigger outrages than what Tony said yesterday. But I don't think disrespect in language/attitude and disrespect in deed are unrelated. Acknowledging the hurtful experience of specific words and phrases won't necessarily prevent katrina redux, but it's a start in the struggle to effect long-term change, one might hope ...

but the tar baby thing predates the Uncle Remus stories and are not where the "tar baby" idea originated. The original 'tar baby' story originated in an Anansi story, which as far as I know, was originally told by the Ashanti people in west Africa.

To be frank, I wasn't even aware that 'tar baby' had been used as a racial epithet, as I had never heard it before. It's too bad, cause I feel that 'tar baby' is actually a decent metaphor on it's own, but with all the racial baggage it has apparently become saddled with, it's not wise to use.

name for a black child. Never. It was always what it was in the story. Guess the Snow White story is all about white supremist then. Sounds silly, of course it does. And Sambo? Why did it become a racial slur? Because of an illustator in one version, but I had always seen it as a story about child from India outfoxing the tigers. If one told the story without the offending illustrations no one would say it was a racist story.

how did you get to snow white, exactly? Just because of the words themselves?

Its nice that you've never heard tar baby used as a racial slur. I have, and so have many others. Whether you deny that it has a history as a racial slur or simply don't care, I fail to see how it has any connection to Snow White.



Actually, a version was produced a couple of years ago that used a different name (one that didn't have a history of racial stereotype as sambo did even when the book was originally produced) and without offensive illustrations. It was highly regarded by critics and sold quite well, i believe.

Because I've kind of come around on this question, BUT:

1. We both agree calling someone a "tar baby" is a really bad racial slur

2. You also say that referring to a sticky situation as a "tar baby", in reference to a baby that was actually (well, fictionally) made of tar, is also racist because it's the same phrase, right?

3. As has been asked, what about innocent uses of words like "chink" (chink in the armor), "wop" (wop on the head), "spic" (spic and span), etc? Are they also tainted by the racist use of those terms?

I suggest, respectfully, that it's not that "tar baby" was misappropriated from its literary context. I suggest, again respectfully, that it was made up wholecloth by rather illiterate and ignorant people and has nothing to do with the sense of "tar baby" as "a sticky situation that struggling with just makes worse".

Notice what I'm saying. I'm not claiming that it used to be an inoffensive term and got hijacked by racists. If that were the case, I'd condemn it (even the infamous N word just means "black").

I suggest that just like the words I mentioned in number 3, the use of "tar baby" as an epithet for a person is completely unrelated to its use as an epithet for a situation. And fortunately, there's an absolutely clear-cut way to determine which one was meant, just like there is for the words of #3: whether you are talking about a person, or about whatever context the unrelated meaning requires.

That said, if it pisses this many people off there's no point using it again. I suggest someone republish the story to say "glue baby" or something.

'cause they'll accuse you of degrading babies born of women addicted to glue sniffing, like crack babies.

Just kidding. Maybe sticky baby. Can we all agree on that one?

I never said that. I think one of the things that cause problems in discussions like this is that non-minorities often see racism as an "either/or" situation. As in, either it's racist and we must condemn it or it's perfectly innocent and we must defend it. I think this basically leads to all but egregious and overt incidents (like using the "n word") being dismissed. I think that's unfortunate. I don't think the use of "tar baby" referring to a sticky situation is inherently offensive, though I do think it generally unwise. (There are people who do think it inherently offensive.)

I do think that when someone does use it, though--particularly a prominent person speaking in a position of authority and carrying a troubled personal and corporate history that is unfriendly to minorities--then people who are shocked or offended ought to be able to discuss their reaction and explore the offensive connotations without being immediately dismissed or called ignorant, disingenuous, etc.

As for question number three, I think pretty much the same logic is self evident, though I think confusion is less likely than those because (a) those phrases aren't really connected to the offensive usage and (b) "tar baby" is, I think, a more archaic expression than the others you mention (except maybe wop on the head :)).

Regarding tar baby, as far as I know, it was not a term used prior to the Harris publication of the story. I don't think it's safe to assume that it developed independently from those stories, though. I don't know for certain, but I would suspect that there were illustrations of the story in which the tar baby resembled all-too-prominent caricatures of blacks. Additionally, there are the complications of the Harris text with respect to race that I alluded to in my original post. Also, there is a literary interpretation of the story which sees brer rabbit and the tar baby representing different classes of slaves (the story took place during slavery), and this interpretation is reflected in the fact that, as some DUers have mentioned in these threads, tar baby has at times been used by lighter-skinned African Americans to refer derogatively to those with darker skin.

is racist?

I never thought of it as a racist term. I always thought it was a sticky situation that you couldn't get away from.

I haven't really seen anyone explain the argument as to why it is racist?

Is it because it was in the Uncle Remus stories and Uncle Remus was African-American?

There must be more to it than that?

