Quoted: Obama on mutts
Excerpted by Carmen Van Kerckhove
“We have two criteria that have to be reconciled. One is that Malia is allergic, so it has to be hypoallergenic. There are a number of breeds that are hypoallergenic,” he said. “On the other hand, our preference would be to get a shelter dog, but, obviously, a lot of shelter dogs are mutts like me.”
(In response to a question at Friday’s press conference about what type of dog the Obamas are going to pick for their daughters.)
Source: Boston Globe
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
little mixed girl wrote:
as a mixed person, i’m annoyed that he would even use such a word.
i don’t use it on myself, and i don’t use it to describe other mixed people.
(waits for slew of “he can say what he wants!!!1111″ comments.)
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 7:57 am ¶
jen wrote:
I hear goldden doodles have been suggested. I love mutts- not hybrids given cutsie names and stamped with a price tag. So I love that they want a rescued animal, because a pooch in need is a wonderful dog friend indeed.
p.s. also it is comforting when people have senses of humor about being their ethnicity-or multiple ethnic identities, in this case.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 9:16 am ¶
jen* wrote:
I have never liked the term mutt applied to people. I thought he was over trying to make other people feel comfortable with his parentage, but I guess not.
I really like Kanye, but when he made his comment about biracial girls in videos being mutts, I had to take a step back.
People aren’t perfect – I get that. But why must this particular phrase become so acceptable?
I’m just *not* into discussing people using animal terms.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 10:48 am ¶
Jus Plain Ol Me wrote:
I was driving in the car when I heard the press conference live on NPR. I couldn’t believe he said it. I almost crashed. The NPR radio broadcasters didn’t really make anything of the comment which surprised me.
I know that there will be differing views on this, but it doesn’t truly bother me that he refers to himself that way. I was just shocked that he said it in “mixed company.” It’s almost as if he’s green-lighted other people calling him that.
I guess I’m the same way about the n-word. I’ve stayed away from the word for years now, but it doesn’t bother me when my close friends use it amongst ourselves. However, it bothers me when they use it in “mixed company” because I don’t want “outsiders”* to think that I’d be okay with them using the word around me.
On the technical side of things, I thought Obama (with his law degree) may have been laying the groundwork to argue that the textbook definition of mutt was wholly appropriate. Not so much. According to dictionary.com, a mutt is either a mongrel dog or a “a stupid or foolish person, simpleton.” Oops.
On a final note, my wife and I have a bi-racial (black and white) daughter (almost 14 months old), and I can’t imagine a situation wherein I would call her a mutt.
Nonetheless, I still like Obama.
For now.
* By “outsiders,” I mean someone who is not a part of my “inner circle.” I don’t mean it to sound xenophobic. Moreover, “outsiders” does not mean “all white people.” My wife is white and has been around when my friends talk and it doesn’t bother me. She doesn’t use the word, she knows that I don’t use the word and she understands the context in which my friends have used it (which doesn’t necessarily mean that she likes it). This whole footnote is an entirely different issue worthy of its own line of discussion, so I’d better stop.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 10:55 am ¶
Oli wrote:
He was obviously making a joke. Some people won’t like it, but that’s all it was
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 10:58 am ¶
Diana wrote:
I don’t think the “mutt” commentary was meant to be derogatory or cast dispersions on all mixed-raced people. He only referred to himself. I’m glad he thought to mention a shelter dog, even if they have to go to a breeder. Maybe they can find a pure-bred hypoallergenic dog through a rescue organization. I’m sure all kind of offers are pouring in. Who would deny those cute little girls anything?
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 11:00 am ¶
Dana wrote:
I don’t think he meant it in an offensive way. But everyone gives a different amount of gravity to statements like that.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 11:09 am ¶
Celeste wrote:
Yeah there’s a big difference in the way Obama used the term, versus Kanye where it was used in a dehumanizing way. I think the Nancy Reagan comment was worse. However, I’m cutting him some slack given all the pressure he’s been under.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 11:14 am ¶
Joanna Eng wrote:
I don’t personally say “mutt” but I definitely know other mixed people who use that to refer to themselves and it doesn’t bother me. But I agree that I wouldn’t want people who aren’t mixed to start using the word.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 11:20 am ¶
Tim wrote:
Yeah, weird. I think the problem — and this is something that Obama will face over and over again — is that people will look to him for cues on how to talk about racial identity. It doesn’t really matter what his intent is, or the context: folks will start indiscriminately using the word “mutt” either genuinely or disingenuously under the pretext that Obama’s use of it legitimizes the term.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 11:25 am ¶
soreal879 wrote:
i think he was just making a joke that didnt go over too well…just like the Nancy Reagan “seance” joke as well
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 12:00 pm ¶
L-K wrote:
My co-workers and I were at an off-site board meeting and gathered around the hotel’s lounge TV when he came on.
