Pages

Jump to bottom

154 comments

1 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 11:27:02am

From the article:

TIME references the collapse of Netanyahu’s government coalition and attributes the breakdown to the issue of how to address the “question of what to do about the ultra-Orthodox.” It says the Kadima party left Netanyahu’s coalition when he refused to force religious youth into service in the Israeli military.

This doesn't make sense. Beyond forcing them to serve in the military, what are they supposed to "do" about them? The Haredim are Israeli citizens, Jews practicing Judaism in the only Jewish state in existence so...what? They should stop having kids? They should not be able to buy property? I don't understand what anyone thinks they can "do about the ultra-Orthodox."

2 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 11:31:52am

Haredim should totally serve in the IDF (my son did). The whole reason why they do not serve is that Ben-Gurion did not want them. He believed that they would become extinct so he agreed to marginalize them from Israeli society.

That was a huge FAIL.

3 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 11:53:34am

re: #2 Learned Mother of Zion

Yeah, I read about that recently. Definitely a big FAIL.

I understand that the original Zionists were largely secular & focused on nationalism, but I really don't get the hostility towards religious fellow Jews. I mean, I get hostility towards extremists harassing people, but not towards simply being Haredi.

Okay, they're Haredi, so what? I assume they want to live, work, raise their families and practice Judaism as they see fit, just like everyone else. Why shouldn't they be able to do that as long as they're not trying to force others to follow their rules?

I read somewhere recently that part of the problem is that Israel has the Basic Laws, but not an official/formal constitution that clearly separates church & state and which has precedence over other legislation. Is that correct?

4 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:00:01pm

re: #3 CuriousLurker

Yeah, I read about that recently. Definitely a big FAIL.

I understand that the original Zionists were largely secular & focused on nationalism, but I really don't get the hostility towards religious fellow Jews. I mean, I get hostility towards extremists harassing people, but not towards simply being Haredi.

Okay, they're Haredi, so what? I assume they want to live, work, raise their families and practice Judaism as they see fit, just like everyone else. Why shouldn't they be able to do that as long as they're not trying to force others to follow their rules?

I read somewhere recently that part of the problem is that Israel has the Basic Laws, but not an official/formal constitution that clearly separates church & state and which has precedence over other legislation. Is that correct?

Israel does not have a constitution and since it is declared to be a Jewish state, the lines separating religion and state are deliberately blurred. The problem is that years ago a decision was made to marginalize the haredim, which the haredim largely went along with, and now that 800-lb gorilla is in the living room.

The haredim will continue to be marginalized as long as they do not join the IDF and the workforce en masse, but once those barriers are removed, they will find that they have much more in common with the dati leumi (religious Zionists) and once these two, until-now squabbling, religious groups unite, the seculars will be pretty much squashed.

5 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:01:41pm

re: #4 Learned Mother of Zion

Got it. Thanks for the explanation.

6 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:05:38pm

re: #3 CuriousLurker

Okay, they're Haredi, so what? I assume they want to live, work, raise their families and practice Judaism as they see fit, just like everyone else. Why shouldn't they be able to do that as long as they're not trying to force others to follow their rules?

I think the concern has to do with Israel's "Ultra-Religious" draining social services/welfare benefits.

PS: I still don't see what's scary about a silhouette and no, I don't think there is an effort by American media to portray Jewish people as scary by silhouetting them just like I don't think there is an effort by the media etc to wage a "war on Christmans/Christians" in America.

7 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:06:19pm

Another article on the awful, awful threat of Teh Ebil Haredi. (The accompanying illustration is even worse than Time's SJS)

8 sagehen  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:07:04pm

When Israel was brand-new, not only had the number of Jews in the world had been drastically reduced, but there was an even more drastic reduction in serious religious scholars (even then, American Jews were more likely to be secular, the Reform movement was almost entirely American, the traditional centers of Talmudic learning were mostly in Eastern Europe).

For the faith to continue as an unbroken line, it seemed important at the time that serious scholars (of whom there were few) get state support and be exempt from the normal demands of civic life.

Today's Haredi, besides being much more numerous than anybody predicted, are abusing the category of "serious religious scholarship". The vast majority of them are pursuing their own personal spiritual path, at state expense, while not contributing a damn thing to the faith's intellectual collective. There's no valid reason the rest of the world's Jews should treat them as special.

9 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:10:14pm

re: #6 Destro

I think the concern has to do with concern that Israel's "Ultra-Religious" are draining social services/welfare benefits.

Yes, but as I understand it that problem was created by the state itself.

10 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:11:57pm

re: #8 sagehen

When Israel was brand-new, not only had the number of Jews in the world had been drastically reduced, but there was an even more drastic reduction in serious religious scholars (even then, American Jews were more likely to be secular, the Reform movement was almost entirely American, the traditional centers of Talmudic learning were mostly in Eastern Europe).

For the faith to continue as an unbroken line, it seemed important at the time that serious scholars (of whom there were few) get state support and be exempt from the normal demands of civic life.

Today's Haredi, besides being much more numerous than anybody predicted, are abusing the category of "serious religious scholarship". The vast majority of them are pursuing their own personal spiritual path, at state expense, while not contributing a damn thing to the faith's intellectual collective. There's no valid reason the rest of the world's Jews should treat them as special.

Blissfully expecting them to become extinct and therefore DOING NOTHING to integrate them into normal society, then suddenly waking up last week ZOMG! TEH HAREDI WILL OUTNUMBER US! is a Fail.

I am haredi, I raised all my kids to be self-sufficient and I really do not like being treated like a societal problem.

11 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:12:04pm

SJS is movin' on up in the world. Cover of Time!

12 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:13:05pm

re: #11 SanFranciscoZionist

SJS is movin' on up in the world. Cover of Time!

Shadow of the Year!

13 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:13:33pm

re: #9 CuriousLurker

Yes, but as I understand it that problem was created by the state itself.

Situations change.

If I was paid to not work and to get free lodgings to read Grimm's Fairy Tales all day long I might consider it as a life style choice and so would millions of others.

14 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:14:48pm

re: #13 Destro

Situations change.

If I was paid to not work and to get free lodgings to read Grimm's Fairy Tales all day long I might consider it as a life style choice and so would millions of others.

Let me translate into wingnut for you:
Why work when you can get unemployment benefits and welfare?

15 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:15:19pm

And NOBODY gets "free lodgings" Where TF did you get that little misinformation?

16 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:19:51pm

re: #9 CuriousLurker

Yes, but as I understand it that problem was created by the state itself.

It's a complicated one. When polled, most haredi men in Israel who don't work say they would like to find jobs, but are not prepared, educationally, or culturally. Israel needs to put effort into finding people alternatives, and everyone needs to understand that the whole country is in one boat.

17 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:21:22pm

re: #13 Destro

Situations change.

If I was paid to not work and to get free lodgings to read Grimm's Fairy Tales all day long I might consider it as a life style choice and so would millions of others.

Ah yes, it's time for the 'Let's Trash Welfare Recipients' hour.

18 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:23:46pm

re: #8 sagehen

When Israel was brand-new, not only had the number of Jews in the world had been drastically reduced, but there was an even more drastic reduction in serious religious scholars (even then, American Jews were more likely to be secular, the Reform movement was almost entirely American, the traditional centers of Talmudic learning were mostly in Eastern Europe).

For the faith to continue as an unbroken line, it seemed important at the time that serious scholars (of whom there were few) get state support and be exempt from the normal demands of civic life.

Today's Haredi, besides being much more numerous than anybody predicted, are abusing the category of "serious religious scholarship". The vast majority of them are pursuing their own personal spiritual path, at state expense, while not contributing a damn thing to the faith's intellectual collective. There's no valid reason the rest of the world's Jews should treat them as special.

This.

19 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:27:56pm

re: #15 Learned Mother of Zion

[Link: www.economist.com...]

They have led in practice to more than 60% of male haredim being unemployed, hugely increasing the welfare burden of Israeli taxpayers.

20 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:33:22pm

re: #17 SanFranciscoZionist

Ah yes, it's time for the 'Let's Trash Welfare Recipients' hour.

Israel's set aside for this population is not akin to welfare recipients elsewhere.

21 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:33:27pm

re: #19 Destro

[Link: www.economist.com...]

Sorry, have scanned it twice, but not seeing the free lodgings part. Can you highlight?

22 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:34:29pm

re: #17 SanFranciscoZionist

Ah yes, it's time for the 'Let's Trash Welfare Recipients' hour.

I can't think of any country that gives you welfare if you are able but not trying to find work. Even in the 'socialist paradise' of the UK, that doesn't happen.

23 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:35:02pm

re: #20 Destro

Israel's set aside for this population is not akin to welfare recipients elsewhere.

Of course not. It's terribly, terribly, different.

24 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:35:56pm

re: #21 SanFranciscoZionist

Sorry, have scanned it twice, but not seeing the free lodgings part. Can you highlight?

If 60% are unemployed where is the money coming from for housing?

25 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:37:30pm

re: #24 Destro

If 60% are unemployed where is the money coming from for housing?

Headdesk.

Let's try that again. Destro writes: "Lodging was meant to be implied by the fact that they are on government support."

26 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:41:11pm

Some food for thought:

[Link: www.matrix.co.il...]

27 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:42:00pm
28 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:42:44pm
29 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:43:57pm

People finding solutions. Israel has absorbed a lot of groups into the work force effectively. There's no reason they can't do this, if they can get past the political infighting.

[Link: www.friendsofjct.org...]

30 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:44:25pm

re: #26 SanFranciscoZionist

That is actually pretty cool. Just like Rosie the Riveter eventually led women to seek equal rights and to be freed from patriarchal hegemony nothing frees women faster from cultural strictures than education and their own incomes.

31 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:47:59pm

re: #22 Aye Pod

I can't think of any country that gives you welfare if you are able but not trying to find work. Even in the 'socialist paradise' of the UK, that doesn't happen.

One thing to recall here is that these are people enrolled in educational programs, and that for reasons discussed above, this was an area of endeavor that was seen as especially vital a few generations ago. Whether every fella in kollel is learning with a dedication which justifies an indulgence you had to be rich or a genius for in the old country is another matter, but most unemployed haredi men are essentially eternal graduate students.

32 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:49:53pm
“The bookish ultra-Orthodox have their militants, too. . .” writes TIME. “Downtown billboards in Israel no longer feature women; advertisers fear defacement, or worse, boycotts. On public buses, ultra-Orthodx women sit in the back. . .ultra-Orthodox men spit on an 8-year-old girl on her way to school, calling her a “whore” for her long-sleeved clothes, which were not conservative enough for their standards.”

