Jewbiquitous

The Best Intermarriage Discussion Ever

2008-12-16T18:05:00.003-05:00

Between Ta-Nehisi Coates and Jeffrey Goldberg. It makes me really sorry I didn't go to a socialist Zionist summer camp.

Vote on November 4!

2008-10-31T12:26:00.004-04:00

So, last time, we remarked on "hit a Jew" day.

Now, Vermont gives us "don't vote for a Jew" day - but not because the state itself has an institutional animus to the Chosen People.

Evidently, some very disturbed local political candidate in Vermont decided to put a bizarre, super-literal-reading-of-Leviticus screed in her "candidate section" of the state's election information publication. Thanks to the First Amendment, which allows people to say the most horrific and stupid things without government interference, the Vermont state government has to print it, since she is a candidate.

Special, "I'm not an anti-Semite" excuse? DNA testing shows that she's part Jewish. Because that, if true, is so compelling an excuse.

Hit a What Day?

2008-10-23T14:17:00.003-04:00

Annie and I had this conversation in response to the fact that suburban St. Louis students are being punished for having a "hit a Jew" day:

ME: Next week: Jews hit back. Better hope they're the ACLU lawsuit kind, and not the King David Hotel kind.

ANNIE: No, they just organize a defense the next day in towns all over Persia. The king sealed it.

ME: That is why we must get a beautiful Jewess to seduce the King of Missouri.

ANNIE: Not it.

Any volunteers?

For the record, Melanie Blunt, first lady of Missouri, makes a relatively plausible Vashti (super-anti-Feminist interpretation found here).

Hatin' on the Persians

2008-07-26T08:13:00.002-04:00

So, if you hadn't heard, Mattel, which makes Barbie dolls, is suing MGA, which makes Bratz dolls, which appear to be the children of Barbie and angels which caused god to flood the earth. The reason for the suit is that one of the principals of MGA worked for Mattel, and Mattel alleges that he came up with the half-space alien strumpet dolls on Mattel's time.

A verdict recently came out in favor of Mattel, but it's in doubt now, because one of the jurors was making ethnic slurs about Isaac Larian, the Jewish CEO of MGA.

The twist: I think Juror #8 was an Ashkenazi Jew, because the ethnic slurs were not about Mr. Larian's Jewishness, but the fact that he's an Iranian. I, sadly, occasionally hear the sorts of things that Juror #8 said from New York Ashkenazim, who evidently think that being Jewish is not exclusive enough of a club, or maybe to pretend that rich European Jews don't also have their fair share of swindlers and jerks. I don't really hear it outside the Judaic bubble, as Jewish/Iranian is more of a dichotomy there, and Iranians are (also sadly) associated with something a little more sinister than dishonest business practices.

I was of the opinion that no small part of being a modern Jew was getting over all the ethnic insensitivity that we ourselves have suffered in no small measure, but hey, maybe it was only to become middle-class so we can be even more prejudiced than our non-Jewish neighbors when it comes to the Middle East.

Darkness

2008-07-21T10:50:00.002-04:00

Saw The Dark Knight yesterday. Had trouble sleeping afterwards.

At the risk of sounding like someone's preachy rabbi, my take-away from the film was that the Joker is a catastrophe familiar to the Jewish people - no matter what you do, he comes with force, with malevolence, and destroys the virtuous just as easily as the condemned.

The only solution, it seems, is to accept that your virtue does not guarantee success, but that failure does not exempt you from the dictates of your conscience.

Od Yishama...

2008-07-15T14:14:00.002-04:00

Not sure if anyone reads this anymore, but this seemed as good a place as any to post the news: CJ and I are engaged.

I guess that this is my equivalent of shouting it from the rooftops.

Well, the World is Certainly Safer for Doughnuts NOW...

2008-05-28T09:36:00.003-04:00

I do not go out of my way to read Michelle Malkin. Nor do I go out of my way to find news about hasty meal entrepreneur and talk show host Rachael Ray.

Yet somehow, here they are, bleeding through into my reading today:

What happened was that Ms. Ray, a spokeswoman for fried starch purveyor Dunkin' Donuts, wore a garment that looked a lot to me like a houndstooth scarf in a television spot. Ms. Malkin evidently sees all objects with a pattern similar to houndstooth as resembling a keffiyeh (example), which in her eyes is per se a statement of solidarity with the intifada. So, obviously, it has to go off the air.

To clarify, there are three issues here:

1) Not all checked scarves are keffiyehs.

2) Wearing a keffiyeh doesn't mean that you're in tight with the Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade or Hamas.

3) Wearing a keffiyeh-looking object should not be enough to get you booted from American television.

The third should go without saying; we're a plural society here, and it really should be OK to wear a clothing item that millions of people, some of them Palestinian radicals, wear. Most agree that general clothing styles, by themselves, do not mean you subscribe to certain beliefs; e.g. this Ronald Reagan shirt does not mean you support violent Communist revolution. Sometimes a patterned scarf is a patterned scarf.

Furthermore, even if Ms. Ray has a copy of Walt & Mearsheimer's The Israel Lobby in her purse in that photo, as Americans we should be able to intelligently disagree about Middle Eastern policy without resort to blackballing doughnut commercials. Can we remember this again? Doughnuts. And coffee. Not policy.

Days Late, Dollar Short

2008-04-03T08:00:00.001-04:00

I guess I'm too late for an "April Fool's" post, but I did just see this banner ad on a popular news website:Looks like the life insurance industry is courting my dollar these days.

A milder post on politics

2008-03-12T10:11:00.003-04:00

CNN's exit polls are hilarious. I just don't get what people are thinking.

For example, in the exit poll of last night's Mississippi Democratic primary, 41% of the electorate indicated that they would not be satisfied if Senator Clinton won the nomination. However, of that 41%, 13% still voted for Senator Clinton.

And only 7% of the voters said they were "dissatisfied with both choices." So some people in Mississippi don't want Senator Clinton , but voted for her anyway. Don't ask me why.

Or, on the other side of the coin, of the voters who thought Senator Clinton was "the most qualified to be commander in chief" in the Missouri exit poll, 13% up and voted for Senator Obama. I guess, if you parse "commander in chief" restrictively enough (one might even say "Bill Clintonian"), you could make a case that Sen. Obama is likely better at all the non-commander-in-chiefy parts of the Presidency, and that would outweigh his deficiency. But that's really debatable.

In Arizona, Rep. Ron Paul's support, by division based on church attendance, was largest among people who never go to church (11% of those voters). In Texas, it was among people who go to church monthly (7% of those voters). Rep. Paul is skeptical about evolution and personally anti-abortion. So maybe Texas's votes make more sense. Or not. Hard to tell with a candidate who has an independent group putting his name on a blimp.

Let's Throw Some More Bombs - Higher Education Edition

2008-03-11T18:12:00.003-04:00

That's right, it's time for another Controversial Opinion™ by your favorite Jewbiquitous contrarian.

Recently, I got into a fight on the internet about higher education. I rarely say clearly what I mean in a comment or forum post, and this was no exception. I strode into an argument about whether Connecticut should offer in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, and my argument was:

U. Conn. sucks.

Well, it wasn't that simplistic. But I did make the mistake of injecting one policy argument into another; I really didn't care about immigration, per se; just college prices.

Instead of rehashing the crap I said the first time, let me rephrase it:

The two most prestigious schools in the United States, Harvard and Yale, are, if not exactly free for the kind of illegal immigrant students who tug on our heartstrings (i.e., poor-ish children of laborers), so significantly tuition-reduced so that they are state-school affordable (Yale, as a bonus, happens to be in Connecticut). There is then a short list of other schools (depending on where you are, ten to thirty) for whom, like Harvard and Yale, the names also open up doors and it doesn't matter what they cost, the debt is worth it; check your local labor market for which these are, although Chicago, Stanford, and U.C. Berkeley are probably always there.

There are then a whole bunch of schools that are, while somewhat selective, somewhat known as "good," but basically offer nothing more than an expensive credentialling service. This would be where U. Conn. falls in.

I come from this from the law school angle (which IS a credentialling service), where the top 10% of every law school can hope to snag a plum job, but outside of that top 10%, if it's not Harvard, Yale, Chicago, or (insert most famous local school), anything lower means a hard slog for jobs. The roughly 190 law schools in the United States hire law professors almost exclusively from Harvard, Yale, and Chicago (with a little Penn and Stanford thrown in), all of whom have done prior judicial clerkships and published, so it's not really like there's a huge difference in the education or scholarship of law professors between NYU and NYLS.

The only real difference, as far as I can tell, is school selectiveness as a measure of overall talent; NYU can get, generally, the more intelligent and more ambitious students. But if you're not one of the "elite of the elite," the fact that I tested modestly better than a CUNY student on the LSAT (and got into a better school as a result) is not a reason to hire me if the other person did better in law school, and legal employers know this.

I can't imagine that other sophisticated employers don't know this; therefore, I would posit that, unless you know you can get into the top-scoring group of students at your university, you should reduce your "class" (and price!) of university until you can expect to be an honors student, unless you can get into a name which no one will care what your class rank is. As such, all colleges that are not in the small clique around Harvard are overpriced to the extent that they cost more than vocational schools or community colleges and deliver the same benefits to their students.