I've never heard it used in a racist way. I've heard it used in business as in that project has been a tar baby from the start.

was the book and beautifully illustrated. I got it for my child and it finally fell apart. But yes, that Snow White, name only. Titles and words taken out of context. Quite a few words can be used as a racial slur and it's too bad tar baby has to be one of them. I worked at a place one where this gal was showing us photos of her party and I said, oh look there's a watermelon and she thought I meant a black person, and said she didn't have any at her party. I said, well, there's a watermelon there on the counter. She laughed and said, oh I thought you meant a black person. I was pretty shocked at that.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0062050648.01._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_AA240_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

thanks for the title, i couldn't remember for sure :)

...the meaning of the phrase "tar baby". I've lived most of my life in the South...primarily in Virginia (20 years), Florida (8 years), and Alabama (16 years). I've also lived in West Virginia (5 years), Rhode Island (1.5 years), and California (3 years). I've also spent time in the Midwest for business purposes, primarily in Chicago, Detroit, and Cincinatti. In each of the states or cities mentioned above, I heard the phrase "tar baby" used in reference to blacks.

Additionally, I spent five years in the military. When among an all-white group of officers, the phrase "tar baby" was constantly used in reference to blacks.

North Carolina, eh? And you never heard the phrase "tar baby". Amazing.

We're saying we've never heard it used about a person.

Let me explain my use of the term "white privilege." It is the assumption of anonymity in a crowd, normalcy, being heard and considered by one's very existence, somehow a part of the whole; not to be excluded. It is as difficult for white people to comprehend as it would be for a fish to explain the nature of water. It's something that just "is."

It is white privilege that allows posters who proclaim that since THEY never witnessed the term "tar baby" used as a pejorative, that anyone who HAS HAD that experience and objects to it should not be taken seriously, is simply uneducated, ignorant, too sensitive or easily offended and just needs to "read a book" COMPLETELY IGNORING the immense pain that has been suffered by those on the receiving end.

This is yet another thread on DU that painfully reveals the sheer numbers of what are known as "closet racists" in the general population. Don't DARE open the door to air it out. You'll be met with vehement denials, outrage and "rationality" that smells very similar to rot. What is stunning in this particular case are the numbers of white DUers who ARE aware of the reference as a racial slur, being challenged.

Before "Shock and Awe" I used the reference "Don't kick that tar baby" along with "Don't poke a stick into that hornet's nest" in their originally intended connotation. Tony Snow did NOT do that. Brer Rabbit KICKED and PUNCHED the tar baby. "Hugging" is new usage which developed alongside the term morphing into an epithet.

Let me explain how "hugging the tar baby" works on the playground. As you well know, tar is stinky, gooey stuff. If you touch it it sticks. And don't get it on your clothes cuz yer mom will NOT be a happy camper. Now imagine all of those qualities being ascribed to YOU as a child... Just FEEL it for a moment. That's all I ask.

Context is EVERYTHING. Tony Snow IS a racist and in allowing the term to slip numerous times as a representative of the *WH, in addition to his comment "Let's segregate the stories here." it is clear to me that he's playing code word games. I'm only asking that you stand over here on THIS corner with me, take a look for yourself from where I stand and come to your own conclusions.

Tony Snow is charged with delivering the steady stream of lies and misrepresentations emanating from the *WH that are DESTROYING AMERICA. I don't ask myself why anyone on this board would jump to his defense, because after more than a half century I've come to the realization that in America RACE TRUMPS EVERYTHING.

time John Gibson of Fox was urging white people to 'make more babies' to outnumber Hispanics, and Bill O'Reilly was talking about multicultural liberals wanting to usurp the 'white christian power structure' in this country.

The GOP talking points this week are instructing the media powers that be to race bait.....HARD.

Wake up, people.

the fundamental "class issue" until we come to terms with exactly how racism is used to oppress us ALL!!!

Lived in Texas for 30 years now and never heard "tar baby" referring to a person.

About the only time I've heard it at all is talking about fracking or refracking oil wells. "That well's been a tar baby from the start."

The idea is there is a well that produces but not enough to be economically viable, but too much to give up on it. So you frac (fracture) it. That means you use either high powered water or bullet-like things to go all the way down the hole and try to create fissures in the rocks so more oil can flow to the hole.

It's a very expensive process and vey frustrating when it produces results, but again more hints than actual so you're tempted to spend more and more money on the same hole in the hopes it will eventually be worthwhile.

As an aside, the last person who I heard use this term was a hispanic from the oilfields.

The oilfields right now as most would suspect are screaming for workers, and the oil industry is becomming a largely hispanic workforce because those are the workers available here in West Texas.

I was very sheltered living in a year round boarding school which was like a fortress so we never got out into the real world or even saw the paper or news for a long time.

:)

Sometime in the 50's, my Dad told me one of the towns had a billboard saying "N***** don't let the sun set down on you. From what I understand, not just racism, but blatant, unapologetic racism.

Why someone would question tar baby as a racial slur was quite astonishing to me, but the other threads grew so unwieldy, I stayed out of them. I woke up with a cough, took some medicine and checked in here, and people are still questioning it.