Fundies....always bad news.

33 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:51:01pm

If I get this correctly: Haredi have stayed in the yeshivas to stay out of the armed forces.

What about the armed forces have the haredi not liked? Working on the sabbath, working next to women?

34 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 12:55:27pm

re: #31 SanFranciscoZionist

One thing to recall here is that these are people enrolled in educational programs, and that for reasons discussed above, this was an area of endeavor that was seen as especially vital a few generations ago. Whether every fella in kollel is learning with a dedication which justifies an indulgence you had to be rich or genius for in the old country is another matter, but most unemployed haredi men are essentially eternal graduate students.

Do they continue to get public support after say five years (which I believe is the maximum period in other countries?)

35 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:02:57pm

re: #29 SanFranciscoZionist

People finding solutions. Israel has absorbed a lot of groups into the work force effectively. There's no reason they can't do this, if they can get past the political infighting.

[Link: www.friendsofjct.org...]

A lot of Heredi males are going to have to learn to accept working closely with and taking orders from women.

As the battalion places great emphasis on accommodating the religious needs of the soldiers the Netzah Yehuda bases follow the highest standards of Jewish dietary laws and the only women permitted on these bases are wives of soldiers and officers.

I hope when the time comes those guys learn to cooperate and accept the fact that it may be female helo pilots pulling their asses out of the fire.

Yesterday, a group of high level female officers in the IDF, as well as other high ranking women from elsewhere (police, Mossad, etc), sent a letter to the prime minister, the defense minister, and others, regarding the movement to find a solution to drafting the haredim.

The letter was a warnign of sorts that in the drive to draft the haredim, care should be taken to not do it in a way that would harm the standing of women in the army. In recent times we have seen many cases in which the integration of religious people into the army (and I point out that almost all those cases were dati leumi soldiers) led to harming the status of women - demanding separation, walking out during poerformances of female soldiers, etc.

36 sagehen  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:07:03pm

re: #34 Aye Pod

Do they continue to get public support after say five years (which I believe is the maximum period in other countries?)

The Talmud is very, very large... studying it in depth is a lifelong pursuit and you'll still never finish.

The problem isn't how long they stay, it's how many of them there are and how low a percentage are really of a quality worth public support.

The world needs some number of historians and literary analysts, too, and they continue to study and learn their whole lives even while sharing that learning... but we don't create enough historian and literary analysis make-work jobs to support everybody who wants to do it, there's a winnowing process and the mediocre have to do it on their own time while earning a living some other way.

37 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:10:03pm

re: #32 Aye Pod

Fundies....always bad news.

Let's consider all Orthodox Jews the same as Pamela Geller considers all Muslims!

Nuance!

38 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:12:05pm

re: #30 Destro

That is actually pretty cool. Just like Rosie the Riveter eventually led women to seek equal rights and to be freed from patriarchal hegemony nothing frees women faster from cultural strictures than education and their own incomes.

I don't need you, or Jimmah, or any other outsider telling me that I have to be liberated from the life that I have chosen.

You can fuck right off.

Yeah I cuss when I get mad. Deal with it.

39 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:13:45pm

The noble Scots warrior wields the downding like a claymore against the threatening Jew granny!

40 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:15:55pm

re: #37 Learned Mother of Zion

Let's consider all Orthodox Jews the same as Pamela Geller considers all Muslims!

Nuance!

Yeah I mean HOW DARE anyone feel sympathy for secular Israelis who are being harassed by ultra fundamentalist assholes?

It's anti-semitism I tell ya!

//

41 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:17:31pm

re: #39 Learned Mother of Zion

The noble Scots warrior wields the downding like a claymore against the threatening Jew granny!

Q: What do you call it when a Scots speaker and a Hebrew speaker have an argument on the internet?

A: A phlegm war.

42 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:19:35pm

re: #41 Aye Pod

Q: What do you call it when a Scots speaker and a Hebrew speaker have an argument on the internet?

A: A phlegm war.

OK that gets an upding.

43 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:22:52pm

re: #40 Aye Pod

Yeah I mean HOW DARE anyone feel sympathy for secular Israelis who are being harassed by ultra fundamentalist assholes?

It's anti-semitism I tell ya!

//

Taking sides that broadly in a major internal conflict is going to get you absolutely nowhere.

During the recent uproar in Beit Shemesh, haredim were out there protesting against the assholes along with the dati leumi and hiloni neighbors. They were also being harassed, didn't like it, and didn't like anyone else having to put up with it.

Painting this as a war between the good, beseiged secular people and the 'ultra-fundamentalist assholes' is simply missing the point. There are a lot more than two sides here.

44 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:27:29pm

re: #43 SanFranciscoZionist

Taking sides that broadly in a major internal conflict is going to get you absolutely nowhere.

During the recent uproar in Beit Shemesh, haredim were out there protesting against the assholes along with the dati leumi and hiloni neighbors. They were also being harassed, didn't like it, and didn't like anyone else having to put up with it.

Painting this as a war between the good, beseiged secular people and the 'ultra-fundamentalist assholes' is simply missing the point. There are a lot more than two sides here.

There are secular assholes too. From the link:

Noam Pinchasi says he is at war with the “blacks” – a reference to ultra-Orthodox Jews – over land in Israel. He and a crew of similar-minded citizens have been arrested for stirring up trouble in charedi neighborhoods by placing posters of nude paintings on the doors of synagogues. Pinchasi said he is sending a message to the charedim, “This is not like Ramot Eshkol, Neve Yaakov, Maalot Dafna,” referring to neighborhoods in Jerusalem which were once identified as secular, but have since become “black.”

45 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:32:42pm

re: #38 Learned Mother of Zion

I don't need you, or Jimmah, or any other outsider telling me that I have to be liberated from the life that I have chosen.

You can fuck right off.

Yeah I cuss when I get mad. Deal with it.

A) I have no problem with cursing and B) I will repeat what I said, when women are educated and have their own incomes - by and large it leads to expansion of women's rights outside of their cultural structures. That is historical fact.

Why does that statement make you angry? Did I say these women will be forced to change in any way? Education, especially a science based education that leads to a job creates self independence, especially for women and that is a fact. Education and work go hand in hand with women's rights and liberation as does access to birth control and abortion.

46 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:34:37pm

re: #45 Destro

A) I have no problem with cursing and B) I will repeat what I said, when women are educated and have their own incomes - by and large it leads to expansion of women's rights outside of their cultural structures. That is historical fact.

Why does that statement make you angry? Did I say these women will be forced to change in any way? Education, especially a science based education that leads to a job creates self independence, especially for women and that is a fact. Education and work go hand in hand with women's rights and liberation as does access to birth control and abortion.

I am educated and have my own income. Oh, and my degree is in Mathematics.

47 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:36:08pm

re: #43 SanFranciscoZionist

The paragraph I quoted was clear about the segment of the ultra-Orthodox they were talking about:

“The bookish ultra-Orthodox have their militants, too. . .” writes TIME. “Downtown billboards in Israel no longer feature women; advertisers fear defacement, or worse, boycotts. On public buses, ultra-Orthodx women sit in the back. . .ultra-Orthodox men spit on an 8-year-old girl on her way to school, calling her a “whore” for her long-sleeved clothes, which were not conservative enough for their standards.”

the people who are doing this SUCK.

48 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:43:36pm

re: #47 Aye Pod

The paragraph I quoted was clear about the segment of the ultra-Orthodox they were talking about:

the people who are doing this SUCK.

Yes. They do. And haredim turned out to protest them.

49 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:46:08pm

re: #48 SanFranciscoZionist

Yes. They do. And haredim turned out to protest them.

To make it clear, the haredim who turned out to protest the Sikrikim and their behavior in Beit Shemesh are also 'fundies'.

50 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:48:23pm

re: #46 Learned Mother of Zion

I am educated and have my own income. Oh, and my degree is in Mathematics.

Once again:

I can recommend Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War, and Social Change

From Library Journal
The poster image of the blonde housewife working in a factory to help her soldier husband win World War II is dispelled by the 10 women (out of forty-five interviewed for an oral history project) who tell their stories here. Blacks and Latinas as well as whites, they entered industry, not only out of patriotism, but for economic opportunity. The experience changed their lives. They gained confidence as well as skills; their horizons broadened as they worked with people outside their own ethnic groups.

51 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:49:06pm

re: #50 Destro

Once again:

I can recommend Rosie the Riveter Revisited: Women, the War, and Social Change

TMSIDK

52 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 1:59:35pm

re: #51 Learned Mother of Zion

TMSIDK

If this is something you know about why did you get so upset by it? More women being educated and working means the more women will break from traditional roles. How is that statement - something you yourself acknowledge with your TMSIDK response - make you curse and indignant?

53 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:14:50pm

re: #52 Destro

If this is something you know about why did you get so upset by it? More women being educated and working means the more women will break from traditional roles. How is that statement - something you yourself acknowledge with your TMSIDK response - make you curse and indignant?

You are implying that because I am educated and employed that I'm supposed to realize that my religion sucks and that the only reason women stay in is they are too dumb and poor to realize that their life sucks.

Every comment that you have made on this, and the other SJS threads, is not exactly a beacon of tolerance and understanding.

54 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:23:17pm

re: #52 Destro

If this is something you know about why did you get so upset by it? More women being educated and working means the more women will break from traditional roles. How is that statement - something you yourself acknowledge with your TMSIDK response - make you curse and indignant?

Try to understand that for many haredi women, the war they are fighting when they go into the work force is to preserve their culture and way of life. Yes, it will give women more options, but not necessarily to 'escape cultural strictures'.

Now that could be a cute image for one of these programs. Rayzel the Riveter. Itka the IT Lady. Something like that.

55 wrenchwench  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:28:55pm

re: #52 Destro

If this is something you know about why did you get so upset by it? More women being educated and working means the more women will break from traditional roles. How is that statement - something you yourself acknowledge with your TMSIDK response - make you curse and indignant?

None of that stuff is 'liberating' unless it's optional.

56 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:31:36pm

re: #54 SanFranciscoZionist

Try to understand that for many haredi women, the war they are fighting when they go into the work force is to preserve their culture and way of life. Yes, it will give women more options, but not necessarily to 'escape cultural strictures'.

Now that could be a cute image for one of these programs. Rayzel the Riveter. Itka the IT Lady. Something like that.

I think that some non-Orthodox Jewish women already co-opted that image for putting on tefilin.