This, of course, does not apply to academics. But for the "bachelor's degree and then on to the cube farm unrelated to my degree" track that is so much of middle-class higher education, it's just not worth it.

* * *

Honestly, I think the mindset creating the University of Richmond vs. Fordham vs. Pomona vs. Adelphi vs. Hofstra vs. University of Memphis gradations make college applicant teens (and their parents) waaaay too crazy and give an unrealistic view of what most of the thousands of colleges in America offer. And it drives the prices up for everyone.

As for illegal immigrants, that's a story for another day. I basically picked on them to be better economic consumers because they don't have a choice and I can't force the rest of stupid America, which is jerk of me. So ignore that part. College prices are too high, and it's because we like to pretend that our moderately smart teens are worth paying $20,000 a year more than our nominally smart teens, despite the lack of gradations in opportunity for both.

The Fad Is Ruined

2008-02-27T10:07:00.002-05:00

Someday, I will write a post about the Jewish community and Obama. My Google Reader runneth over with starred stories from this, that, and the other as to whether the Illinois Senator is "good for the Jews," "good for Israel," or vice versa (or, my favorite, the New York Jewish Week story as to why those questions are irrelevant).

This is, however, not that post.

Instead, I report that a friend of mine, in a post about lesbians, has revealed to me that the Wall Street Journal has already reported on the LOLcat craze, making it totally uncool.

Therefore, I risk significant levels of uncoolness if I try to one-up the LOLJews website, which, at least according to my repeated hitting of "refresh," only has three pictures.

Must-Read

2008-01-17T09:57:00.001-05:00

Regardless of your opinion of Caitlin Flanagan, her article in the current Atlantic Monthly about Katie Couric is a must-read.

The Hasmoneans, and Us

2007-12-04T10:18:00.000-05:00

I, too, read the Slate piece by Christopher Hitchens, remembering as I did that this is a man who professionally hated on Mother Theresa for a while and just published a book titled God is Not Great. And I actually liked it, although the Sherbs tells me that Mr. Hitchens's history is a tad reductionist and simplistic.

Hanukkah should be a time of a little philosophical soul-searching for more liberal Jews, because Hitchens's piece builds on a fundamental truth of Hanukkah: we're celebrating the butt-kicking of one society because our religious fanatics weren't comfortable with it. Sure, there's a forced assimilation component to the Hellenic side, as the closest they got to religious tolerance in those days was "we'll let you worship your gods if you also worship ours," but, to a great extent, this was a war to define us as a particularly religious nation.

I'll still be lighting the candles, because, even though I don't like the Hasmoneans and I'm a little suspicious of holidays based on the Apocrypha, I don't have a good enough theological reason not to and I like fried food something fierce. But I take Hanukkah to, in part, warn us of what happens when we get all we want religiously - we can then become big jerks to one another. It seems that the UK chief rabbinate and some Israeli rabbis are in conflict over conversions - mostly because some people seem to want to speak for all Judaism despite getting their position through having support in only a small minority. Just because we've had some big wins doesn't mean we get to be jerks. That's my lesson for the season.

Hannukah: Festival of Backwardsness?

2007-12-04T03:50:00.000-05:00

I came upon this slate article indirectly from a frequent, yet anonymous commenter of this blog (sorry if it annoys you that I'm blogging on this, but it was just too extreme to let slip, and I'm in finals and therefore easily distracted). All I have to say is whoa. That is quite a strongly worded piece directed against Hannukah. Ah the joys of journalism and the internet, where one does not need to cite sources or hold a reasonable respect for the subject of one's inquiry (though in all fairness there are plenty of academics who do the same thing but with bigger words). I'm not saying the history is not generally correct. Though my historical knowledge of this subject comes from a freshman class I mostly slept through, I believe the general facts is somewhere in the reasonable range of the truth (obviously feel free to correct me). But the tone is, well lets just say, not really compatible with our societies generally p.c. pluralism.

Before I continue I should note that the article was written by Christopher Hitchens, and he is definitely not a man who shies away from controversy to say the least. But irregardless, it does raise some interesting questions for us..

If I can guess correctly, our readers are probably thinking one (or many many) of these opinions (hows that for precision?):
1. This is (insert adjective) anti-semitism
2. This is (insert adjective) secularism primarily, but also anti-semitic
2b. This is secularism, but walks a fine line between secularism and anti-semitism
2c. This is secularism, not anti-semitism
3. This is correct, but seriously this author must have (insert non-sexist noun)
4. other (who is Zie to tell me what to think?)

Crazy right? Personally, I think there are ways to say something like this that seek to elucidate the facts and not merely anger a community. History can be told from an unlimited number of viewpoints with an unlimited number of agendas. Almost every year I come upon numerous articles that discuss Christmas as a commercial holiday lacking any actual religious meaning or historical fact. However, I do not know if I have ever read someone saying that Jesus represented backwards ideas and therefore to celebrate his birth is to deny enlightened thinking. hmm..

when did we stop appreciating a good metaphor?? Literalists make me seriously angry! Really takes some of the beauty out of life eh? Try reading Shakespeare literally... really doesn't make much sense. end of digression.

So, what do y'all think?

Grad School and God

2007-12-01T15:19:00.000-05:00

It's been a really long time since I have written. Granted, Harley may be the only person to have noticed, as I am new and only sometimes interesting... but here goes Jewbiquitous, you new method of procrastination!

This may seem paradoxical, but the vast majority of divinity school students could not care less about God. Granted, this is not a true religious institution but an institution of religion. My university prides itself as being uber academic and empirical evidence means everything and conviction close to nil. Perhaps as it should be -- I know if it were the other way around I'd high tail it back to the east coast. However, would it kill us to show phenomenology (briefly, studying religion from the side of or inside religion) a little respect? Why do the Godless chose to study the exact theologies and communities they largely reject? Because its freaking fascinating.

However, I have been wise in choosing philosophy. I can talk about God in a million different theological or rational frameworks and accept or destroy God at will based upon my superhero like rational skills. (hah!) In my line of work, God is a concept just like subjectivity or beauty or thought itself. I can say Kant's idea of God is flawed (this is a what if, I'd rather not argue this point) in the context of Kierkegaard's philosophy/theology (hat tip nature boy) and it really does not have to mean anything but a grade to me.

But eventually philosophy has to mean something. Ideas matter. Or at least I like to tell myself that. You can turn on the evening news and hear watered down Enlightenment ideas being spewed that may seem passe in philosophic circles but are still in full swing in the actual social world. So in that case, don't we have a responsibility to show a little respect? If i say God is bullshit based upon a logical proof or scientific fact (uh Dawkins) and would it really matter to you?

There is always a theological answer that trumps reason, if the individual cares more about theology than science. I don't know how familiar y'all are with Christian theology but Schleiermacher might have had one thing correct- our feelings and intuitions matter and they do not always line up with reason. But then he went and ruined everything by saying Christianity is absolute (and it almost always is... unless you are reading Maimo or something). My new grad school friend who I will call truth man, would just say that feelings are a result of complex actions and chemicals in the brain. Well yes. But that is a really boring way of experiencing the world. If I am just a series of complex chemical interactions, they why would any of this matter at all. Because it feels like it matters. And I truly believe life is mostly about getting through it without causing too much harm to anyone, especially ourselves. But I digress, the point is... sometimes its just nice to have a little love with my morning helping of rational proofs.

So if some of you out there believe in God and want to write books about God's love... I will be interested to read that. Perhaps. But in the end, I'm probably just another critic.

I do not Love Frank

2007-11-16T10:30:00.000-05:00

I just finished Loving Frank while on a plane yesterday. Although I really enjoyed Devil in the White City I was pretty ambivalent about reading Loving Frank.

Both are about Chicago, at least sort of, both feature architects and artists, and both have some historical fiction. Seems like my cup of tea, right? WRONG.

You see, I actually have an issue with books. It's one that I'm a little embarassed about, because I feel like it makes me seem immature, naive, and unworldly. And here it is: I actually can't get that into books whose protagonists do things that I don't approve of. I couldn't feel sorry for Frank and Mamah because they were both adulterers. Their spouses weren't abusive, cared for them, and their lives were nice. They both selfishly left home and family in the pursuit of "happiness."

I just can't get behind that. I couldn't feel bad for them, no matter the censure they recieved because a) they were adulters and fairly irresponsible, leaving others to clean up their mess at home, and b) they KNEW what would happen. Frank was well-known and Mamah well-respected in their community. It should have come as no surprise that they'd be shunned and censured. Does it suck? Yes. But it isn't shocking.

I did manage to cry at the end anyway (I won't tell you why, it'll ruin the book--although Pedant believes, and I sort of agree, that you can't ruin historically-based books because presumably the story is common knowledge), but I didn't love the book. There were some interesting feminist and philosophical ideas (Mamah Cheney was apparently friends with Ellen Key) but it mostly felt like a whiny "the world is against us, boo-hoo."

In conclusion, my book club sucks at picking books, we totally should have read Peony in Love.