The reactions to the “mutt” comment varied. One was absolutely shocked. And I was the one who shouted out “he said mutt, hooray for mutts!” (I have referred to myself as a mutt on occasion, as sorting out the genealogy has been a pain in the ass, yet mainly identify as Afro-Dominican).
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 12:09 pm ¶
Danielle wrote:
Though I don’t like the word mutt, I think Obama was trying to make people comfortable with a situation they are uncomfortable with (i.e. trying to categorize a President of mixed-race descent). I won’t go into a dissertation about why our constructed racial categories make no sense, but I was disappointed to see that Obama seemed to be defining himself by popular social definitions. In reality, we are all “mutts,” descended from people of many different countries, cultures, and ethnicities. I have actually heard the word mutt used more frequently by people of mixed-European descent, describing the composition of their whiteness instead of describing multiple-race backgrounds.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 12:19 pm ¶
jen* wrote:
The hue and cry “it’s just a joke” is what I was expecting. He meant it as a joke – sure. And I get that.
It doesn’t make me like the term any more, though. And there will be some who use this instance as carte blanche to call people like me mutts – as a joke.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 1:17 pm ¶
Cara wrote:
I happen to like the term “mutt”….i’m a mutt, most Americans (who’s families have been hear ~ 150 – 200 years) are MUTTS!!!! I have issues with a lot more terms for ppl of mixed heritage, than this one…..it was funny, and at least he knows he’s a mutt and has a since of humor. He’s a serious person, but it’s good to know he doesn’t take him self that seriously all the time.
What’s blk, red, yellow, and white all over……ME! I’m a mutt
). As a matter of fact many multi-generational American have that mixture.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 1:41 pm ¶
Robespierre-Grillet wrote:
I’m half Russian Jew, one quarter Irish and one quarter Welsh. I and my family have always referred to ourselves as mutts; the term isn’t strictly racial except among eugenicists. It commonly denotes the kind of varied and non-pedigreed lineage of which every American ought to be proud: supposedly, the Boston Tea Party was about saying no to the idea of royalty, which means consciously pure bloodlines are elitist and possibly anti-democratic. The only negative connotations of *mutt* come from purists, whose classifications of human beings shouldn’t be respected in the first place.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 2:13 pm ¶
Gothic Guera wrote:
When I heard that joke I was slightly put off but trust me I heard worse about people who have mixed heritage. I will admit I once used the term to describe myself,(this was when I was bitter) my mom found out and told me why I shouldn’t used the word and said I should have more respect for humans and for myself. I’m not offended that Obama used the word mutt. I guess he was trying to poke fun about how people feel about his heritage(it was a poorly delivered joke), but hey American voted for him because we wanted a Leader, not a comedian’s
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 2:33 pm ¶
jen* wrote:
I don’t think the objection to the term comes from the idea that this is a pure-bred vs. mixed breed discussion. Or more precisely, that’s not where my objection comes from.
The comparison of POC to animals is offensive to me. Yes, we’re all from Kingdom Animalia, but the implication is that there is justification for the disparity in treatment between white people and POCs because POCs are closer to animals.
Being multiracial is great – and everyone in America *should* realize that there are very few [if any] ‘pure’ race people here. Using mutt as the term to describe those who are not? Not my cuppa.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 2:49 pm ¶
rahma wrote:
Apparently, when I put on hijab, my ethnicity suddenly becomes confusing and people will ask where I’m from. After I say Wisconsin, if they ask me to dig deeper (no, where are you really from?), rather than rattle off the litany of a dozen european countries that my ancestors hail from, I say I’m a euro-american mutt.
Granted, I wouldn’t want anyone else refering to me as a mutt, but it is a bit more pithy than saying I’m a norweigan/german/swiss/french/slav/irish/italian/sicilian american. And, it shuts people up
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 2:55 pm ¶
miss girl wrote:
To me, it was an obvious tongue-in-cheek, self-referential comment on how others perceive him. He’s always identified as a half-black, half-white American.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 3:36 pm ¶
Black Canseco wrote:
I’ve heard the term for years, but the difference i it’s usually referring to/used by people who have so many heritages going on, that they don’t know how to refer to themselves.