Many years ago my rabbi told me it was OK to shake hands with men since it is normal business etiquette, but more recently that etiquette has changed, due to sensitivity about more Muslims in the workplace.

57 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:39:22pm

re: #52 Destro

Look at the bright side.

It isn't as if these Jewish Haredi women are the most poorly treated of religious women.

58 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:40:44pm

re: #56 Learned Mother of Zion

Same here. I know lots of Muslim women that shake hands as part of business etiquette. To not do it would seem rude and be more than a little awkward. I'm aware that it may be different in the ME as it's not part of the culture to do so.

I don't know about you guys, but Muslims will usually place their right hand over their heart and bow slightly instead of shaking hands.

59 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:42:03pm

re: #57 researchok

Heh, see? That naughty Jew Shadow is always stirring up controversy. //

60 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:42:49pm

re: #59 CuriousLurker

There are days I just can't help myself.

61 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:44:16pm

re: #58 CuriousLurker

I have seen that.

Overall, it is a matter of common sense and propriety.

62 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:45:56pm

All these ugly debates would be unnecessary if children attended proper day care from Day One.

63 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:49:40pm

I read once how a religious man responded to woman who proffered her hand tell her. 'If only I weren't so religious- I would be delighted to shake hands with lady as lovely as yourself'

The man said the woman was most gracious, laughed and thanked hi for the compliment.

It's all in the delivery.

64 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:49:56pm

Is the Jew Shadow on the cover of Time magazine "scary" or "arty" or both?

65 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:50:11pm

re: #61 researchok

I have seen that.

Overall, it is a matter of common sense and propriety.

Exactly. If I'm introduced to a Muslim man or a Haredi, I do the bow thing. If it's neither and a hand is extended, then I shake it. It's pretty simple.

There are some non-Muslims that are aware and ask first. That's always kind of nice, thoughtful of them.

66 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:51:03pm

re: #64 Learned Mother of Zion

IMO both, with emphasis ob the former.

Scary sells a lot better than arty.

67 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:51:39pm

re: #65 CuriousLurker

Common sense, not so common.

68 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:51:44pm

re: #63 researchok

That's a great way to handle it. ;)

69 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:53:15pm

re: #68 CuriousLurker

I thought so- in fact it is most gentlemanly.- and everyone appreciates that kind of consideration.

70 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:53:22pm

re: #64 Learned Mother of Zion

Is the Jew Shadow on the cover of Time magazine "scary" or "arty" or both?

I agree with researchok: Both, but emphasis on the "scary" because of the context.

71 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:55:46pm

Religious expression never ceases to fascinate me.

By definition, religious expression denotes the elevation of the individual and those he or she comes in contact with.

When religious expression results in degradation, you have to ask yourself 'What went wrong?'

And why.

72 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 2:58:01pm

re: #71 researchok

Religious expression never ceases to fascinate me.

By definition, religious expression denotes the elevation of the individual and those he or she comes in contact with.

When religious expression results in degradation, you have to ask yourself 'What went wrong?'

QFT

Wait. Aren't you supposed to be trying to annoy me? //

73 researchok  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 3:03:37pm

re: #72 CuriousLurker

I'm building up to that.
/

Seriously, given my line of work,m it does fascinate me the lengths people will go to explain their religious behavior- as if their religious expression somehow justifies their own dysfunctions.

It seems to me many people wil gravitate to religion so as to absolve themselves of their own dysfunctions- in other words, they find a home.

Religions are for the most part, vehicles for the search for meaning.

I submit G-d, God, Allah and all variatioswn thereof will find little fault with the likes of Mother Teresa as well as every other unheralded hero who works to make life better for others.

Call me crazy- or blasphemous.

74 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 4:09:33pm

re: #48 SanFranciscoZionist

Yes. They do. And haredim turned out to protest them.

Good for the ones who did that - seriously. Yes of course, not all fundies are the same- I didn't mean to imply that. For one thing Jewish fundies don't seem to be anywhere near as taken with creationism as their counterparts in some other religions.

However, it remains that religious fundamentalism of whatever stripe still values revelation over reason wherever possible, (at the very least in areas where scripture is not directly contradicted by scientific fact) and so tends at the very least to be at odds with progress on all kinds of social, moral and economic issues. That is something that fundamentalist approaches to religion always seem to have in common. The issues discussed in the magazine piece illustrate this pretty well in their impact on modern Israeli society.

But hey there's a silhouetted Jew in the illustration so let's fixate on that because that's the BIG issue here/

75 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 4:52:02pm

re: #64 Learned Mother of Zion

Is the Jew Shadow on the cover of Time magazine "scary" or "arty" or both?

Neither for me. The effect and most frequent purpose of photographing a subject in silhouette is to strip it of all information indicating individual identity, to make it into a generic stand in for type. In that way I see the technique as generally depersonalizing.

76 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:05:20pm

re: #75 goddamnedfrank

Neither for me. The effect and most frequent purpose of photographing a subject in silhouette is to strip it of all information indicating individual identity, to make it into a generic stand in for type. In that way I see the technique as generally depersonalizing.

But the figure is still identifiable as a religious Jew, but stripped of all individual characteristics that would make it seem, you know, like everyone else.

77 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:12:49pm

re: #76 Learned Mother of Zion

But the figure is still identifiable as a religious Jew, but stripped of all individual characteristics that would make it seem, you know, like everyone else.

Exactly my point. Depersonalization isn't necessarily good, the most frequent time we silhouette used it is on bathroom signs and instruction manuals. Of course there's no such thing as a generic heredi but that's the intent here, to almost create a caricature. It's not a traditional caricature because the features aren't exaggerated, but nonetheless the image creates an identifier for type.

78 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:27:51pm

re: #75 goddamnedfrank

Neither for me. The effect and most frequent purpose of photographing a subject in silhouette is to strip it of all information indicating individual identity, to make it into a generic stand in for type. In that way I see the technique as generally depersonalizing.

Yep. Very common in stock photos used by the media over a wide range of story types.

Example (scary athlete shadow):

Image: p00r0ztm.jpg

79 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:32:04pm

re: #78 Aye Pod

Yep. Very common in stock photos used by the media over a wide range of story types.

Example (scary athlete shadow):

Image: p00r0ztm.jpg

Scary Athlete Shadow so commonplace!

Knock yourself out finding all the Scary Athlete Shadows at the Olympics.

I know you feel this is a distraction, IT'S THOSE DAMN ORTHODOX JEWS WHO ARE HELLA SCARY not the artful silhouette illustrations of the faceless hat wearer.

80 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:45:20pm

re: #79 Learned Mother of Zion

Scary Athlete Shadow so commonplace!

Knock yourself out finding all the Scary Athlete Shadows at the Olympics.

I know you feel this is a distraction, IT'S THOSE DAMN ORTHODOX JEWS WHO ARE HELLA SCARY not the artful silhouette illustrations of the faceless hat wearer.

What would they illustrate pictures of individual athletes at the Olympic games with silhouettes for? They might well use the silhouetted athlete in an item that discussed athletes, athleticism or some such in a general way however.

More random terror courtesy of the silhouette:

[Link: www.google.co.uk...]

81 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:51:37pm

re: #80 Aye Pod

What would they illustrate pictures of individual athletes at the Olympic games with silhouettes for? They might well use the silhouetted athlete in an item that discussed athletes, athleticism or some such in a general way however.

More random terror courtesy of the silhouette:

[Link: www.google.co.uk...]

But those aren't identifiable religious or ethnic groups. How would you feel if all Scottish people were identified by a silhouette?

Although the girl from Brave would be VERY identifiable by her silhouette.

82 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 5:53:31pm

re: #80 Aye Pod

What would they illustrate pictures of individual athletes at the Olympic games with silhouettes for? They might well use the silhouetted athlete in an item that discussed athletes, athleticism or some such in a general way however.

More random terror courtesy of the silhouette:

[Link: www.google.co.uk...]

So, individual athletes are highlighted because of their unique and individual accomplishments, you have to click through page after page after page to find one fancy shmancy fisheye artsy shot, even then they make sure to mention the athlete's name! whereas one Jewish event features shadow after shadow after shadow, nameless faceless silhouettes because they all look alike anyway.

83 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:00:14pm

re: #81 Mostly sane, most of the time.

But those aren't identifiable religious or ethnic groups. How would you feel if all Scottish people were identified by a silhouette?

Although the girl from Brave would be VERY identifiable by her silhouette.

Uh I'd be, like, devastated.

Image: 9476557-silhouette-of-a-man-playing-the-bagpipes-over-a-flag-of-scotland.jpg

Get a grip, folks - the silhouette as used here is not part of some graphical international language of hate.

84 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:03:13pm

re: #81 Mostly sane, most of the time.

But those aren't identifiable religious or ethnic groups. How would you feel if all Scottish people were identified by a silhouette?

It's a little known fact that a caber tossing Scotsman invented the photographic silhouette to make it look like he had a gigantic penis.

85 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:03:59pm

re: #83 Aye Pod

Uh I'd be, like, devastated.

Image: 9476557-silhouette-of-a-man-playing-the-bagpipes-over-a-flag-of-scotland.jpg

Get a grip, folks - the silhouette as used here is not part of some graphical international language of hate.

You Googled "silhouette" and by golly you found a bunch of silhouettes! I salute your Google Fu.

Please explain how Jew silhouettes keep showing up in the news photo stream even when you don't specify "silhouette" in the search term.

86 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:06:01pm

re: #82 Learned Mother of Zion

So, individual athletes are highlighted because of their unique and individual accomplishments, you have to click through page after page after page to find one fancy shmancy fisheye artsy shot, even then they make sure to mention the athlete's name! whereas one Jewish event features shadow after shadow after shadow, nameless faceless silhouettes because they all look alike anyway.

a) Most of those pictures aren't even silhouettes at all.

b) They are all pictures of spectators, not athletes.

c) Many of these are just pics of people in dark clothing, in normal light.

d) You are displaying some serious levels of paranoia here.

87 Aye Pod  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:08:16pm

re: #84 goddamnedfrank

It's a little known fact that a caber tossing Scotsman invented the photographic silhouette to make it look like he had a gigantic penis.

Well that's the English version of that story ;-)

88 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:11:41pm

I think I need to pen a bit of a troll hammer. This time, more pointed at the misguided left before the right.

Some facts:

1. Orthodox Jewry is not monolithic. We have never been monolithic. We have no equivalent of a pope or a caliph. Even in the old days, the closest thing to that was comprised of 71 members of a high court, the Sanhedrin. They debated furiously with each other over many issues and those debates (gemara, a part of Talmud) are studied to this day. That is the way it works to this day. If you ask two rabbis for an opinion on any non-settled topic, you will get between two and seven answers.