"Bagel"?

2007-11-16T09:57:00.000-05:00

I just had a "bagel sandwich" from Cosi. The bagel, if you could call it that, was a puffier version of the flatbread, squared off at the edges, and with a hole in the middle.

I now know what other ethnic groups felt when white people stole their music. I thought I felt this when I discovered that some companies sell blueberry bagels, but I really feel it now.

If you can't eat creamed pickled herring on it unselfconsciously, it's not really a bagel.

Super Bug

2007-11-15T23:42:00.001-05:00

Sigh. I'm embarrassed. It's been a while, a really long while, since I've blogged. I didn't go on hiatus on purpose, but I should admit that Jewbiquitous was never labor of love for me. Since the Queen of the World died, it's been more of a chore to blog than a pleasure, mostly because it feels like an echo of her, being the spawn of a comment she once made to Annie and me.

In the beginning of August, Annie mentioned that she was leaving out workplace and that she was planning on quiting the blogosphere. I have not hidden that I miss her here and that I'm thrilled when she decides to post, regardless. I left our office a couple weeks ago and I haven't had it in me for various reasons to sit down at the computer and write. Maybe it's the process of being in transition (to another job, to grad school, maybe to a whole new state!) or maybe I was never built for blogging in the first place. But I do think things and discuss things and I miss writing them down. So I'm not gone, so much as more periodic, now that my full time job involves writing applications and going on lengthy interviews.

On a related note, part of the reason I've been away is that I had a super bug: an antibiotic-resistant sinus infection that knocked me on my ass for the last month. Two rounds of antibiotics and several trips to the doctor later, I am finally healthy. A few observations (I know how y'all love lists):

1) Despite the name, a "super bug" does not give you super powers. It just super sucks.

2) Every time I write "antibiotic," I'm tempted to put a dash in there (anti-biotic).

3) Upon canceling and interview and worrying to my dad, in an email, that the interviewers would think I'm a wuss, he responded, ""If they think you're a wussy, have them call me. I don't raise wussies. Or geraniums, for that matter."

4) Marion Barry is absurd.

... And we're back.

Shabbos With Squanto, Et Al.

2007-11-15T10:29:00.000-05:00

The Kvetcher dug up Harley's post from a year ago about Thanksgiving and is not happy with it. The whole controversy is whether or not those Jews who take a more stringent view of Torah and halakhic requirements should celebrate the U.S. Federal Holiday every third Thursday in November, or whether one should avoid it like those temple prostitutes that buzzkill Rashi warned us about. The Kvetcher thinks it's a silly controversy, born of those who just like to pick fights with the secular world.

I'm actually inclined to agree, for the most part. You never hear any controversy about whether or not it's okay to celebrate such traditional American burnt meat festivals like the Fourth of July or Memorial Day, even though you tend to get a lot more Christian god-references in the music on those days. We can take this to the ad absurdum: President's Day Sales - does taking advantage of the discount bring on the wrath of the Divine?

I think there's a reasonable line to be drawn between being a holy people apart and being complete wet blankets about the universe, and looking down on Thanksgiving is the wrong side of the line.

Plus, I love stuffing.

Two Quick Things:

2007-11-14T15:25:00.000-05:00

1) I just read How We are Hungry by Dave Eggers, and have come to realize that, despite What is the What, I don't really like Dave Eggers. Or short stories.

2) I may be going public soon with my identity. Most of the three remaining readers know who I am already, but it will certainly make it more difficult for me to stalk ex-boyfriends using this name (NB: kidding! I'll still stalk them.)

Also, as a side note, unrelated to either of those points, I learned how to use a paper bindery-thingy today. And let me say, that I am soooo coool.

A Mishmash of different things

2007-10-31T09:42:00.001-04:00

1. I read Away with my book club. I liked it, and so did the roommate. No one else did. It was my first book club meeting, which was interesting. A varied group of people, and just like in class, there are some people who are smarter or more intellectual than others, and you can't tell the others to shut up because they are adding nothing to the discussion. I really liked the girl who was leading the discussion, though. If I remember correctly, she's a teacher.

At any rate, you should all read it and let me know what you think.

2. A little while ago, Esther Kustanowitz emailed me (and her whole list) a blog posting by XGH about how Esther missed the point in dating. Or she isn't dating correctly. I found his piece to be very interesting (no, seriously) and it made me think about a couple things:

A. We're told from childhood that we're "special" and "unique" then we grow up, are thrown into a new environment (often a city, it's easier to date and get married in a small town/small pool) and told to find someone like us. It's a pretty large order, especially for those who don't have a tight-knit community and the automatic filters of Orthodoxy. It can seem so overwhelming, so people HAVE to define boundaries, (like I want someone who covers her hair, but wears pants) if only to be able to start selecting.

B. We're also told that we shouldn't "settle," but also that "no one is perfect" and that "people can change" but "you shouldn't try to change someone." So what are we supposed to do? Pick someone whom you like the way that they are, but maybe they could be better, but they have to be pretty good already, or else you're worried that you could "do better." It is all a bit confusing. When people are "too picky" I think it comes from a place of not knowing HOW to choose, and making, sometimes arbitrary decisions.

As a corollary to that: while the characteristics that XGH lists (looks, money, family, etc) shouldn't be the only ways that you measure a possible mate, neither should you ignore them. For instance, I have an ex whose family was totally crazy. It wasn't just an issue of when we saw them, but also the example it set for him in terms of interpersonal relationships. He was really nice most of the time, but didn't get that when you're angry, you can't make personal attacks against someone you love. Well, you can, but you shouldn't. It made it impossible for me to be around him anytime that he was frustrated or angry, because I'd be worried that he'd take it out on me. I found myself avoiding conflict, etc, etc. Same sort of deal with looks. If you aren't attracted to someone, you just aren't. That is fine. You shouldn't canonize some ideal of beauty and look for that, but if you happen to have a thing for redheads (as I used to), or smaller women, or whatever, that isn't a bad thing. You have to build a life with someone, and that includes an intimate life. If you aren't attracted to them, your relationship, no matter how spiritual it may be, is not complete*.

C. I believe that if you are unmarried up to the age of 30, that it is possible that it just didn't click for you (I also believe that, on some level, everyone has the love life that they want, but we can talk about that later), but after 30 maybe you should start looking at yourself. The longer you stay single, the more set in your ways you get. That said, I'd rather be single at 35 than compromise and marry some guy just for the sake of getting married. XGH and I might disagree on whether or not marriage is an end in an of itself. I don't want to be married for the sake of being married, I want to find the one for whom my soul calls out (NB: CJ and I have been dating for a year, this week), and I don't think that, that is unreasonable.

*This assumes that you are attracted to other people. If you're asexual, go for it. Also, you don't need to be THE MOST attracted to your mate, but there has to be something.

At Last My Love, At Last

2007-10-25T23:22:00.000-04:00

I went to Chicago. It was beautiful. The weather was warm, but not hot, clear, and gorgeous.

I had two goals:
1) Take public transportation
2) Eat at Ken's

Sadly, I accomplished neither of those things. I was on a business trip, so I either walked or took cabs (but one of my co-workers, who lived in Chi-town gave me the grand tour from the cab), and I ate a lot of salad, but no Ken's. Stupid co-workers who eat stupid treif.

At any rate, I did walk around a lot. I had a drink at the top of the Hancock building (95th floor) and saw all of Chicago laid out for me in lights. I drank some local beer (and non-local tequila) and heard a great deal about aforementioned co-worker's love life. I also spent a lot of time in hotels, in meetings, and in a business suit (which makes me look like an old lady). This, however, was not Chicago's fault.

I called CJ from my hotel room to let him know that I loved the city. His response: "That's nice. You can love it from New York." LAME.

Don't worry though, I am still gathering a group of friends who will all move to Chicago together in a few years. I actually have 10 people who've committed. We'll see how well it works out, seeing as I can't even get anyone to move to the East side.

Oh well. I can dream.

Do you know what happens when a Jew is struck by lightning? The same thing that happens to everything else.

2007-10-23T21:03:00.000-04:00

Well, Well, take a look at this: http://www.nypost.com/seven/10232007/gossip/pagesix/pagesix.htm
In short, Halle Berry made an anti-Semitic comment that was poorly edited out on the Tonight Show. Now, I certainly don’t have any problem with the comment itself. Guess what everyone, the secret is out. Some Jews have big noses. As far as negative stereotypes go, there are far worse things to be saddled with. Off the top of my head I’m having trouble remembering them, but I’m sure I’ll think of some as soon as I’m done brushing my teeth of the blood of Christian babies.

No, the real concern here is that Halle’s Berry’s poor decision making has now hemorrhaged out of her ability to pick a good script and into her sense of humor. After Monster’s Ball it has indeed been a slippery slope for Miss Berry; Gothika, Die Another Day, Catwoman, Robots and Perfect Strangers. FACT: If you added up all the dust collected on copies of these films at your local blockbuster you could give the entire state of Texas asthma. Thank goodness for all that good country air.

Oh, and she’s also the weakest link in the X-Men movies.

