We are independent & ad-supported. We may earn a commission for purchases made through our links.
Advertiser Disclosure
Our website is an independent, advertising-supported platform. We provide our content free of charge to our readers, and to keep it that way, we rely on revenue generated through advertisements and affiliate partnerships. This means that when you click on certain links on our site and make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn more.
How We Make Money
We sustain our operations through affiliate commissions and advertising. If you click on an affiliate link and make a purchase, we may receive a commission from the merchant at no additional cost to you. We also display advertisements on our website, which help generate revenue to support our work and keep our content free for readers. Our editorial team operates independently of our advertising and affiliate partnerships to ensure that our content remains unbiased and focused on providing you with the best information and recommendations based on thorough research and honest evaluations. To remain transparent, we’ve provided a list of our current affiliate partners here.

What does "Lipstick on a Pig" Mean?

By Alan Rankin
Updated May 23, 2024
Our promise to you
Language & Humanities is dedicated to creating trustworthy, high-quality content that always prioritizes transparency, integrity, and inclusivity above all else. Our ensure that our content creation and review process includes rigorous fact-checking, evidence-based, and continual updates to ensure accuracy and reliability.

Our Promise to you

Founded in 2002, our company has been a trusted resource for readers seeking informative and engaging content. Our dedication to quality remains unwavering—and will never change. We follow a strict editorial policy, ensuring that our content is authored by highly qualified professionals and edited by subject matter experts. This guarantees that everything we publish is objective, accurate, and trustworthy.

Over the years, we've refined our approach to cover a wide range of topics, providing readers with reliable and practical advice to enhance their knowledge and skills. That's why millions of readers turn to us each year. Join us in celebrating the joy of learning, guided by standards you can trust.

Editorial Standards

At Language & Humanities, we are committed to creating content that you can trust. Our editorial process is designed to ensure that every piece of content we publish is accurate, reliable, and informative.

Our team of experienced writers and editors follows a strict set of guidelines to ensure the highest quality content. We conduct thorough research, fact-check all information, and rely on credible sources to back up our claims. Our content is reviewed by subject-matter experts to ensure accuracy and clarity.

We believe in transparency and maintain editorial independence from our advertisers. Our team does not receive direct compensation from advertisers, allowing us to create unbiased content that prioritizes your interests.

“Lipstick on a pig” is a figure of speech used to describe attempts to make an ugly fact, policy or item seem more appealing. These attempts fail, in the speaker’s view, because the object’s essential nature cannot be changed by surface or cosmetic adjustments. Although the term “lipstick on a pig” was coined in the 20th century, many older phrases use the pig as a sort of standard for the crude or undesirable. The phrase was used frequently by candidates and news media during the 2008 United States presidential election.

Pigs are, of course, used as a food staple around the world, and some people even keep pigs as pets. They are, however, commonly perceived as lazy, filthy creatures because of their long history as domesticated farm animals. Consequently, many people use pigs as verbal shorthand when they want to describe someone or something as gluttonous, slothful, unrefined or otherwise unattractive. To put “lipstick on a pig” would thus be a waste of time and good lipstick; most people still would not want to kiss one.

Similar phrases have been in use since at least Biblical times; a passage in Proverbs refers to a “gold ring in a swine’s snout.” The common expression “pearls before swine,” meaning to waste something precious by offering it to those who can’t appreciate it, was used, and perhaps coined, by Jesus Christ during the Sermon on the Mount. Other pig-related terms include “making a silk purse from a sow’s ear,” which has been in use since at least the 1600s. The phrase “lipstick on a pig,” however, was not documented until the 20th century; lipstick itself was not invented until the 1880s.

During the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, the Democrat and Republican candidates each accused their opponents of putting “lipstick on a pig,” that is, manipulating voters into accepting undesirable policies. Media outlets quickly gave the phrase global currency. In September 2008, Republican presidential nominee John McCain took issue with Democrat candidate Barack Obama’s use of the phrase, claiming that Obama was referring to his running mate, Alaska governor Sarah Palin. On the campaign trail, Palin often referred to herself, jokingly, as “a pit bull in lipstick.” McCain had used the phrase “lipstick on a pig” the previous year to describe an opponent’s policies.

Language & Humanities is dedicated to providing accurate and trustworthy information. We carefully select reputable sources and employ a rigorous fact-checking process to maintain the highest standards. To learn more about our commitment to accuracy, read our editorial process.
Discussion Comments
By Rotergirl — On May 16, 2014

@Pippinwhite -- Yeah, I've heard it too, and years before any national politicians said it. My dad used to say it about situations where people tried to just make the outside look a little better, but the rest was still a wreck.

It's usually said when the "lipstick" or whatever is applied to attempt to camouflage the seriousness or the absurdity of the situation. That's how my dad generally used it.

By Pippinwhite — On May 15, 2014

This is a great expression I've heard all my life. I heard a local city official use it to explain the futility of beautification on a street riddled with potholes and cars sitting on the streets. His quote made the newspaper and made the mayor hopping mad, since that was his project. It was pretty funny. That was way before either Obama or McCain used it publicly.

Language & Humanities, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.

Language & Humanities, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.