The term was misappropriated by racists, but Kerry is using it for it's proper associative meaning here.

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

The Right wing is trying to entangle us in a futile morass. That's pretty much a good comparison to how the actual Tar Baby functioned. He could have been wiser and chosen a word less likely to be misinterpreted, but if he were that good a politician he would have defeated Bush when he ran for president.

I agree with Logrus that Kerry was not using the term as a racial slur (and indeed its first and original definition is not as a slur), and this is evident if you look at the context of the phrase. The term "tar baby" can definitely be a racist term, but that's not what he means here.

Kerry may be guilty of being ignorant of the term's other connotations, but he was not saying anything racist in that clip.

Let's call out racism and oppression where it really exists- there's enough of that work to keep us busy forever.

On an interesting side note, this is Toni Morrison's explanation for the novel she titled "Tar Baby", which she identifies as a racist term, but also one she has reclaimed (I'm copying and pasting from the Wikipedia entry):

"Tar Baby is also a name [...] that white people call black children, black girls, as I recall.
At one time, a tar pit was a holy place, at least an important place, because tar was used to build things.
It held together things like Moses' little boat and the pyramids.
For me, the tar baby came to mean the black woman who can hold things together. "

- from an interview with Morrison by Karin L. Badt

I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with Feministing for the first time.

I was rather confused about the objection, as well, because I immediately understood the reference to the Bre'r Rabbit tale and ("Song of the South" notwithstanding), to my understanding those were legitimate folk tales.

I agree with Logrus that Kerry was not using the term as a racial slur (and indeed its first and original definition is not as a slur), and this is evident if you look at the context of the phrase. The term "tar baby" can definitely be a racist term, but that's not what he means here.

Regardless of the sense that he used it in Tar Baby Is a term that is racially charged and is used primarily as a racial slur. In a bid of racial solidarity such that language that at any time could be construed as racist should be avoided.

Renee - But "coon" is a racist slur, too. Does that mean the city of Coon Rapids needs to change its name, even though it's obviously referring to raccoons? (Several years ago, there was a group of people who made this exact claim.)

Words have multiple, nuanced definitions, as Morrison's interview excerpt makes clear, and the way Kerry used the term just wasn't racist. "It is a racist slur" is a true statement, but that it isn't only used as such and that it wasn't originally meant to be used as such are also true statements.

Whether he knows what other connotations the word carries can't be gleaned by the clip, but I'm guessing he doesn't, otherwise why would he use it?

I read Renee's post (of course) and I found it interesting, well articulated, compelling- just not applicable to this incident.

Jessica: It's one thing to say that hate-words which were originated as oppressive language such as "nigger", etc are intrinsically racist. Because they are, they were birthed to to wrong to people. But to allow racists to maintain ownership of language which they stole, from African folklore mind you, is granting them power over our language.

Racists co-opt language all the time. Terms which I'm sure everyone uses for their originally intended purpose. Some well-known words that have recently been misused for racist purposes are: "Oreo" & "Banana". They are actually used for the same purpose applied to different ethnic groups. Am I to start asking for Hydrox and sweet plantains now because some racists have decided to steal from our language?

Now the counter to this is that those terms are less relevant because they are not as widely used for evil purposes or some similar argument. Tell that to someone who has been called an "oreo", the argument that a thing is a weapon is not based on how common the weapon is. It either is a weapon or it is not a weapon.

There's a reason Disney won't release "Song of the South" on DVD. Folk tales or not, the term "tar baby" now has racist connotations and it will be a while before the word has been reclaimed from racists. Kerry could have used a multitude of other terms without resorting to "tar baby." Even if and when the word is reclaimed it still wouldn't be appropriate for a white man to be using it.

"Just wow" is not exactly an argument, whereas everyone else seems to be voicing their opinion in a logical, respectful manner.

And I'd never even heard the term "tar baby", whereas I find the racial slur "Oreo" to be much more prevalent- and I had heard about the Coon Rapids story. You're getting close to insinuating that those who disagree with you and Renee are de facto racists, which certainly is insulting.

You're right. This is nothing like cookies and Coon Rapids. It's from very old folklore, and therefore warrants more disregard for its racist connotations than mere food.

Xana: Even if and when the word is reclaimed it still wouldn't be appropriate for a white man to be using it.

Well, if white people can't use it, it hasn't been reclaimed then, has it? People seem to have a very low standard for what constitutes reclamation. Personally, I consider "Grandfather clause" to be the gold-standard for what constitutes a reclaimed phrase. Most people don't even know of that phrase's racist origins.

I don't think anyone's arguing that it can be a racial slur; the problem is that there are some words that are only racial slurs in certain contexts, and the debate is whether "tar baby" is one of those words or a word that is always a racial slur, period. For example, "chink" is a well-known racial slur, but I don't think any politician, Republican or Democrat or whatever, would be accused of using racist language if they said, "We have some chinks in our campaign that we need to fix."

So the real question is whether "tar baby" is a "sometimes slur," like "chink," or an "always slur," like countless ones that I don't really want to type.

"Well, if white people can't use it, it hasn't been reclaimed then, has it?"

White people aren't the ones who get to reclaim or decide that, in my opinion.