Plus there’s always an underlying tone of having to ridicule and degrade your ethnicity heritage in the name of being human.
For Obama, if there’s one person who can stand up and proud enough of what makes him who he is it’s the president of a country. Furthermore, there’s no confusion on his end–His father’s Kenyan, his mother’s Irish-American.
So why the need for the self-deprecation? I’m African and Chocktaw; I get enough deprecation and insults from others about my heritage—I don’t need to make anyone “feel better” or more comfortable by going along with it.
here’s a piece i wrote about this yesterday…
http://www.hustleknockin.com/hustleknockin/2008/11/hey-barack-im-nobodys-mutt.html
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 3:51 pm ¶
Tony wrote:
Eh, personally I’m happy he’s reminding folks he’s not just ‘Black” considering how many times I’ve heard him referred to as the “First Black President” in the last week.
Mutt isn’t my favorite term, but I remember when I was a kid thinking I was the only mixed person in human history because so many biracial historical figures get called “Black” to simplify things.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 3:55 pm ¶
Ike wrote:
@ Cara:
“I happen to like the term “mutt”….i’m a mutt, most Americans (who’s families have been hear ~ 150 – 200 years) are MUTTS!!!!”
Sentiments like this categorize me as less American. I am the American-born child of immigrants, both of the same ethnicity, both originally from the same country. Am I somehow less American because I’m not mixed-race or mixed-ethnicity? Sadly, this is a question that I’ve struggled with, but I certainly hope the answer is NO.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 3:59 pm ¶
Paz wrote:
I’m mixed, and when I heard him say that, I thought “Yay for mutts!”
I’m a bit surprised that people here have taken such offense to it. I wouldn’t call someone a mutt, but the way he said it was self-deprecating.
I guess there are people who will be offended, but I was pleasantly surprised that he gave a shout-out to his mixed heritage.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 4:17 pm ¶
Jas wrote:
I’ll admit I didn’t have a problem with it at all but when I heard him say it I knew some people would be offended. And I can definitely understand why some people wouldn’t want him to use that term in a positive way and so publicly that would lead people to think it’s acceptable. He probably should have given that more thought but I honestly think people are most likely going to forget about it.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 4:35 pm ¶
Rita wrote:
Taking it as an analogy of mutts vs. purebreds, I’ve always felt that the USA is the land of the mutt. I don’t believe the concept of “purebred,” as in a noble class, etc, has any business in the USA. Even the Daughters of the American Revolution strike me as fundamentally unAmerican.
I say, Go Mutts!
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 4:48 pm ¶
kristine wrote:
I liked his comment although I understood instantly that others might not. I’m white but my parents are from different cultures and called us mutts. It was always taken as a positive. We were better for being ‘mixed’. That was the take. Although when whites say this about whites it’s not taken as a negative – at least I have not heard it taken that way.
My son is biracial and I would not be offended if he speaks of himself this way. I’m happy that we have a president who doesn’t take himself to seriously.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 4:51 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:
He has probably used this joke MANY times in his personal life and has never been called on it. So, it just rolled off his tongue, albeit, given his current position as the President Elect, he could have/should have been more thoughtful. On the other hand, given the past gaffes and blunders of Bush, really mutt isn’t that bad.
You know, I knew that we would get to the whole “Obama isn’t the first Black President” conversation. And despite the fact that it robs Black people of the magic and historic significance of this moment in the name of Bi/Multiracial identification and unity (NOT A BAD THING AT ALL, POWER TO THE PEOPLE!), I can go on and agree with you all. Obama is not Black, or not just Black, he is also White. He is not the first Black president. I agree. I concede the point.
But, we have the FIRST BLACK FIRST LADY! So, I no longer care what Obama calls himself, or what anyone else calls him for that matter. Michelle LaVaughn Robinson, from the South Side of Chicago is all the representation that I need in the White House.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 5:05 pm ¶
Monie wrote:
@Michelle
“He has probably used this joke MANY times in his personal life and has never been called on it. So, it just rolled off his tongue, albeit, given his current position as the President Elect, he could have/should have been more thoughtful.”
Thanks for summing up exactly what I think about it!
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 6:46 pm ¶
ambre wrote:
@ JPOM
“I know that there will be differing views on this, but it doesn’t truly bother me that he refers to himself that way. I was just shocked that he said it in “mixed company.” It’s almost as if he’s green-lighted other people calling him that.”
