Posts from — July 2005

Mobius (the Orthodox Anarchist) wrote an interesting article about Jewschool’s raison d’e tre. He said,

“Jewschool provides counter-balance to the dominant voice of mainstream and institutional Judaism that infests practically every Jewish publication both on- and-offline.”

As a believer that Judaism is essentially quiescent, I think it is critical that questions are raised about popular beliefs within our own community, instead of focusing on what is wrong with the world at large. I am shocked to see the fervor and interest of so many bloggers and periodicals in repeating the same party line to one another and pretending they are effecting change.

To just LOL each other over how right we are and how everyone else is an idiot (or worse) is not an environment of discourse - it is a support group.

Un-Orthodox Jew is of a similar mindset to Mobius. Though different than Mobius in outlook and values, he challenges commonly held notions popular by the black hat communities he is a part of.

Just as their issues are different than each others, mine are different than theirs.

These are the popular issues I feel I am a dissenter, and wish to challenge within my Jewish community.

1) That traditional Judaism is reconcilable with secular egalitarian notions, this can be refuted without even resorting to halacha, averting the babbling that halacha on this issue can “change” and “evolve”.

Biggest proof in my favor - Male Only Circumcision.

Worst Offender: Most Jewish women (and men) who consider themselves both traditional and feminist.

2) That what is good for Israel is good for the U.S. It is not.

Biggest proof in my favor - terrorism.

Worst Offender - The Neocons.

3) Holocaustism - that through “educating” the world about our holocaust and continued musuem proliferation we will somehow stop anti-semitism, and systematically labeling those people who disagree with us “anti-semitic” productive. It is a waste of resources, and frequently invokes resentment.

Worst Offender - The Simon Wiesenthal Center

Biggest (but not only)proof in my favor - The world hates Jews more every day.

There are certainly many positions where I am in line with the mainstream Jewish community, and some of these positions are in sharp contrast to the majority of the world.

But I don’t see the need to kvetch about them as much.

Not on a Jewish blog, targeting a primarily Jewish audience.

One would surely expect that the (Mr. Stephen I. Weiss) zealous defender of everything Forward himself would not criticize the Forward - at least not in as viscous and nasty terms the likes of this:

“Either way, the reality of the Forward’s bias as presented by editor J.J. Goldberg is, predictably, distant from the reality as the rest of the world probably knows it.”

That is Mr. Weiss, Forward defender. Go here.

Who the hell is this guy to tantrum?

Stephen I. Weiss, the author of the Canonist, is a nasty fellow. I was shocked to read his very personal attacks on me in his recent post, including its headline which labeled me a “Jackass”, since I never met the guy, nor have I ever had any form of correspondence with him.

But I would at least hope that someone who had written for the Forward would attempt to be fair. But of course, he was fired from the Forward for not taking his meds for undisclosed reasons. Quickly. Quite quickly.

Which says something, doesn’t it?

In between his unrelated insults and a totally bogus anecdote, he also made some very misleading statements about my story on Jewschool about the Forward’s latest section “The Shmooze”.

First of all - only two stories were part of “The Shmooze”, while Weiss pretended all five on the page were part of that section, when only two of them were. This is not my misunderstanding - it is his. For intance, “Forward: Looking Back” is a section that has been going on for years. It is not part of “Shmooze” as Weiss asserted.

Weiss insisted that my joke about Satmar Hassidim not dancing a hora was wildly inaccurate and “ignorant” because Eastern European dances, particularly Hassidic ones, influenced the modern hora.

But the Satmar dances are different. For instance, they don’t have mixed dancing. Not the last time I checked.

And they certainly don’t call it a “hora”. Ever.

That is like insisting they are “Zionist” in the same way as secular nationalist Israelis because of the influence the Hassidim had on the Zionist movement through their messianic utopianism as well as the Ba’al Shem Tov’s own push for a return to the land of Israel which influences this national, secular movement.

They did influence Zionism, but the Satmar simply aren’t “Zionist”, and would not refer to themselves as such. There are some critical differences.

Did Weiss really not understand this? Did he really need this explained? No, he isn’t “intellectually incapacitated” (which he called me) - but he seeks to prove I’m an ignoramus, and if there isn’t material there to prove his arguement, he pretends there is through intentionally obtuse distortion. He brings up the hora thing again on yet a second post on this same issue.

It’s all he’s got!

Weiss is unremitting in his lies. He overreacts to my “frowning” on the Forward generally, while the first paragraph was essentially a love letter to the Forward, and many of the few posts in the short life of my blog have praised the Forward consistently.

To boot, he gives a bogus anecdote of some “editor” at Heeb, without revealing who it was, and pretends that this maisah represents Heeb’s view of the Forward.

Weiss writes,

“I’m reminded of one time I tried to help out a Heeb editor by introducing him to Eden, thinking that he could get some writing gigs at the Forward through the connection. The genius went on to deride the Forward for being irrelevant, and not covering the kinds of things he’d like to read.”

It is one thing to not reveal your sources - it is entirely another to not reveal the subject who “proves” the position of an institution.

Again - it’s all he’s got. The Forward, contrary to what Weiss would like, has been quite supportive of Heeb.