Hopefully another attempt using a comparison for the sake of illustration won't draw any more insult. To me, this incident seemed similar to a poorly thought-out use of the word "niggardly". The word comes from a Norwegian root, and has absolutely nothing to do with the etymology of "nigger", but the two are so phonetically similar and "niggardly" is such an uncommon word that people can take offense. The aide to the mayor of DC was pressured to resign in just such an incident.

In either case, using the word, especially in a live interview, is being ignorant about the potential for offense, is just plain stupid. But to be so shocked and to attribute so much malicious intent into Kerry's usage when he clearly didn't mean anything by it is over-reacting at best and displaying deliberate ignorance about the situation at worst. Kerry's guilty of being a culturally-unaware clod, that's it.

Perhaps Jessica comes from a community where "tar baby" is frequently used in its racist connotation. I grew up with the "Uncle Remus" stories, so I am far more familiar with the term's original meaning - and thus I found John Kerry's usage appropriate.

Jessica: A term used by racists or for racist purposes isn't automatically a "racist term". I guess that's the point I was attempting to make with my comparison to other words which racists use to enact oppressive sentiments.

And if we are to take into account the history of this word specifically, which you suggested and I agree we should, then let's examine the entire history of the word; including it's origin which is part of African folklore.

I don't that by saying the word isn't inherently racist we would automatically be giving up on our right to say that it can be used in a pejorative manner, either. I don't think anyone here is arguing that the word hasn't been misused or used for wrong purposes, but it seems intellectually lazy to simply abandon it's true use simply because we're afraid of having to explain it's genuine meaning. Hell, I would say the fact that is it so misunderstood should be a call to more Afrocentric cultural education.

I think if you look at my comment defending the use of this word in this instance also contains a not-too-subtle denigration on Kerry's political acumen. Hardly the behavior of a Kerry fan.

I'm white. I was aware of the meaning of the phrase derived from the Brer Rabbit stories. I was unaware of the subsequent development as an insulting term against black people. It is part of my white privilege that I was able to be unaware of this.

I suspect that just the same is true of Kerry. This is an explanation, but it is not an excuse. And even if somehow he could in these days have used this phrase innocently in its original meaning, to use it as a white person talking about a black person could not but summon up its meaning as a racial slur.

My conclusion is that Kerry was most likely simply unaware of the ramifications of his words, but that this does not excuse his offence and that he should apologise publicly.

Jessica, the discussion throughout this board is about whether the word, as used, was a racist slur.

That comment was another insinuation that I'm racist because I disagree with you, and intentionally misinterprets my comment, just as, I believe, you are misinterpreting Kerry.

And, no Jessica, I won't call you crazy. And I don't think of Kerry as just being "on our side", because the world is a little more nuanced to me than that.

This is one I have a lot of trouble with, honestly. I have never in my life heard the term "tar baby" used in a racial manner. This doesn't mean that it isn't - it just means that I have never experienced that. However, I have heard it many times as a shorthand for "sticky situation that only gets worse the more you mess with it."

I understand that some people are offended by the term, so I don't use it, but I honestly don't get why a perfectly useful non-racial term has to be completely eradicated because some racist fool decided they wanted to use it for something reprehensible.

In some ways, it is like "bitch" to me. It is a definite slur against women - unless you are talking about female dogs where it still seems to be a perfectly legit word.

Is the thought that any word that has been or will be used in a negative/racist/sexist/etc. way must be expunged regardless of its other meanings?

This is one I have a lot of trouble with, honestly. I have never in my life heard the term "tar baby" used in a racial manner. This doesn't mean that it isn't - it just means that I have never experienced that. However, I have heard it many times as a shorthand for "sticky situation that only gets worse the more you mess with it."

I understand that some people are offended by the term, so I don't use it, but I honestly don't get why a perfectly useful non-racial term has to be completely eradicated because some racist fool decided they wanted to use it for something reprehensible.

In some ways, it is like "bitch" to me. It is a definite slur against women - unless you are talking about female dogs where it still seems to be a perfectly legit word.

Is the thought that any word that has been or will be used in a negative/racist/sexist/etc. way must be expunged regardless of its other meanings?

Ditto to what Identity said about overreacting at best and purposefully misconstruing the situation at worst. This sort of hypersensitivity and PC-indignation is precisely why people grow frustrated with liberal activists.

Thank you Zula for a very competent clarification that the question is whether the term was being used as a racist slur in this content, not whether it's ok to use a racist slur. Do I really have to say that I don't think it's every ok to say racist things?

Jessica, that comment was a personal attack, a red herring, and insulting. Why shut down discussion with comments like that on your own website? I thought this thread was an interesting forum for discussion and sharing information about words and their uses, but if that is what I can expect, I'm out.

I am nodding my head along with you, Mahjani.

Sometimes it's shocking to hear announcers casually use the word "bitch" whilst watching a dog show. But since I recognize that the word is being used in its original context, I am not offended by it.

Racists are always coming up with new slurs. I actually found the Oreo/Banana examples compelling. Some racists now use the innocuous word "Canadian" to refer to black people when they don't want everyone to know what they're talking about. That example is obscure compared to "tar baby," but there is no reason normal people should discontinue their use of the word "Canadian" to refer to people from Canada.

SarahMC: Nobody had better call me a damn Canadian. Ever.

j/k. This thread needs some levity.