At least she had enough common sense to ask Leno to cut the bit. What’s kind of damning in all this is her excuse:

"What happened was I was backstage before the show and I have three girls who are Jewish who work for me. We were going through pictures to see which ones looked silly, and one of my Jewish friends said [of the big-nose picture], 'That could be your Jewish cousin!' And I guess it was fresh in my mind, and it just came out of my mouth. But I didn't mean to offend anybody. I didn't. I didn't mean any harm."

Don’t you see? It’s ok, because the joke wasn’t Halle’s at all. It was one of her Jewish friends/assistants. Despite this tired old equation of having “x friend=not prejudicial against x”, I honestly don’t believe that Halle Berry is an anti-Semite. Unlike some other celebrities I could name (but I won’t because it would be apocalyptic…o), Halle Berry doesn’t strike me as having an agenda of any kind. She’s just an actress with a steadily declining career that, in an effort to promote her sub-Paul Haggis Oscar bait, slipped up. I don’t think people should be banned from making off-color comments in service of comedy, especially if they’re satirical. What irks me is that it’s such a staggeringly unfunny bit. Facial photo morphs? Really? Didn’t we all get over this when Goo came out in the early 90’s. I’m not offended as a Jew, I’m offended as a funny person. And believe me, I’m funny. My black friend told me so.

thank me later

2007-10-19T12:15:00.000-04:00

First of all, if you have never heard of Dinosaur Comics click this now. Seriously. So hilarious especially for the dorkier set (not to make any judgments on our readership, but I think I am changing lives). I thank my buddy science guy for the revelation. Heres a taste:

PS. alternately, this could just be another thing you all already love, or harley has already posted on, and I could as always just be behind the curve. :)

Smoke, Mirrors, and Sexy Witches

2007-10-18T11:57:00.000-04:00

Stop telling me what to do! Seriously, STOP TELLING ME WHAT TO DO!!!

"Sexy should be the way you define it--free from peer pressure and the influence of a junk culture." How about free from the endless commentary from all sides about how we should and shouldn't dress ON HALLOWEEN, for hell's sake.

Last year (wow, really, a whole year ago), Annie blogged on Jews and Halloween and how we love it (or don't, actually, love it at all). I'm astounded that I didn't blog about Prettyboy's infamous Halloween party or the costuming I witnessed there.

For the record, there was more skin there than at market day in a nudist camp. There was even a young woman in assless chaps. 'Nuff said.

I went as a gangster, with a cigar and fedora and suspenders. Perhaps my lack of decolletage (and did I mention the assless chaps?) is why Prettyboy claims I dress like a nun (I don't, for the record, dress like a nun). At the time, I thought to myself: I can be sexy without being a sexy nurse or cat or witch. I can even wear pants and be sexy! Plus, it's Halloween! Who cares if I'm sexy (well, um, I did. Prettyboy and I had just started casually dating and I'll admit to wanting to be the hottest chick there. I didn't anticipate assless chaps, but I think I pulled off my own version of hot. My own, much more covered, not purposefully attempting to make that statement, version of hot.)

Yet now, upon reading Debra Condren's Huffpost post (redundant), all I want to do is slap on a pair of chaps and go marching through Times Square. Look at my ass! It's Halloween! Woo-hoo!

I probably won't, there are appropriate times to remove one's clothing and inappropriate times (no comment from the peanut gallery on this one, please). Likewise, I define how and where I want to be sexy (the answers: in any way I damn well choose and anywhere).

I think that's the point.

Sexy isn't about what you wear, so all this endless chattering about clothed and unclothed is all distraction from the real issue: the commodification and objectification of women's sexuality. I know, big words, I'm sorry, but it's true. These commentators aren't talking about clothing, they're talking about women. And in only addressing one aspect of a women (her body parts, her outfit), they're removing her humanity.

Do the endless commentators on women's dress realize that they're compounding the problem by objectifying us? Condren claims that women are disempowering themselves by wearing revealing clothing on Halloween; that the true way to be empowered is to cover up. Yawn. Wasn't there just a book written on the subject?

Once again, it's all how men perceive us:

Single and looking? Consider the type of partner you want to attract when you're
contemplating how you'll present yourself to the world, even for just one night.
Remember: the brainy, fully-clothed-yet-somehow-mesmerizing-librarian look attracts a totally different animal than does the Playboy Bunny who has nothing substantive to say or do. Think about it. Step out as Tina Tequila and you'll attract a like-minded buffoon.

Does no one else see the irony of arguing feminist values from "dress like that and no nice man will want you"?

Think about the issue in terms of discussions about hip hop lyrics. Talking heads mouth off endlessly on their crassness and violence, without addressing the race and class politics underlying their creation. It's a way of pretending to talk about the issues without actually addressing the root of the problems. It's about perception of propriety by the powerful and not about the content of the words and the actions (the language of the music and the wearing of provocative clothing).

So if the issue is that women are only valuing themselves insofar as they attract men, then let's address that. If the issue is that women are objectified and sexualized far too young, let's address that. But let's throw out the smoke and mirrors bullshit that is the discussion of sexy Halloween costumes.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go try on my sexy mental patient outfit.

Jews Are Not Perfectionists, According to Some

2007-10-11T16:10:00.000-04:00

If you haven't heard about it already, politically reactionary demagogue Ann Coulter was on Donny Deutch's talk show last night, and she told him that his being Jewish was okay and all, but he'd be "perfected" if he let Jesus into his heart.

I'm not too troubled by this. Any moderately (small-c) conservative version of the liturgy keeps the Aleinu and similar statements that, eventually, the rest of the world is going to wake up and say, like the Rowan Atkinson sketch about hell, that the Jews are right. So if other people are harboring the hope in their hearts that I will suddenly accept the Bahá’u’lláh into my heart, as long as it's not a major part of my interaction with those people, I do not care.

My favorite response is from New York Post editorialist (and son of the author of a famous neoconservative article on African-American/Jewish relations) John Podhoretz, who said:

If I could be assured that conversion to Christianity would instantly cause me
to lose 80 lbs., give me infinite patience when my daughters wake me up at 5 in
the morning, allow me to read 100 pages an hour with total recall, feel complete
indifference when some @$%&^ cuts me off in traffic, grow my hair back on
the top of my head and make it disappear from my ears, and keep me from checking
my Amazon ranking when I have a book out, I would seriously consider it.

I second that.

I wish to close with a piece of trivia. While discussing Ms. Coulter's inability to avoid proseltyzing cable talk show hosts, Emily2 and I got into a tangential discussion about the legal concept of "perfecting" secured debts under American law, which allows the person with the perfected debt of getting first proceeds out of the house, car, stock, etc. when it's sold at foreclosure. I set forth that perfecting people has been illegal in the U.S. since the Thirteenth Amendment, to which Emily2 pointed out that most references to Jews being perfected as chattels come from antiquity, with the most famous example ending in a whole mess o' plagues.

Just FYI.

Know Your Jewish Community: Simchat Torah, a little late

2007-10-11T10:19:00.000-04:00

This was my first year spending Simchat Torah on Manhattan's Upper West Side. I knew that it was a scene, so, last year, fresh off an awful breakup, I avoided it.

That was a good choice.

Unfortunately, this year, CJ and I were not so wise. We decided to stay, made plans for meals (I hosted two, he hosted one, and we were invited out a lot), and accepted invitations to parties. In general I don't love chag* parties, I don't find them to be in the spirit of the holiday, and I don't really enjoy drinking all that much. It's fine, I'll do it socially, but it isn't really how I like to spend my time.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that I had an awful time. Instead of recapping, in gross detail, everything that went wrong, I'll give you a few highlights:

1. Simchat Torah night: no women dancing. At one point it was me, my friend, and three little girls. Their mom actually thanked us for ensuring that there was SOME dancing in the women's section.

2. All of the people who came to services to socialize, not to pray. I couldn't even hear the Torah reading on Simchat Torah morning.

3. The people who got falling down drunk, and then were loud and obnoxious in the streets/hallways, causing me to hear the remark from a doorman that "I hate this holiday, it's worse every year."

4. Anyone who thinks that it is ok to get drunk and make out at a chag party is incorrect. Make out at home. Ew.

5. The lack of spirituality. I came to dance, and to pray, and it seemed like I was the only one.

Long story short, next year I'm going back to Washington Heights.

*Chag is the Hebrew word for holiday.

Great Scotts!

2007-10-04T15:18:00.000-04:00

The Scottish have way better senses of humor than we:

(Hat tip: Queerty via Dan Savage, who is unquestionably NSFW.)

Bragging Rights

2007-10-03T14:45:00.001-04:00

Not to brag, but my friends are cooler than yours.

That's right, a close personal friend of mine is part of the documentary team that created Up at Lou's-the Fulton Fish Market Documentary (but in the interest of maintaining my secret identity, I won't tell you whom-- hint: it's not Ed Koch).

Do you like fish? Do you like documentary film-making? Then go see the most amazing documentary about the Fulton Fish Market EVER TO BE MADE!!!!

Friday, October 5, at the Millenium Theatre (66 E. 4st St) at 8pm.

