#whoever they think is jewish

[do-angels-dream-of-starry-seas]

Okay, nobody is giving a straight fucking answer to what's happening in Amsterdam? Is it antisemitism, did Israeli soccer fans really say "death to arabs" to start everything, WHAT

[kvetchinglyneurotic]

I wish you would write a fic where...

Anything exploring Jewish Roy Kent. How being sent away at such a young age affected his connection to that part of his life, the new ways he’s learned to experience it with his family now, anything

I'm going to Frankenstein this ask together with your one for the fic title game because I got this I was like. good news!

This one is kind of based on personal experience, so allow me to overshare for a moment: I grew up in a city with a fairly small Jewish population in general but especially in my neighbourhood — I'm pretty sure I was the only Jewish kid in my entire year in elementary school, and by the time I got to high school I knew of like. maybe two or three others. (This did produce some funny moments, like when we got to the part in Macbeth where witches call for the liver of a blaspheming Jew and everyone at my table turned to look at me).

And so Jewish Roy is very dear to me but also makes me sad because while I did find that experience kind of difficult and alienating at times, at the end of the day, I came home to my Jewish family. I think when you're in that type of situation, it's incredibly valuable to have someone who shares that experience so you can essentially reaffirm each other — because when you're the only one who has (or doesn't have) a certain experience or is bothered by something that everyone else seems to like, it's very easy to assume that you're being irrational or overreacting (this is also, incidentally, why I appreciate all my fellow aros and aces), and that's not something Roy is likely to have had.

I don't have any snippets for this one yet but the premise of Roy Kent vs the Jewish Experience is that as he's working with Dr. Sharon post-season 3, Roy starts to unpack some of his complicated feelings around growing up the way he did, and part of that is realizing that he resents the fact that he never had the opportunity to grow up in Judaism — and part of that's directed at his family, but it's also directed at the football academy system for not really giving him that opportunity. So he decides that for the first time basically ever, he's going to take time off for his holidays because he's the manager now and no one can stop him. The fic basically follows Roy through a year of Jewish celebrations starting with Rosh Hashanah (new year's) that somehow turns into a full club event because the boys love their coach and have never heard of subtlety, and if they celebrate Christmas at the club despite a bunch of them not being Christian, why not other holidays?

[roseverdict]

.

[entropy-sea-system]

having to block more ppl for their antisemitism these days...

[batmurdock]

Finding out Hermann Gottlieb is confirmed Jewish in extended PacRim canon >>>>>>

💕❣️❤️💘💙💞❤️‍🔥💖

[rodeodeparis]

sorry if this isn't that deep but could you clarify what you meant on your last post? i'm just not sure if you're saying these people would've fallen for zionism or if i'm misunderstanding you really badly

that is exactly what i'm saying

[snekdood]

weren't ppls 23andme's accounts hacked for the info on ppl with ashkenazi ancestry? and thats just... normal and not antisemitism? antisemitism just... isnt happening in your opinion, correct?

[crimeronan]

once my sunday school teacher at my very conservative evangelical church (the kind of church that goes out preaching at shopping malls) came in devastated because her brother had just committed suicide. this church did NOT teach that suicide would send you to hell, but they DID teach that you could only get to heaven through an ongoing relationship with christ.

my teacher mentioned that her brother had 'fallen away from the church' in recent years because of his depression. but then she added that he'd been a firefighter and saved lives, so she hoped that god would take that into consideration for him.

this was, of course, completely against the church's teachings, and it puzzled me that she would say something so erroneous. so i helpfully informed her that her brother was Definitely in hell if he'd fallen away from christ. this did not seem like a cruel thing to say because it was simply factual, and it was important that people in the church were factual about hell and who goes there. she was lying to herself and needed to be honest instead, was my reasoning.

i was ten years old.

I said this a couple years ago (one year ago?) and most of the comments on tumblr actually did not know this, so to reiterate what you’re up against: a VERY mainstream belief among American Christian fundamentalists is that they are the only ones who experience love. They raise their kids to think that everyone “living in sin” (all other faiths, atheists, and LGBT people) goes through life sad and empty, falsely believing they know what love feels like, and will never know until they’re ��saved.” It’s not as simple as them diminishing the humanity of others out of hate, but being deeply brainwashed to believe others are automatically mentally less human. They are also very good at convincing new converts that they really are experiencing this “real” love for the “first time;” the same way members of all cults can become wholeheartedly convinced that they’re receiving psychic alien messages or communing with spirits. Cult conditioning is simply that powerful.