Jessica, I know this website practically has a patent on the phrase "just wow", but when there are so many people in disagreement with your post, and they take the time to explain why they feel that way, a elucidatory response goes a lot further towards a productive discussion than a dismissive, "I can't believe you don't see this", response. Thanks for giving one when people asked, it's a lot more helpful.

Alice, thanks for the info on Grandfather clause. I had no idea. Reminds me of when I found out that "jerry-rigging" (sometimes mispronounced as "jury-rigging") was actually a slur against Germans. Now I just call it "McGyvering".

Jessica, I think that many of us have literally never heard tar baby used to mean anything other than a situation you don't want to get involved with because you'll never be able to extricate yourself. And, as the previous sentence demonstrates, that's a hard concept to illustrate quickly, making a shorthand phrase rather attractive, though this one obviously comes with bad baggage.

Some, like my wife, grew up in the South and have heard it used as a racist slur 'in the wild', and still more probably encountered it for the first time while reading Morrison's novel.

Myself, I fit in the former group, and lord knows how many people I may have offended until, well, last year, when some politician said it on TV and caught hell. I ended up feeling a bit like Randall in Clerks II.

I think we should wait and see how Kerry handles this.

I believe he may not have know that 'tar baby' was a racist comment...

I was reading the letters to the editor section of my local paper and a reader was taking someone to task for refering to somebody as a 'buck' as African Americans had been advertised as such at auction.

I knew from hunting that a buck was a young male, and in the military we had buck sergeants, or young/new sergeants. Never knew that buck had a racial connotation until reading that letter to the editor.

MikeT: jerry/jury, as in jury-build, jury-mast, jury-mast, is a navy word from the 1600s. Whoever told you it had something to do with "Jerry" as a slur on Germans, which comes from the first world war, was mistaken.

Re: Jury rig.

Maybe that's the right phrase, and jerry rig is the neologism. Etymology is confusing.

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

x364173, you beat me to the punch. I said it, then wondered if it was right, and then found out it wasn't.

FWIW, it looks like there is a slur, Jerry-built that dates from WWI or WWII that got elided with jury rigged. And there are other more blatantly racist slurs of similar formation.

MikeT: Alice, thanks for the info on Grandfather clause. I had no idea. Reminds me of when I found out that "jerry-rigging" (sometimes mispronounced as "jury-rigging") was actually a slur against Germans. Now I just call it "McGyvering".

Uh, I hope that doesn't mean you'll stop using it, since I was citing it as an example of a previously racist phrase which has since been throughly reclaimed, and hence usable by anyone without risk of offense.

Keep in mind throughout, if it means anything, that I am an easily offended person of color:

Renee wrote at the linked page:

"What we need to do is be hypervigilant in our choice of language to ensure that our everyday conversations do not reinforce the idea that it is acceptable to other for the sake of convenience. A white man using the term tar baby is racist period."

I believe I understand what she means. I also believe I understand what she wishes to avoid.

Here is a word more likely than the simple "coon" to cause controversy:

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

[quote]

Julian Bond, then chairman of the NAACP, deplored the offense that had been taken at Howard's use of the word. "You hate to think you have to censor your language to meet other people’s lack of understanding", he said. "David Howard should not have quit. Mayor Williams should bring him back — and order dictionaries issued to all staff who need them."[4]

Bond also said, "Seems to me the mayor has been niggardly in his judgment on the issue. [...] We have a hair-trigger sensibility, and I think that is particularly true of racial minorities."[5]

[end quote]

More illustrative was the "University of Wisconsin incident" in which one student's offense at the repeated use of the word "niggardly" resulted in the abolition of the school's faculty speech code.

http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/1999/april_1999_3.html

[Jonathan Rauch, author of Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought and senior writer for National Journal magazine] said in a speech, "In a free society all of us have an obligation to be thick-skinned," he explained. "We have a First Amendment not because we like offensive speech, but because we disagree on what’s offensive."

I see his point, as well. Why? Because according to Rauch, under the "hostile environment doctrine" in place at "many" universities, "anyone who feels they are in a hostile environment can file suit against the individual or group creating that environment."

I am not accusing the average woman, feminist, or person of color of being overly sensitive, or as some claim, looking for offense. But words, or in this case, use of words is open to interpretation. I will not invalidate Renee's feelings, or those of any other offended person. Of course the headline grabbed me as well. In the "University of Wisconsin Incident," the only black person in the class "left the class in tears after her professor repeatedly used the word 'niggardly,'" according to Accuracy in Academia. Wikipedia adds the student said, "'I was in tears, shaking,' she told the faculty. 'It's not up to the rest of the class to decide whether my feelings are valid.'" She's exactly right. No one can decide how she feels.

However, this can also be used against you. What if John McCain and every other "wing nut," "anti-choicer," or other subject of Feministing articles and comments came after the editorial staff and posters of Feministing en masse, for offense at what is said here? We don't know if they are "really" offended or emotionally scarred, or to what degree. It doesn't matter that it would probably be thrown out of court every single time, because it is not "really" offensive to the reasonable person. How many times are you willing to go to court, at your expense, to challenge every single accusation against you for expressing your opinions? Won't the First Amendment ever come to your lips or those of your defense attorney on your behalf?