WORD! As a mixed person, it doesn’t bother me that Obama referred to himself as a “mutt.” To be honest, I thought “me too!” immediately after I heard it, but that was quickly followed by a panicked second thought that people would see this as a “green light.” It felt like a “laughing at” vs. “laughing with” moment.
(I too was driving and listening to NPR when I heard this and luckily was at a stop.)
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 8:07 pm ¶
Ratrace wrote:
This is the first time I’ve ever heard a non white person call himself a mutt. On the other hand, I’ve heard dozens of Whites refer to themselves as such over the years; often mentioning they are a mix of German, French, Irish, Italian, etc. To which I can only ask, how does being all White make you a mutt?
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 9:04 pm ¶
Kay wrote:
“I think the problem — and this is something that Obama will face over and over again — is that people will look to him for cues on how to talk about racial identity.”
@Tim: This hits the nail on the head for me. A self-deprecating sense of humor is a fine thing, but so many people are looking to Obama to let us know how he would like *us* to talk about his racial identity, that hearing him joke about it is confusing on some level.
I also expected that a lot of people wouldn’t be comfortable with reclaiming the word “mutt”, whether of multi-racial or multi-ethnic heritage, and that seems to be the case. I call myself a “northern European mix” if pressed (and if I don’t want to list all the countries my ancestors hail from), but I can’t bring myself to say “mutt” because of the animal connotations. There is a long history of PoC, women, working class folks, etc. being dehumanized by being compared to animals, and for too many groups, this is a problem in the present, too.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 10:42 pm ¶
NancyP wrote:
How about “Heinz 57″? Although the comparison here is to various members of the plant kingdom.
The thing is, lots of people LOVE canine mutts, so while it strikes me as rude if someone else says it, if the mixed race person says it, I figure that’s their choice.
Posted 11 Nov 2008 at 11:32 pm ¶
bas bleu wrote:
I thought it was a dumb thing to say.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 1:08 am ¶
B wrote:
I think it came out as a result of his not sleeping for several days, and his being out of sorts due to the death of his grandmother. I’m guessing he prepped on all the serious stuff, overcompensating for the stressed, exhausted state he must be in, but didn’t prepare an answer to the dog question, as it isn’t a matter of national security.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:48 am ¶
little mixed girl wrote:
i agree with ratrace, i’ve heard a lot of white people call themselves “mutts”.
and it sounds offensive when they do it too!
like they are trying to sound multicultural and post-racial by using an offensive term.
if it was a phrase he used with his wife, then he should have kept it there…in my opinion.
i can see even more people using the word thinking that “it’s fine cuz he said it!”
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 9:55 am ¶
Ka_Jun wrote:
Neither my wife or I were comfortable with him using the term, “mutt”. I have to say I also think it was a dumb thing to say.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 10:53 am ¶
bdsista wrote:
Didn’t really have an issue with it, think he was trying to be light about the race thing and promote mutt adoption. What I am tired of is Whites saying, “I’m just American” when asked what their ethnic background is as if no-one of color is American. But that’s part an parcel of the Anglo Assimilationist philosophy which evolved from Nativist sentiments from the turn of the century.
I am soo glad he is looking at rescue organizations. My dachsies both came from rescue organizations and are wonderful sweet dogs. I highly recommend www. hua.org (Hearts United for Animals) these are the people who bust the puppy mills and lobby for legislation to regulate puppy mills. They also have a no-kill shelter that houses small animals and some horses and mules in Nebraska. They will fly the animal out and in one case I hosted one of the workers who flew out with the dog and helped her adjust.
So don’t forget Animal shelters and Rescue groups if you have breed preferences. They also have mixed breeds as well. Wonder if the Obama’s have thought about Greyhounds which are often discarded from the Racing industry.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 10:57 am ¶
Jeremy Pierce wrote:
I suspect it was just his way of trying to underscore that there’s nothing wrong with mutts. He doesn’t have any special hierarchy of dogs. That’s not why he won’t get a shelter animal. His reason has to do with allergies. But it’s probably right to say that it reflects an underestimation of how bad people will take the comment to be. Obama doesn’t really have a good ear for how people are going to hear things he says. This isn’t the first time this has happened.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 11:52 am ¶
Tara K. wrote:
You know, I usually use the word “mutt” to describe most white people in America. (I’m white.) Because I know a lot of white people have lineage like mine (assorted anglo-European descents – Irish, German, etc. – with one known black ancestor and a few known native American descendents), I use the term to try to disspell the myth of the “pure” white race, because most of us just aren’t, even though anyone looking at us would know that we’re white. This isn’t because I want to claim that I’m not white (I know I’m white, whether you look at it socially or in terms of majority of my genes) or because I want to be a cool “other” (like annoying white people who try and play up their one native American or Jewish ancestor). My students, all international students of other ethnicities, too often think that American whiteness is blonde hair, blue eyes and something “true,” like “true” American.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 11:57 am ¶
Vince wrote:
No wonder I didn’t vote for him.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 1:30 pm ¶
Robespierre-Grillet wrote:
Quoth Ike: “I am the American-born child of immigrants, both of the same ethnicity, both originally from the same country. Am I somehow less American because I’m not mixed-race or mixed-ethnicity?”