Maybe, as Weiss contends, I “know nothing” and “have accomplished nothing”, and only feel comfortable referencing the Forward because of my “membership in ‘edgy’ endeavors like Heeb.” Maybe I read my first Forward yesterday.

Or maybe I worked on the business side there, schmuck.

And at least I worked at the Forward (for two and a half years) without getting fired.

Before your time, you punk.

And I chose to move on to other venues, including but by no means limited to Heeb.

We’ll see what you do.

Find out on this Heeb Magazine Exclusive on Jewschool.

According to this article in the NY Times, traditional Democratic backers are bucking their party affiliations to support Bloomberg. What is not explicitly mentioned, but is obvious by the names, is that most of them are Jews. This has been occurring for a while. What is interesting is that there are more and more women who are in this camp.

There is a gender divide among Jews in this town, if not nationally. New York City Jewish men, to a large degree, have abandoned a strict Democratic party affiliation, at least in local elections, as evidenced by their denying Hillary Clinton the benchmark 60% Jewish vote, even though her challenger, Lazio, was weak. Very weak.

Now, unlike the Orthodox, secular Jewish men have not become Republicans. They just tend to be more politically independent minded than their female counterparts (perhaps on other issues as well), and less comfortable pretending they have the exact same concerns, always belong under the same tent, and face the same struggles as say, a welfare recipient in public housing, something Jewish women are better at convincing themselves of.

Or were.

What started with Giuliani appears to be a trend, but what has changed is the pride and readiness to publicly back a candidate from a different party, without feeling guilty for not endorsing chaos and fiscal irresponsibility in the name of compassion and solidarity.

There is no need to become a card carrying Republican, and I certainly wouldn’t place Bloomberg on the list of great mayors of this city, but it is nice to see Jewish women willing to think about a specific candidate and the issues at stake, and not just pull the same lever out of some brand loyalty and party platitudes without at least pausing to consider if this is who they really want in power.

It has taken less than one hundred years to get to this point.

They might not be quick learners, but they do learn.

I would agree with them. I never understood the idea that Judaism could be reconciled with egalitarianism.

But if the goal is, rather, to undermine Judaism, then it all makes a lot more sense.

Judith Plaskow, with her new book, “The Coming of Lilith: Essays on Feminism, Judaism, an Sexual Ethics 1973-2003″, is open that her goal is not spiritual, but subversive, as reviewed by Jay Michaelson in this week’s Forward demonstrates.

And that’s - honesty.

We should all recognize Jewish Feminism for what it is, just as this important thinker of the Jewish Feminist movement does.

“The Scholar”

The subscription base of the overwhelming number of Jewish Weeklies throughout the country is owned by their respective, local UJA. The ramifications of this can be seen in the headline of the New York Federation paper, the Jewish Week (80% of it’s specific subscription base supplied by the UJA) with this story on UJA fundraising achievements: Go figure - this did not warrant a headline or a story the Forward, a precious secular Jewish newspaper outside the control of the Federation. The problem is the New York Jewish Week (and many others) pretend they are independent. The JUF News of Chicago is a rare exception, acknowledging that it is indeed a Federation organ.

The problem does not stop with puff pieces about the UJA, however. Used to (and comfortable with) setting an agenda, the Federation sets a dishonest parameter of debate on many, many issues.

One of them is Israel.

Another is Jewish Feminism.

Debra Nussbaum Cohen is often selected to report on “gender issue� stories in the Jewish world. She is selected for a reason. To give the feminist perspective. Only.

The only other side recognized is one of stringent halacha. And halacha, according to these women, can “evolve� and “change�.

That’s it. That’s the parameters of the debate, and all such (frequent) stories are written within these parameters.

So what’s the problem?

Nussbaum Cohen’s dishonesty and inconsistencies in her reporting are tolerated, and her self-grandeur rewarded. No one, as far as I know, calls her on it.

Come and Hear:

In this past week’s article on the reasonable discomfort of people trying to concetrate on praying and not breasts reactionaries who would prefer to not have the woman next to them nursing while they are focusing on praying, and the new Conservative resolution to allow breast-feeding in the synagogue, Debra editorialized that,

“In Jewish environments, those in charge don’t always seem to extend the milk of human kindness to nursing mothers.�

Yes – if you are uncomfortable with a woman nursing, anywhere, at any time – you hate motherhood.

Who says the boob can’t be a cudgel?

What if an infant is screaming at the top of his lungs? Should he also be allowed to stay with his mother in the sanctuary or concert hall since that is part of childhood? After all, to make him leave (apparently) means we hate children. And we should love children.

Strange also is the statement,

“The 14-3 vote for approval was split largely along generational lines, Rabbi Artson said.�

But the quotes of the sentence in its entirety are mine. I am quoting Ms. Nussbaum Cohen, not Rabbi Artson.

She did not have quotes. Why not Debra? Did he not say that? Was that your interpretation? Was that your interpretation so you can push your own agenda that all that is Jewish Feminism is NOW and FOREVER, and all that isn’t is yesteryear’s alterkacker stinky leftovers?

