More

'Anchor Baby' Controversy: American Heritage Dictionary To Add Label to Pejorative Term

Americanheritage

First Posted: 12/05/11 07:45 AM ET Updated: 12/05/11 08:01 AM ET

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, responding to criticism for including "anchor baby" in its latest edition, will add a label identifying the politically-charged term either as "derogatory" or "offensive."

The change comes after Immigrationimpact.com, a project of the nonprofit American Immigration Council, questioned the inclusion of the "anchor baby" definition without describing its pejorative nature:

The degree to which the immigration debate has coarsened over the last few years is no more evident than in the pages of the recently released fifth edition of the New American Heritage Dictionary. Among the new entries is the term 'anchor baby.' You might think that the definition would read something like: slang, a pejorative description of a child born in the United States to parents without legal status, implying that the parents intend to leverage the child's citizenship to 'anchor' their own presence in the U.S. You would be wrong.


The online version of the American Heritage Dictionary defines "anchor baby" as:

"A child born to a noncitizen mother in a country that grants automatic citizenship to children born on its soil, especially such a child born to parents seeking to secure eventual citizenship for themselves and often other members of their family."

Over the weekend, Immigrationimpact.com reported that Steven Kleinedler, the dictionary's executive editor, said a "swift and careful revision" of the term's use was under way. American Heritage Dictionary, he said, was "adding a label ... either derogatory or offensive, which I acknowledge should have been done in the first place, and we will determine how to revise the definition."

Kleinedler added, "Then on Monday we begin making the actual change -- first on the website, and then we begin propagating the change out to the electronic products and in the next printing.”

Mary Giovagnoli, director of the Immigration Policy Center, which handles research and policy for the American Immigration Council, wrote that "anchor baby" was "a wholly American" creation "mired in the politics of anti-immigrant rhetoric."

Giovagnoli wrote: "Those who use it are not in the business of clinically describing some sort of sociological phenomena. They are instead intent on suggesting that people come to the country illegally and deliberately have babies in order to use their children's citizenship to acquire legal status of their own.

Second, the New American Heritage Dictionary's definition ignores the very specific intent of the term and, in fact, gives it more credibility by treating it as some sort of universal description of children who acquire citizenship at birth. This masks the poisonous and derogatory nature of the term, a term which demeans both parent and child and in the process suggests that it is acceptable to call a child born in the U.S. -- i.e. an American citizen-- an 'anchor baby.'"

In the political campaign season, the phrase "anchor baby" -- long a source of controversy -- has become popular in the argot of anti-immigrant hardliners.

When a Latino student recently asked Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann what she would do with children of undocumented immigrants, she said they shouldn't be granted citizenship. She said she "would not do anything" for them. At another campaign stop, she talked about passing a law to bar citizenship to U.S.-born children whose parents are undocumented.

"We've got to end this anchor baby program," she said.


WATCH RELATED:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST LATINO VOICES

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, responding to criticism for including "anchor baby" in its latest edition, will add a label identifying the politically-charged term either a...
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, responding to criticism for including "anchor baby" in its latest edition, will add a label identifying the politically-charged term either a...
Filed by Ray Sanchez  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 350
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
11:16 PM on 12/06/2011
In the not too distant future words like "sovereignty" and "border" will be considered "offensive" to the global elites be they Wall Street tycoons or mustachioed Marxists barricaded in their Ethnic Studies faculty lounges.
01:01 AM on 12/10/2011
And where exactly have you seen those barricades--and, for that matter, Marxists?
09:27 PM on 12/06/2011
I was thinking that an "anchor baby" was a baby produced to trap a man in a relationship, as in "well, I trapped him with an anchor baby. Now I'll reel him in for diamonds." Hmmm. The real definition is much more offensive.
photo
corte33
Educator, Musician
01:01 PM on 12/06/2011
Thanks. Now I know what "anchor baby" means. Is it like tar baby?
03:13 PM on 12/06/2011
Not even remotely.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
J Osteen
Truth, Justice, America !
03:54 PM on 12/10/2011
However, it is JUST as racially charged and its use should be off limits to educated persons.