Absolutely not! “Less American in spirit” would apply only if you felt superior to others based on your same-race ethnicity, or saw mixed-race people as somehow less human.
Quoth little mixed girl: “i’ve heard a lot of white people call themselves ‘mutts’ and it sounds offensive when they do it too! like they are trying to sound multicultural and post-racial by using an offensive term.”
No, they are not “trying to sound post-racial,” nor is the term offensive to them because they have not for a moment entertained the idea seriously of equating humans with dogs — they probably don’t even know how that would feel. They refer to themselves that way because that is how they understand themselves. They are also technically correct, since they are not “white” in the most literal sense. Read about the history of Jewish-, Irish- and Italian-Americans: these people, too, were treated as non-white and even non-human a hundred years ago. Irish and Italian people were *not* considered white by so-called Anglo-Saxons.
The POC/animal objection is valid for POC, but if a black person can use specific words that might seem derogatory when used by others, then so-called whites can refer to themselves as mutts. It’s a question of terminological quid pro quo.
Some see self-denigration where others see modestly stated pride. Working-class metaphors need not be free of all possible negative connotations if the people using them find kernels of identity in the process. In terms of *inherent* difference, race is a myth. The problem lies in how it is perceived/interpreted. Purity is a myth but becomes a problem when the myth is accepted and favored.
Quoth bdsista: “What I am tired of is Whites saying, ‘I’m just American’ when asked what their ethnic background is as if no-one of color is American. But that’s part an parcel of the Anglo Assimilationist philosophy which evolved from Nativist sentiments from the turn of the century.”
QFT. I agree with this completely. Everyone has an ethnic background because no one is non-ethnic, therefore every American is ethnic. Being American is never a matter of race unless purists make it one. The “founding fathers” certainly did — perhaps *they* were unpatriotic. Perhaps patriotism only becomes possible in the wake of true religious/irreligious freedom and the Civil Rights Movement: before that, “we the people” meant “we the select.”
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:15 pm ¶
Robespierre-Grillet wrote:
One clarification: By “Being American is never a matter of race,” I mean that purity of race is not the litmus test of being an American (a blatantly obvious idea, of course). I do *not* mean that race is irrelevant to being an American.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 2:34 pm ¶
Tony wrote:
Personally I never saw white folks going “I’m American” as saying “Non-whites aren’t”
It’s saying “I don’t really care who my ancestors were, or where they were from, before they wound up here.”
I don’t doubt there are some who mean the more racist incarnation, but most I’ve met seem to embody the latter interpretation.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 3:06 pm ¶
Paz wrote:
What I am tired of is Whites saying, “I’m just American” when asked what their ethnic background is as if no-one of color is American.
I don’t think that when White people say that they’re making a distinction between them and PoC. I think if let’s say your parents are of Polish ancestry, but have been in the U.S. for generations, and now you don’t speak the language, or know much about the culture, it is conceivable that you may not feel connected to your Polish heritage, and instead simply feel American, the culture where you were born and raised in.
My dad is Irish, English and French and when asked, he identifies himself as Native American (which by the way I find insulting to real Natives) but he reasons that his family has been here since the 1500s, so how can he identify with European culture?
Anyway, my point is that I don’t think that assuming only an American identity necessarily means that it assumes that White=True American.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 3:13 pm ¶
atlasien wrote:
@Tony: What’s racist is not the statement “I’m just American.” It’s the context and reception around that statement.
When a white person says “I’m just American”, there’s not much reaction. Everyone understands what they mean.
But when someone like me says it, people actually disagree and argue. That’s what’s racist!
Here are some reactions I’ve gotten when I’ve said something like “I’m just American.”
“That’s not what I meant.”