But is Ms. Cohen that vocal on what should be in the Jewish world today? Does she have a stong opinion on these matters?

Oh, yes. A visionary.

Many journalists write books. They write books on the subjects they are experts in, or about their experiences as journalists.

B’nai Jeshrun calls Ms. Nussbaum Cohen “a scholar.�

So Ms. Nussbaum Cohen wrote a book too. But she wrote one on ritual.

Alternative rituals. Alternative rituals for your daughters.

There is one problem. Ms. Nussbaum Cohen is not a rabbi. I don’t mean she isn’t an Orthodox Rabbi. I mean she has no rabbinical certification from anywhere.

And it shows.

In “Celebrating Your New Jewish Daughter” (Jewish Lights Publishing, 2001), she suggests many things for her flock.

That’s what she told Beliefnet.com. And I quote her, not my interpretation.

“I’m hoping that’s what the book will do–really be a tool for people to use.â€?

She gives some examples, such as a favorite Jewish Feminist “ritual�, the Simchat Bat, like she did for her daughter, which included,

“For taste, we put some grape juice on her tongue, which is also done at a bris.�

She also did something else!

“For hearing, we sang a traditional Jewish song. And then we ended with the seven blessings, the sheva brachot, the traditional end to a Jewish wedding.�

Why, Debra? Is she getting married today? At eight days (of course) old?

Or do you simply not have the skills to navigate through Jewish text and prayers in anything more complicated than a bencher?

Parallel ceremonies to circumcision are telling in their doublethink, and illuminate that this movement is not about egalitarianism at all.

If it were, they have two options.

1. Don’t circumcise the boys
2. Also circumcise the girls. Cut the hood of the clitoris off the girls.

Neither of those options may be particularly appealing to these women, but they are the only egalitarian options with regards to circumcision.

A Simchat Bat, or allowing Mohelets, is simply not egalitarian. The boy’s genitalia is cut, the girl’s is not.

Nussbaum Cohen, though, is not only a rabbi in her own mind, but apparently a prophet.

She writes that,
“I think when my children have their daughters, every Jew will do this for their daughter.�

Yes, the Chassidim and B’nai Torah are going to be following this Gender Rebbe of the Jewish week. It’s just a few years away.

All stories on “gender� are given to the likes of Debra Nussbaum Cohen or her ilk. There is no other type of “gender� story, there is no other perspective. Just like a story on what wonderful things the UJA did this week.

The Jewish Weeks of this country are dedicated to this monolithic viewpoint, and so will only assign only those types of writers. This is the viewpoint of the UJA, who despite the denunciation of too many men at the tippy top, is composed of a work force that is 75% women, and rising. It is very much like a Westchester chapter of N.O.W. And those few men there are well aware of their paucity of numbers, and the resentment towards them. Hence they will not be a dissenting voice, but rather consistently capitulate to the Jewish Feminists without fail, and willingly enforce this slant in their newspapers on “gender” issues.

The NY Post credits the Forward with its story on Page Six that in the new Fantastic Four Movie, there is no mention of “The Thing’s” Jewish roots.

I could not find this story on the Post’s or Forward’s online edition, so if you want to see it, spend a quarter.

I guess the Forward got tired of only Heeb Magazine getting on page 6, so good for them!

As for the Thing declining to reveal his yid background on the Lower East Side, The Forward was quoted as quipping, “The more things change, the more things stay the same.”

Esther K is obviously a nice girl. Go to her personal site! You can just tell.

But Esther - you also work for Jewlicious - and they are a bit name calling and a bit crass. Actually, they curse and personally insult people in the most vulgar terms constantly in their comments sections.

You are certainly not vulgar, Esther - but others at the site you associate with and lend your name to are. Very vulgar.

It is easier for them, Esther. They aren’t all as interested in the level of engagement with community life as you. They therefore don’t all have the same visibilty.

One of them is crass so frequently and consistently that even HE doesn’t feel comfortable identifying himself.

Who can blame him! I wouldn’t either. Would you, Esther?

What does he lose from spewing these words?

But it isn’t appropriate for you, Esther. You are obviously a nice girl going somewhere positive, somewhere good.

Don’t associate your name with such behavior, Esther.

Don’t you think you owe it to yourself and the Jewish community to do better?

In a press release today, Jewlicious.com announced a strategic alliance with a German print media company prominent in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s. Der Sturmer will now run content provided by Jewlicious on the power and menace of the Ultra-Orthodox in Israeli life.

Jewlicious writer The Middle explained that “although we reach vastly different audiences, the content produced by Jewlicious on this and other topics is desired by both markets.�

Dismissing detractors who assert that Jewlicious was unable to secure any significant partners in the Jewish media world, The Middle explained that “today, Der Sturmer is a Zionist organ, dedicated to encouraging its Russian immigrants to consider moving to Israel from Germany, so anyone who questions our relationship is obviously anti-Semitic and a c–t. And that’s not hot, cool or sexy.â€?

Jewlicious staff have repeatedly expressed shock that Michael Steinhardt and Steven Spielberg have declined to fund their “100% kosher� site while other, less overtly Zionist organizations and publications targeting a younger Jewish market have enjoyed such contributions.

Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.