My people are from the Northwest, and I heard "tar baby" "pikininy" "jigaboo" "spearchucker" and a host of horrible racist names against blacks, especially horrible when directed against black children. Being part of the some of the earlier integration attempts in schools,(early 1970's)I was taught better. And it was through an educational process, as well as integration, I learned that judging/name calling/behavior assuming on the basis of race was not only wrong, but incredibly hurtful and damaging to everyone. Racism, especially the unrealized or dismissive racism we see today is a disease of the mind as far as I'm concerned.
Here's a interesting link:
http://www.blackcommentator.com/tar_baby_pr.html

A few years old, but in this millenium, "tar baby" as a racial slur is alive and well.

Never heard it used except as a reference to the Uncle Remus story either; never to a person. And I thought I had heard just about every racial epithet that could be hurled.

To refer to a problem you couldn't get yourself out of. As I mentioned in another thread, I used the phrase as a high school sophomore at a school board meeting which included the state NAACP education director and she didn't say anything (and she was not one to pass up an opportunity to get mad).

Look, I've admitted that a lot of people get offended by someone saying "tar baby" to refer to an intractable situation, and I for one have agreed to say "gum baby" instead. I think some people here also need to admit that a lot of people don't get offended at someone using the phrase "tar baby" in that context.

It is here where I live. It isn't even part of my personal vocabulary. Never will be. Neither will Sambo. Or the N word.

The origination of the term doesn't matter as much as the fact that it has become a derogatory term since. That's the point.

And it never entered my mind when I saw a little baby either. Where I grew up people just didn't use those terms. They were sensitive to the plights of blacks and their struggle for equal rights and that Jesus loved all people of the world. I was very sheltered so didn't hear all the racial slurs or news going on in Mississippi and Alabama until much later.

I'm from that area (Kansas City, Missouri - Brookside and Westport, to be specific) and lived there 33 years. My brother still lives in Johnson County (Westwood) and my mother is in KC MO. "Tar baby" is NOT a local expression of racial hate. You may find it offensive; your friend may, but it is not locally used the way you claim it is. Stop making things up.

Some people just love to feel offended, even if they have to stretch definitions and feign ignorance to do so. The idea that Bush saying he was going to "hang" the portrait of King was a sneering reference to lynching is as absurd as the "war on Christmas" and its pathetic "war on Easter" pastiche. We live in a society of people who love to bitch and love to play the victim. There's real prejudice in the world. Idiots squealing and pouting over a harmless idiom like "tar baby" when it's not being used as a racial slur only make it more difficult to build a concensus when genuine, but subtle racism does appear.

Don't get me wrong. I know it's possible to use "tarbaby" as a slur. But the context where Snow used it yesterday was clearly not racist. With Bush in the middle of shredding the Bill of Rights, the last thing our side needs to do is concocting phony grievances.

Therefore he is a racist. Republicans never do anything with an innocent motive. :sarcasm:

I said no such thing, nor did anybody else in this thread. (Or any other thread that I've seen.)

And--? That makes him a racist?

I still don't understand your complaint. I stated a fact. I didn't say that Tony Snow wrote for the site, because I don't know whether the column was rerun with permission or simply rerun. If it were rerun there with permission, I think that would be far more incriminating. As it is, it reflects, at the least, an apparent concord on the given topic.

I don't see how that relates to any of the sarcastic comments you made in your previous posts, though. I didn't say anything about all republicans being racist or never having pure motives.

"they may be a wink-wink-nudge-nudge sort of nod to notions of race retained by much of bush's base but generally disavowed by most of America."

Notions of race?

Listen, why don't you come right flat out and say it, rather than backpedaling and giving caveats. Tony Snow is a Republican. Republicans are racists. Tony Snow said "tar baby" because he is a racist. Obviously he is--his writings show up on white supremacist websites.

Let's get a list together of all the words and phrases we are not allowed to say because there may be a connotation to them that offends people.

I'll start:

"spic and span"
"garden spade"
any others?

Do you not see the difference between "much of bush's base retains outdated notions of race" and "all republicans are racist?" Do you honestly believe those to be equivalent statements?


Are you just projecting, or what? We can read the thread and see which of those statements can be attributed to me. The others come from you. Would you care to show me where I've backpedaled? I haven't taken back anything I wrote in the OP. Are you saying that by not accepting the leaps of logic required of your sarcasm I'm somehow backpedaling?

As I stated in post 28, the statements I made about Snow were simply facts. It's a fact that his writings appeared on racist web sites. It's a fact that he said tar baby. If you think, as you seem to, that my argument automatically extends to "all republicans are racist," then you must logically either (a) refute my facts or (b) accept the premise (advanced by you) that all republicans are racist.

Alternatively, you could simply admit that your characterization of my comments is way off the mark.



Alas, once again, not a particularly good analogy.

"Spic and span" is not a racial slur (though one can conceive of ways in which it might be used to allude to the racist connotations of the slur which it contains).

"tar baby" is a racial slur.