[gothhabiba]

Hi, this is very ignorant. I'm trying to read as much as I can on Palestine and Zionism but there is one point I cannot find an answer for. Given that Zionism is not Judaism, given that at the beginning most Jewish people did not share this view and was actually supported by christians with antisemitic views, given that it was conceptualized as a colonial project that could only be actualized by ethnically cleanse Palestine, one thing I don't know how to disagree with Zionists is the idea that Jewish people do come from that land. Even if European jews are probably not genetically related to the Jewish people from there, I think Jewishness is something that can be constructed as related to that land. This of course does not mean that Palestinians are not natives too and they have every right to their land. However I don't really know how to answer when Jewish (Zionists) tell me that Jewish people fled that land during the diaspora. Other than "yeah but the people that stayed are native that underwent christianization before, arabization later, grew a sense of nationhood in the 19th century and are Palestinians now"

It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what "indigeneity" is to believe that it means "whoever has the oldest claim to the land." Rather, to describe a people as "indigenous" is a reference to their current relationship to the government and to the land—namely that they have been or are being dispossessed from that land in favour of other private owners (settlers); they have a separate, inferior status to settlers according to the law, explicitly; they are shut out of institutions created by the settler state, explicitly; they are targeted implicitly by the laws of the settler state (e.g. Israeli prohibitions against harvesting wild thyme or using donkeys or horses for transportation); the settler state does not punish violence against them; &c. &c.

It is a settler-colonialist state that creates indigeneity; without one, it is perfectly possible for immigrants to move to and live in a new location without becoming settlers, with the superior cultural and legal status and suppression of a legally inferior population that that entails.

If all that were going on were some Jewish people feeling a personal or religious connexion to this land and wanting to move there, accepting the existing people and culture and living with them, not expelling and killing local populations and creating a settler-colonialist state that privileges them at the expense of extant populations, that would be a completely different situation. But any assertion of the land's fundamental Jewish-ness (really they mean white or European Jewishness—the Jewish Arabs who were already in Palestine never seem to figure in these arguments) is a canard that distracts from the fundamental issue, which is a people's right to resist dispossession, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.

Decolonize Palestine lays out some of the ethnic and cultural history of the region, but follows it up with:

So, what does this all mean for Palestine? Absolutely nothing. Although the argument has many ahistorical assumptions and claims, it is not these which form its greatest weakness. The whole argument is a trap. The basic implication of this line of argumentation is as follows: If the Jewish people were in Palestine before the Arabs, then the land belongs to them. Therefore, the creation of Israel would be justified. From my experience, whenever this argument is used, the automatic response of Palestinians is to say that their ancestors were there first. These ancestors being the Canaanites. The idea that Palestinians are the descendants of only one particular group in a region with mass migrations and dozens of different empires and peoples is not only ahistorical, but this line of thought indirectly legitimizes the original argument they are fighting against. This is because it implies that the only reason Israel’s creation is unjustified is because their Palestinian ancestors were there first. It implies that the problem with the argument lies in the details, not that the argument as a whole is absolute nonsense and shouldn’t even be entertained. The ethnic cleansing, massacres and colonialism needed to establish Israel can never be justified, regardless of who was there first. It’s a moot point. Even if we follow the argument that Palestinians have only been there for 1300 years, does this suddenly legitimize the expulsion of hundreds of thousands? Of course not. There is no possible scenario where it is excusable to ethnically cleanse a people and colonize their lands. Human rights apply to people universally, regardless of whether they have lived in an area for a year or ten thousand years. If we reject the “we were there first” argument, and not treat it as a legitimizing factor for Israel’s creation, then we can focus on the real history, without any ideological agendas. We could trace how our pasts intersected throughout the centuries. After all, there is indeed Jewish history in Palestine. This history forms a part of the Palestinian past and heritage, just like every other group, kingdom or empire that settled there does. We must stop viewing Palestinian and Jewish histories as competing, mutually exclusive entities, because for most of history they have not been. These positions can be maintained while simultaneously rejecting Zionism and its colonialism. After all, this ideologically driven impulse to imagine our ancestors as some closed, well defined, unchanging homogenous group having exclusive ownership over lands corresponding to modern day borders has nothing to do with the actual history of the area, and everything to do with modern notions of ethnic nationalism and colonialism.