So what is to be done? Should we, as Renee says, be hypervigilant about our language or use of language? That would be my normal inclination, as I've said before. [Seriously. I don't TRY to offend people.] I don't use obscure words like "niggardly," except here on Feministing regarding use of language, and only for the second time ever in my life. Why not use the contemporary (though still uncommon in my experience*), "stingy" instead?

*That reminds me. Here in Hawaii while I was growing up, a small minority of people might in private, use the term "Chinese" to denote stinginess, as US racists (or South Park's Eric Cartman) may associate with American Jewish people. Problematic, yes? It's rapidly falling out of use.

That said, the occasional misunderstanding resulting purely from a listener's limited range of vocabulary is regrettable. It's hard to hold them responsible for something they honestly don't know.

This is just silly. Are we not smart enough to use context to sort out appropriate and inappropriate uses of words rather than banning whole slates of words out of hand? Can bitch not still mean a female dog? Can a faggot not still be a bundle of sticks? The only problem with what John Kerry said is that the analogy of the tar baby does not seem clearly applicable in this case.

http://votingwhileintoxicated.wordpress.com/2008/07/23/he-said-what/

Alice, don't worry. The history of our language is filled with unpleasantness and slurs we're not aware of, or that impugn groups that no longer exist. I just think the history of the language is fascinating. Normally, I only change my usage if there's a chance someone will be offended. McGyvering is the exception, because it's so much more evocative than jury-rigging. Although now that I read up on the history of that phrase, I may alternate.

How could I forget those who do or claim to hold strong religious beliefs. It is their offense (or perception of a "hostile environment", blamed on e.g. feminism) that results in such as Abstinence Only education, campaigns against the Vagina Monologues, or other attempts to shut down pro-woman messages WE consider sex positive or empowering. Why? Because they call it something else. That's how ugly opponent's demands to moderate or silence voices they disagree with can get.

Jumping on the "it's all about context" bandwagon here. He didn't call anyone a tar baby- that would've been undeniably racist- he referred to a situation as a tar baby, using it's intended meaning. Words and symbols are hijacked by unsavory parties all the time.

The irony, oh, the vicious irony of a white politician referring to a character/story from a collection of folk lore collected from African-Americans of the Old South.

Would it be racist if I named my chocolate Lab "Darkie"?

What if, gasp! A person actually had to stop. think. before using the word "racist"?

I've always been my deep dark suspicion that racism, sexism, ageism, and the like are less the product of evil intention and more a matter of laziness and a dislike of thinking for oneself.

This reminds me of the Water Buffalo Incident, as well.

As I writer, I can't help but scoff at those who have gotten angry about use of the terms niggardly or water buffalo; I don't think it's always the speaker's job to be sure that the listener won't be offended by a connotation that doesn't even exist in the word. In classrooms (see: the Wisconsin incident, and a similar incident with the word "niggardly" in a fourth grade classroom) this is a valuable time to discuss the importance of the precise meaning of words.

However, the same holds true for words like "tar baby" that do have racist connotations. John Kerry is an educated politician, and while I don't think that his intention was to be racist, he's certainly educated enough to know better: he needs to understand that part of the power of using words is dealing with the ramifications of the sometimes-ugly history of words.

I'm not really offended, though. More just really sad that people don't know the actual meaning of things and either speak, or act, based on ignorance.

"Can bitch not still mean a female dog?"

It certainly still does. I can't tell you the last time I used that word. Certainly never in reference to female dogs. I would ask of a dog owner, "Is it a girl?" which may be considered problematic in itself.

"Can a faggot not still be a bundle of sticks?"

Among my British former coworkers, it means cigarette, as in "I'm stepping out for a fag" (really, they said gems like this), and I've never had experience with a bundle of sticks in Hawaii for that usage. The full word is not commonly used, here, either.

Speaking of the British, here in the US, we have the quaint word "fanny" used to refer to the buttocks, which may uncommonly be a woman's name, or even part of the name of the US government established company that helps millions of Americans buy homes.

http://www.fanniemae.com/index.jhtml

The British may use the word fanny to mean cunt, and may be offended at American usage of the word (or even hearing a name). British I have known, on the other hand, are also likely to use the word cunt itself in a friendly or hostile derogatory fashion, which is in any case offensive to many Americans. Who is in the wrong? Who needs to adjust their language? Who needs to broaden their cultural awareness and simply hold their reaction in check?

I didn't see him being racist .It was clear what he meant and he is from an older generation where that context is more clearly understood. Also it was a great read from Toni Morrison btw.

As for words like bitch, I think this demonstrates the importance of context--which, in language, is one of the most important considerations of all.

A male: "fag" as cigarette isn't short for "faggot", though. It's impossible to say *"I'm stepping out for a faggot".

(/offtopic)

Among my British former coworkers, it means cigarette, as in "I'm stepping out for a fag" (really, they said gems like this), and I've never had experience with a bundle of sticks in Hawaii for that usage. The full word is not commonly used, here, either.

"Fag" isn't an abbreviation of "faggot." It may seem that way if someone is using both as slurs for homosexual men, but they are distinct words otherwise. Faggot was originally a unit of measurement for bundles of sticks, but is not any bundle of sticks regardless of proportion. It can also refer to a type of pork meatball and a metalworking technique ("faggoting"), among other things. Fag, on the other hand, refers to junior students in some British schools. Follow that link if you want to read an entirely straight-faced and non-sexual used of the phrase "fag-master." Indeed, I dare you to read that article and keep a straight face throughout.