2. The reason number 1 was listed first is because all of this "shadowy religious Jew" imagery is nothing more than a sop to the idea of the evil secret Jewish organization lurking in the shadows. Jews have never been so organized. If you believe the Torah, even under Moses, they were not so organized. These images are a dog whistle and a visual boogey man. Observant Jews have faces, and most are really nice people.

3. The meme of 2 fits all too well into an image of the "acceptable Jews" and the "unacceptable Jews." To all too many, that means a Jew who isn't "too Jewish." For the ohhh so progressive set, they are a threat, because this is the founding monotheistic religion. Some academic sorts, and self styled enlightened ones think that getting rid of the source would make the world more enlightened. For many (not all, but many) assimilated Jews, seeing an observant Jew often causes all sorts of discomfort. It may come from guilt. It may come from feeling excluded. It may come from embarrassment, because they don't want to stick out to their non-Jewish friends and colleagues. In all these cases, keep the observant Jew in the shadows. If he goes away, all will be better.

4. The appropriate observant answer to those who think like 3, is not printable here - even if appropriate.

5. It is absolutely true that some amongst the Haredim are an astonishing pain in the ass. In fact, I would go so far as to say that some are an ignorant disgrace that rival the most crazy of any tent revival in America. It is also true that they are the fringe of the fringe, and even so, they are generally not the sorts to kill.

6. In the circles that I move in, the observant Jews, men and women, tend to have Ph.D.s, M.D.s and J.D.s. There is the occasional DDS, accountant or musician. For every nut-job that makes the press from the observant world, there are a lot more who are more educated and in tune with the enlightenment and the scientific method than the vast majority of all other Americans. That is just the numbers. The average American doesn't have PhDs, MDs JDs etc...

7. Point 6 is the other thing that really pisses off the "ohh so enlightened, we are so past this religion thing" segment of the left. Observant Jews do not easily fit into the contemptible "religious nut" mold that the hard left would like to put them into. Many know more science than the person who thinks that. The enlightened want to think religious people are prima facie backwards. This disrupts that narrative.

8. Finally, the right. Nazi propaganda was the most pervasive use of shadowy Jews (pictured in silhouette) reaching out to conquer the world. And yeah, to hell with that. See number one.

89 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:43:55pm

re: #40 Aye Pod

Yeah I mean HOW DARE anyone feel sympathy for secular Israelis who are being harassed by ultra fundamentalist assholes?

It's anti-semitism I tell ya!

//

However, that is not the situation that obtains.

90 Eclectic Infidel  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 6:53:23pm

re: #4 Learned Mother of Zion

The haredim will continue to be marginalized as long as they do not join the IDF and the workforce en masse, but once those barriers are removed, they will find that they have much more in common with the dati leumi (religious Zionists) and once these two, until-now squabbling, religious groups unite, the seculars will be pretty much squashed.

I find the bolded part to be rather disturbing. I've been lead to believe that Israel is largely secular.

91 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:06:18pm

re: #56 Learned Mother of Zion

I think that some non-Orthodox Jewish women already co-opted that image for putting on tefilin.

Many years ago my rabbi told me it was OK to shake hands with men since it is normal business etiquette, but more recently that etiquette has changed, due to sensitivity about more Muslims in the workplace.

Well, and also, these young folks are so machmir.

92 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:08:21pm

re: #58 CuriousLurker

Same here. I know lots of Muslim women that shake hands as part of business etiquette. To not do it would seem rude and be more than a little awkward. I'm aware that it may be different in the ME as it's not part of the culture to do so.

I don't know about you guys, but Muslims will usually place their right hand over their heart and bow slightly instead of shaking hands.

I worked with a bunch of Afghani immigrant parents for a while. I adapted my approach to greeting Orthodox folks whose observance I don't know--greet the woman enthusiastically, first, which gives her husband a chance to either step up and stick out his hand, or step back and look as though the greeting part is over, right?

In general, if the woman didn't cover her hair, her husband would shake my hand, but there were exceptions both ways.

93 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:09:59pm

re: #74 Aye Pod

But hey there's a silhouetted Jew in the illustration so let's fixate on that because that's the BIG issue here/

He's not a big issue. He's just the recurrent SJS. Alouette chronicles his shadowy life story.

94 SanFranciscoZionist  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:27:09pm

A question: is it so frightening to think that there is, (with no conspiracy behind it, that's bullshit and those demanding to know if that's what Alouette means know it), a tendency to portray religious Jews like this?

Why? Because the media is free of all forms of stereotyping and scrupulously vets itself for any sign of racism, ethnocentrism, and stock narratives?

Because pointing this out is causing undue embarrassment to the camera guys at AP and Reuters?

Because pointing it out pisses someone off?

If anyone wants to set up a competing meme of the Scary Inuit Shadow, they can be my guest. But a real question. Why is it disturbing for Alouette to voice this?

95 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:39:50pm

re: #94 SanFranciscoZionist

A question: is it so frightening to think that there is, (with no conspiracy behind it, that's bullshit and those demanding to know if that's what Alouette means know it), a tendency to portray religious Jews like this?

Why? Because the media is free of all forms of stereotyping and scrupulously vets itself for any sign of racism, ethnocentrism, and stock narratives?

Because pointing this out is causing undue embarrassment to the camera guys at AP and Reuters?

Because pointing it out pisses someone off?

If anyone wants to set up a competing meme of the Scary Inuit Shadow, they can be my guest. But a real question. Why is it disturbing for Alouette to voice this?

Since I'm probably the only one here with a graduate degree in photography let me just say this: Visually, Orthodox Jews are just begging to be imaged in black and white. Why? Because their very presence is, to most of modern society, a kind of walking optical anachronism. Which isn't to say that they don't "belong" in the present day but their look is just old. Awesome, badass in it's own way and totally classy, but old. And black/white, it's a very stark, classic look. Since silhouettes themselves are a classic B&W technique, because they're already about the stripping away of as much shadow detail and information as possible down to a mostly binary, contrasty image, I can see why many trained photographers see Orthodox Jews and choose to shoot them in silhouette.

And because as I mentioned above it's a very depersonalizing technique I can see why many photographers go to it when the individual identity of the subject isn't the story.

96 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:40:56pm

re: #94 SanFranciscoZionist

A question: is it so frightening to think that there is, (with no conspiracy behind it, that's bullshit and those demanding to know if that's what Alouette means know it), a tendency to portray religious Jews like this?

Why? Because the media is free of all forms of stereotyping and scrupulously vets itself for any sign of racism, ethnocentrism, and stock narratives?

Because pointing this out is causing undue embarrassment to the camera guys at AP and Reuters?

Because pointing it out pisses someone off?

If anyone wants to set up a competing meme of the Scary Inuit Shadow, they can be my guest. But a real question. Why is it disturbing for Alouette to voice this?

See Ludwig's #3 and #7 in which he totally nails the thought processes displayed by Destro and Jimmah.

The point is not the "silhouette" is a perfectly normal artistic expression and is found everywhere. If that were only the case, we would be seeing "artistic silhouettes" in the news photo stream IN THE SAME PROPORTION for all topics, and not BUNCHED UP ALL TOGETHER whenever Jews are in the picture.

For Jimmah to Google up some random "Scotland silhouettes" is completely missing the point. You never see these silhouettes in the news photo stream when "Scotland" is a topic.

Jimmah and Destro have already expressed their superior, enlightened opinion that religious people are like, so lame and totally deserve to be hated on and kept out of normal society.

97 Sheila Broflovski  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:42:28pm

re: #95 goddamnedfrank

Since I'm probably the only one here with a graduate degree in photography let me just say this: Visually, Orthodox Jews are just begging to be imaged in black and white. Why? Because their very presence is, to most of modern society, a kind of walking optical anachronism. Which isn't to say that they don't "belong" in the present day but their look is just old. Awesome, badass in it's own way and totally classy, but old. And black/white, it's a very stark, classic look. Since silhouettes themselves are a classic B&W technique, because they're already about the stripping away of as much shadow detail and information as possible down to a mostly binary, contrasty image, I can see why many trained photographers see Orthodox Jews and choose to shoot them in silhouette.

And because as I mentioned above it's a very depersonalizing technique I can see why many photographers go to it when the individual identity of the subject isn't the story.

This may totally shock you, but we are human beings, we have individual characteristics, names, hobbies, skills, we have loved ones and we are loved. We are not faceless black blob non entities.

98 goddamnedfrank  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:52:33pm

re: #97 Learned Mother of Zion

This may totally shock you, but we are human beings, we have individual characteristics, names, hobbies, skills, we have loved ones and we are loved. We are not faceless black blob non enetities.

It doesn't shock me. I'm not sure why you think it would. I'm simply pointing out that there is an aesthetic explanation for the phenomenon that's rooted in the art history of photography. One that's especially understandable when the specific individual identity of the photographic subject isn't relevant to the story of the accompanying article.

99 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:53:06pm

re: #95 goddamnedfrank

Hmmm... more anachronistic than African villagers or Aborigonies who are always shot in color? No, not at all. Observant Jews are part of the modern world. That is why it is more comfortable to shoot them in black and white.

But even in black and white is not the issue. I get that the outfit is striking in that format.

The issue is in shadow.

You know that thing lurking in the shadows.

100 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 7:58:40pm

re: #88 LudwigVanQuixote

Nitpicking for the sake of accuracy:

1. Orthodox Jewry is not monolithic. We have never been monolithic. We have no equivalent of a pope or a caliph. Even in the old days, the closest thing to that was comprised of 71 members of a high court, the Sanhedrin. They debated furiously with each other over many issues and those debates (gemara, a part of Talmud) are studied to this day. That is the way it works to this day. If you ask two rabbis for an opinion on any non-settled topic, you will get between two and seven answers.

While a caliph rules according to Sharia, it is largely a symbolic religious title—i.e. he functions as the head of state and commander in chief of the military. IOW, while he would obviously be the Muslim representative of a Muslim state and governing according to Sharia, he wouldn't necessarily be the spiritual leader. Those types of caliphs pretty much ended with the death of Ali, the last of the four "rightly guided" caliphs (the other three being Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman) who had been companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.s.)

There should only be one caliph at a time, therefore he should be the caliph of the entire Muslim ummah. Nowadays that is impossible. Even if it were possible, he wouldn't be the one dispensing fatwas or whatever—that would still have to come from the ulama (religious scholars). IOW, the caliph could announce the fatwa, but it would need the backing of the ulama. There is no single religious scholar that speaks for all Sunni Muslims in the way that the Pope speaks for all Catholics.

