Posted on 07/11/2007 7:55:07 PM PDT by TavoNYC
Yesterday my wife, my brother and I decided to go to the city (Manhattan -we live in the New Jersey suburbs-) with our two daughters. As we were joyfully strolling down Broadway minding our own business and talking among us (in Spanish, of course, which I'm sure you'll understand is perfectly normal behavior for native speakers of any language when they speak among each other regardless of what country they happen to be in -Americans living in Mexico or France speak English among themselves as they are perfectly entitled to do-), when out of the blue a woman turned to us as we walked pass her and sarcastically referred to my daughters (6 months old and 6 years old) as "anchor babies".
Ny wife and I are Mexican citizens (from Morelia). We came to the New York metro region under a work visa, we've lived here for 10 years and are now US permanent residents. I work in investment banking for a bulge bracket US firm. Needless to say (and yet, here I am feeling compelled to state it) we are law abiding citizens that have paid literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes in the past ten years. Needless to say as well, my current and future immigration status have nothing to do with the fact that my daughter's were born here and (will) have dual citizenship.
I am normally pretty hard skinned, but I have to confess that this made me quite angry. I blurted out a profanity (which of course got me in trouble with my wife for using such language in front of the kids) and told my wife and brother what the woman had just said -apparently I was the only one who actually heard her and in fact, I had to explain what the term "anchor baby" meant as neither my brother nor my wife had heard it-. They were much cooler about it than I was. My 25 year old brother laughed it off: "does she realize where she is?" (New York City, where 40% of the population is foreign born), "I guess she must go around saying this to every other person she meets on the street... I know she'd have to call this to the kids of most of my colleagues on the trading floor".
Am I being overly sensitive about this? I don't think so. Anchor baby is obviously a loaded term. In my culture it's considered impolite to even refer to someone as "he" or "she" instead of by his/her name if that person is present (mothers will correct this with a stern: "el/ella tiene su nombre" ("he/she has a name"). So, I find it beyond rude to refer to a stranger's kid by a label, even if it were a less emotionally loaded one (think about it: how would you feel if a stranger refer to your kids as "child tax credit babies" or something like that?) Calling someone's kids "anchor babies" seems almost unfathomable. (Think of the inherent chauvinism/xenophobia in assuming that because we are speaking a foreign language and look non-American we: a) are here illegally, b) had our babies in the US in order to one day get American citizenship ourselves and live-off the generosity of American tax payers).
I'm not even dealing with politics here, but with mere politeness. What drives an apparently otherwise normal person (I wish I could report that our harraser was an obviously fringe character or displayed obvious signs of ignorance and unsophistication, in fact, she seemed like an average New Yorker) to harrass a person she doesn't know like this? I agree that American style political correctness can at times be almost grotesquely funny, but I much prefer it to insensitive name calling and labelling. Labelling is oftentimes the first step in dehumanizing the "other", which is a dangerous slippery slope (Milgram, the psychologist, in a lesser known variation of his famous -or infamous- experiment, showed that people were much more likely to voluntarily harm a stranger that had done no harm to them if they "accidentally" overheard the researcher using a derisive label in referring to the stranger). I obviously don't want to take this argument too far. I think I am already giving way too much importance to the hateful words of a random stranger as it stands. However, I do think both sides of the immigration debate need to tone down the rethoric. There are clearly valid arguments on both sides, but labelling and name calling are utterly unhelpful and will only lead to further polarization.
As an aside, I think the concept of anchor babies is largely a myth. First of all, having an American baby will not necessarily save an illegal alien from deportation, as it has been clearly established by well publicized cases. Second, an anchor baby cannot really apply for a green card for his/her parents until after he/she is 18. After that, there's usually a long wait of several years before parents can get permanent residence. Finally, having an "anchor baby" does not give the parent rights to receive social security payments, etc. I really don't think that illegal aliens that are having babies in the US are doing so in order to get a green card 30 years down the road. There are other myths that are used by both sides in this debate (another one that comes to mind is that illegal immigrants are draining social security funds, when in fact, it's well documented that the social security administration records a significant amount of social security contributions that were made under a false SSN and therefore cannot be claimed by the people who made such contributions, so illegal immigrants are in fact subsidizing social security). Well, I said I did not want to get into politics. Besides, it's unfair because I'm only giving one side of the argument here. As I've said, there are valid arguments to both sides. I'm all for fair and objective debate of these arguments, but ad hominem attacks and labelling are clearly not constructive.
I realize that in the big scheme of things, these woman's comment is not a big deal. As I said, I'm usually pretty hard skinned, but perhaps the fact that this involved my kids (however tangentially) made me react strongly to this person's insensitivity and prejudice. I too have wondered whether there were other factors that drove this person to act the way she did. I don't tend to divide the world into demons and angels, and know full well that the capacity for evil resides within each of us (I recently read the Lucifer Effect, which deals with this subject). If anything, I blame the rethorical excesses involved in the current immigration debate. I happen to notice the excesses incurred by one of the sides in the debate, simply because I'm much more attuned to the arguments of the other side, but I'm sure both sides engage in this to some degree.
Finally, let me clarify that my rant is in no way intended as an indictment of an entire country. In all fairness I have to say that this is the first time in my 10 years in this country that I've directly experienced something close to xenophobia. I consider myself a New Yorker (after 10 years here you'd expect that) and have many good friends in this city and this country. I also realize that prejudice is, alas, prevalent among different cultures. I've traveled extensively for work and pleasure and have lived and worked in three countries and two continents. I have very good friends in each of those countries. I have encountered many examples of garden-variety rudeness, but fortunately have not personally often seen the ugly face of overt prejudice.
I apologize for the rant. I feel better already.
Thanks,
Since you call me Pedro and you’re Latin American, what should I call you? Juan? I would appreciate your help here as someone who clearly has a superior grasp of cultural etiquette.
So, when in France or Costa Rica or Spain, you don’t speak to your kids in English? Do you scold them in French while vacationing in the French riviera if they misbehave? (”arretez les gamins!”) How sensitive of you! I have to say that this is not at all my experience with actual multi-cultural families (yes, another “globalist” giveaway, for all of you, er, “non-globalists?” out there), who when in Rome, China or Mexico still speak to their kin in their native tongue.
And it’s good to see that you are a person who can analyze things, read someones arguments and “take forth the precious from the vile” instead of resorting to the easy resource of ad hominem attacks (which those who have nothing to say often have to do). Yes, that’s why you carefully analyzed all of my arguments and finally, after carefully considering them, decided to “reject my introductory self-serving assumption in total” because of my “arrogance” and “cultural ignorance”. Way to go there!
Oh, and that’s probably why you’ve already concluded that I am an idiot. Takes one to know one, I guess.
Thanks. Your post is an oasis of reason in a sea of... never mind...
But truly, thanks for your post.
Cryptic? I said it from my first post: law-abiding citizens (should have read: law abiding residents), my mistake. But cryptic??? not at all!
Lighten up! Life’s too short to live it as a “pissed-off” no matter what... It is not good for your health, you know that.
Between my wife and I we have 43 years and neither of us were drafted. What's your point?
You posted a pic of Chinese in Chinatown. I responded to said picture. Hence the reference to "they".
Although my statement still stands no matter where you are from. One hundred years ago, THEY wanted to be Americans. Nowadays many immigrants, and illegals in particular, just want to suck off America's teat and have no desire to become Americans. Though immigrants from communist countries still seem to appreciate what we have here.
Don't worry, as you see the OP has no desire to become a citizen either. At least he's legit and I have no problem with that. And if he wants to speak Spanish, French, Russsian or Swahili at home doesn't bother me in the least. What he does in his own home is not my business either.
Now, towns in Texas conducting public business in Spanish is wrong, libraries stocked with Spanish publications is BS and multi-language ballots are a joke.
Well, I do confess to a certain level of intolerance, for I am "toleranced" out. The result, I suppose, of considerable irritation at the possibility that I might be lumped together with the whiners; the easily offended, the "relish in victimology" crowd. I am not ashamed in the slightest of my ethnicity, but would never use it as a weapon.