What's your excuse, corte ?
12:57 PM on 12/06/2011
If the phrase is an accurate representation then the issue is manufactured.

If a pregnant illegal immigrant came across the border for the express purpose of giving birth in the United States in order to have that result, then the "outrage" over that term is motivated by politics.

And what has been the result from years of this practice?

One out of every five people in prison in CA is an illegal immigrant, imprisoned for murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc. etc., many of them repeat offenders.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
EbonBrown
ignant and lovin it
05:12 PM on 12/06/2011
ya but they were wrongfully profiled they shouldn't even be in jail they should be out and be allowed to be productive citizens oh wait they're not citizens and they're not productive they're a menace who knows how many more are walking the streets right now just doing what ever they please because some liberal sucker will fall for their sob story they make us look like fools i've worked with many illegals they just laugh at us and then say i'll get an advocacy group to tell my horrible awful plight ha ha
photo
AZ Stang
Life is far too important to be taken seriously.
05:21 PM on 12/08/2011
Fanned!
photo
AZ Stang
Life is far too important to be taken seriously.
05:21 PM on 12/08/2011
Fanned!
12:16 PM on 12/06/2011
What's the problem? That definition sounds spot on.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:25 AM on 12/06/2011
Giovagnoli wrote: "Those who use it are not in the business of clinically describing some sort of sociological phenomena. They are instead intent on suggesting that people come to the country illegally and deliberately have babies in order to use their children's citizenship to acquire legal status of their own.

It happens every day along the border. Although the parents themselves can't become citizens, the child is now a citizen and and unlawfully is granted all rights of citizenship. That is the problem and the reason for the "Anchor" terminology. It's "Anchor Baby" not "Anchor Family".
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
garystartswithg
el sueno de la razon produce republicans
09:29 AM on 12/06/2011
teabaggerese is not english. shame.
09:21 AM on 12/06/2011
The term states that an undocumented person can come over to the US and have a child. They then can use this child as a way to anchor themselves. This is a complete fallacy. If a person enters the US illegally and has a child, yes the child becomes a citizen but the parent does not. They can never by law be a citizen. No matter how long they wait. This comes direct from Immigration law look it up folks. I'm surprised that HUFF PO didn't add in this commentary.
garystartswithg
el sueno de la razon produce republicans
09:31 AM on 12/06/2011
The article was about adding derogatory terms to the dictionary -- your post is off subject.
02:49 PM on 12/06/2011
It was a valid related point that Karen made, that the definition proposed is a fallacy. :)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Southernthinker
10:29 AM on 12/06/2011
So right; accuracy is not of importance in many of these posts. They only want to stimulate salivation,control the flow and count the comments as if Americans did not know it was just another word to convey their comtempt.
11:51 PM on 12/05/2011
no one wants to use the words responsibility.but if they come here illegally it's not our responsibility to take care of their kids it is theirs
11:31 PM on 12/05/2011
It's more about illegals anchoring themselves in our welfare system. Have lots of babies, get TANF, WIC, foodstamps, rent assistance, etc. When over 70% of households headed by illegals get some kind of welfare, you know that they aren't just here to pick lettuce, now are they?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dtairtime
It is what it is
11:22 AM on 12/06/2011
Little known (at least little published - especially on HP) facts like these are frustrating for the chambers of commerce spokespeople on this site aren't they?
photo
GravitonX
10^300 bosons could care less.
12:56 PM on 12/06/2011
Most of the people on welfare are white. White people need to stop having lots of babies.
03:04 PM on 12/06/2011
I think you should do a little research on the fertility rates of Hispanics in the US.
04:22 PM on 12/06/2011
I am surprised that there is even a study out there concerning this since doesn't paint the 100% rosy picture that so many like to see. It is quite old, but very interesting:

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/leavers99/race.htm#fig1
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dhbarkley
10:38 PM on 12/05/2011
Guess, they can't handle the truth. The United States are so unfair, PLEASE. When Mexico or any other Country give's us the same rights as they want from us, then I might listen. It makes me sick to read this BS given I am a legal immigrant.
09:30 PM on 12/05/2011
What we have here is the normally misunderstood term or "trigger" word.

