Mary Giovagnoli, the director of the Immigration Policy Center, posted a new blog about the "dramatic reversal in the definition" of the term "anchor baby."
In their initial definition, executives for American Heritage Dictionary didn't include any notation that the phrase was offensive or disparaging. But they have since corrected their entry online at ahdictionary.com and will update the hard copy of the dictionary.
Giovagnoli writes, in part, at immigrationimpact.com:
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
This is the kind of controversy that doesn't fade away quickly, and many argue that the term is so offensive that it shouldn't appear in the dictionary at all. I understand but disagree with that position, largely because the term, however offensive, exists as a political and practical reality. I think the new definition validates what many outraged voices in blogs, on Twitter, and in the press have been saying all along: "anchor baby" is a term that shouldn't exist but does because immigration restrictionists are really good at creating words that generate fear.