I Am The Daughter of My People. I Am The Squeaky Pink Plastic Hammer of Justice. A Vision of Peace and Jewish Self-Determination--Plus Some Snark
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
OK, There Are Apparently Officially NO White Jews
From the This Is White Privilege Blog: White privilege is not having to Google if there’s discrimination against your ethnic group in a country you want to visit.
Discrimination? Hell, you may want to check if you can get in, and if you can bring your tfillin with you.
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Stupid Things That People Say When They Talk About Israel, Part One
Today's favorite: "Why doesn't the UN build a new headquarters on the Temple Mount? Then all the nations could help pay for its defense."
Yes. I certainly want the UN on top of the Temple Mount, and I'm sure that the Muslims of the world will smile happily at the thought of the al-Aqsa mosque being turned into a bureaucratic headquarters for the United Nations. (Interestingly, the Knights Templar did exactly this during the Crusades, I mean, a headquarters for themselves, not the UN, and peace did not ensue.)
Because the UN has worked so hard to bring peace to the region.
MASSIVE FAIL.
On the other hand, perhaps this is EXACTLY what is needed. Then, Israelis and Palestinians would unite to get the UN off the Temple Mount, and forget all of the petty land-water-national sovereignty stuff until that was over.
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Roman Polanski, Gore Vidal, and "Charges of Anti-Semitism"
Goddamnit, I get tired of this.
So I wander over to Tiger Beatdown, to see what the hardcore feminists are talking about, and as it happens, they're talking righteous smack about the newly late Gore Vidal, and his defense of Roman Polanski. I am still, as it happens, unbelievably angry about the spineless, unbelievable defense of Polanski exhibited by far too many Hollywood names ('rape-rape', Whoopi? WTF?), so I settle down for a quick read.
Now, apparently Vidal said this: "The idea that this girl was in her communion dress, a little angel all in white, being raped by this awful Jew, Polacko – that’s what people were calling him – well, the story is totally different now from what it was then." And then right in the middle of the take-down of Vidal's victim-blaming and viciousness, I get this, not from Gore Vidal, but from blogger Garland Grey:
I wrote a quick response on the comment thread:
I agree that accusations of anti-Semitism were used to deflect blame in the Polanski case, and avoid confronting his actual rape and abuse of this young woman.
You should, however, be aware that the formulation used above, that accusations of anti-Semitism are used to control conversation about the Israel/Palestine conflict, is, in fact, often used to cover for actual anti-Semitism, and to provide people with an excuse for not learning the real history of the conflict, or taking responsibility for the bigotry they may speak.
It's remarkably similar to many other accusations about people 'playing the race card', and it plays a similar function.
Was there some reason for bringing in an unrelated topic to illustrate your idea that people sometimes lie about the bigotry they face? Or was it easier than explaining why you don't believe anti-Semitism was a factor in the Polanski case?
That was was much more restrained and polite than I felt like being. There's a fine line between trying educate and just wanting to break stuff, and this makes me want to break stuff. For real? Is there some way this does not break down into "I take accusations of anti-Semitism very seriously, but Jews and their friends sometimes lie about it, anyway, to shut people up, you know, like if you show any sympathy (a 'sliver') for the Palestinian people, so I guess I can dismiss this contention of Gore Vidal's without seeming like I'm not giving it enough attention, because this is just another example of using charges of anti-Semitism to make people be quiet"?
Is there another form of racism that a serious anti-oppression blogger would treat like this? I'm betting not.
It's really pretty funny, because I think Polanski is scum, so it's fairly hard to offend me when railing on him and his defenders. I wouldn't have blinked if the writer had simply said she thought Vidal was full of shit on the anti-Semitism issue re: Polanski.
Hilarious, too, is the fact that Vidal himself was an anti-Semite fond of veiling his hate in rants about Israel:
Commenting for the Huffington Post on his infamous 1986 piece "The Empire Lovers Strike Back", David Greenberg writes:
So unquestioningly has this idea been accepted, that calling anti-Semitism by name is only a way to 'shut the conversation down', that it now creeps into conversations as far afield from Israel as this. Charming. Really charming.
So I wander over to Tiger Beatdown, to see what the hardcore feminists are talking about, and as it happens, they're talking righteous smack about the newly late Gore Vidal, and his defense of Roman Polanski. I am still, as it happens, unbelievably angry about the spineless, unbelievable defense of Polanski exhibited by far too many Hollywood names ('rape-rape', Whoopi? WTF?), so I settle down for a quick read.
Now, apparently Vidal said this: "The idea that this girl was in her communion dress, a little angel all in white, being raped by this awful Jew, Polacko – that’s what people were calling him – well, the story is totally different now from what it was then." And then right in the middle of the take-down of Vidal's victim-blaming and viciousness, I get this, not from Gore Vidal, but from blogger Garland Grey:
"I take charges of Anti-Semitism very seriously, but I also know that sometimes (as when people show even a sliver of support or concern for the state of Palestine and its people) accusations of such are misused to shut the conversation all the way down."Well.
I wrote a quick response on the comment thread:
I agree that accusations of anti-Semitism were used to deflect blame in the Polanski case, and avoid confronting his actual rape and abuse of this young woman.
You should, however, be aware that the formulation used above, that accusations of anti-Semitism are used to control conversation about the Israel/Palestine conflict, is, in fact, often used to cover for actual anti-Semitism, and to provide people with an excuse for not learning the real history of the conflict, or taking responsibility for the bigotry they may speak.
