Is the term "anchor baby" really offensive? Fox News had a story speaking of Penelope Cruz's desire to have her baby in the US as an "anchor baby".
A Republican Hispanic group, Somos Republicans, objected, saying, in part:
Penelope Cruz is admired world-wide, and comparing her unborn child to an inanimate object is demeaning.
"Comparing her unborn child to an inanimate object"? I think this may be a bit of PC run amok. Does anyone get upset when Walter Cronkite or Dan Rather was referred to as an "Anchorman ? When someone calls Katy Couric a "News Anchor", are they comparing her to an inanimate object, or describing her position in a news organization?
"Anchor baby" describes the role that an infant, born in the US to non US citizens, can play in establishing US residence and citizenship, and the possibility of additional "chain migration" of relatives. Now, those relatives are no more "chains" than the infant is an "anchor" as far as inanimate objects go, but it is descriptive of the relationship.
Now if Somos Republicans want to object to the characterizations of her motives, that's fair game. But to object to the comparison of "her unborn child to an inanimate object" is simply abusing the language.
* FYI, I am not comparing Penelope Cruz to an inanimate object. It's an analogy.
H/T News Real blog
Cross posted at LCR.
No comments:
Post a Comment