Correction: the "not" in "...but is not any bundle of sticks regardless of proportion," should be "now."

Thank you for reminding me of "fagging" Alice, and to both of you for the correction. See? It's also on the listener's lack of range of vocabulary.

I wish I could say I did that on purpose.

@A male: You missed an opportunity to showcase the sometimes amusing question of "Can I bum a fag?" (Can I "borrow" a cigarette?). Obviously context is everything. And the same applies to the other scenarios you described. Only when the context of the word isn't clear (which part of the anatomy were you referring to when you said fanny?) does it become a problem.

-

From my perspective John Kerry saying "I think John is trying to throw that big tar baby out there" is no more offensive in context than if he had said "John is trying to find the chink in our armor".

Of course, if there is racist subtext in the original Br'er Rabbit story of the Tar Baby then that's another situation entirely. (I don't recall there being any, but it has been over two decades since I last read the story).

"Tar baby" is one of those words I'd really rather not cede to racists. I'm happy with "shovel" or "stingy" or "raccoon" -- those are fine; there's nothing uniquely connotative about "niggardly," and it's just simply too close to n_____. But Brer Rabbit And The Tar Baby, once you get past the Disney-ization and Confederate nostalgia that's been so ironically attached to it, is a subversive narrative on how to deal with powerful, vindictive people who are intent on making you suffer. It's a fable for the oppressed, and it's one I plan on telling to my children, in the hopes that they a) will recognize traps and b) will escape them.

How many racists does it take to make us give up a word?

Are we going to give up "Canadian?"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_burman/2008/01/is_canadian_a_racist_slur.html

Are we going to stop using databases?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-slave_%28computers%29

Does Danny Glover get his own post condemning his racist children's video?

http://www.amazon.com/Rabbit-Ears-Brer-Wonderful-Baby/dp/6301720474

What about the name "Ann?" The word "bong?" "Coconut?" "Oreo?" "Bounty Bar?" "Brownie?" The name "Charlie?" The word "crow?" "Dutchman?" "Flip?" "Frog?" "Gin?" "Hapa?" "Husky?" "Jock?" "Pancake?" "Powder burn?" "Redneck?" "Slope?" "Teapot?"

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

Language and hate are complicated games -- let's not try to underestimate either.

Last year, my (white) boss was speaking to my (black) co-worker about some topic or whatever, and looked her carefully in the eye as she said, "we wouldn't want to be niggardly."

We both are intelligent women who know what the word means. We are also both positive she did it it be either insulting or racist with a veneer of plausible deniability. So if my co-worker complained she could reply that it was just because my co-worker didn't know what the word meant or something.

I think that, as a white person, we have to be very careful about how we use certain words, despite our correct use of the word because of the effect they have on others.

I loved the Br'er Rabbit stories as a kid (and to this day may use "don't throw me in that brier patch!") I don't think John Kerry was using the term maliciously and it was in the correct context, but I cringed nevertheless at his ineptitude.

I've never thought of the term as a racist term, probably because of reading the Uncle Remus stories as a kid. But I decided to see if this was maybe an age thing. My father, who's 76, didn't see any racial connotation in 'tar baby' either. However, my mother, who's 64, was brought to tears by the term as a kid.

I agree with Mahjani's & Kasia's argument, that we have a perfectly innocuous word with both legitimate & illegitimate meanings. Savvy politicians would be wise to avoid it, if just to avoid the prolonged debate we're having here, but unless its actually used racially I personally take zero offense from it.

I didn't take offense when Tony Snow said it. I didn't take offense when Mitt Romney said it, and I see no reason to take offense at it now.

I have to say that I am little uncomfortable with you posting this video the way you did, Jessica. It led to some fruitful discussion, but this is a classic example of shock and awe blogging that often perpetuates misunderstanding and misinformation. By posting this video, point to Sen. Kerry's use of a "racist" term, you are calling him racist, even if you try to deny it.

Kerry has no history of racism. In fact, he has one of the best voting records in the senate when it comes to civil rights. All you have done is perpetuate a misunderstanding of John Kerry's personal beliefs. Clearly he did not mean to use it at a racial slur.

Kerry's personal history is marred by political missteps and poor word choice (Remember his comments on getting stuck in Iraq?), but it is not scarred with racism. Fortunately for us, some of the people in this discussion are level-headed enough to look to origins of the word, its possible meanings, and its context.

The fact is, if a Republican senator had made this statement, we would all be up in arms about it and no one would doubt that it was racist.

I'm with Jessica on this one - we can't give someone a free ride just because he/she is "on our side".

Frankly, as a black person I am kind of offended that people are making such a big deal out of something that clearly was not about black people and was in no way meant to convey racist ideas. Why ascribe racist intentions where there are none? There are worse, actually racist problems to focus on, and this is a waste of time. It adds fuel to the fire that people are too willing to cry racism over anything, thus trivializing the problem of racism. Also, conceding to the pejorative meanings of words is how so many female gendered words came to be insults today; let's not allow the English language to be completely governed by bigots. Finally, by working so hard to see racism where there is none you are contributing to the perpetuation of the marginalization of black people. As long as white people have to think so much about what words to use around us black people, it will continue to emphasize the differences rather than similarities and keep black people in the role of the "other." It is this perception of difference that allows racism to continue to flourish.

callmesister: The fact is, if a Republican senator had made this statement, we would all be up in arms about it and no one would doubt that it was racist.