I would also be careful about mentioning a sense of "nationhood" or "national identity" in this context, as it could seem to imply that people need a "national" identity (a very specific and very new idea) in order not to deserve genocide. Actually the idea that Palestinians lacked a national identity (of the kind that developed in 19th-century Europe) is commonly used to justify Zionism. Again from Decolonize Palestine:

This slogan ["A land without a people for a people without a land"] persists to this day because it was never meant to be literal, but colonial and ideological. This phrase is yet another formulation of the concept of Terra Nullius meaning “nobody’s land”. In one form or the other, this concept played a significant role in legitimizing the erasure of the native population in virtually every settler colony, and laying down the ‘legal’ and ‘moral’ basis for seizing native land. According to this principle, any lands not managed in a ‘modern’ fashion were considered empty by the colonists, and therefore up for grabs. Essentially, yes there are people there but no people that mattered or were worth considering. There is no doubt that Zionism is a settler colonial movement intent on replacing the natives. As a matter of fact, this was a point of pride for the early Zionists, as they saw the inhabitants of the land as backwards and barbaric, and that a positive aspect of Zionism would be the establishment of a modern nation state there to act as a bulwark against these ‘regressive’ forces in the east [You can read more about this here]. A characteristic feature of early Zionist political discourse is pretending that Palestinians exist only as individuals or sometimes communities, but never as constituting a people or a nation. This was accompanied by the typical arrogance and condescension towards the natives seen in virtually every settler colonial movement. That the early settlers interacted with the natives while simultaneously claiming the land was empty was not seen as contradictory to them. According to these colonists, even if some scattered, disorganized people did exist, they were not worthy of the land they inhabited. They were unable to transform the land into a modern functioning nation state, extract resources efficiently and contribute to ‘civilization’ through the free market, unlike the settlers. Patrick Wolfe’s scholarship on Australia illustrates this dynamic and how it was exploited to establish the settler colony.

[starswallowingsea]

amazed i havent lost this little pink dreidel i won when i was like 8

[genderkoolaid]

expand on ur "mental asylum Marxism shit" thing about children & grief?? from what you've said im pretty sure i will relate from my own experiences as a grieving child. also it sounds interesting!!

so i was thinking about how weird it is that, when a child has to deal with the death of a loved one, they say something like "no child should have to go through this! no child should have to even think about death!" which strikes me as weird because i was a child who dealt with the deaths of multiple close family members, very close together. the first was my great-grandmother, who i lived with and who was my best friend. death was never foreign to me (my mom has always been very death-positive on top of all that). grief was just part of my life like everything else was.

but i realized that its because people think childhood should not have any flaws. you should be 100% happy and fulfilled all the time. any time a child experiences anything painful, its bad. not "children should have access to love and support," but "children should not have basic life experiences because the idea of childhood being anything other than fluffy purity scares me."

because children in society are fundamentally not people. especially in a society structured around christian beliefs in natural law theory, that what is natural = what is good, healthy, and Divinely commanded. so on top of children being the property of adults, they are also forced to be the symbols of Nature. whatever is the most useful to whoever needs them. which means we built up this idea of children as tabula rasas, pureness incarnate. like a magic mirror where if we look into it, we'll be able to catch a glimpse of the true face of humanity. every single thing children do can be scrutinized for some grand truth about humans as a whole. and then, the ways children are treated also reflect how we think humanity should interact with its own nature.

example: the idea of humanity as inherently sinful and wicked, with that urge needing to be suppressed through state violence (hello hobbes) = the idea that children are annoying and shitty on purpose and need to be forced via punishment into being Good Citizens.

this is also why children cannot be trans, even though all trans people must prove that we were trans children. being queer must be unnatural; and even if not, its inherently sexual, and sexuality is dirty and bad. so children can't be trans, and they also can't read books on puberty until their parents decide when and what exactly they are allowed to learn. child victims of sexual assault only matter to the extent that they can be used as a symbol of a cultural threat; calling Jewish or trans people pedophiles means saying that they are foreigners attacking basic human nature, and indirectly, Divine command. if you aren't the right kind of victim, or when you inevitably reveal yourself to be A Person with complicated experiences and opinions, you are no longer of use to the agenda.

it sucks that bad things happen to anyone. aspects of youth can exacerbate the pain sometimes, but sometimes it does the reverse: I wish I could have spent more time with the family members I lost, but I know other people who are glad they loss family members young, because they weren't really hurt by it. I think the main thing is that, even sometimes when we talk about our past selves, we project this cultural idea of Child As Purity and ignore the actual person having the experience. when we "empathize" with children by projecting Purity onto them, we aren't actually connecting with them.

[autistic-katara]

yeah but the nazis pretending violence is peaceful when it’s against Bad Jews are also pretty bad which is what the post was about

peaceful is when u punch jews, yell slurs, set things on fire and wave around signs with mein kampf quotes on it

[crinosg]

Hey. remember how I said it was just a matter of time before the GOP would come after Italians and Irish people, because they hate everyone and they only wanted Italians and Irish around to vote against Abortions? Remember how one of you responded by posting that stunned party girls meme pic?