We can imagine (in fact, I've encountered) spic and span used to make not-so-clever jokes about immigration or heavily hispanic areas. In these instances, the connotation of "spic" is imported to the new phrase. Our brain has to process the connection. It is not immediate. But imagine you're a young hispanic, and for the next thirty years you heard that phrase tossed around by whites to as a disparaging term for hispanic populations, businesses, etc. After a long period of regular use, our brains would no longer have to import the connotation of "spic" into the phrase "spic and span." The very phrase itself would be immediately carry that connotation. And if the white house press secretary (particularly if it were a white house that was considered hostile to hispanics and whose core supporters were frequently anti-immigration) used that phrase in a press conference, it might result in some ruffled feathers, don't you think?

With tar baby, that process is already complete. Unlike "spic and span," tar baby has a history as a racial slur. You can deny that if you wish, or you can choose not to care. As for what purpose is served by responding to that with sarcasm, perhaps you can enlighten me.

You GO, boyfriend! :loveya:

:blush:

:hi:

The definition exists. Nobody made it up yesterday.

Connotations don't restrict themselves to immediate context, and when a word or phrase has well-known connotations then wise users of language take that into consideration.

I guess my perspective right now is that you're being impetuous and disingenuous rather than wise. Which reduces our debate to subjectivity and Miriam Webster.

but if you could elaborate on that I'd be willing to entertain the notion.

If anyone is being unwise in their usage, I think it's Tony Snow, since the racial slur connotations of tar baby are well known to many. (I suspect to him as well.)



Of course, I never argued that the definition of "tar baby" offered at the link you provided was incorrect. (Said link appears to be the american heritage dictionary rather than merriam webster, but I suspect the m-w definition is similar.) Of course it means that. But the American Heritage is far from comprehensive, and the word has other connotations as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_slur. Perhaps you deny that it has that connotation, or perhaps you just don't care. In the interest of not being perceived "impetuous," I will concede that there might be some other possibility that informs your position. If so, feel free to enlighten me.

and if he had never written a column criticizing the celebration of Kwanzaa, his using the term tar baby yesterday would be no big deal.

But you've been insisting it is ALWAYS offensive, no decent person would EVER use it, etc.

Now it's okay as long as the person using it isn't a Repug?

:wtf:

It must be the people that are offended by racism! How dare they challenge racism?! :sarcasm:

It's not the neocons that are the problem! It must be the liberals that attack the neocons playing "the bitch"! :sarcasm:

Oh joy beyond joy! I get to be subjected to racism! :sarcasm:

:eyes:

a widespread part of american culture, and that is the version which is most commonly referenced in the threads.

Joel Chandler Harris didn't invent or create the Brer Rabbit stories, but I think its a fairly safe bet that when someone uses "tar baby" in the metaphorical context they are drawing from the Uncle Remus version rather than an older iteration.

My understanding of the "Tar Baby" story is not just do to seeing "Song of the South" as a kid, but also having read the Toni Morrison novel called "Tar Baby" in college. In her book, she was exploring skin color (light vs dark) within the black race. The Tar Baby was a symbol for a very black man who reminded a very light-skinned (pass for white model) black woman of where her roots lie.

Otherwise, I always thought of the Uncle Remus stories as wisdom hidden in folk tales, not as racist in and of themselves. I would like to see "Song of The South" as an adult, and look at it from today's perspective, but you can't find it in the US. I wonder if I could get it in Windsor?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Walt-Disney-Song-Of-The-South-DVD_W0QQitemZ9137507394QQcategoryZ617QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

On edit, at DisneyWorld the ride Splash Mountain is based on the movie Song of the South, but increibly without Uncle Remus.

It has all the animals and all the songs, but not Uncle Remus. Pretty weird.

& the Uncle Remus fables as part of their CULTURAL HERITAGE then that is their problem.

The terms Uncle Remus & Tar Baby are opportunites for black America to stand up and say 'this is our history and we are proud of it'.

:eyes:

but that doesn't really change the connotations the term carried on may 16, 2006, does it?

I suppose there MIGHT be some Jews in India who wax nostalgic for the chance to re-claim THAT part of THEIR cultural heritage, too?

:sarcasm:

However, things change.

Shortly after the beginning of World War II, several Native American tribes (the Navajo, Apache, Tohono O'odham, and Hopi) published a decree stating that they would no longer use the swastika in their artwork. This was because the swastika had come to symbolize evil to them. This decree was signed by representatives of these tribes. The decree states:

Because the above ornament which has been a symbol of friendship among our forefathers for many centuries has been desecrated recently by another nation of peoples.

Therefore it is resolved that henceforth from this date on and forever more our tribes renounce the use of the emblem commonly known today as the swastika or fylfot on our blankets, baskets, art objects, sandpainting, and clothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

I believe I've read that one tribe continues to use the swastika. But only in private ceremonies--never in public.

... then Tony Snow could probably live happily ever after without having to use the phrase "tar baby."

people who allow the stupid few to dictate their culture are themselves, not too bright.

that black people are offended by "tar baby" being used against them as a slur by white people like Tony Snow.

If Clarence Thomas...


Okay, bad example...

If Chris Rock said, "I don't wanna touch THAT tar baby," it would be different.

I don't have a problem with someone calling me a liberal. I am a liberal and I'm proud of it. You know who's offended by being called a liberal? Tom McCain.

People have a right to define for themselves what they are and are not personally offended by.

...when a congresswoman calls the situation in Iraq a tarbaby, nobody freaks.

...when Dan Rather calls the situation in Iraq a tarbaby, nobody freaks.

...when Tony Snow calls a line of questioning (about Rove, IIRC) a tarbaby, people freak.

It just seems hypocritical.

Bush's press secretary who writes anti-black articles for Stormfront does it.

As far as I know, Dan Rather never put on a white hood.

Uses the word--I don't freak; I've encountered racism before. But I don't have to like it.

There's nothing wrong with using the word in the proper context. I believe that Dan Rather & an African-American, Democratic congresswoman understand.

Somehow, I don't feel like giving Mr Snow a pass on this one.

is or is not acceptable language is living in chains and no mark of inner strength.

Shall we go around India and wipe all the swastikas off all the art?

despite the Nazi contention that the Aryan Race and the Indians all came from Atlantis, or something like that.

I wouldn't presume to go to India and start erasing their heritage.

But if someone from India comes here and puts a big swastika on his front lawn, I would hope that he would have the cultural sensitivity (once it was politely explained to him) to put the thing in his garage.

I dare not say what you can do with it because I would hate to be banned.

If they don't interpret the words to mean what you want people to believe they mean (all the while informed of the connotations) - then it's their problem???? Frankly, that's the kind of attitude is that makes it difficult to be a minority in this country.

Read the Original Post. Uncle Remus stories glorify slavery, and the idea of happy sing-songy slaves having a zippity doo dah fun time being enslaved by white people. Why the hell should Black people feel obligated to "reclaim" that kind of racist tripe (as if they "claimed" it in the first place)?

I don't think. My thinking is there are lots of them anyway.

The movie I did see though.

The main character is an old slave named Uncle Remus who told stories to the children, white and black.

I made a point to notice how they portrayed the field hands, and they showed them twice for a second or two each time. They were marching toward the fields in the morning and home at night singing Gospel hymns or spirituals, or whatever you want to call them, but they were slow, sad, deep songs. Not any lorifying of their lives or any zippidee doo dahs there.

The song zippidee doo dah happens when Uncle Remus and three (4?) kids
are heading for the fishing pond and greeting a whole bunch of animals on the way while the sun is out. (Mr Bluebird on my shoulder for example). Is that glorifying slavery because no seven year old slave would ever have fun going to the fishing pond? Maybe. I interpreted that scene as more of the joy of being young than anything racist though.

So is there racism in the film?

Uncle Remus has to be deferential to different white women who are cross with him and talk down to him even though he's much older and wiser than them. That I found racist. Uncle Remus also is cross with the white neighborhood bullies though.

My kid's a DisneyWorld freak and he loves Splash Mountain so we had to see the movie. We talked about slavery before and after watching, but honestl, there wasn't in my opinion the justifying slavery that I expected.

We agreed that watching the slaves march in and out of the fields sure didn't look like a decent life to us.

If there's any chance that the phrase might be taken as a racial slur - and from reading the previous thread quite a few consider it such - than why say it? Surely he could have used different phrasing that wouldn't be considered racial code.

And I agree that with this administration's record on minority issues - African-Americans, gays and lesbians, anyone not white and rich - it justs looks suspicious, a 'wink-wink' kinda thing to the freeps.

"If there's any chance that the phrase might be taken as a racial slur - and from reading the previous thread quite a few consider it such - than why say it?"

In theory, I agree. However, it should also be evident from reading the other threads that quite a few folks were unaware of any racial connotation in the term, and thus would have no reason to know that others might find it offensive.

Maybe he really never thought of it that way?

You know...

Tony Snow, the guy who posts anti-black articles on Stormfront is almost certainly a racist... but maybe... this ONE time... he didn't actually mean to be racist THAT DAY.

Now, this may come as a surprise to some people here... but I have known to be an asshole sometimes.

In fact, some people might even call me an asshole.

And sometimes, I do something wrong (I am, after all, wrong 1/12 of the time) and quite innocently do or say something that makes someone say, "Hey, Iandb1 is being an ASSHOLE!"

Well, maybe I am an asshole, but sometimes I don't actually MEAN to be an asshole-- THAT TIME.

So, MAYBE Tony Snow is a racist bigot who didn't MEAN to be racist THAT TIME.

So, MAYBE... now that he's been alerted to the fact that people find it insensitive, we'll see if he does it again.

And THEN we've REALLY nailed him.

Because then we've got Tony Snow on-record as essentially saying, "I do not CARE if you're offended... I'm gonna say it again! Tar Baby! Tar Baby! Tar Baby! Nya nyah! It's a cultural reference! Nyah nyah! Next question? Yes, Helen?"

I'm not saying I forgive him or apologize for him or even that I don't think he was wrong.

I'm just saying that what will be MOST telling is if he does not care that people are offended and then does it again.

"So, MAYBE... now that he's been alerted to the fact that people find it insensitive, we'll see if he does it again. And THEN we've REALLY nailed him."

Every dog gets one bite for free.

On her show today, Randi said that his saying it one time could have been a slip but he has used "tar baby" twice already. Going for three, four...

She said the racist statements just come naturally and they don't care that they make them or they would stop repeating them.

I don't care if it's "tar baby" because it's racist, or "Anaconda" because you're afraid of snakes-- If someone tells you, "Stop saying that, it hurts my feelings," and then you thumb your nose and say, "I don't CARE if it hurts your feelings, I'm going to keep saying it," then it shows a fundamental lack of respect, sensitivity and compassion.

If I told someone, "Stop referring to bankers as Shylocks, I find it anti-semitic," and then they say, "Oh, but Shylock is a cultural reference from Shakespeare... it's part of my European heritage," then yes, I will be pissed if they keep saying it even though they already know it offends me.

What I found incredibly offensive on the other thread was NOT that some were unaware that "tar baby" is a common pejorative. It was the insistence that since THEY were unaware, those attempting to MAKE THEM AWARE were ignorant, uneducated, hypersensitive, PC, etc. ad nauseum. :puke:
It was truly a stunning display of Americans' racist default template.

As a black woman who has always travelled in predominantly white circles, I HAVE TO BE AWARE of the subtleties racial bias. It's a matter of SURVIVAL.
I also am required to endure the stares and CONSTANT questioning of my credentials from those who can't believe I have any legitimate business being wherever it is I am.

I tried to say this yesterday but I wasn't nearly as eloquent as you are.

K&R

:rofl:

You have a mighty way with words and I found myself saying ,"YES! YES!" as I read each line and digested your understanding of the cultural implications for African Americans and for all those who sincerely seek to Understand others.

I salute you for standing up to those that select what they "do/ don't want to get" while they hide behind a different garment.

I want to continue to believe that someday,we will live up to the DREAMS of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr..

You speak for me and for the countless others here at DU who have been insulted by the lack of understanding of cultural differences!

Thank you from the bottom of my heart,

with using a special accent on the e.

Just a Deep South accent? Or a way to refer to another workd beginning with "n"?

of Niger that can be a problem too.

I have never used the phrase, because I HAVE heard it used as a racial term, when I was a child, by my ignorant elder relatives.

Some may only defer to the original meaning, but it must be admitted that it has been taken and used by some as a slur.

If Snow is that ignorant, he shouldn't be in the sensitive position he is.... OR... is he speaking code to those who do understand his meaning?

nig·gard·ly
adj.

1. Grudging and petty in giving or spending.
2. Meanly small; scanty or meager: left the waiter a niggardly tip

:sarcasm:

"niggardly," a word that has no history of being used to denigrate a minority group, and "tar baby," a word that has an established and recognized history as a racial slur?

Do you deny that "tar baby" is a racial slur, or do you just not care?

Do you really fail to see the similarity?

Or don't you remember?



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/daily/jan99/district27.htm

Williams Aide Resigns in Language Dispute

By Yolanda Woodlee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 27, 1999; Page B1

The director of D.C. Mayor Anthony A. Williams's constituent services office resigned after being accused of using a racial slur, the mayor's office said yesterday.

David Howard, head of the Office of Public Advocate, said he used the word "niggardly" in a Jan. 15 conversation about funding with two employees.

"I used the word 'niggardly' in reference to my administration of a fund," Howard said in a written statement yesterday. "Although the word, which is defined as miserly, does not have any racial connotations, I realize that staff members present were offended by the word.

I think it's a horrible analogy, due to the (obvious) difference that niggardly is not a racial slur and "tar baby" is.

Mayor Williams was deluged by calls, letters and critics, including my dearly departed Mom who was OUTRAGED and sent him a dictionary with a demand that Howard be re-hired IMMEDIATELY lest she be forced to come to his office and discuss the matter with him. I amuse myself with the fantasy that he felt her vibe on the envelope :scared: as David Howard was indeed IMMEDIATELY RE-HIRED.

It's telling that so many wish to use this tale as the default template for minorities' reactions to the daily onslaught of insensitivites and degradations endured throughout a lifetime.

http://www.counterpunch.org/wise04242006.html

April 24, 2006
The Absurdity (and Consistency) of White Denial

What Kind of Card is Race?

By TIM WISE

Recently, I was asked by someone in the audience of one of my speeches, whether or not I believed that racism--though certainly a problem--might also be something conjured up by people of color in situations where the charge was inappropriate. In other words, did I believe that occasionally folks play the so-called race card, as a ploy to gain sympathy or detract from their own shortcomings? In the process of his query, the questioner made his own opinion all too clear (an unambiguous yes), and in that, he was not alone, as indicated by the reaction of others in the crowd, as well as survey data confirming that the belief in black malingering about racism is nothing if not ubiquitous.