Breast Cancer Awareness Month (Or How My Day Couldn't Get Worse)

2007-10-02T17:06:00.000-04:00

Today is offically the second day of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

Ladies, please eat your greens and walk briskly. Also, don't forget your monthly exams.

And read all the articles to thoroughly freak yourself out about risk factors.

Most of all, educate yourselves.

Meanwhile, I'm going to spend the rest of the month under a rock.

i just kant...

2007-10-02T12:21:00.000-04:00

Blah. Sorry for the lack of participation (and general rabble rousing usually found in my contributions), but grad school is totally nuts. I have recently started divinity school, and let me just tell you... the fun here is definitely dead. Plus Christian theologians totally love to prove why Judaism is lame... and there's nothing that makes me more "Jew-ish" than reading old white men say how Jesus is the only way to go, and how Jews are lacking in the morality department. Throw in a lot of Kant and you can witness my crankiness. Plus evidently everyone in the MA program already knows the topic of their PhD dissertation!! what!

Alas, I would be lying if I said I wasnt having fun. Not actual fun, but student fun. You know, reading until your eyes hurt, debating for enjoyment, dropping names of dead philosophers... totally a good time. Email me if you want to talk about free will or your noumenal self! wooo!

On another note, the trees here are lovely and cars slow to ensure they do not hit me as i cross the road. People hold doors when my arms are full and my building actually has a perimeter. Life is nice, if not lonely without the "family."

... and i promise to write more (often and interestingly) when i actually have internet! woo

(and tent dresses are totally dumb and look bad on everyone... harley is 99% always right :) )

Another Letter

2007-10-02T10:38:00.000-04:00

Dear Security and Assorted Men at My Building,

I'm really flattered that you take the time out of your busy schedule to hit on me every morning. When I wake up in the morning, I think to myself, "All I really want today is to feel awkwardly uncomfortable upon entering my place of work. Please, please let someone much too old for me compliment my outfit!"

But seriously, please stop. I don't mean to be bitchy, which is why I've always been sweet in the past. It's not that I don't think you're very nice guys: I do, really. But please stop with the compliments and the telling me to 'smile.' If I'm not beaming when I walk past you on my lunch break, keep in mind that we're not out at a bar, but, in fact, at our place of business. I could have something business-related on my mind (I don't) or just be really really cranky that I'm at work (I am). And, by the way, that's not flirtatious, it's creepy and annoying.

Also, it's very nice that you like my outfit or think that I'm looking "goooooooood" today. I appreciate the sentiment, really, but it makes me very self-conscious. In fact, it makes me not want to walk through those lobby doors even more than the fact that I'm going to work makes me not walk through those those doors. Who would have even thought that was possible? So, in the interest of my comfort, please keep that one to yourself.

Couldn't we just be cordial? How about a "Hello, how are you this morning"/"Fine, thank you" perfunctory relationship. That way, I can happily ignore it when you stare at my chest and you can go about your business of harassing delivery men.

Please? Or do I have to bring Prettyboy in here and get all kung fu on your ass?

Thank you.

Cordially,
Harley

P.S. Could you give the hot UPS guy my number?

Dear Women of New York,

2007-09-27T14:39:00.000-04:00

Stop wearing tent dresses! They are unflattering and unattractive! Just STOP! Don't look at me all saucily like that. You know what I'm talking about and, secretly, you agree.

I know, I know. It's hard. When Fashion says it's right, it's so hard to say it's wrong. I feel your pain. I know the siren call of fashions that will never suit my body, of formal shorts and skinny jeans. I feel your pain, I do.

But here's a hint: if it makes the model look preggers, it's not going to look good on you.

See how her eyes are downcast, as if to say, "Oh no! What was I thinking when I put on this dress? You can't even tell I have a figure under here. I could be smuggling the Hindenburg under here."

It's time to stand up for yourselves, women of New York. Stand up for yourselves and shout from the rooftops: I refuse to wear something that someone could mistake for a muu-muu! I refuse to walk around in what may be misconstrued as camping equipment! I refuse to be mistaken for a giant toilet roll cover!

Thank you for your time. Damn the man; save the Empire [waist].

XOXO,

Harley

On Linguistic Irony

2007-09-27T11:36:00.000-04:00

About a week ago, Eboo Patel, the creator of the Interfaith Youth Core, wrote a brief article for The Washington Post and Newsweek's On Faith project: On Muslim Antisemitism. In short, the piece discusses the voices in Islam condemning Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.

The title of the article caused my brain juices to percolate (always dangerous and slightly messy): Muslim Anti-Semitism. It seemed to me that that phrase was linguistically ironic, at the very least, considering that the world's Muslim population are, by and large,* Semites themselves.

The use of "Anti-Semitism" as "Anti-Jewish," which was the term's original, if etiologically confusing, meaning, obscured the meaning of "Semite": a label that covers Jews and Arabs alike.

To clarify, a Semite is "A person belonging to the race of mankind which includes most of the peoples mentioned in Gen. x. as descended from Shem son of Noah, as the Hebrews, Arabs, Assyrians, and Aramæans. Also, a person speaking a Semitic language as his native tongue." (Thanks, OED)

So, technically, to be anti-Arab is also to be anti-Semitic.

The whole thing reminded me of the conversation that I had with the Afghani cab driver about the nature of modern anti-Semitism.

All of which just made me realize how the forms may appear to shift, but, functionally remain the same. Which is really to say: think carefully about those unfair epitaphs you before hurling them at others.

*I'm using a broad definition of Semitism extrapolated from the reach of Semitic languages in the late ancient period. Using that matrix, the Middle East and Asia Minor are both considered geographically Semitic areas, where Semitic languages are still in use. This area is also the geographic area where counties with a Muslim majority are concentrated. It should be noted, for the purposes of intellectual honesty, that by numbers, the highest populations of Muslims live in South and East Asia (which also includes Iran and Afghanastan), but constitute a minority, proportionately, in those regions.

A Revamped "On Atheist," AKA: Whatever Happened to Jared Leto?

2007-09-24T16:33:00.000-04:00

You’re buzzing along and suddenly, one day, you look up and realize that you don’t recognize this place. Your parents have moved from their three bedroom house in Rockville to a condo in Potomac (zip code makes all the difference). Your siblings have paired off and procreated.

You’re living in Brooklyn and you’ve blinked and suddenly all your friends are moving away to pursue PhDs and law degrees and you realize that no one lives here anymore. You look in your closet and you realize that you own more shoes than Satan and not a single pair of them are anti-establishment Doc Martens. In fact, the closest you get to anti-establishment are a pair of Rocket Dogs you picked up on sale at DSW at the mall. It suddenly dawns on you that, without you recognizing the change, you are an adult, in your mid (not early) twenties, and you’re going to have to start getting serious about shit.

So you research PhD programs because you’ve always wanted to be a historian and doing programming at a non-profit is just not cutting it; you begin to discuss the M-word (it rhymes with carriage) with your significant other because it seems de rigueur for people in your age bracket; and you finally trash your well-worn collection of middle school papers that you’ve been schlepping from apartment to apartment for the last half decade, ever since your parents determined to sell the family house and move into the aforementioned condo.

Feeling all alone and finally reflecting on the myriad of insecurities that seem to have piled up on your doorstep while you were out at one of those Bryant Park summer movies drinking red wine from a plastic cup, you turn to the one thing that always helped center you in times of trouble (or in times of ennui): God. But something strange has happened here, too. Like your parents, like your friends, like your stability, God has packed up and moved away. You were so certain about God, but you realize that while you were learning other things, you unlearned God.

What do you do now? Is God like the PhD programs and apartment cleaning? Do you go out and try to recapture God, to reconnect with God like you reconnected with all of those random friends from high school whom you barely remember and with whom you now have to have a series of those vapid “remember when” conversations? Are you going to have “remember when” conversations with God?

What does the new, improved, grown up version of yourself do?

You hear all the time about people finding God, but rarely about them losing God. When you declare yourself an atheist, you proclaim that there is no God, but no one talks about the pain of that loss, a pain more deeply felt because it also entails losing those whom you’d consigned to heaven, now no longer extant. It’s the second loss of your mother, whose death was the impetus for your intractable belief in a higher power in the first place. And how do you respond to that loneliness, that loss, without the structures of the religion that had always been there to embrace and comfort you, that had provided a context for your relationship with God, that had given words to your still, silent pleas back when you didn’t have the words yet to ask the right questions or describe what you needed.

Does losing God mean losing religion? If you no longer have God, can you still benefit from the forms and rituals that religion provides? Paralleling your realization about the end of your childhood, once you realize that God is gone, can you retain the benefits that you felt when still in the innocence of youth?

I don’t know the answer to that. I do know that I continue to observe Shabbas, in my way, and to follow the rituals, to attend a shul that allows me to be myself religiously and politically, and to engage with Jews across the spectrum of observance and faith. I figure that, if there’s a God to be found, I’ll be in the right place to find God. And if not, then I’ll just be in the right place for me.

As for Jared Leto, I’m sure he’s out there, somewhere, along with other expunged remnants of my adolescence.

and we're back...