It's remarkably similar to many other accusations about people 'playing the race card', and it plays a similar function.
Was there some reason for bringing in an unrelated topic to illustrate your idea that people sometimes lie about the bigotry they face? Or was it easier than explaining why you don't believe anti-Semitism was a factor in the Polanski case?
That was was much more restrained and polite than I felt like being. There's a fine line between trying educate and just wanting to break stuff, and this makes me want to break stuff. For real? Is there some way this does not break down into "I take accusations of anti-Semitism very seriously, but Jews and their friends sometimes lie about it, anyway, to shut people up, you know, like if you show any sympathy (a 'sliver') for the Palestinian people, so I guess I can dismiss this contention of Gore Vidal's without seeming like I'm not giving it enough attention, because this is just another example of using charges of anti-Semitism to make people be quiet"?
Is there another form of racism that a serious anti-oppression blogger would treat like this? I'm betting not.
It's really pretty funny, because I think Polanski is scum, so it's fairly hard to offend me when railing on him and his defenders. I wouldn't have blinked if the writer had simply said she thought Vidal was full of shit on the anti-Semitism issue re: Polanski.
Hilarious, too, is the fact that Vidal himself was an anti-Semite fond of veiling his hate in rants about Israel:
Commenting for the Huffington Post on his infamous 1986 piece "The Empire Lovers Strike Back", David Greenberg writes:
It was the kind of piece that should give pause to those who ritually deny that anti-Zionism is rooted in anti-Semitism; it should be read in full. Describing the Podhoretzs as propagandists for Israel (“in its never-ending wars against just about everyone … a predatory people”), he cast Podhoretz, who was born in the United States, as someone who would never become “an ‘assimilated American,’ to use the old-fashioned terminology.” Addressing Decter, he declared, “I’ve got to tell you I don’t much like your country, which is Israel.”
So unquestioningly has this idea been accepted, that calling anti-Semitism by name is only a way to 'shut the conversation down', that it now creeps into conversations as far afield from Israel as this. Charming. Really charming.
Monday, July 30, 2012
Dividing Nations at the Olympics
What is it about judo and the Middle East? First, Iran decided to leave their judo champion home, osenstibly because he had an iffy tummy, more probably because he was the only Iranian competitor in danger of facing an Israeli.
Now, the Lebanese judo team has decided that they can't train while looking at the Israeli judo team. And the Olympic officials have decided to accomodate them, erecting screens across the gym.
This is, frankly, disgusting. It is part of an ongoing attempt to portray Israel as a uniquely transgressive nation, one which can be freely discriminated against, with accomodation from the Games themselves. And it is already being defended by anti-Israel voices such as Ben White's, and compared to boycotts against apartheid South Africa.
The Olympics have made their message loud and clear this year, first through refusing to honor the memories of the Israeli athletes murdered in 1972, and now through giving in to the political posturing of Lebanon. At an event supposedly dedicated to allowing nations to meet without political burdens, in an open spirit of athletic dedication and competition, Israel, and no other nation, is being delegitimized by her enemies, with the cooperation of the IOC.
A Spectacular Piece from Chas Newkey-Burden
This is something so good I just had to repost it immediately, and get it out to as many people as possible. Over at Oy Va Goy, Chas Newkey-Burden takes apart the inherent anti-Semitism of the common anti-Israel plaint that after the Shoah, the world has the right to demand more moral behavior from Jews than others.
Newkey-Burden writes: Let us strip the “they-of-all-people” argument down to its very basics: gentiles telling Jews that we killed six million of your people and that as a result it is you, not us, who have lessons to learn; that it is you, not us, who need to clean up your act. It is an argument of atrocious, spiteful insanity. Do not accept it; turn it back on those who offer it. For it is us, not you, who should know better.
Read the whole thing here.
Newkey-Burden writes: Let us strip the “they-of-all-people” argument down to its very basics: gentiles telling Jews that we killed six million of your people and that as a result it is you, not us, who have lessons to learn; that it is you, not us, who need to clean up your act. It is an argument of atrocious, spiteful insanity. Do not accept it; turn it back on those who offer it. For it is us, not you, who should know better.
Read the whole thing here.
Sunday, July 8, 2012
Stand With Israel, Jimmy, And Call Your Sister
This sign is, according to www.passiveaggressivenotes.com, somewhere in South Texas. It's been there for a while.
As you can see, Jimmy owes his sister some money for his fourth divorce. This is not the part that made me laugh. The part that made me laugh is the 'Stand With Israel' lawn signs, standing guard to either side of the big pink sign.
I'm on Jimmy's sister's side. Her brother owes her $2,500 bucks, and she's an Israel supporter.
Commenter Aquapt writes: And then there are the “Stand with Israel” signs. Somehow, I’m picturing Israel inching away, in a desperate attempt not to stand with this.
As you can see, Jimmy owes his sister some money for his fourth divorce. This is not the part that made me laugh. The part that made me laugh is the 'Stand With Israel' lawn signs, standing guard to either side of the big pink sign.
I'm on Jimmy's sister's side. Her brother owes her $2,500 bucks, and she's an Israel supporter.
Commenter Aquapt writes: And then there are the “Stand with Israel” signs. Somehow, I’m picturing Israel inching away, in a desperate attempt not to stand with this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