Speak for yourself. I'd respond exactly the same way, because my issue is not actually whether or not John Kerry is racist, but the idea that "tar baby" is racist in the given context.

callmesister, most of us are not so reactionary. if a republican senator had said what kerry said, but had a long history of fighting/voting for equality, i think most of us (and certainly i) would do exactly what most of us are doing now: recognize that it was a graceless and perhaps insensitive use of language, but not evidence of real racism. (it just seems to be that there's relatively few republican senators with such a track record, so this is a straw man argument.) don't paint me or anyone else here with the hypocrite brush without evidence.

I honestly have never heard tar baby used as a racial slur. I just assumed he meant the reference to the old story of brair rabbit and the tar baby... *shrugs*

All I am saying is we have to consider our own biases here. I'm not trying to speak for anybody or call anyone a hypocrite, but I honestly think that we are treating this statement differently since Kerry said it than we would if, say, McCain said it.

I'll have to disagree with you callmeister. If this were an article about McCain saying what Kerry said here, I'd be thinking exactly what I'm thinking now: "Wow, this is really reaching."

This post epitomizes for me my ambivalence about feministing.com. I am a daily reader of the site, and there is much about it I enjoy. But then I read a post like this, or Samhita's post from a few weeks ago (to which I also objected for its flippant tone and reductionist analysis), and I wonder: how can meaningful, reasoned discourse and dialogue occur when stories like this are presented on a "you're either with us or against us" platform? Thankfully, the commenters in this thread have engaged in a reasoned discourse despite the prejudicial nature of the original post. (To be clear, by "prejudicial" I mean "prematurely judged," not "bigoted".) As others have noted, the term "tar baby" (like other excellent examples provided in the foregoing comments) is a word that CAN be used as a racist slur, but is not INHERENTLY a racist slur. I think a more productive entry, Jessica, would have engendered discussion about the appropriateness of politicians' (or others') use of such loaded terms, and whether and how these terms are interpreted differently by people according to geographic location, age, race/ethnicity/nationality, etc. Just as Renee's post encompasses one particular perspective on this issue, many other feminists (especially those with a deep appreciation for the English language) have alternate or opposing perspectives. To dismissively suggest that those of us who do not share your and Renee's perspective cannot "see the light," as it were, or are racist-apologists completely shuts down whatever fruitful conversation might have occured (and, thankfully, in this case still did occur). Indignation is best used sparingly, especially in regard to situations like this about which there is likely to be a wide spectrum of opinions, all of which are equally valid.

Thanks very much Jessica, and in the end, this has been a fascinating look into American semiology. It's also the first time I've heard about this whole "Canadian" thing (thanks for the link) and, as a Canadian, I'm so offended! I am certainly not giving up my nationality to the lexicon of racism. Thanks to everyone for their nuggets of wisdom!

"Frankly, as a black person I am kind of offended that people are making such a big deal out of something that clearly was not about black people and was in no way meant to convey racist ideas. Why ascribe racist intentions where there are none? There are worse, actually racist problems to focus on, and this is a waste of time."

I hope I am treating you respectfully, AwakenedDesires, but it was the linked post by a black woman who was herself so adamantly clear:

"Okay folks, what the hell was John Kerry thinking using the term tar baby? It is just as racialized, and just as negative as the word nigger."

"A white man using the term tar baby is racist period."

http://www.womanist-musings.com/2008/07/john-kerry-and-tar-baby.html

I will not devalue how she feels, or even directly rebut her. Even African Americans may be divided on issues such as these, as seen in the "niggardly" controversies, regarding what is "really" racist or worthy of one's time and effort. I can only determine what I will do, which is try to watch my use of language, not only among people of a different shade of skin (I'm Asian), but those who may find my language offensive or triggering for other reasons.

For example, just this week, I've pondered my use of language, because my listeners (in any situation such as an all male Narcotics Anonymous meeting) will probably include survivors of sexual assault or DV/IPV. Perhaps I should not use language the way, e.g., sportcasters do, when declaring State THRASHED Tech, Southern REAMED West, or White HAD HIS WAY with Smith. I certainly believe e.g. the actual word "rape" is used overly much, to consider it gratuitous and insulting, as in "high gas prices are RAPING the pocketbook." WTF?

When I went to college, the word "denigrate" was a big deal for a lot of people (and someone used it in this thread, which made me happy). The problem with it is that taken back to Latin roots it means "to make black" or "to darken," that is, to remove the goodness (lightness) from something. I remember we had this huge discussion in one of my theology classes regarding cultural connotations of darkness--generally a bad, scary thing--and how those interact with modern race theory. It had the potential to be a very good, thoughtful conversation, but really boiled down to "words that may possibly offend people should never be used." What is relevant to this thread is the part of the discussion where a woman said, "I think it's really sinister that people can use words and not know what they mean."

Besides the fact that she misused "sinister"--it refers to intent--she disproved her own point. "Sinister," taken back to the original Latin, means "left," or "left-handed." She did not know that. I pointed it out, remarking that I am in fact left-handed, and by her logic and the logic of the discussion that day I could have taken offense at her usage. Not that being left-handed has anything like the type of oppressive history as being African American, but it followed the logic. (We were burned as witches for a while, though, and I knew a man when I was in high school who wrote with his right hand because when he was a child his teachers would beat him when he wrote with his left.)

