Sunday, August 01, 2010

The history of “sugar” tit pacifiers

Recently, pious Catholic Mel Gibson was chastised for saying "What do you think you're looking at, sugar tits?", to a female police officer.

While everybody knows that Mel is not too bright, he also used horrible grammar.

I'm not a grammar Nazi, but the correct term is "Sugar Tit" is always singular, and it’s boorish to pluralize it.


The correct term is “sugar tit”, never “sugar tits” . . .

But I suppose it's too much to expect proper tit grammar from a drunken Australian . . .


What's a sugar tit?

But most folks don’t know that “sugar tit” was a common term in Colonial America, and it was not considered a nasty at all!

There is even a town named Sugar Tit in South Carolina:


Sugar Tit, South Carolina

The town of Sugar Tit has trouble with Yankee tourists stealing their signs, and I hear that they finally gave up making them:


An anonymous thief with a stolen Sugar Tit sign

Hello there, sugar tit!

The phase "Sugar Tit" was never indended to be a nasty word at all; it was the accepted colonial American term for a baby pacifier!

The term “sugar tit” used to be a Southern term of endearment, used when somebody is sweet, and in the 1800's it was not offensive for a gentleman say “Hello Sugar Tit” when greeting sweet young a lady.

Unfortunately, people with dirty minds think that it had to do with breasts and it’s time to set the record straight.


A sugar tit has nothing to do with a woman's breats

Back before they had rubber pacifiers in the mid 1800’s, Momma’s would soak a piece of cloth or smooth bone in molasses and stick it in the baby’s mouth, hence the name “Sugar Tit”.

There was also a “gum stick” variant of the sugar tit, made from smooth carved bone which was soaked in a sweet sorghum molassas solution:


A gumstick sugar tit pacifier

Sadly, today we have far more sophisticated baby pacifiers, and the sugar tit has been lost to history: