Why is “For the Birds” a Bad Thing?

By Mike March 27, 2007 6 comments

The idiomatic expression “for the birds“ is common enough to crop up in everyday conversation. One hears it all the time: “This pizza is for the birds!” “The Mets are for the birds!” “Lying, fascist, ideologue politicians are for the birds!” You probably get the point. This phrase is obviously negative in connotation, meaning objectionable or worthless. But why is it bad to be for the birds anyway? Who coined the term and for how long has this designated an undesirable state?

If you’re still reading, then perhaps you share my curiosity. Regrettably, I’m short on answers. There seems to be no authoritative answer regarding the origin of this avian insult. The best source of information is a website called businessballs.com. This site’s idiom page offers the following insights:

…for the birds (also strictly for the birds) - useless, unreliable facts, unacceptable or trivial, implying that something is only for weaker, unintelligent or lesser people - American origin according to Kirkpatrick and Schwarz Dictionary of Idioms. Decharne’s Dictionary of Hipster Slang actually references a quote from the Hank Janson novel Chicago Chick 1962 - ” ‘It’s crazy man,’ I told him, ‘Real crazy. Strictly for the birds.’ ” - but doesn’t state whether this was the original usage. Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable (1870) certainly makes no mention of it which suggests it is no earlier than 20th century.

This is good stuff, but far from definitive. I will have to respectfully disagree with the author’s conclusions regarding the age of this expression. You see, since so many other sources of inspiration turned into blind alleys, I consulted that font of ancient wisdom, the most-quoted tome of all time, the Good Book itself. That’s right, I checked the Bible for the phrase “for the birds” and I think I found our answer.

Isaiah 18:4 For this is what the Lord has told me: “I will wait and watch from my place, like scorching heat produced by the sunlight, like a cloud of mist in the heat of harvest.” 18:5 For before the harvest, when the bud has sprouted, and the ripening fruit appears, he will cut off the unproductive shoots with pruning knives; he will prune the tendrils. 18:6 They will all be left for the birds of the hills and the wild animals; the birds will eat them during the summer, and all the wild animals will eat them during the winter.

Jeremiah 16:4 They will die of deadly diseases. No one will mourn for them. And they will not be buried. Their dead bodies will lie like manure spread on the ground. They will be killed in war or die of starvation. And their corpses will be food for the birds and the wild animals.

According to the Old Testament, something that is “for the birds” is roughly equivalent to an unproductive shoot or manure. Suddenly it all makes sense. One has to wonder, though… As birders, we are clearly for the birds. What does that say about us?

Tags:

Have you seen the cool 10,000 Birds t-shirts? Get yours today!


Explore These Related Posts

  • No Related Post

About the Author

Mike

Mike

Mike is a leading authority in the field of standardized test preparation, but what he really aspires to be is a naturalist. Besides founding 10,000 Birds and I and the Bird, Mike has also created a number of other entertaining sites and resources, particularly the Nature Blog Network.

6 Responses to “Why is “For the Birds” a Bad Thing?”

  1. I can’t stand that phrase when it is used as a pun. I generally will not link to an article that uses that as a headline, unless the article is really, really good.

    I think the biblical origin might make sense. The passages you cite have somewhat different meanings than the English usage, though. I read them less as a dismissal than as a warning. If you have access to the OED, perhaps that might help you find the earliest English use of the phrase.

    “The Mets are for the birds!”

    Frankly, I think that is an insult to birds.

  2. That’s cold, John! Wait until you see the Mets this year. They’re going to be amazing (I hope.)

  3. As someone who is both “for the birds” and “for the METS”, I will ask it we can now explore the correlation between the “Amazin’s” and the amazing effect birds can have on some of us.

  4. I agree with John about the biblical citations — they do not seem insulting to birds, but serve as a warning that what will be left will not feed the human transgressors, but only animals. I suspect the dismissive meaning did arise in the 20th c and does have more insulting implications as to birds’ intelligence.

  5. Enchilada, I haven’t seen the phrase used to insult birds, but rather that which is described as “for the birds.”

    Nancy, I’m sure you’ll agree that the Mets are going to have a decidedly deleterious effect on some birds this season, mainly Blue Jays and Cardinals, and perhaps some Orioles as well.

  6. I didn’t mean to imply that it is used specifically to insult birds, but the implications are derogatory to birds, the way, e.g., calling someone a snake implies that snakes are evil.

Share Your Thoughts

You can use these XHTML tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <strong>