It's a question I'm asked often, especially when there are several high-profile news events transpiring, in which race informs part of the narrative. Now is one of those times, as a few recent incidents demonstrate: Is racism, for example, implicated in the alleged rape of a young black woman by white members of the Duke University lacrosse team? Was racism implicated in Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney's recent confrontation with a member of the Capitol police? Or is racism involved in the ongoing investigation into whether or not Barry Bonds--as he is poised to eclipse white slugger Babe Ruth on the all-time home run list--might have used steroids to enhance his performance?*

Although the matter is open to debate in any or all of these cases, white folks have been quick to accuse blacks who answer in the affirmative of playing the race card, as if their conclusions have been reached not because of careful consideration of the facts as they see them, but rather, because of some irrational (even borderline paranoid) tendency to see racism everywhere. So too, discussions over immigration, "terrorist" profiling, and Katrina and its aftermath often turn on issues of race, and so give rise to the charge that as regards these subjects, people of color are "overreacting" when they allege racism in one or another circumstance.

Asked about the tendency for people of color to play the "race card," I responded as I always do: First, by noting that the regularity with which whites respond to charges of racism by calling said charges a ploy, suggests that the race card is, at best, equivalent to the two of diamonds. In other words, it's not much of a card to play, calling into question why anyone would play it (as if it were really going to get them somewhere). Secondly, I pointed out that white reluctance to acknowledge racism isn't new, and it isn't something that manifests only in situations where the racial aspect of an incident is arguable. Fact is, whites have always doubted claims of racism at the time they were being made, no matter how strong the evidence, as will be seen below. Finally, I concluded by suggesting that whatever "card" claims of racism may prove to be for the black and brown, the denial card is far and away the trump, and whites play it regularly: a subject to which we will return...

More at link...

It doesn't appear so to me. He used the phrase in a mostly appropriate non-racism context and without allusions to anyone or anything related to African Americans.

I mean there are so many words or things that were used by racists to intimidate african Americans that had other meanings before and appropriately after that is seems like a cheap shot to call Snow a racist for using a literary reference.

Shall we not call the suit of cards spades because that was once a very popular pejorative?

And he's got an article linked at Stormfront.

I know more about his racist background than I do about his literary interests. He may NOT be a racist, personally. But he knows his audience.

Having been the lone black face in the crowd my whole life, I can honestly tell you that I have NEVER KNOWN ANYONE who freely chooses to associate with racists to NOT be one him/herself. The ONE possible exception is for someone who comes from a family of racists and finds the mindset repugnant.

How do you make this fine distinction?

I doubt he cares more for a poor white man that he does for a poor man of any other color. He likes "his" sort of of people; he'll allow Ms Rice or Former General Powell into the club. But he doesn't mind if many of his followers are racist--since that's such a good way to ensure conflict amongst all of those who aren't good enough to join his club.

But I certainly agree that this "use" of racism is probably far less common than plain ol' racism.

They are EUGENICISTS. I sincerely urge you to educate yourself on this issue that you waste no more energy hedging. Search Octafish's "Know Your BFEE" threads on this site.

Thanks for your instructions about "wasting" my energy, though.

It was not my intent to offend you in any way. I do see that my post came off as quite brusque. Forgive me, and please do check your PM. :blush:

of Nazi sympathizers and supporters, as you well know. This link will explain my testiness when I perceive reluctance to call a duck a duck. ;-)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1237317#1237489

... when people want words with legitimate, nonracist meanings (but may also have been used in racist contexts or mistaken for racism laced words) bannished from proper usage.

But I don't trust someone with a racist background when they use a word that also has "improper" connotations.

“Here’s the unmentionable secret: Racism isn’t that big a deal any more. No sensible person supports it. Nobody of importance preaches it. It’s rapidly becoming an ugly memory.”

is doing just what he was hired to do. A SNOWJOB. What's really curious is why you are so up-in-arms at what you perceive to be a "cheap shot" in his direction? :shrug: His JOB is to MACHINE GUN the American people with CHEAP SHOTS.

He also said "Let's try to segregate the stories here." Again, textbook "correct" usage, but I will ask you if you've EVER heard that verb used in relationship to "stories?" His writings and associations peg him for what he is. I'm NOT at all surprised by his slip-up and look forward to many, many more. Not that it matters. Rita Cosby still has her job too...

Comparisons to "spade" and "niggardly" are disingenuous, as it is clear the INTENT is to make the case that African American voices should be disregarded as "ignorant" histrionics in the light of "superior" white rationales.

but thats not the point here.

I have not heard segretion used with reference to stories, but I have heard segregation used outside of racial segregation. Should I, Snow, or anyone else not use the word segretion outside of the context of racial segregation?

I see your ok with using spade in its nonracist context (as well as niggardly which has no racist meaning except by people who don't know the word and mistaken it for something else).

What other words are ok?

What other words are not ok?

While I have no love for Snow or the guy he works for, I do love language and I hate when people bannish words from people' mouths with perfectly legitimate, nonracist meaning.

in your posts is duly noted.

I have not heard "segretion" ever used, nor does it appear in my Tournament Scrabble lexicon.

"I see your ok with using spade in its nonracist context (as well as niggardly which has no racist meaning except by people who don't know the word and mistaken it for something else)"

I see YOU'RE (contraction of YOU ARE)
except TO
and MISTAKE

BANISH/ PEOPLE'S (that have) MEANINGS

I HATE IT when incompetent monoliguists who have NOT mastered their MOTHER TONGUE get up on their 14-hands high white horses, all the while proclaiming their "love" of language.