Through ignorance, selective programming and stupidity individuals and groups alike are constantly scanning their enviornment listening for those tell-tale, instaneously, emotionally and viscerally overreacting to "those words." Arms flailing and with a foaming mouth the attack ensues to remove or destroy the offensive word and who had spoken "that" word.

Obviously there are words that shouldn't be used in a civilized world but such words as"Gay, atheist, non-christian, black, ethnic, liberal, fundamentalist, Fascist or Muslim" cause too much scrunity or emotional distress. Ignore it and it won't be a problem; it's still there but doesn't control people's minds. Bears sometimes kills humans, so let's kill every bear. Poppycock!

Reality is, but how that reality is viewed and then "filtered" to match the preconceived view of the offended observer. It fits into the three part tenants: Thesis, anthesis then synthesis.

Normally an input word Muslim [thesis], experience and/or historical knowledge of diverse religions [anthisis] leads to a religious disciple [synthsis].

Unfortunately it's Muslim, terrorists equals terrorist. Trigger words. It's just a word or term. Deadly and destructive.

Why?

Review second paragraph.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dtairtime
It is what it is
11:25 AM on 12/06/2011
Kind of like the trigger words undocumented immigrant huh?

They imply the person is simply devoid of some simple paperwork. It glosses over the fact that virtually all have committed multiple felonies. It refuses to acknowledge the damage this proctice imposes on the most vulnerable citizens of this country through lower wages, higher unemployment and fewer social program funds to go around.
02:58 PM on 12/06/2011
"It glosses over the fact that virtually all have committed multiple felonies"

Now that is quite a reach. No they haven't "virtually all committed multiple felonies", in fact few have. Please don't fabricate information. Secondly, there is some wage suppression in lower skilled labor (roughly 3-7%) in different areas, but not widespread. Higher unemployment is incorrect, as areas with high immigrant populations (undocumented and other) have very low unemployment rates among citizens. And social program funds are impacted, but at a fraction of the already allocated budget.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/05/does-immigration-cost-jobs/
09:27 PM on 12/05/2011
I would submit that the term is mainly "offensive" to entities that favor open borders and the dissolution of US sovereignty. The term anchor baby would cease to be "offensive" and even meaningful if the United States had the moral courage to clarify once and for all that the 14th Amendment does not confer citizenship on the children of illegal immigrants.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dhbarkley
10:45 PM on 12/05/2011
Thank goodness. Someone who went to college or has a brain, that knows it was meant for children of slaves.
12:31 AM on 12/06/2011
Or how about those that value human life outside of nationalistic ideologies, and know that children are the innocents in this, and have the insight to understand that the term is derogatory to them, as it demeans their existence. Immigration policy beliefs aside, the term is offensive.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dhbarkley
01:55 AM on 12/06/2011
Then maybe Maggie, you should speak to the people who brought them into the world and put them into this mess. Where was your support when I was being called names due to my color.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dtairtime
It is what it is
11:32 AM on 12/06/2011
Then you can certainly use your money, your time and your effort to help.

After all I'm sure the BILLIONS of children in this world who are living in abject poverty would benefit greatly from your help.

Allowing a few million kids to stay here based on their parents crimes won't serve any greater purpose, no matter how you wish to rationalize it. What it will do is set a HORRIBLE precedent for the world. There are so many with so little to throw them this hoep that IF they can break our laws and IF they can pop out a kid here their kid will win the lottery is unfair to far more then it helps.
Cacey
Ignore rudeness, honor discussion
08:37 PM on 12/05/2011
Current US law states that any woman having a child in the US gives birth to an American Citizen. What about any man fathering a child in a foreign country? This is going to be the next big issue. And we know where American college guys go on spring break. "Hola, papi"
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cmr86
Reality. Progressively-based.
10:19 AM on 12/06/2011
US law confers citizenship through the mother, not the father when abroad.
Cacey
Ignore rudeness, honor discussion
11:30 AM on 12/06/2011
Ah, sexual discrimination. That will change or is it just the fact that guys aren't so responsible.