“But where are you REALLY from?”
“Yeah, but what about…”
“Well, you don’t LOOK American.”
“Are you sure?”
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 3:19 pm ¶
jen* wrote:
cosign atlasien. I usually respond by saying I’m American, and usually get the barrage of follow-ups.
As for the whole ‘mutt’ thing. It was disappointing to me because of context and connotation. It’s not a huge deal to me, because I’m much more concerned about the financial outlook, environment, wars, etc. But like it or not, a lot of the things the Obamas do and say are going to [at least at first] be interpreted as representative of the entire group. I really feel for them because of this. And sometimes, I hold my breath.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 4:18 pm ¶
Nick wrote:
I think Robespierre put it rather well. If pushed, I would describe myself as a mutt since the alternative (pure-bred?) would be inaccurate.
I’m white, but my whiteness is an anglo/irish mix with a bit of german thrown in.
I’d be curious to meet anyone white who could claim with certainty that they weren’t a mutt. Europe isn’t that big and people have been living/marrying/gettin’ it on for a long looooong time.
Just my two cents (or pence)
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 5:06 pm ¶
Christie wrote:
@Little mixed girl – “i agree with ratrace, i’ve heard a lot of white people call themselves “mutts”. and it sounds offensive when they do it too! like they are trying to sound multicultural and post-racial by using an offensive term.”
@Robespierre – “They refer to themselves that way because that is how they understand themselves.” “Some see self-denigration where others see modestly stated pride.”
Robespierre put this well, I think – as a white person, I have heard many other white people refer to themselves as mutts, and most of these people have probably had very little exposure to mixed-race people, so the concept the word “mutt” being offensive to mixed-race people is totally off of their radar.
The fact is that many white Americans have only a vague understanding of which countries in Europe their ancestors came from. For example, 1/4 of my family came to the U.S. about 110 years ago from Finland, so I know that part. Another 1/4 came from England about 150 years ago. The remaining 1/2 came longer ago, and their origins are largely lost in the mists of time. A working-class white man with such a background and no special interest in family history may truly have little idea where half or more of his family came from, and will often call himself a mutt (instead of saying “I don’t know” or “somewhere in Europe”), but will say it with some understated pride (as Robespierre put it). So they are saying it purely from their own concept of themselves, and not with any inkling that someone might find it offensive.
I personally do not use this word, though. My children are mixed race and I would not like to hear someone else call them mutts. I was surprised to hear Obama say it and have mixed feelings about it.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 8:50 pm ¶
Christie wrote:
Sorry to come on again, but I just remembered that my dad used to tell me that his dad (a white Californian who lived 1909-1959) used to say that his own family background was “English, Irish and Scotch Terrier”. My hobby is family history, and after a lot of looking I uncovered the English part of my grandfather’s family, but no Irish or Scottish so far — I can definitely say that his family background is obscure and/or unknown. I always understood this stock joke he used as another way of saying “mutt”, but it was definitely said with some pride, too.
Posted 12 Nov 2008 at 9:43 pm ¶
Michelle wrote:
Dear Mr. President Elect Obama,
Are you sure you want this job? Because EVERYTHING you used to say and do, well you won’t be able to do much of that anymore.
You sure, Mr. Obama?
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 2:00 am ¶
hexy wrote:
It’s a term I use to refer to myself, jokingly, and have heard many other mixed race people do so.
That fact didn’t take the shock and the sting away the one time I saw a white man spit it at a mixed-race woman as an insult.
I’m reconsidering my usage.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 6:19 am ¶
Nick wrote:
I’m not sure that I would reconsider my usage of the term based on someone else’s mis-use of the term.
Some people have a problem with the idea that there is, has been, and ever will be, intermixing of the races. That is their problem, not mine.
I don’t have a problem with the term mutt because I see it as a light-hearted way of acknowledging that many of us are a big mix of different lineages.
The idea of a “pure-breed” human is fairly ridiculous and faintly disturbing (Aryans?).
There are some isolated communities where you can track back a thousand years (ie. Iceland) but even then you never know.
My uncle thought he was 100% Finnish but turns out there might have been a Swede involved somewhere along the way. Quell Horreur!
PS – Isn’t Barack partly Irish?
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 10:27 am ¶
CVT wrote:
Reactions to Obama’s comment are interesting to me. I’m mixed. Bi-racial. A “half-breed.” A “mutt.” And it didn’t really blow my mind to hear him say that because I’ve been known to refer to myself as a “half-breed” at times as a sort of tongue-in-cheek re-claiming – I could easily see myself making the same comment as Obama did.