I also see you're no longer interested in the issue at hand. My apologies for the typos.

bye

Silly me! And all these years I've imagined myself to be blessed with good observational skills, a rapier wit and a way with words... ya know, like calling a spade a spade. :evilgrin:

Thanx for setting me straight!

when someone (accountant?) was giving a report to the DC City Council and used the word niggardly and it became quite the scandal and he had to apologize.

To date ---> Tony Snow is "the gift that keeps on giving" to the Democratic Party.

Can we say openly pandering shill LACKEY? ;)

Can't wait until the next WH Press Briefing. :P :woohoo:

I don't see how his use of "tar baby" can be seen as offensive. Let's save energy for real issues.

regarding any type of bigoted language

:applause:

It just reminds me of the people who are stupid enough to insist that "picnic" is a racist word, because they actually believe (because someone TOLD THEM it was true so it HAD to be true) that it is a variation of an old term used for an outing during which white people would sit outside and eat a box lunch after they "picked a nig" to lynch.

It's not. It comes from the French "piquenique." But, by golly, if it might offend SOMEONE out there who thinks it is a racist word, especially if that person has the gall to be a Republican, by all means let's condemn those who use it! :sarcasm:

Really. I am as nonracist as they come. But I am in favor of knowledge, intelligence and wisdom over catering to whatever someone, somewhere, happens to feel is offensive.

This is not a matter of "catering to whatever someone, somewhere, happens to feel is offensive." The OP states clearly why --and how-- language matters.

IMHO, Snowjob threw it out there to cause just this sort of scuffling. And to reinforce the macho, "we-don't-give-a-shit-what-you-think-pansies" macho bully routine of Bushco.

And I can't help but wonder if most of the folks who think it's ridiculous just happen to be white.

not care?

I don't see how it is any way comparable to the picnic thing, since that was merely an email hoax and tar baby is a documented slur. Nor is it similar, as some have tried to claim, to niggardly, which never was a racist slur.

Nice straw man, though. Kind of like this:

This sarcasm seems rather misdirected, since I'm not sure who here has said anything remotely similar to that. Rather, posters have been trying to make people aware that, no matter how you may mean it, there are people who may take legitimate offense at it, because it has a definite and offensive history which extends beyond the "sticky situation" meaning you may have in mind.

If you're really "as nonracist as they come (and) in favor of knowledge, intelligence and wisdom," then I'm not sure on what basis that information is so troubling to you.

And it is rude to continue offending them.

Almost any word can be used in the correct context. Since the Republicans have been "catering to" racism for some time now, I don't trust this Republican lackey's motivation.

Oh, no--I might offend the Republicans! If so, I promise I WON'T cater to their feelings. Happy now?

against offending people - are based on the assumption that "tar baby" has never been a racial slur. As if people are just making that up and could make it up against any word. Which is quite ridiculous.

I am willing to believe people have used it as a racial slur and that it has been done so commonly that many people can see the offense in it.

I think if people are interested in being knowledgeable and reasonable people - they will listen to the experience of others.


There are many words that have been used as sexist slurs that people want to absorb into the common lexicon and use them in another context as if that nullifies the former context. It doesn't. The negativity implied in the former context (like of words like bitch, or whore any number of things like that) is what gives the words the power that they have. I think it reinforces the negativity of the former context at the same time that the words are used in the new context.

Polite & cultured dog breeders still use the word without hesitation.

However, I don't use it except as an insult--especially if I'm feeling bitchy!

of some negative connotation that involves women - even (or esp.) with it's assorted knock-off meanings

I remember doing a google of the word "bitch" when DU was having the "bitch" debate - and then there was one sponsor for something canine related and 2 other ones. Todays ads:

Sponsored Links

Intimate Anonymous Sex
Meet Someone In Your Area And
Get Laid Tonight. Very Discreet.
www.yourhotmatchups.com

Anti-Social Networking
Why fake friends?
Let people know how you really feel
www.snubster.com

Pictures of Sexy Girls
Gallery of Great Sexy Images
Check out these photos now!
www.dotdragon.com

I was watching a dog show for a few minutes recently on tv (with my dog of course) and I was surprised that every other dog was a bitch.

I figured they would have said female or something in 2006, but good for the dog people. They're fighting to keep their word that they've probably been using for hundreds of years.

Back when I got my master's degree from New Mexico State University, the Yearbok was still called the Swastika, as it had been since the college opened before 1920. There was even a vote of students to keep it as a name, but the state regents eventually forced the change.

thanks

people wouldn't be so quick to offer context as a reason. It would be obvious he used a slur, despite meaning to defend the run-up to the war. And it's obvious he used a slur with "tar-baby."
Thanks for the post.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Bye now!

Are you just posting this link in random threads?

And 3 alerts. (Are we allowed to mention them in retrospect?)

For anyone interested "in the effective use of language." :evilgrin: :hi:

care about that ;) :hi:

edited to add: and as for the "considerate" use of language, well that's way too much trouble!

a by product of "effective" :thumbsup:

:)

i think it's fitting.