2007-09-24T16:28:00.000-04:00

Occasionally, I forget to blog for a few days, then I get embarrassed that I've not blogged in several days and, confronted with the onus of "catching up," I illogically continue not to blog. It's like when you've forgotten to call your grandma for a couple weeks and, stupidly, discontinue calling her out of fear and embarrassment, thereby making the original sin far worse.

So, um, sorry! Hi, guys! I'm still here.

I Know Some People Who Have Some Repenting To Do

2007-09-21T11:02:00.000-04:00

Besides myself of course. I have a lot of trouble with repentance, but that's not really the issue here.

1. Whoever it is that is trashing the bathroom at my new office: It is so absurd. On my first day of work I noticed the printed signs in every bathroom stall that encouraged employees to wash their hands and not leave a mess. This seemed totally absurd to me, until I noticed that despite TWICE daily cleanings, the bathroom is disgusting by 4pm. Once I walked in to see that someone had taken paper towels and strewn them all around and in a toilet.Why? There is plenty of toilet paper.

2. The inventor of the bagel: I've gained 10 lbs this past year, and it is in large part due to the delicious nature of bagels.

3. Whoever thought it was a good idea to keep office buildings freezing: It is wasteful, uncomfortable, and bad for the environment. What happened to 60 degrees?

4. Google: I have many issues with Google this year. Their refusal to not record searches/ say that they'll never turn them over to the government for one. But my most recent issue is with Google presentations. Google has made its name by providing simple services with many nifty features. Presentations doesn't even come close to PowerPoint (as much as I hate it), you can't build charts, or graphs, or really even images, and forget importing anything over 2mb. Google, way to raise my hopes and then dash them.

5. High Heels: They are awful. Expensive, uncomfortable, and cause lasting damage. Why again are they necessary in a business environment?

The Law's the Law - But Should It Be?

2007-09-19T09:54:00.001-04:00

Yesterday, the District of Columbia did not get the right to vote, and the Maryland Court of Appeals (which is the supreme court in Maryland) stated that the law of Maryland, as currently constituted, does not allow for same-sex marriage.

In both of these cases, the naysayers fell back on a position that was, basically, "what you've proposed sounds good, but that's not what the law says." This, I think, opens a fascinating question for Judaism as well, especially for those of us who do not want our religion to be like the Amish, wearing exclusively buttonless outfits and shunning most advances made after the Sixteenth Century.

We, of course, have The Law, which is divine (even if divinely inspired and not divinely written) but also speaks to a tribal early iron age people who can't just clone all the red heifers they need. When the law "says" something, assuming that we are not going to be tied into the most unchanging of dogma, how do we know when the law is able to change according to the time, and when something is supposed to be a principle for the ages?

Absit Invidia*

2007-09-11T10:39:00.000-04:00

It feels wrong to let today go by without saying anything about the anniversary of September 11th. It also seems unlikely that I can say anything that hasn't already been said, and probably more eloquently.

I will say this: it's hard to think about that day, now, without also thinking about the war it spawned. And it's hard to think about that war and to look at the fallen soldiers, on either side, without seeing the faces of my friends. I would by lying if I said that I knew how the hell to get out of Iraq in any way that makes sense and opining about what should or shouldn't have been makes no sense at this stage.

I thought to look to history for guidance, but so many mitigating factors shape the course of a war, that it's nearly impossible to draw any worthwhile lessons. Historians speak of wars won and lost, but ultimately that only affects who dictates the terms of peace until the next war.

And so I feel irrevocably sad for all those lives lost in the towers and also for the lives lost in response. I pray, in my own way, that reason will triumph over idiocy, in all its many forms, on all sides of this war. And when I say "war," I want to be clear that I'm speaking globally.

As I said when the Queen of the World died, the only lesson you can take from a catastrophe of this magnitude is to work tirelessly to make the lives of those we love a little better, a little happier, because we will all be here together for so short a time. That seems relatively doable, right? Maybe we could also try to solve world hunger and poverty and end ignorance, too, but I don't like to get ahead of myself.

And if that sounds like contrived sentiment, I apologize.

*Absit Invidia, Latin, "Let ill will be absent"

Hypocrisy

2007-09-06T10:28:00.001-04:00

I really don't like defending politicians who do scummy things, but every time a (usually Republican) politician gets caught in a sex scandal, you get dozens of variants of this rant, including something like this sentence:

"There's nothing worse than a self righteous, moralizing hypocrite. "

Can we all agree that there are plenty of things worse than self righteous hypocrites?

People with scary ideologies who are completely consistent are probably worse. As are amoral people who seek only temporal power and authority.

Let me just throw out some world leaders whom we all can agree were not so good people (a list chosen to create minimal tangential controversy):

Idi Amin
Papa Doc Duvalier
Rafael Trujillo
Ferdinand Marcos

I don't think that any of these people, who collectively have caused huge amounts of human misery, could be accurately assessed as being self-righteous, moralizing hypocrites. To the extent that they said one thing and did another, it was because they personally felt exempt from the rules, or they were just disposed to lie to keep themselves in power.

Furthermore, hypocrisy is a cop-out accusation. It allows the accuser to duck the fact that he likely agrees with either what is said or what is done.

For example, let's say I take a vocal public position against random mass murder of people in restaurants. Then, for reasons unknown, I go to a local restaurant with a machine gun and shoot a lot of people. I am a hypocrite. But there's nothing wrong in my going around and saying that shooting people is bad, whether or not I shoot people. It's my shooting a bunch of people that is morally problematic.

But let's say, instead, that I belong to a religious sect that doesn't believe in reading newspapers. You catch me reading a newspaper. Reading a newspaper is not a horrible thing. There's nothing wrong with doing it, even if I'm not living up to my standards. It's just that my belief is silly and always was. It's, in some respects, intellectually bizarre to fault people for not living up to a moral code you find stupid and pointless.

Wedding Crashers

2007-09-04T11:20:00.000-04:00

I just finished reading this article in The Washington Post about a Groomzilla. Now, before I spew some venom, let me clarify a few points:

1) I enjoy attending other people's weddings. I've now had the pleasure of seeing several of my friends marry and the honor of being in their wedding parties. Few moments are more beautiful than watching people who love each other pledge their fealty forever. (Crap, I can hear TR retching from here. Sorry, honey)

2) I am not against weddings as an institution, so long as the people getting married put as much thought in choosing the institution of marriage as they do in the color of their bouquet.

3) I am not cantankerous.

Alright, so putting aside the rampant gender generalizations sewn throughout the article ("Mike's the woman, because he does the cooking, cleaning and decorating" at home, says Atta.), and even pausing to concede that the stress of planning large events are enough to put anyone on edge, can we all join in a giant, impassioned "WTF?!?!?!?!" at the self-involved absurdity of this man's approach to planning his nuptials? Several months later they're "aggrieved" because they had to pour their own salad dressing and get their own drinks?!?

Maybe some perspective is due. Hey, Mike and Rita, you two found the person with whom you want to spend the rest of your life. Who cares if there was a wilted rose in one of the centerpieces?

Sigh.

On a related note, at my nephew's birthday party, I was discussing the exorbitant price of weddings with my brother's dad (my mom's first husband), his stepson, and another guest. The woman was bemoaning the price of her daughters' weddings, saying that the cheapest wedding you could have these days costs at least $20,000.

Me: Well, not quite. The cheapest wedding is two people and a judge.
Stepson (with whom I'm quite close): I'm surprised. I would imagine you to be a fairy princess wedding type.
Me: I'm actually quite low maintenance.
Brother's Dad: Well, then, you're the first woman ever to be low maintenance.
Me: [Stunned silence.]

Did I mention, "Sigh."?

Any takers?

Happy Birthday, Baby!

2007-09-04T10:02:00.000-04:00

My nephew is so totally cuter than this baby

Last Saturday, September 1st, my family celebrated nephew's first birthday. My sister-in-law (SIL) is Korean, so we had a traditional Korean first birthday celebration, called a Tol. SIL's family came and loaded their home with Korean pears, apples, strawberries, pineapple, rice cake, small rice cake dumplings, and lots of sweets.

They dressed my nephew in the birthday clothes: pink jogori (jacket) with puple paji (pants), striped durumagi (long jacket), a blue vest printed with a gold pattern, a jonbok (long blue vest) with a gold pattern, and a hongsadae (traditional belt) over it. On his head he wore a bokgun (black hat with a long tail), on his toes he wore tarae-busun (traditional socks), and hanging off his belt was a yumnang (traditional round shaped pouch). He looked ridiculously cute.

So he stood (with aid from my brother and SIL) in front of the table and he had to choose one of the items placed in front of him, the choice of which would presage what he will one day become. According to Lifeinkorea.com, he was supposed to choose from

-bow and arrow: the child will become a warrior
-needle and thread: the child will live long
-jujube: the child will have many descendants
-book, pencil, or related items: the child will become a successful scholar
-rice or rice cake: the child will become rich (some resources say choosing a rice cake means the child is not smart)
-ruler, needle, scissors: the child will be talented with his/her
hands
-knife: the child will be a good cook

My brother and SIL modified the list a bit (instead of a knife, they had a plastic fork, for example, and they had a $20 bill for prosperity). My nephew chose the fork, the pen, and then a book. His grandma (my SIL's mother) kept pushing the $20 bill at him, to encourage him to be prosperous. He picked up the sticky rice cakes and put them back 15 times before finally tasting one.