What happened here with Kerry is the reverse of this situation. He used "sinister" to mean "left," not "evil and insidious." Or, as Bondo suggested above, he may have used it to mean "up." Not quite right, but in the ball park.

The fact is, it's impossible to know the meanings of all the words we use. It's impossible to trace the etymology of absolutely everything to be sure we're offending no one. Even for words that can be slurs in modern usage, it's impossible to check for every region and subregion and dialect, etc. I'm not going to look over my shoulder next time I head to the supermarket to buy some Oreos. Words are too old, and language is too fluid. Check out the Oxford English Dictionary entry for "nice." About halfway down the very long entry, you'll discover that it used to refer to prostitutes. Does that mean I'm going to stop using the phrase, "She's a really nice lady"? Definitely not.

At any rate, it may have been inelegant for Kerry, knowing the way in which the American media and public dissects every single thing a public figure says, to use the term "tar baby." But, as many people on the thread have noted, it's not outside the realm of possibility that he'd never heard it used as a slur, and as this wasn't a prepared speech, as far as I can tell, we can't accuse him of not doing enough research, because I don't plan every single thing I'm going to say ahead of time. If we're going to be highlighting his use of the term, maybe we should be applauding it for being a positive example of usage. Or we should just leave it alone.

I am really surprised people don't know this phrase as a racial slur- I think I heard it when I was in high school, and I'm only in my 20's. I think if Kerry had been discussing a different subject I could maybe assume he didn't know "tar baby's" racist connotations, but the fact that he's speaking about an African American who has been a very public target of racism for the last year or so should give us pause. While he may indeed have no idea what he said when he used the phrase, I think it's dangerous for us to assume he's just naive or uninformed. Let's not stick our heads in the sand.

I think crimgal raises a good point about some of the problems with Feministing.com. This is, after all, a commercial website. And while I know nothing about the site's profit margin, I do know that its writers have every incentive to exaggerate the pervasiveness of sexism/racism. (You don't attract attention to your site - and you don't get a book deal - by saying, "Things are improving.") I mention this only because I think we tend to imagine feminists are somehow purer in their motives than everyone else, and I am increasingly beginning to see this is not the case AT ALL.

I have to agree with AwakenedDesires on this one.

It really is all context, and damn right the War in Iraq is one huge tar baby.

"The fact is, it's impossible to know the meanings of all the words we use."

Over one million available in the English language alone, and only God knows the knowledge base or cultural background of every listener.

I don't know how racist Kerry is, or meant to be; but if he can pull the term "tar baby" from the back of his mind, he can also find a more commonly used and possibly less offensive word, like "quagmire" or "predicament." I don't expect him to censor himself (McCain should), but he'll need to be prepared to deal with situations like these, regardless, being as high profile as he is, and in the political arena where people actually are poised to tear into anything he says or does.

I read this site quite often and really appreciate that it's here, but I too found myself rolling my eyes this afternoon... maybe it's because I also have never heard tar baby used as a racial slur (I grew up in an east-coast inner city which was very diverse, and was working as one of 3 white employees out of dozens of workers and was lovingly nicknamed "little house" as in, the freckled praire girl).

Anyway, I would imagine by now, the phrase tar baby will or has already firmly planted itself in countless numbers of brains as a racist term. Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

I googled "john kerry" alongside "tar baby" and at last count there were 5,180 sites. I mean really, as echoed before, isn't this distracting from more pressing issues?

"I am really surprised people don't know this phrase as a racial slur- I think I heard it when I was in high school, and I'm only in my 20's."

Someone in their 60s is probably more likely to use the term as it was originally intended. I'm sure intellectually (and after the fact) he knows it's a racial slur but the original meaning is the one he grew up with and that's the one that stuck. That's why it just rolled of his tongue without hesitation. The tale of Brer Rabbit and the tar baby is a staple of John Kerry's youth.

"...by working so hard to see racism where there is none you are contributing to the perpetuation of the marginalization of black people. ...It is this perception of difference that allows racism to continue to flourish."

Well said!

I prefer to think of it as diversity, not racism, to recognize that people of different backgrounds or cultures may differ in SOMETIMES characteristic or predictable ways, and to like people and society different that way. Others may call this stereotyping or racial profiling.

Particularly because of my background in marketing and its obsession with demographics, e.g. how to promote John McCain to working class African-Americans in southern states, which may not work in a 98% white community of any economic background; or our need in nursing to offer "culturally competent" care to a diverse clientele (allegedly, African-Americans may be distrustful of doctors, but see their spiritual leaders as authority figures who may need to be brought into family discussions on health care decisions), I may need to imagine or predict the needs of a particular individual based on their appearance or the culture they come from. I may need to adjust my approach as a health care provider, depending on culture, as well as the individual. Local white people are not quite like those who visit. Japanese-Americans with 100 years of history in this community sure aren't modern Japanese on vacation. It doesn't mean I judge people's value as human beings simply because I notice e.g., the color of their skin or the (foreign) accent with which they speak.

A Male said: "...but if [Kerry] can pull the term 'tar baby' from the back of his mind, he can also find a more commonly used and possibly less offensive word, like 'quagmire' or 'predicament'."