Perhaps the best way to explain it, is by remembering a story about Golda Meier.
At a gathering of heads of state, she was there early, and a cultural moron walked in, a minor functionary, and asked her to get him some coffee, mistaking her for facilities staff.
She quietly went and got him his coffee, and quietly went about her business.
That, compadre, is class.
Those that have it are not easily offended; they don't make a federal case out of slights and, certainly, with totally equanimity consider the source of potential insults.
And you may call me anything you wish.
This post is made of win. Thanks!
Yes, clear this post is part of an evil conspiracy to spread disinformation on FR.
By “clearly” I mean, not really. :p
You’re talking a lot for a guy who essentially said “Too long, didn’t read”
Here’s how we do this on the internet:
tl:dr
Caps lock is cruise control for cool.
But even with cruise control, you still have to use the steering wheel. :)
Thanks for the post. It does shed some light on the tone of your prior post.
I liked the Golda Meir anecdote. I do not consider myself part of the whiner crowd. To be honest, as someone who came to the US only 10 years ago, I find the whole “affirmative action” rulings and “politically correct” sensitivities a bit perplexing. I like to think I am self sufficient and pull my own weight (and then some).
The intent of my post is not at all to portray myself or my family as victims. The only victims here are open and honest debate and truth, I think. I can appreciate the intensity the immigration issue brings on these forums. But, as I’ve said, what good does it make to disregard someone’s arguments because if we parse his words we can find something that gives that person away as a such and such and we can then just call him a name, label him and ignore his arguments? That’s fine with me if people want to act that way (what harm does it really do to me? none that I can think of), but what is gained from such an exchange? People come out of it with their same preconceived notions and cannot for a second concede that the other guy may have a teeny tiny appearance of a point.
I don’t like calling people names and I did not intend to call you anything. My apologies.
Oh, but of course! I have to go back and report to Harry Reid after I log off. Some of the posters here are just too good and cannot be fooled by even the most machiavellian schemes! I’ve been found out.
LOL!
You’re entitled to your opinion.
Does that also include rejecting legal immigrants currently in the US that follow the law?
Thanks for your post.
I have to disagree with your position on the constitutional interpretation of citizenship rights. So what you are saying is that the Framers did not really mean to say “any person” when they said “any person”? With all due respect, that’s gotta be the most Clintonian argument I’ve heard in a long time!
Have you ever lived outside your country for an extended period.”
You’re a legal citizen of the USA,but consider yourself on an extended leave of absence from Mexico and you want dual citizenship because when you become an American (USA) citizen you can’t buy property in Mexico.
XD
Seriously, though, it seems like this place has been taken over by people who do nothing but worry about illegal immigration.
They’re sucking all of the fun out of this place. There is no joy anymore. When was the last time we had a good laugh unexpectedly? No stuned beebers, no sister-biting mooses, no Clinton jokes, just lots of hating on people who don’t toe the Pat Buchanan line. If you don’t agree 100%, then you’re an “evil plant,” as if there are people paid to sit on FR all day and troll, lol.
It’s bloody ridiculous.
It does put me in the mood to troll people personally, though, because they almost always take themselves very very seriously.
The internet is Serious Business!
Thanks for taking the time to try an inject a bit of reality into the mix.
Not really but nice try.
Mexican citizenship cannot be renounced as far as the Mexican government is concerned. I would still be considered a Mexican national even if/when I got US Citizenship. So, I would not lose any rights to own property in Mexico...
Why have I not become a US citizen? The decision has really not presented to me, as I have been a permanent resident only for 3 years and I need to have that status for 5 years before I can qualify... And, just in case you are wondering, prior to becoming a legal resident I was what is called a Non Resident Alien, legally here under a work visa...
Thanks for your post.
No. Not current legal immigrants. Unless, of course, they insult America by claiming dual citizenship for their children born here. Yes, to any of the twenty + million here illegally who may gain legal status from those willing to break Reagan's 1986 promise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.