Interestingly, it was a mono-racial African-American co-worker of mine that was the first to bring it to me – and she was shocked that it didn’t bother me that he said that. It really bothered her.
And I think part of it is the use of “mutt” in the African-American community, as opposed to elsewhere. It bears more contempt and hurt in that community. And I think that part of this is the fact that African-Americans have a much more negative history with dogs, in general – their use as weapons by white slave masters, during the civil rights era, and in gentrified neighborhoods to this day. So, culturally, being compared to a dog in African-American culture is MUCH more offensive than it might be in other cultures. And that’s how “mutt” is often used in that culture (whereas it might be used more gently, or with less of a bite elsewhere).
So – should Obama have said it? Probably not. And it probably gives monoracial folks a new excuse to say it. But does it bother me as a mixed-race American? Not at all.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 11:10 am ¶
Prometheus wrote:
@ Celeste (8) there’s nothing more dehumanizing than comparing yourself to a dog (a.k.a. a nonhuman)…and does it really matter what his intention was OR is the action more important? just some thoughts.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 11:19 am ¶
jen wrote:
i used the word “comforting,” didn’t i? take back my “p.s.” as was originally written.
edit: it is nice to see that he has his sense of humor, regardless of whether the joke failed, especially since it was in regard to somethng he is doing out of love for his daughters. maybe the mutt comment can be taken as dehumanizing, but the puppy promise he gave to his daughters in his acceptance speech was entirely human.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 12:00 pm ¶
Robespierre-Grillet wrote:
Tony ululated rakishly over a Bulgarian ruchenitza: “Personally I never saw white folks going ‘I’m American’ as saying ‘Non-whites aren’t.’ It’s saying ‘I don’t really care who my ancestors were, or where they were from, before they wound up here.’”
Other than separatists and supremacists, I doubt most people of any ethnicity are avowedly racist. The point people seem to be making is that the rejection of a racial *discussion* is implicit: “I’m American, i.e., I’m normative. I am choosing not to discuss the intricacies of race because such matters are irrelevant to normative Americans.”
And let’s be clear: phrases like “most whites” are also misleading. I’m guilty of the same thing in a previous post (referring to whites who use *mutt* as “they”), so I’m more concerned with correcting myself than you.
Paz belted out in a raucous yet socially responsible manner: “Anyway, my point is that I don’t think that assuming only an American identity necessarily means that it assumes that White=True American.”
If we forget about race for a moment and look at it purely as a response, I think the “I’m an American” answer falls into what Roland Barthes calls *neither-nor criticism*: A way of dismissing subtlety and difficulty by professing not to understand it. “Just American” = “I can’t/won’t understand/tolerate the complexities of a racial discussion” and/or “complexity doesn’t exist in my experience.”
The amusing thing is this: Every nuance and variant you and I wrest from the phrase — no matter how thoughtfully! — will not apply to those who happen use it in a different way. Our collective discussion on *mutt* is similarly ironic (though seriously engaging).
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 1:13 pm ¶
chicagorose wrote:
@CVT
Just what degree of contact with African Americans do you maintain? Because that entire explaination read like something very bizarre! It would better fit a fear of dogs than a distaste for the term “Mutt”, which to my knowledge I’ve never noticed an aversion to using or hearing. My family seemed comfortable enough using it, and in the same context as Obama, in a light hearted non-derogatory manner. I chalk it up to a matter of personal preferences and that whole “a time and a place” thing; some of us think it impolite or offensive, some of us are not fussed by it.
And for the record? Those of us that fit the term African American in its traditional sense, meaning descendents of slaves, are not mono-racial. We are a mixed people, from the darkest to the fairest.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 3:11 pm ¶
chicagorose wrote:
Michelle wrote:
“You know, I knew that we would get to the whole “Obama isn’t the first Black President” conversation. And despite the fact that it robs Black people of the magic and historic significance of this moment in the name of Bi/Multiracial identification and unity (NOT A BAD THING AT ALL, POWER TO THE PEOPLE!), I can go on and agree with you all. Obama is not Black, or not just Black, he is also White. He is not the first Black president. I agree. I concede the point.”