One observation, if I may: this statement illustrates the points some of the commenters here, I believe, were trying to raise: neither "quagmire" or "predicament" is an exact synonym for "tar baby". In the Uncle Remus story, the tar baby was used to entrap Br'er Rabbit. The more Br'er Rabbit fought with the tar baby, the more entangled he became. Thus, Kerry's use of the term had specific connotations (e.g., that McCain was attempting to use the claim that Obama is unsupportive of a U.S. victory in Iraq to ensnare him in campaign war of words that would only worsen the more Obama tried to "clarify" his position and/or deny McCain's claims) that would have been lost had he substituted a different word or phrase.

I am sensitive to the racist connotations of the term, and understand and appreciate that some people will take (and, clearly, have already taken) offense to Kerry's comments. And as I said in my original post, I think situations like this can provide excellent foundations for really meaningful discussions about race/ethnicity, language, culture, values, etc. That said, the English lover in me is saddened when linguistic precision is sacrificed for political correctness. As I often tell my students, you cannot simply select a synonym from the thesaurus and assume it shares an exact definition with the original word, as words and phrases have unique connotations and shades of meaning that often are lost when similar terms are substituted.

I really like what Maggie said -- I agree that it may have been "inelegant" of Kerry to use that term (and, arguably, not particularly racially/culturally sensitive)...but when used with absence of malice and in its appropriate linguistic context, I find it hard to muster any anger over the matter. Surprise, perhaps, but not anger.

Finally, perhaps the substantial number of comments this post has elicited means that this would be a good topic for further online discussion, perhaps in a community blog post or in some kind of Feministing discussion forum?

In Middle English, the word "silly" meant blessed. If you trace it over time, it was applied euphemistically to people with mental illness or developmental disabilities, and the meaning eventually shifted, similarly to the shift happening with the word "special" in slang.

As has been noted, "sinister" meant left-handed, which has been generally associated with treachery throughout much of history, a fact I love to tease my wife with.

Particularly applicable to this site, the word "virtue" comes from the Latin word "virtus", which literally means "manliness".

Language is full of weird little things like this, and some will be offensive to other people, some won't. The problem, as others have observed is that if you're going through life terrified of offending anyone, ever, you're going to be both paralyzed by fear and open to manipulation by people willing to fake offense in order to gain power (William Donahue and the Catholic League come to mind).

And then there's the humorous side of things, where we end up sounding like a post from Stuff White People Like, agonizing over what to do when one person is offended by a phrase we used, then another is offended by our refusing to use that phrase, and we have to parse out the different levels of offense in order to decide what to do.

My personal feelings on "tar baby" is that it's a useful trope from a beautiful and funny African American folktale that was seized by racists and turned into a shallow slur, and that to take the latter meaning is to denigrate the wisdom of the original storytellers in favor of a bunch of morons (another word with an interesting history).

"The fact is, if a Republican senator had made this statement, we would all be up in arms about it and no one would doubt that it was racist"

Well when this controversy came up two years ago with Tony Snow acting as White House Press Secretary, I think the reaction from the left blogosphere was mixed. The one thing I am a little surprised at is given the Snow controversery, I find it difficult to believe that Kerry was unaware at least of the issues about to the term.

Not that long ago I wrote in something I was filing in Court that: X is trying to tar Y. I then thought, remembering the Tony Snow controversy over tar baby, had the word "tar" itself also taken on racial overtones. I had never actually heard it in a racial way but i could see that it might. So a few google searches later I could not find anything so I figured it was fine. But quite frankly it would not surprise me if somewhere some how some used tar as a slur. I guess the question is when does a word or phrase that is otherwise not racial get so tainted its lost its original meaning.

(FWIW, what I said about not having been aware of its use as a racial slur was true, but I'm not sixty; it's just that I didn't grow up in the US.)

The fact is, if a Republican senator had made this statement, we would all be up in arms about it and no one would doubt that it was racist.

I posted about this yesterday, but my comment must have been eaten. Tony Snow, Mitt Romney, and Tom Davis have all used the term "tar baby" in exactly the same way Kerry did here. Ann has even posted at Feministing about "Tony 'Tar Baby' Snow."

I never knew tar baby was a racial slur. I thought it was exactly as John Kerry had used it. I don't see how someone who uses a word without knowing it's meaning is to blame. Also, I feel like the whole argument here is whether he knew the racist meaning or not. If he did, he was wrong to use it. If not, like many people on this thread, then I do not see the problem. Simple as that.

Are we supposed to stop using "grandfathered in" now too?

I think the arguement that 'grandfathered' is racist is tenuous at best.

My understanding about 'grandfathered' was a term created when reading test were required in some states to vote. A person had to have be able to read to vote, but if one of your grand parents could vote then you were exempted from the reading requirement.

The term is about a legal mechanism that came about in racist times, the term applied today to legal mechanism. If they change the zoning in your city that says you don't have enough yard space for a R-A1 but your house is old, then your house is grandfathered in and is exempted.

If anything, it could be construed to be directed against illiterate whites (probably intoxicated) southerners.

To pixiepie:

So, now that I know that "tar baby" can be used in a racist way, I shouldn't ever use it in the proper way ever again in fears of upsetting someone? Sounds like the racists have won.

Hey Jessica, I'm with you.
John Kerry is in