Mmmm... delicious rice cakes

Then we all ate ridiculous amounts of food. And then we went to a Korean restaurant and ate even more food. I happen to love Korean food, but my father is perhaps the most unadventurous eater in the history of ever. Here's a man who, at fifty-eight, has never chewed gum or eaten an olive. On Saturday, he not only tried sushi for the first time, but also willingly ate bulgogi and fish cake. He was pleasantly surprised; needless to say, we kept the kimchi and other chili-spiced food away from him (he thinks white bread is spicey, I'm not sure if he would survive wasabi).

By the end of the day, we were stuffed and exhausted, but my nephew, as always with that bubbly, happy, delightful child, offered us all smiles and giggles.

Happy Birthday, Nephew!

Jews Love: Bioengineered Food

2007-08-31T09:39:00.000-04:00

This is a really important (albeit seriously slanted) documentary on the state of bioengineered food. For my own part, the discussion of agricultural/organic patents is incredibly disturbing, and lends an entirely different moral imperative to the organic/local farming idea. I'm not sure this is the entire doc, but you can find out more at The Future of Food.

rollin with the rabbi

2007-08-29T12:13:00.000-04:00

So in a few hours, I will be traveling with Besheret to the motherland to visit with my childhood Rabbi who will be performing our wedding ceremony next summer. Whoa. Is it weird to be nervous about meeting with a woman you have known since Kindergarten and met with weekly through adolescence?

I guess, in a world where same sex marriages are by and large not sanctioned by the state/secular authorities, the only authority we can find for our union is in Reform Judaism (and I'm sure Reconstructionist and some Conservative folks). Plus she will be the first Rabbi with whom my fiance will discuss her conversion. And we seriously don't have time for Besheret to be turned away three times. I'm moving to the Midwest in two weeks! And lets be honest, who really likes riding the commuter rail?

Doing the "Jewish" thing in my life is so much more complicated than someone like my mother who ditched her Italian boyfriends for a "nice Jewish boy" like my dad, and then got married by Rabbi Whoever at the local Young Israel. If one more person asks me if same sex marriage is "legal" in NY, I might just scream. Or pout and shake my fist with purpose! When did the Jewish ritual stop being enough to be legitimate? mmm American pluralism.

An Open Letter: New Kosher Deli

2007-08-28T13:09:00.001-04:00

( I wasn't going to blog, but I couldn't help it, I am STEAMED)

Dear Kosher Deli near my new office,

you suck. You are, on average $2.50 more expensive (per ITEM) than my previous kosher deli. You didn't have whole wheat bread, and you charged me extra for lettuce and tomato on my sandwich... and then DIDN'T PUT THEM ON.

Also, your pickles are kind of gross.

Love,
Annie

When Democracies Go Bad

2007-08-28T10:11:00.000-04:00

Zie and I had a discussion in the comments to her post on language charter schools which I think is really branching out into something very different than the merits of any particular school - that is, basically, if we let democracy choose the method of teaching our children, can we let democracy choose the content?

You can tie this to "Jewish issues" in a number of ways; not only in the curriculum fights regarding the Arabic and Hebrew language schools Zie referred to in her post, but regarding curriculum choices among schools in the Middle East and with creationism and school prayer generally.

In the United States, the First Amendment pretty much bars taking a religious standpoint, but let me posit the following hypothetical:

The appropriate curriculum-deciding body in a school district in Rhode Island, elected and supported by a majority of the people in that area, are significantly dissatisfied with the current state of the federal government. In response, they wish to teach their children a relatively jaundiced view of the federal constitution, with an emphasis on state sovereignty.

Therefore, they vote to only have textbooks which describe Rhode Island's ratification of the Constitution as an act of national extortion by the other twelve colonies and emphasizes the corruption and tyranny of the Lincoln administration during the Civil War. This view will produce citizens highly skeptical of any federal power and wishing to dismantle much of the federal administrative state.

The position taken by this hypothetical Rhode island curriculum-setting body is not objectively true. But, if we assume that it is supported by a majority of the constituents in the jurisdiction, and does not violate the Establishment Clause, should we really object?

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Resigns

2007-08-27T11:49:00.000-04:00

Without a word as to why.

Tax Dollar Semites

2007-08-24T11:28:00.000-04:00

So in honor of my first day of unemployment I have decided to blog! woot! woot!

This morning, while going out for my first bagel and iced soy chai latte of freedom I happened to buy a NY Times. When was the last time I actually read a real paper (e.g., not am NY)? So while sipping my latte and enjoying a p-funk, I noticed this article on the front page. It was obviously a not so subtle hint from the power(s) that be that I have been neglecting my blogosphere responsibilities.

In Broward County Florida, (Ft. Lauderdale area, incidentally about 45 minutes from my parents) an Orthodox Rabbi and his cohorts have started what he claims to be the first English/Hebrew charter school, i.e., free, tax dollar payed for, public school that teaches classes in both English and Hebrew. They are being seriously watched for any mention of religion, which, as anyone who knows a bit of Hebrew may be aware of, is quite hard. Hebrew is littered with sayings that have a literal religious connotation but in everyday speech is used quite secularly. So anyway, evidently while Miami is referred to as "Little Havana," parts of South Florida could also be called "Little Jerusalem." (oops.. wasn't that Vilna back in the day?)

I guess my problem here is that I don't really have too strong of an opinion. And that bothers me. If we were discussing a right wing, bible belt public school that teaches creationism, I would be up in arms. But I think my heeb status is once again making me instinctively side with the Jews. Probably why it took me until Sophomore year in college to have a real opinion on Israel/Palestine (but I'll save that for another day, shall i?)

They say they are trying really hard to teach Hebrew as a language for students whose parents often primarily speak Hebrew. There are TONS (and I mean tons) of charter schools across the country that are dually Spanish and English and I think they are a great idea. They are found most commonly in South Florida, Texas and California and my cousin (heeb like me) is in one. His parents think its important for him to learn a language young. There are tons of studies that show that students who learn dual languages (or more) as a small child will be benefited intellectually etc.

But, I am pretty glad that officials are at least giving them a hard time to ensure the complete lack of religious content. I mean, look at the controversy in NY over the Khalil Gibran International Academy, a charter school in Brooklyn that plans to teach a dual Arabic/English curriculum. The crazies over at the Sun (I had to deal with those reporters in college over numerous political skirmishes, and I feel 100% justified in calling them crazies... or at least always ideologically driven, which is, in my opinion, an awful way to run a newspaper) have painted it as a terrorist training school. Which is ridiculous.

So here is what I make of this- Dual language schools are wonderful (and I wish I had gone to one) and I hope this school survives... if it is just that, a language school. So proceed with caution, and be damn sure to let in any child who wishes to attend. Why does my gut instinct tell me that they sneaking in a few brachas :)

On a last note - in mid/high school my language options were French, Spanish, Italian or German. In this world, besides Spanish, I'd say the next most useful would be Arabic. Can we separate language, religion, culture and politics?

The Great Threat of Birthdays

2007-08-23T16:09:00.000-04:00

According to Slate, the Washington Post Company-owned website that many on Jewbiquitous have come to love, the traditional Latin American fifteenth birthday party has become for some the "go forth and hook up" ritual. Ross Douthat, a somewhat conservative commentator, reads the article and says that:

The same coming-of-age tradition that in an agrarian society segues naturally into marriage and family can, in a more permissive cultural context, function as a license for sexual activitity and unwed motherhood. The same network of extended families, churches, and stay-at-home mothers that sustains a traditional social order can provide a temporary cushion that makes second-generation family breakdown more socially acceptable than it should be.

Which brings me to b'nei mitzvot. Nobody's kidding nobody that a thirteen-year-old boy or a twelve-year-old girl are ready to join the adult Jewish community. In some jurisdictions, they're still not even liable for their own tortious (personal injury causing) conduct. For various reasons, we don't really hear about teen pregnancy in the Jewish community. But that's not the point.

We still have an "out into the world" ritual for people who aren't going out into the world for at least five more years, usually more. Does that make sense?

I love Gene Weingarten

2007-08-21T15:17:00.000-04:00

The following illustration and explanation were created by the hilarious humorist, Gene Weingarten for his Live Discussions on washingtonpost.com:
"As you can plainly see, the line representing Presumptions of Magic has a steadily downward slope of approximately 43 degrees, beginning in the era when hominids attributed all observed phenomena to supernatural causes. These include such things as Thor creating lightning with thunderbolts, dyspepsia being caused by disruption of bodily humors, torrents being attributed to the weeping of Matlalcueitl, the Aztec rain goddess, plus your occasional Cacodaemons, Simulacra, Succubuses and whatnot. EVERYTHING had a mystical explanation. That's because people were fearful, ignorant, and desperate to give meaning to life.