The last Muslim ruler who could have been considered a caliph in the classical sense of the word (i.e. representative of the Muslim ummah as a whole), probably would have been one of the Ottoman sultans at the height of their power around the 17th century.

Day-to-day private spiritual matters are handled at the local level by religious scholars & imams. In an Islamic state there would be judges (who would also be scholars) appointed to handle public criminal & civil matters.

If anyone wants to know more about how Sharia works and how decentralized it is, I'd recommend watching the following Bloggingheads.tv interview with Prof. Brannon Wheeler, Director of the Center for Middle East & Islamic Studies at the United States Naval Academy.

Sorry for temporarily hijacking your thread, Alouette.

101 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 8:01:25pm

re: #100 CuriousLurker

I stand corrected then. Please take it to mean caliph in the classical sense of the four you mentioned then. And I understand why you felt the need to write that correction.

102 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 8:22:34pm

re: #96 Learned Mother of Zion

See Ludwig's #3 and #7 in which he totally nails the thought processes displayed by Destro and Jimmah.

The point is not the "silhouette" is a perfectly normal artistic expression and is found everywhere. If that were only the case, we would be seeing "artistic silhouettes" in the news photo stream IN THE SAME PROPORTION for all topics, and not BUNCHED UP ALL TOGETHER whenever Jews are in the picture.

For Jimmah to Google up some random "Scotland silhouettes" is completely missing the point. You never see these silhouettes in the news photo stream when "Scotland" is a topic.

Jimmah and Destro have already expressed their superior, enlightened opinion that religious people are like, so lame and totally deserve to be hated on and kept out of normal society.

If they were to look scientifically at all of the science that Jews (across all levels of observance) produce and have produced (like Maimonides, definitely not Reform), it would destroy their hypothesis. So, in a feat that is just as down doubling as climate, evolution and science deniers doubling down on the right when confronted with data, they ignore the facts and just flail on.

103 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 8:27:53pm

Despite how paranoid it may seem to others, I understand why it bothers Alouette, so I'm going to have to risk annoying my liberal friends here.

If you go to Google Images and type in "Muslim" or "Jew" you'll be immediately confronted with an avalanche of negative images. Those of you who aren't Jewish or Muslim may not even notice them because they're so pervasive, but for us each one is like a little stab in the heart.

I think it's worse for Jews. I'm certain I'd be 10 times more sensitive about negative imagery WRT to my religion if relatives as recent as a generation or two ago had been gassed & shoveled into ovens while the world stood by doing nothing for years.

Alouette's not accusing anyone here of being an anti-Semite for disagreeing with her, so how about we cut her a little slack on the SJS thing? Or not. I can't tell you guys what to do, and I'm not going to fight with anyone about this—all I can tell you is how it feels as a Muslim to see stuff like that and ask you to stand in Alouette's shoes for a minute.

Have a good night, everyone.

104 What, me worry?  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 8:33:37pm

re: #95 goddamnedfrank

Indeed. They do lend themselves to b/w photography.

Have you ever seen Jordi Cohen's work? He's a neat guy and travels a lot to the Caribbean, South and Central America. He's also done many photos in Israel of the Orthodox. Mostly men, but women and children, too.

Here's a link to some of his catalog. English is not his native tongue, btw.

[Link: www.jordicohen.com...]

Much different photos.

105 CuriousLurker  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 8:35:31pm

re: #104 What, me worry?

Wow, those are beautiful.

106 What, me worry?  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 8:40:46pm

re: #105 CuriousLurker

Wow, those are beautiful.

He's an intense photographer, isn't he?

I know what you mean about the Muslim/Jewish photographs on the web. It's pretty awful. We both could use better representation for sure.

107 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:04:57pm

re: #55 wrenchwench

None of that stuff is 'liberating' unless it's optional.

All I mentioned is that independence and women's rights are an eventual bi-product of education and employment over time for many women.

108 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:15:48pm

re: #107 Destro

All I mentioned is that independence and women's rights are an eventual bi-product of education and employment over time for many women.

And yet, there are many observant Jewish women with Ph.D.s

I know a rebbitzen who is a full professor of biochemistry at a tier one school. Her papers average more citations than you have words in your longer posts.

And yet she is very observant, proud of her heritage, into her tradition, at home with evolution and quite clear to her daughters that they are going to learn science too.

The evidence does not neatly fit your prejudices.

109 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:18:49pm

re: #103 CuriousLurker

Despite how paranoid it may seem to others, I understand why it bothers Alouette, so I'm going to have to risk annoying my liberal friends here.

If you go to Google Images and type in "Muslim" or "Jew" you'll be immediately confronted with an avalanche of negative images. Those of you who aren't Jewish or Muslim may not even notice them because they're so pervasive, but for us each one is like a little stab in the heart.

I think it's worse for Jews. I'm certain I'd be 10 times more sensitive about negative imagery WRT to my religion if relatives as recent as a generation or two ago had been gassed & shoveled into ovens while the world stood by doing nothing for years.

Alouette's not accusing anyone here of being an anti-Semite for disagreeing with her, so how about we cut her a little slack on the SJS thing? Or not. I can't tell you guys what to do, and I'm not going to fight with anyone about this—all I can tell you is how it feels as a Muslim to see stuff like that and ask you to stand in Alouette's shoes for a minute.

Have a good night, everyone.

To say that the western press is showing Jewish people in a "negative light" by photo journalists just because they show silhouettes is on par with Christians claiming that there is a war on Christmas.

I just don't see it.

[Link: www.smashingmagazine.com...]

110 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:31:03pm

re: #109 Destro

What of the obvious history of that sort of imagery is difficult to see?

You only don't see it out of wilful blindness. But that is OK. You aren't going to either.

So once again, let's cut to the chase.

You think you are ohhh so enlightened and there is no issue here, when what the issue is has been laid out with nearly mathematical precision in multiple different posts.

What, do you suppose the media is unbiased towards Israel, Jews and religious Jews in particular? Of course you do!

Do you suppose that if you question the way scary religious Jews are portrayed and accept that most really aren't that scary, you might have to question other views you might have? Of course you do!

Fine. So much easier to deny all the history that is driving Alouette's discomfort.

I used to think this crap was just ludicrous trolling. It's possible that is your game. More likely its just that most humans really can't handle information that forces them to challenge their world views. In this aspect, the far left is no different than the far right.

Either way, you can't see it because you won't, and either way it is not worth the effort to engage much further than pointing out the obvious.

111 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:32:48pm

re: #108 LudwigVanQuixote

Education and self employment allows for choices.

112 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:38:40pm

re: #111 Destro

Education and self employment allows for choices.

And Judaism is all about that. Jewish women could always read, write, own property, inherit and do business. They engaged in things that were "the men's world" effectively and with great skill for thousands of years before the women of most other cultures were given anything resembling such rights.

Not that you know any observant women - and of course you don't, because if you did, she would put you in your place about these things. Jewish women are like that. Don't mess with them - but perhaps you should check that out before making pronouncements.

113 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:40:45pm

re: #110 LudwigVanQuixote

Do you suppose that if you question the way scary religious Jews are portrayed and accept that most really aren't that scary, you might have to question other views you might have? Of course you do!

I don't question the way "scary religious Jews are portrayed" because I don't see it in American press!!! Is the American press like Egypt's? And this claim of yours is no different than Catholics who claim the media is out to get them or the various 'war on Christmas' reports on FOX news or right wing radio.

You might be sensitive to it but it does not mean you are factual about it.

114 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:47:40pm

re: #112 LudwigVanQuixote

And Judaism is all about that. Jewish women could always read, write, own property, inherit and do business. They engaged in things that were "the men's world" effectively and with great skill for thousands of years before the women of most other cultures were given anything resembling such rights.

Not that you know any observant women - and of course you don't, because if you did, she would put you in your place about these things. Jewish women are like that. Don't mess with them - but perhaps you should check that out before making pronouncements.

You don't know me or with whom I grew up with or where. Also, this is forum for discussion, this is not someone's parlor or place of business or a clubhouse where different real world etiquette's are in force.

Just because I question your assumptions do not take that as trolling. We have here real world serious accusations that there is some sort of American press trying to attack Jewish people by how they frame still photos. That requires some challenge.

115 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:49:16pm

re: #113 Destro

You really are selective.

I know there is nothing to be gained in the way of educating you, but of late the brain that can not fathom data even when it bashes one in the face is of interest to me.

This is due to my research into climate physics and dealing with climate deniers.

So indulge me.

Do you deny that showing someone in shadows, just an outline without a face is frequently used to represent a lurking threat?

Can you think of no times when such imagery has been used to that effect?

Why is hiding the face of someone threatening? Why are people who can't be identified more threatening than those who can be identified?

Did you ever notice that the other purpose of hiding one's face was to empower them to do evil? Seriously, how does mob mentality work? Why do the storm troopers have no faces in Starwars?

If there is nothing to this, why did the Nazis use that image again and again in their propaganda?

I'm just curious... can you answer these questions and make the mental leap to seeing the point?

I don't think so.

116 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:50:15pm

re: #114 Destro

I know prima facie that you don't know any observant Jewish women. If you did, she would have set you straight.

117 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:52:51pm

re: #112 LudwigVanQuixote

And Judaism is all about that. Jewish women could always read, write, own property, inherit and do business. They engaged in things that were "the men's world" effectively and with great skill for thousands of years before the women of most other cultures were given anything resembling such rights.

Not according to Leviticus.

118 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:57:55pm

re: #115 LudwigVanQuixote

You really are selective.

I know there is nothing to be gained in the way of educating you, but of late the brain that can not fathom data even when it bashes one in the face is of interest to me.

This is due to my research into climate physics and dealing with climate deniers.

So indulge me.

Do you deny that showing someone in shadows, just an outline without a face is frequently used to represent a lurking threat?

Can you think of no times when such imagery has been used to that effect?

Why is hiding the face of someone threatening? Why are people who can't be identified more threatening than those who can be identified?

Did you ever notice that the other purpose of hiding one's face was to empower them to do evil? Seriously, how does mob mentality work? Why do the storm troopers have no faces in Starwars?

If there is nothing to this, why did the Nazis use that image again and again in their propaganda?

I'm just curious... can you answer these questions and make the mental leap to seeing the point?

I don't think so.

Do you know that when you show people in silhouette the viewer projects themselves into the outline? So someone watching a Jewish person in silhouette who is not Jewish suddenly is that person?

Did you not see the Ipod silhouette commercial? Did Ipod make a commercial showing people in silhouette to make their product menacing?

Click the youtube link. Don't be scared.

119 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 9:58:33pm

Destro, if you don't mind, exactly how many highly religious women do you know, personally?

It would make this easier to understand.

120 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:00:17pm

re: #116 LudwigVanQuixote

I know prima facie that you don't know any observant Jewish women. If you did, she would have set you straight.

Oops. Wrong. Where do you think I am from? Kansas?

121 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:04:39pm

re: #117 Destro

Not according to Leviticus.

Your arrogance is boundless.

Are you really telling one of the few Yeshiva educated Jews on this board what is and is not in Jewish law and has or has not been Jewish practice for thousands of years? Why yes you are!

It's amazing! It is also further prima facie evidence that you don't know any observant Jews.

Your ignorance is also showing by that comment. Of course, it is the tragic ignorance that thinks itself expert. Pride goeth and all that....

The book is called Vayikra. It is not Leviticus. Leviticus is a selectively translated text of another religion, that purposefully discounts the Oral Law.

Vayikra is not to be read without the context of the Oral Law.

However, even in selective translation, there is no prohibition against women reading, writing or owning property. Moses himself orders that single women can inherit land.

In the book before, God out and out tells Abraham that his wife Sarah is a greater prophet than he is, and orders him to "listen to her voice in all things."

A little further on is a psalm that talks a lot about how the great Jewish Woman of Valor, is wise and charitable, buying and selling fields, working hard and producing cloth, and all while being an awesome mother. In modern terms, the ideal of the "woman who has it all" in terms of career and family.

But you see, to know that, you would actually have to read the book.

But you didn't - and certainly not with the commentary from the Talmud and the Midrash. And again, that is prima facie obvious.

How about we don't flitter around the goal posts. I am very curious if you can process the questions I gave you. Can we stick to that?

122 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:04:48pm

re: #119 Mostly sane, most of the time.

Destro, if you don't mind, exactly how many highly religious women do you know, personally?

It would make this easier to understand.

Lot's. All religions, too. But what difference does it make? Just because I wrote educating women leads many (not all sure) to be more secular and question partiarchal authority over them? It is a fact of history.

123 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:05:47pm

re: #120 Destro

Oops. Wrong. Where do you think I am from? Kansas?

I think you are some sort of European. But where you are from is not the issue.

It is prima facie obvious you don't know any observant Jewish women.

124 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:09:11pm

re: #118 Destro

No just answer the questions please.

You are proving an hypothesis of mine, but it is one I would rather be wrong about.

125 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:09:40pm

re: #121 LudwigVanQuixote

The only women in the ancient world that had any rights we would recognize as being near those of the men were Spartan women and Roman noblewoman.

126 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:10:17pm

re: #123 LudwigVanQuixote

I think you are some sort of European. But where you are from is not the issue.

It is prima facie obvious you don't know any observant Jewish women.

I am also some sort of American.

127 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:16:30pm

re: #125 Destro

The only women in the ancient world that had any rights we would recognize as being near those of the men were Spartan women and Roman noblewoman.

Spartan women? You mean the ones who were locked up and used as brood mares in one of the the most male centric cultures ever??? Those women?

You are sadly stuck in the web of your own arrogance to the extent that you are saying fabulously fatuous things.

And you still can't address the questions.. even though the answers are obvious.

You can't because that would challenge your narrative.

Pity. People really are retarded. There is this thing called reasoning and being able to process the facts - even if the data forces you to conclude differently than you had hoped.

Well another confirms my growing set of observations. Ego triumphs over data - and to that end, in the face of climate we are truly fucked as a species. Truly a pity. I had thought you smarter than that.

128 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:17:17pm

The issue here is that you are not describing the highly religious women that we know.

It is true that my mother and aunt that are religious only have bachelors (although my mother has a full wood shop and builds rock walls for fun) while my other two aunts have advanced degrees.

(Although I do have a religious aunt with advanced degrees, just on the other side, which is more than her non-religious sister-in-law.)

However, and this is important to note, they weren't religious when they went after the degrees. They had emerged from their childhoods without attachment to any religion. In both cases, they got the degrees to pursue what they wanted to do with their lives.

You don't need an advanced degree to do what my mother does; you need tools.

129 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:26:31pm

re: #124 LudwigVanQuixote

Do you deny that showing someone in shadows, just an outline without a face is frequently used to represent a lurking threat? Yes, I do deny it because context has to be applied.

Can you think of no times when such imagery has been used to that effect? And I showed a context where silhouette is used in a positive way like the Ipod commercial. Or did that freak you out?

Why is hiding the face of someone threatening? Why are people who can't be identified more threatening than those who can be identified? Hiding the face is also inviting and self identifying. Face covered Spider-man is popular because we imaging ourselves as Spider-man under that faceless mask. Did you take any art theory courses? Did anyone here go to college? Take an art course or two? No?

Did you ever notice that the other purpose of hiding one's face was to empower them to do evil? Seriously, how does mob mentality work? Why do the storm troopers have no faces in Starwars? Spider-man? Bat-man? Iron-man - all face covered heroes.

If there is nothing to this, why did the Nazis use that image again and again in their propaganda? The Nazis used full color in their propaganda also. They used cartoons. They used black and white and color movies. Shame on you.

There we go - point by point answers to questions posed by someone so paranoid and devoid of the theory if art that they think silhouettes are 'evil' and can only be evil.

130 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:30:42pm

re: #127 LudwigVanQuixote

Spartan women? You mean the ones who were locked up and used as brood mares in one of the the most male centric cultures ever??? Those women?

Those were the Athenian women. Spartan women and their rights were shocking to Aristotle. Honestly, did anyone here go to college? Humanities courses?

[Link: www.fordham.edu...]

Aristotle: Spartan Women

But, when Lycurgus, as tradition says, wanted to bring the women under his laws, they resisted, and he gave up the attempt. These then are the causes of what then happened, and this defect in the constitution is clearly to be attributed to them. We are not, however, considering what is or is not to be excused, but what is right or wrong, and the disorder of the women, as I have already said, not only gives an air of indecorum to the constitution considered in itself, but tends in a measure to foster avarice.... And nearly two-fifths of the whole country are held by women; this is owing to the number of heiresses and to the large dowries which are customary. It would surely have been better to have given no dowries at all, or, if any, but small or moderate ones.

131 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:31:34pm

And in truly important news, Dave Barry has been writing columns about the Olympic, so I'm off to go and read them.

He's found an Olympic trampolinist named "Dong Dong."

132 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 10:41:02pm

re: #129 Destro

And yet you still have not answered the questions.

Amazing.

We can debate Spartan women some other time... not because you are correct, you aren't, but because I am so fascinated by you inability to reason.

Let's try again:

1) Do you deny that showing someone in shadows, just an outline without a face is frequently used to represent a lurking threat?

The fact that sometimes masks are used in a brightly colored masked hero positive context is not the issue. That is a clumsy dodge.

Why is a man in the shadows scary? Can you think of an evolutionary reason this might be so?

2) Can you think of no times when such imagery has been used to that effect? Seriously... have you never seen it used that way? I think the Time cover photo of this very thread is pretty clear about it. What with "the battle for Jerusalem and the word struggle and all that....

What does battle + struggle + shadow equal?

3) Why is hiding the face of someone threatening? Why are people who can't be identified more threatening than those who can be identified?

Your imagining you were the other person bit is adorable... Do you imagine you are Hezbollah or Hamas? Do you imagine you are Darth Vader? What is the goal of those outfits?

4) Did you ever notice that the other purpose of hiding one's face was to empower them to do evil? Seriously, how does mob mentality work? Why do the storm troopers have no faces in Starwars?

Actually answer this one. Don't pretend you did.

5) If there is nothing to this, why did the Nazis use that image again and again in their propaganda?

Actually answer this one. Don't pretend you did.

But go on... keep proving my point. You are literally incapable of seeing it in this frame. It is amazing.

I suppose the way to reach you would involve framing it differently.

So who do you like? What if they were shown in shadows ominously... Really tragic levels of denial here. Is ego that much more important to you?

133 Destro  Tue, Aug 7, 2012 11:02:53pm

re: #132 LudwigVanQuixote

1) Do you deny that showing someone in shadows, just an outline without a face is frequently used to represent a lurking threat?

Not only do I deny it is a fucking bullshit assertion just like all your other assertions.

I just posted a whole link above to a website devoted to the subject and not a lurking shadow threat of a picture in the bunch.

[Link: digital-photography-school.com...]

Silhouettes add a sense of mystery and intrigue to any image. Because our brains fill in the details of what is not known, a silhouette demands stronger involvement and interpretation from viewers.

Do you get that bit of art theory? Did you ever take an art course? From your Spartan women remark it is sure you have no history background either.

Here is another example of silhouettes not being menacing but actually inviting as in you become the person in the photo. Ergo, a silhouette of a Jewish man praying makes me become the Jewish man praying. Is that blowing your mind?

Here is what this photographer has to say that back's my point up:

[Link: www.pbase.com...]

Waiting for the taxi, Cuenca, Ecuador, 2011:
I stood behind this man as he waited for a taxi along a busy Cuenca street, silhouetting him by exposing for the bright light reflecting off the cobblestone roadway. A taxi approaches, but he must sense that it is already taken. I framed him squarely between two oncoming motorbikes, just as a woman with a child passes him on the sidewalk. The silhouette makes him anonymous, a symbol of anyone facing a frustrating wait.

In your mind he must seem like Jack the friggin Ripper. In the mind of someone who took a few art courses he is me or you or whoever is looking at the picture enduring what we all endure. Sorry, got all art theory on you again. Darn that Euro-peon edumacation. Should have stayed in America and ate Big Macs like everyone else.

Here is another example to back me up The backlighting throws him into a silhouette, creating anonymity, and transforming him into a symbol of all who must wait. That means, we become/identify with the silhouette.

The art lesson was free, by the way. You are welcome.

134 Flavia  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 12:48:09am

re: #103 CuriousLurker

Despite how paranoid it may seem to others, I understand why it bothers Alouette, so I'm going to have to risk annoying my liberal friends here.

If you go to Google Images and type in "Muslim" or "Jew" you'll be immediately confronted with an avalanche of negative images. Those of you who aren't Jewish or Muslim may not even notice them because they're so pervasive, but for us each one is like a little stab in the heart.

I think it's worse for Jews. I'm certain I'd be 10 times more sensitive about negative imagery WRT to my religion if relatives as recent as a generation or two ago had been gassed & shoveled into ovens while the world stood by doing nothing for years.

Alouette's not accusing anyone here of being an anti-Semite for disagreeing with her, so how about we cut her a little slack on the SJS thing? Or not. I can't tell you guys what to do, and I'm not going to fight with anyone about this—all I can tell you is how it feels as a Muslim to see stuff like that and ask you to stand in Alouette's shoes for a minute.

Have a good night, everyone.

I think this is one of the loveliest posts I have ever seen on LGF. Maybe even Usenet. Maybe I'm a little whacky with not sleeping (cold is back - coughing too hard). But for any Muslim - you know, "those awful terrorists!" (rolling my eyes here like you wouldn't believe) - to say that Jews have it worse when it comes to stereotypes? That shows a generous sensitivity that we could all use a little more of.

135 Flavia  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 12:55:07am

re: #112 LudwigVanQuixote

And Judaism is all about that. Jewish women could always read, write, own property, inherit and do business. They engaged in things that were "the men's world" effectively and with great skill for thousands of years before the women of most other cultures were given anything resembling such rights.

Which is where we first got the stereotype that we're "pushy". When Jews started coming to America in the late 19th century, the ethic in America was that "Ladies didn't work. Ladies were demure. Ladies were subservient to their husbands." Well, Jewish women were self-sufficient, or even the bread-winners for the family, because it was considered an honor, an accomplishment, if you could earn enough so that your husband could fulfill his duty of studying Torah. & you couldn't become a businesswoman without going out into the world & marketing your skills. This is why feminists decry the label of "lady" because they point out that it's used in ways to limit a woman's behavior.

(& now we know what advance degree I have!)

136 Aye Pod  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 3:22:04am

re: #102 LudwigVanQuixote

If they were to look scientifically at all of the science that Jews (across all levels of observance) produce and have produced (like Maimonides, definitely not Reform), it would destroy their hypothesis. So, in a feat that is just as down doubling as climate, evolution and science deniers doubling down on the right when confronted with data, they ignore the facts and just flail on.

You obviously haven't even read what I said:

Yes of course, not all fundies are the same- I didn't mean to imply that. For one thing Jewish fundies don't seem to be anywhere near as taken with creationism as their counterparts in some other religions.

However, it remains that religious fundamentalism of whatever stripe still values revelation over reason wherever possible, (at the very least in areas where scripture is not directly contradicted by scientific fact)

So, totally not advancing a hypothesis that Jewish fundies, nevermind Jews in general are characterised by backwardness in matters of science. Not my argument at all, as you can clearly see from what I actually wrote, as opposed to what's in your imagination.

So, in a feat that is just as down doubling as climate, evolution and science deniers doubling down on the right when confronted with data, they ignore the facts and just flail on.

LOL@ you describing yourself to an absolute tee.

137 Aye Pod  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 3:47:42am

re: #103 CuriousLurker

Alouette's not accusing anyone here of being an anti-Semite for disagreeing with her

Um yes she is. [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Plus I not only think that religious fundamentalism is generally not a good thing to encourage, (I totally do think that, just to be clear) but in addition, according to Alouette, I want to see fundies 'hated on' and otherwise mistreated(which I totally don't think and never said anything of the sort) How about you do a post asking her and others here to stop making up total shit about us just for disagreeing with her?

I'm just pointing out that this whole scary Jew shadow thing seems to be based on paranoia and is not borne out by the facts.

And when you are presented with a clutch of supposed scary jew shadow/silhouette pics which turn out to be almost entirely pictures of people in dark clothing shot in normal lighting conditions what are you supposed to do? Lie and say you totally get it now?

Jeez!

138 Aye Pod  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 4:04:49am

re: #96 Learned Mother of Zion

The point is not the "silhouette" is a perfectly normal artistic expression and is found everywhere. If that were only the case, we would be seeing "artistic silhouettes" in the news photo stream IN THE SAME PROPORTION for all topics, and not BUNCHED UP ALL TOGETHER whenever Jews are in the picture.

For Jimmah to Google up some random "Scotland silhouettes" is completely missing the point. You never see these silhouettes in the news photo stream when "Scotland" is a topic.
.

You showed me a bunch of such pictures insisting that they were all scary Jew shadows/silhouettes and they were ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF THE SORT. The vast majority of them were just pictures of people shot in normal light who happened to be wearing dark clothes.

Now, if your 'hypothesis' was correct and not simply the result of scanning the media for months with confirmation bias set to 'overload', a google image search of the terms 'orthodox jew' and 'bbc' (for aren't they always supposed to be the worst culprits) ought to show a clear bias towards silhouetted, shadowy representations. So let's have a look:

[Link: www.google.co.uk...]


Bearing in mind that not all images appearing here are actually from the bbc but also from other media outlets (many of them of a liberal bent - gag!) - out of about 450 images, I count about 11 that show orthodox Jews in silhouette or shadow, and 6 of those link to pages by yourself on LGF!

You got nothing.

Jimmah and Destro have already expressed their superior, enlightened opinion that religious people are like, so lame and totally deserve to be hated on and kept out of normal society

I didn't say anything of the sort. Not that my conversation went there, but as a matter of fact I'm pretty sure that integration is the way forward. Attempted mindreading and making stuff up - not great debating tactics.

Cultural isolation is one factor that can allow and encourage extremism - something we observe all the time in our cultures, and not only pertaining to religion. By all means, though, keep dreaming about the 'squashing of the seculars' in Israel. That's really cool n' stuff. Really hope they pull it off that'll be great/

139 Destro  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 5:44:16am

re: #135 Flavia

Which is where we first got the stereotype that we're "pushy". When Jews started coming to America in the late 19th century, the ethic in America was that "Ladies didn't work. Ladies were demure. Ladies were subservient to their husbands." Well, Jewish women were self-sufficient, or even the bread-winners for the family, because it was considered an honor, an accomplishment, if you could earn enough so that your husband could fulfill his duty of studying Torah. & you couldn't become a businesswoman without going out into the world & marketing your skills. This is why feminists decry the label of "lady" because they point out that it's used in ways to limit a woman's behavior.

(& now we know what advance degree I have!)

I would like to have you source this please. Because what you wrote was not based on fact but on "truthiness".

Women (men and children, too) were working in Scottish factories and factories all over Great Britain way before the great wave of Eastern European migrations to America and were doing so a 100 years before that (you know because industrialization was a British invention and they exploited women and children much earlier than in America).

Here is a source:

Women have always worked. The Industrial Revolution did not usher in a new phase in the employment of women in that sense.

[Link: www2.stetson.edu...]

140 Destro  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 5:57:21am

re: #137 Aye Pod

I'm just pointing out that this whole scary Jew shadow thing seems to be based on paranoia and is not borne out by the facts.

You noticed that also, eh?

I see one post then a second (using the offensive way to describe Jewish people) and I am like what is going on?

Maybe religious people all feel like this regardless of what faith they are. Take a look at the so called 'war on Christmas' in America supposedly being waged. The fact that there is no war on Christmas and the evidence they cite is as flimsy as whether a dept store places a sign that says "Happy Holidays" vs "Merry Christmas" does not seem to dissuade them from their assertion there is no war on Christmas.

The assertion that Jews and maybe Muslims are being portrayed in silhouette so they can look "sinister or scary" by American and western photo journalists (and their editors) is the most bizarre conspiracy theory I have heard yet.

What maybe happening if there is such a trend (we would have to see the total number of pictures published to figure that out and I am not seeing anyone here do that statistical work) is that silhouettes are are maybe used to make a subject more approachable - the opposite of making them scary (this is based on what I know about art and marketing).

But even when I cited website after website of photographers telling us that they use silhouettes for such purposes they deny this reality even if when confronted with evidence that the very photographer is saying so in "black and white" words.

141 Aye Pod  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 6:57:38am

re: #140 Destro

What maybe happening if there is such a trend (we would have to see the total number of pictures published to figure that out and I am not seeing anyone here do that statistical work) is that silhouettes are are maybe used to make a subject more approachable - the opposite of making them scary (this is based on what I know about art and marketing).

I think it's more just a way of simplifying and 'iconifying' a particular type of person. Take the example Alouette responded to me with - asking why we don't see many pictures of Scots rendered in this way. The reason is pretty straightforward - your typical Scot doesn't have a distinctive outline that sets him apart and makes him recogniseable from say, todays typical german or frenchman. Give him a kilt and a set of bagpipes however and that all changes.

Image: 400_F_2312323_i6yLEFPvjcU0Flm9tPvnfY3nX3RJKq.jpg

Oh...the scary Scotsman coming over the hill , his bagpipes over his shoulder, his face no doubt covered with soggy shortbread crumbs....coming for YOU!

142 Aye Pod  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 7:00:16am

PS I'm out of this thread - have a feeling it's about to get all weird up in here again :D

143 CuriousLurker  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 9:47:23am

I don't get why everyone is ignoring the longstanding hostility towards Jews. There has been hostility towards Muslims since the Crusades, but anti-Semitism has been around...well, it seems like it's been around as long as Jews have, if the history books are any indication.

Scots have faced regional hostility, but nothing like the widespread hostility towards Jews (or Muslims). Yes, observant Jews & Muslims dress distinctively, which makes them stand out, but even if a Scot was dressed in a kilt & holding bagpipes, he wouldn't have a bunch of negative history attached to him (except, as I mentioned, maybe in a limited region), so I think it's unlikely that anyone would perceive his silhouette/shadow as threatening.

Let's just put it right out on the table—the thing no one wants to say, but that I feel just under the surface every time these spats start up, and what I've flat out heard people say in real life on numerous occasions:

Those Jews, they're always whining. Yes, the Holocaust was horrific, but it was a long time ago and it was the Germans who did it, not the rest of us. We rescued them. How long are they going to keep trying to squeeze sympathy out of it and demanding special consideration?? It's emotional blackmail. Anyone who's even mildly critical of Jews or Israel get labeled an anti-Semite. That's B.S. and it's deeply resented.

Yeah, there it is. You can down-ding me to hell & back, swear no one actually feels that way, or tell me it's just me projecting my supposed Muslim Jew-hate on others, and I will call B.S. I've heard it too may times from too many different kinds of people. It's out there and it's a sore spot.