You know, I knew we would too. I just hoped upon hope that it wouldn’t become the bi-racial community pitted against the black community dynamic. He can be both the first black AND bi-racial president; why some folk can’t wrap their heads around that idea I haven’t the foggiest. Black is a term the African American community came up with at a highly political time in history as a call to unity, It defines a group, not a race. We didn’t say “No bi-racial people of African descent allowed.” It isn’t a club. It’s an identity. One Barack has chosen. Please don’t treat it like a religion he converted to. It is his own experience from which he operates.
And yes it does rob “Black people of the magic and historic significance of this moment in the name of Bi/Multiracial identification and unity”. So don’t. Black people are a multi-racial people. He IS your first Black President. And mine. And ours.
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 4:03 pm ¶
jln wrote:
Rather than being a matter of bringing people down by comparing them to dogs, I read it and assumed the point was to bring up the shelter dogs by comparing them to people!
I’m not American, so I could be missing the historical background but still: I like the idea that a major world leader is essentially putting out a vote for the rescue animals!
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 4:10 pm ¶
onely wrote:
I wonder if maybe Obama was talking less about his race and more about his whole being. Raised in Indonesia, and Hawaii, by grandparents, having parents from two different countries. . . being a writer, community organizer, and politician. . . he’s a “mutt” in more ways than just race, one might say. I wonder if all those aspects of his life might have been flashing through the forefront of his tired, stressed, grieving mind, as much as or more so than his mixed race.
Or maybe this is just what I Hope.
-CC
Posted 13 Nov 2008 at 8:09 pm ¶
Robespierre-Grillet wrote:
Dearest Onely:
“I wonder if maybe Obama was talking less about his race and more about his whole being. Raised in Indonesia, and Hawaii, by grandparents, having parents from two different countries . . . he’s a “mutt” in more ways than just race, one might say.
In that sense, the late Russian/German composer Alfred Schnittke made *muttism* his artistic style as well as his genetic calling card: The son of a journalist who moved his family several places before settling on Russia; born at a moment of utter stylistic fragmentation; the first to coin, use and embody the idea of *polystyle* in absolute music. Not surprisingly, he scored a lot of music for films, since polystyle is often especially appropriate for that medium.
Something about Obama’s demeanor and method fairly screams *polystyle*, and his sense of contradictory/complimentary origins and experience might be one of the reasons so many voters identified with him. We are impure not only genetically but stylistically:– the idea of diversity seems to extend to style, demeanor, and everything else — not in terms of how a particular person is *supposed* to behave, but in terms of how an idiosyncratic upbringing affects them, and the individualized synthesis they then bring to our huge table. (By the way: when’s dinner?)
Posted 14 Nov 2008 at 4:19 am ¶
Globalistgirl wrote:
@ Onely: I can definetly see that interpretation. In a US context I’m white, but my parents are from different countries and I grew up in three countries on three continents. I’ve jokingly called myself a mutt, referring not to race but to culture, in an attempt to shorten my answer to “Where are you from?”. (Turns out people do not accept answers that aren’t of the form “Placename.”, especially if you’re the “wrong” ethnicity for that place.) I don’t particularly feel like sharing my life story with everyone who asks me that question, and light-hearted answers like “I’m a mutt” and “Everywhere” are easy ways to deal with a difficult question. (I know 99% of the people who ask don’t want to deal with the complexity of the answer.)
Obama hasn’t talked much about his third culture background, but then he’d never have been elected if he talked about it like I do. The fact remains that few of us with international childhoods end up being anything but cultural mutts. He just isn’t completely American culturally, and I’m very impressed with how he’s drawn attention away from that. I wish I were as good at it sometimes.
Regardless of whether he meant mutt like I mean mutt when talking about myself, we might want to keep in mind that his ideas about race may not be in a 100% American idea context. The only person who might guess whether they are is Obama – those kinds of things depend so much on your particular experience that I wouldn’t try to guess. Sometimes it’s hard to know whether your ideas are the same as in the dominant culture – I’ve found out many times that I thought they were and they weren’t.
Posted 17 Nov 2008 at 2:46 pm ¶
frank english wrote:
Obama again is using simple words and a situation to allude to a greater question and perception. He is a grand american mix as most of us. Myself being english, sicilian and possibly lots of other stuff mixed in as my fathers family is very very old in this country.
Obama’s mother and grandmother were sicilian americans whom have been great contributors to this american culture and are greatly misunderstood. African Americans, Native Americans and Sicilians have a somewhat close bond that has gone through the long years of this country.
I am thankful that Obama uses “Mutt” just like Bill Murray in STRIPES as he describes all the soldiers that make up the platoon.
Posted 22 Jan 2009 at 9:48 am ¶