YEAH WELL LOOK WHOSE FUCKING RIGHT? Vance pulling that mask right off and showing you what the GOP really thinks of us.

Like you think if you're not black or Jewish or trans that you're safe? No no no, you will never be white enough for them, whoever you are whatever your background, if they want to they will find a reason to other you. If you are kept around its only as a convenient pawn and nothing more, and they will discard you as soon as they feel comfortable doing so.

[odinsblog]

I know there’s a lot more serious things happening than worrying about what some spoiled culture vulture thinks, but the Jenners + Kardashians stay hopping on the, “I support the latest popular thing” bandwagon, without having any understanding or taking any nuance into account.

In sharp contrast, here is the thoughtful post Gigi Hadid released:

"My thoughts are with all those affected by this unjustifiable tragedy, and every day that innocent lives are taken by this conflict too many of which are children. I have deep empathy and heartbreak for the Palestinian struggle and life under occupation, it's a responsibility I hold daily. I also feel a responsibility to my Jewish friends to make it clear, as I have before:

While I have hopes and dreams for Palestinians, none of them include the harm of a Jewish person.

The terrorizing of innocent people is not in alignment with & does not do any good for the 'Free Palestine' movement. The idea that it does has fueled a painful, decades-long cycle of back&forth retaliation (which no innocent civilian, Palestinian or Israeli, deserves to be a casualty of), and helps perpetuate the false idea that being Pro-Palestine = antisemitic.

If you are hurting, as I share my condolences today with my loved ones, both Palestinian and Jewish, I'm sending you my love & strength — whoever and wherever you are. There are a lot of complex, personal, and valid feelings, but every human deserves basic rights, treatment, and security; no matter their nationality, religion, ethnicity, or where they were born.

I know my words will never be enough or heal the deep wounds of so many, but I pray for the safety of innocent lives, always."

—Gigi Hadid

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

Honestly at this point, I'm really uninterested in hearing any gentile's "critique" of Judaism.

Whatever it is, whatever you're about to say, I am 1000% certain that at least one Jew has already raised this issue in ways that are thoughtful and centered in respect for other Jews. Probably lots of Jews; possibly whole theological movements. It's even possible that this particular topic has been under active discussion for hundreds or even thousands of years.

Someone has already said this better than you will. Someone has already raised whatever issue you have and grounded it in their own experiences of having lived a Jewish life.

So just leave it to us. Just stop. You're not helping. At best you're white-knighting, at worst you're actively contributing to an antisemitic majority culture.

"Well I've never seen Jews discussing [x] topic!" Your ignorance is not reality. These conversations are happening, possibly offline and at our Shabbos tables or shuls only, but they are happening.

"Well [x] topic impacts me personally!" Does it? Does it really? Because unless you live in Israel or Palestine, no Jewish group - no matter how seemingly numerous we may be in your city or neighborhood - is actually powerful enough to affect large-scale (or even typically small-scale) changes. Our fundamentalism is, for better or worse, directed at other Jews. The most intense thing I've heard of outside of Israel is a community getting together to petition the city to allow an eruv or a concentrated effort to make a few neighborhood blocks particularly Jewish because they're within walking distance of an orthodox shul. All other issues - no matter how ugly the opinions - are something that is part of much larger social trends that unfortunately some Jews happen to be engaging in. We'll deal with them; you focus on your people.

"I'm just listening to ex-fundamentalist Jews and white-knighting trying to help them be heard and not shouted down!" So first of all, if you knew anything about this topic, they typically call themselves OTD (which I'm sure you know what that stands for, because you've been listening) and secondly, great! You should listen to them. But their critiques are not your critiques. I can go on all day long about my family and their bullshit, and I can even (sometimes) appreciate you chiming in supportively. But it hits different when you go off chattering to other people about how my family is bullshit.

"Okay fine - I'm taking all that in and accept that my critiques aren't wanted, but what CAN I do, since I am literally vibrating in place about how Those People Over There Are Wrong and cannot simply ignore them?" Best thing you can do? Honestly? Learn about Judaism thoroughly from a variety of people, and learn how to be a good ally against antisemitism in all the spaces you want us in. Judaism not feminist enough for you? Learn how to make your feminist spaces safe and welcoming for Jews. Judaism not queer or trans enough for you? Learn how to make your queer and trans spaces safe and welcoming for Jews. Whatever movement you think we're not supporting enough or not showing up for enough, or whoever it is you think we're oppressing? Find the Jews who are doing that work (they exist, I promise) and listen to what they tell you about how to make your spaces be better.

[snekdood]

bro? this looks like something a conspiracy theorist alt righter would say...........