Do some Jews hurl the anti-Semitism charge at people undeservedly? Absolutely. Do some of them do it as a way to shut down valid criticism? Yes. Is that harmful? Obliviously, as it is unfair and causes feelings of resentment. The same could be said for Muslims hurling charges of Islamophobia to shut down valid criticism. It's not helpful and it's intellectually dishonest. Ditto for African Americans "playing the race card" or Hispanics claiming bigotry to deflect discussion of real problems within their respective communities.

All that said, everyone knows for a fact that anti-Semitism & Islamophobia (and racism and bigotry) exist, both in mild & highly virulent forms. Most of the people here are intelligent & well educated, but we're also imperfect humans with lots of baggage & shortcomings. Like I said in my #103, I get where Alouette is coming from. Is she being hypersensitive or paranoid? Maybe sometimes, but surely not all the time. She's human, after all. Me too—on more than one occasion I've interpreted something as Islamophobic when it was actually lack of understanding or a poorly expressed question or statement. Who hasn't made the same mistake WRT something they're sensitive about?

Is it a pattern with some people? Yeah, it seems that way sometimes, but I've never seen a case where bashing people over the head or ridiculing them for their faults makes them rethink their position or change. In fact, it does the opposite—they just double down.

I guess my whole point is that despite how smart some many of the people here are, we too often come into a conversation with a hyper-critical eye and armed to do battle, to defend our positions to the bitter end. That might work okay for politics, though it seems to be mostly frustrating based on the slap-and-ding-fights I've been seeing in the main threads recently, heh.

Maybe we should cut each other a little more slack once in a while, since we're all so far from perfect. Or maybe not. Like I said previously, I can't force anyone—it's just a suggestion.

Okay, that was longer than I intended. Time to get back to work now. O_o

144 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 11:22:32am

Thank you for saying that, CL.

145 Flavia  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 11:52:26am

re: #139 Destro

I would like to have you source this please. Because what you wrote was not based on fact but on "truthiness".

I am NOT going to quote you every damned book I studied in getting my Master's Degree. No. You can disbelieve & ridicule me all you want. The fact is that, in America (& Europe), LADIES (don't think I didn't notice you completely changing what I said by using the word "women") did not work - all the women you are discussing as having worked were not considered LADIES. This is as classist as it is anything else.

146 CuriousLurker  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 12:53:04pm

Looks like I missed this one earlier.

re: #137 Aye Pod

Um yes she is. [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Plus I not only think that religious fundamentalism is generally not a good thing to encourage, (I totally do think that, just to be clear) but in addition, according to Alouette, I want to see fundies 'hated on' and otherwise mistreated(which I totally don't think and never said anything of the sort) How about you do a post asking her and others here to stop making up total shit about us just for disagreeing with her?

Alouette's comment was up-dinged by several people, including SFZ, who tends to be pretty even-tempered, so I'm guessing she wasn't the only one that interpreted what you said as being a blanket statement. But okay, since you've clarified your meaning: Alouette, your #37 was over the top, which is why I didn't up-ding it myself.

How about if we're gonna have a useful conversation you dispense with some of your own hyperbole & aggressiveness? A little diplomacy can go a long way.

I'm just pointing out that this whole scary Jew shadow thing seems to be based on paranoia and is not borne out by the facts.

I would say that "facts" have context. For Jews the context is much different than it is for non-Jews. I've never taken the time to ask Alouette how many of her relatives died in the Holocaust, have you? (I'm assuming that every Jew lost at least one.)

I've also never asked her about any negative experiences she has had as a result of being Jewish and/or Haredi, have you? (As a Muslim, I'm assuming there have been numerous instances.)

Asking and getting answers to such questions can provide important context as to why "facts" look different to you than they do to her.

Or you can insist that all facts are by nature objective and MUST be divorced from human experience, empathy be damned. If that's the case, then you might find it difficult to locate any common ground via which to build bridges to people whose beliefs & life experiences are vastly different from your own.

Of course, there's always the possibility that you're not interested in finding common ground or building bridges—not everyone is—if that's the case, then fine, just tell me to piss off. I'm sure I'll recover from the disappointment somehow.

And when you are presented with a clutch of supposed scary jew shadow/silhouette pics which turn out to be almost entirely pictures of people in dark clothing shot in normal lighting conditions what are you supposed to do? Lie and say you totally get it now?

Jeez!

Nope. See above.^

147 Sheila Broflovski  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 2:25:12pm

THERE WILL BE MORE SJS.

This is an Internet meme that I noticed a few years ago and it has been a regular feature at my blog.

It is supposed to be light-hearted and humorous, not intended to fuel the seething rage and (dare I say) frenzied downding butthurt that has been displayed on this thread.

SJS WILL RETURN, with more faceless sinister looming. He will ruin your Christmas.

148 Destro  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 7:33:23pm

re: #145 Flavia

I am NOT going to quote you every damned book I studied in getting my Master's Degree. No. You can disbelieve & ridicule me all you want. The fact is that, in America (& Europe), LADIES (don't think I didn't notice you completely changing what I said by using the word "women") did not work - all the women you are discussing as having worked were not considered LADIES. This is as classist as it is anything else.

Immigrants to America were not considered "ladies of the upper class" and very few non WASPs were considered to be of this class so your assertion that women who were Jewish immigrants did not work is nonsense. With that said, I meant no offense.

149 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 8:41:32pm

re: #148 Destro

That is not what she said.

I am shocked, really shocked that you are arguing with a bunch of Jewish women - from all levels of observance - who are unanimously telling you that you are full of shit about traditional Jewish women's roles.

You really are that arrogant.

150 Almost Killed by Space Hookers  Wed, Aug 8, 2012 8:44:04pm

re: #139 Destro

Do you really think that your cherry picked quote from whatever reference is going to discount the several thousand year history that all the Jews here are telling you?

Yes you do.

It's fascinating.

151 Aye Pod  Thu, Aug 9, 2012 4:45:58am

Hi CL - I thought we were all done here, but I'll respond to this:
re: #143 CuriousLurker

I don't get why everyone is ignoring the longstanding hostility towards Jews.

No-one is doing that! And what do you mean, by everyone? Two people - count 'em - in this thread are disputing that these photos show bigotry against Jews, and are evidence of widespread Jew-hate in the media.

So let me re-phrase for you: "Why is anyone at all disagreeing with Alouette?"

Because the evidence presented amounts to a spectacular fail. It doesn't add up. Her claim has been completely destroyed and no convincing answer has been given to any of the points made. Just repetition of the same totally debunked claims.

Scots have faced regional hostility, but nothing like the widespread hostility towards Jews (or Muslims). Yes, observant Jews & Muslims dress distinctively, which makes them stand out, but even if a Scot was dressed in a kilt & holding bagpipes, he wouldn't have a bunch of negative history attached to him (except, as I mentioned, maybe in a limited region), so I think it's unlikely that anyone would perceive his silhouette/shadow as threatening.

Has anyone disputed the history of anti-semitism here? Nope. Should claims about anti-semitism always be validated even if they are completely untrue?

These claims made by Alouette and othes are wildly off-base, and should not be validated. It's as simple as that.

Let's just put it right out on the table—the thing no one wants to say, but that I feel just under the surface every time these spats start up, and what I've flat out heard people say in real life on numerous occasions:

Those Jews, they're always whining. Yes, the Holocaust was horrific, but it was a long time ago and it was the Germans who did it, not the rest of us. We rescued them. How long are they going to keep trying to squeeze sympathy out of it and demanding special consideration?? It's emotional blackmail. Anyone who's even mildly critical of Jews or Israel get labeled an anti-Semite. That's B.S. and it's deeply resented.

I imagine that real anti-semites actually rather like to see easily debunked, clearly false claims of anti-semitic bias like this 'scary Jew shadow'. It would serve their propoganda well visa vis advancing the argument you just presented. So how exactly does making, or validating, clearly false claims about bias help anyone but anti-semitic propogandists?

Is it a pattern with some people? Yeah, it seems that way sometimes, but I've never seen a case where bashing people over the head or ridiculing them for their faults makes them rethink their position or change. In fact, it does the opposite—they just double down.

I guess my whole point is that despite how smart some many of the people here are, we too often come into a conversation with a hyper-critical eye and armed to do battle, to defend our positions to the bitter end. That might work okay for politics, though it seems to be mostly frustrating based on the slap-and-ding-fights I've been seeing in the main threads recently, heh.

Maybe we should cut each other a little more slack once in a while, since we're all so far from perfect. Or maybe not. Like I said previously, I can't force anyone—it's just a suggestion.


Yes let's be nice to each other on LGF and slander a whole bunch of professional photographers, editors and media outlets, while not even caring if the claims are true or not. And let's make LGF look like a weird and silly place, that advances moderate left leaning politics and secularism/religious moderation for the USA at the same time as advancing right wing politics and religious fundamentalism/anti-secularism for Israel, and embracing paranoid, easily debunked media conspiracy theories.

152 Aye Pod  Thu, Aug 9, 2012 4:52:19am

re: #147 Learned Mother of Zion

It is supposed to be light-hearted and humorous, not intended to fuel the seething rage and (dare I say) frenzied downding butthurt that has been displayed on this thread.

That's a very honest admission, Alouette and I appreciate it. Actually I think destro and I can handle the downdings we've been getting, but thanks anyway. Have this, it's complementary:

153 CuriousLurker  Thu, Aug 9, 2012 6:42:57am

re: #151 Aye Pod

Hi, Jimmah. You're right, we're done.

154 Flavia  Fri, Aug 10, 2012 9:56:52pm

LudwigVanQuixote - thanks for the sanity check.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2021-06-05 2:51 pm PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Goleta Park Our Sunday GetawayWe drove 80 miles up to this favorite spot. The weather was nice, the tides accommodating, and the waves calm. Too calm. Instead of ocean and beach, we shot wildlife in the brackish creek.
Rightwingconspirator
6 hours, 55 minutes ago
Views: 99 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 1 •
Train Songs Nine
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
2 days, 9 hours ago
Views: 196 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Eight
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
2 days, 10 hours ago
Views: 232 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Seven
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
2 days, 10 hours ago
Views: 191 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Six
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
2 days, 10 hours ago
Views: 191 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Five
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 575 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 6
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Four
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 574 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Three
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 530 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 •
Snarky Puppy - Trinity (Extended Version) Snarky Puppy never lets you down, they always come out bright and enthusiastically high on the sounds. Snarky Puppy - Trinity (Extended Version)From Snarky Puppy's new album, Empire Central (September 2022, GroundUP Music)Stream/Buy: orcd.co Written by Mark LettieriArranged by ...
Thanos
2 weeks ago
Views: 803 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2
Tweets: 2 •