If a philosopher or social scientist were to try to encapsulate a single principle that yoked together the intellectual process of civilazation, it would be a gradual dismantling of presumptions of magic. Brick by brick, century by century, with occasional burps and hiccups, the wall of superstition has been coming down. Science and medicine and political philosophy have been on a relentless march in one direction only -- sometimes slow, sometimes at a gallop, but never reversing course. Never has an empirical scientific discovery been deemed wrong and replaced by a more convincing mystical explanation. ("Holy cow, Dr. Pasteur! I've examined the pancreas of a diabetic dog, and darned if it's NOT an insulin deficiency, but a little evil goblin dwelling inside. And he seems really pissed!") Some magical presumptions have stubbornly persisted waaaay longer than others, but have eventually, inexorably fallen to logic, reason and enlightenment, such as the assumption of the divine right of kings and the entitlement of aristocracy. That one took five millennia, but fall it did.

There remain many unanswered questions about how the world works, how our bodies work, where we came from, and so forth. We're workin' on 'em. When you think about it, though, there is only one fire-from-the-sky booga-booga notion left. But it's a biggie.

So here we are in 2007. And the question we must ask ourselves, as dispassionate truth seekers, is: Which is the most likely place that civilization will find itself in the year 3000? Will it be position A, or position B?" - Gene Weingarten

Monkey is not Kosher

2007-08-20T09:58:00.000-04:00

You know, you have an entire post's worth of links and notes outlined from the weekend, and then someone does something so eminently postworthy that all of that goes out the window.

I am referring, of course, to a New York Sun article about a Liberian woman who ran afoul of customs by trying to smuggle monkey meat into the United States. She claims that the food-grade monkey parts are for some religious purpose, and therefore she should get a free pass.

The Liberian woman's attorney, who happens to be Jewish, is really putting forward the "sacred food" angle.

Now, it could be that, if you asked nicely in advance, Immigration and Customs Enforcement would let you have your religious monkey meat. But it's pretty clear on the website that you can't just bring foreign meat into the United States.

So, my thought for the blog this morning is: how far should exemptions for religious observance go? I know the law on these things, which means that you can't make a public health risk for yourself or refuse to get a social security number, but I don't know how far "it's my religion" should take us in this modern world. And I've been kind of a jerk about religious exemptions on occasion.

More on Noses

2007-08-17T13:15:00.001-04:00

Prettyboy's nose, on a slightly less handsome man's face

Zie mentioned that her nose is the most remarked upon part of her face when people say she doesn't look Jewish (to be fair, she has one of the cutest little button noses in the history of ever, second only to Prettyboy's perfectly rendered nose. Now that I think about it, his nose may be a major motivation for me if I ever come around to considering procreation. Our progeny would be short, but with a perfectly formed nose. Alright, I just freaked myself out a little there. Back to our regularly scheduled, non-parenthetical post.).

I don't have a large nose. I don't have a small nose, but I don't have a large nose. It's not like the 'before' picture in the nose job scene in Space Balls, but it is, emphatically and unquestionably a nose, taking up space (too much?) in the middle of my face. I've always had a bit of a complex about my nose. My mother had a nose job when I was in first grade. She had always hated her nose and I suppose she figured that she was in the hospital so much anyway, they might as well throw in a nose while they were at it.

Years later, I found out that she made my aunt promise that she would get me a nose job if I needed it. Keep in mind here, that my mom was on her deathbed and she made my aunt swear that I would have a nose job if I needed it. I'm not saying that to undermine all the other stuff that I'm sure she was anxious about, but rather to emphasis the source of my nose-neurosis.

This neurosis was compounded by my paternal grandmother. The last time I saw her, I was fifteen and we were shoe shopping for her. We were sitting together and she leaned into me and motioned for me to come closer. She looked deep into my eyes and said, "You are so beautiful. Like a movie star... But you're going to have to do something about that nose, huh?"

So there you have them. My grandmother's last words to me. What a legacy.

And so that's why I so emphatically compliment Zie's nose and why I'm so obsessed with Prettyboy's. They are so perfect and little. No one would ever think to mention to them that they need to do anything to alter them.

On a related note, I've recently come back into contact with my best friend from high school. We were hanging out last weekend and she said, "I have to ask: did you just not notice or were you too embarrassed to say something." And I responded with confusion, "Say something about what?" Apparently she had had a nose job that rather drastically changed her nose. Now that I look at pictures from high school, I recognize it, but I just didn't notice it on her. Both noses fit her perfectly and she's stunning regardless, so I guess I should worry less about mine. It also had never occurred to me that my vocal insecurity about my nose made her feel worse about hers (something else she admitted to me).

When I did a google search on Jewish noses, I came up with the following hits:

A children's book from the German Propaganda Archive.

The historical implications of plastic surgery on "Jewish" noses and this Jewish Encyclopedia entry.

A well written blog post comparing Jewish anti-Semitism to Arab anti-Semitism (we're all Semites).

A hilarious post decrying the trendiness of being Jewish.

And this picture:

For now, I've come to terms with my nose, with Prettyboy's assistance (he calls himself a nose connoisseur and claims that mine is his favorite.) What? I don't need outside reassurance to bolster my morale, but it sure does help from someone with as impeccable a nose as his.

Native Dress: Part 3?

2007-08-17T12:18:00.000-04:00

It happens in every culture, with every stereotype.. its inevitable to see a person and immediately assume their life. We often assume class, race and even sexuality based upon certain stereotypical triggers. I'm not saying that every person sets off in the morning to exhibit as much bias as possible - rather, I think people in this city often go as far as they can to not offend. We define our selves in a million ways - short, sensitive, smart, Latino, queer, Jewish, artist, type A personality, etc., etc. However, our conglomerate identity is tied up in our view of the "other." We define the "other" in their similarities and differences to ourselves.

(note: if interested in philosophical elaborations on the "other," read my boy Levinas, by far my fav Jewish philosopher, even if he is often impossible to read and understand clearly or quickly. I'm sure you'll be hearing more from me on him)

People see my fiance and all they see is that she is Korean, yet she was adopted by a white, Protestant family. Through other adoptions, I have more Asian people in my family and life. Yet when people pass her on the street they expect her to have a history and culture she neither experiences or understands.

I'm always hearing that I "don't look Jewish" because my nose is small, and interestingly enough, my Jewish friends always say my nose is my best feature. Folks often speak Spanish to me on the street because my appearance (hair, body, skin color, clothes) makes them believe I am Latina (often Puerto Rican here, but Cuban in Miami). People see similarities in me that cause them to place me in a context that is familiar to them. I'm sure if I was seen strolling down a street in Norway, the locals there would have a different idea of my heritage/history/ethnicity. Or Israel. Or Africa. Or Missouri.

I may make jokes about how everyone here thinks I'm Latin... but I'm actually damn proud that other folks want to claim me as their own.

To get Jew-y: I get tons of sideways glances when I wear pants etc., to an event for my good friend who is orthodox. And you can bet she gets looks wearing long skirts and shirts in a heat wave, while spending time with my friends. It is all about context, all about how we view ourselves and standards for dress/behavior.

We want to find similarities (guess the Jew on the train) just like we want to pick apart differences... We build communities on shared histories, shared interests, shared humor. I am not saying this could ever end - could humanity really stop categorizing ourselves? I'm not that optimistic, or that I think it should. I won't get all "we are the world" on you but identity is what makes us feel whole, gives us a place in our communities. We thrive on definitions and its in bridging the definitions that we learn anything. We just need to make damn sure we watch who we are damaging in the process -- uh... racial profiling anyone?

Native Dress Redux

2007-08-17T11:48:00.000-04:00

The Pedant's post from this morning reminded me of a thought-process I had on the subway this morning.

I don't dress Jewy (that is, traditionally or with tzneis) and I look Jewish if you know I'm Jewish, but I've as often been asked if I'm Irish (dyed red hair), Russian (I am), Polish (that, too), British (I have no idea), and French (that was in Israel, actually; apparently I have a French Hebrew accent). All of those are nationalities, I realize, and you can be Jewish and those, too, but you get my point (I hope).

This morning, I saw a man in a velvet kippah and I thought to myself: I wonder if he knows I'm Jewish. Not that it matters, but I often think that around people who are wearing overt cultural markers of our shared identity: do they know I'm Jewish, too, and that I've read that tractate of Talmud, and that I went to seminary, and that I share the same rituals with them? Would they consider me part of their community, if I did? I'm Jewish, but I worry they would consider me Jewish and not Jewish, if you know what I mean.

Maybe that's just my insecurity speaking, but it's something I felt deeply in college, where there was a very large, very active, very accepting Orthodox community, if you knew all the right things to say, wear, and do. To say the least, I didn't. I didn't fit there. I could never pass. I had friends who could pass, who successfully integrated themselves into the community, even without the right yichus, but I always felt I stuck out like a sore thumb, the same feeling I got when I attended my high school boyfriend's country club (he was WASPy enough to have a III at the end of his name).

That said, I was in a cab the other day and, after hanging up the phone with Prettyboy (don't worry: I asked the cab driver if he minded if I used my cell phone first, since I know that loud cell phone talking in an enclosed space can be annoying), the cab driver said: "You're Jewish, right?" I kind of froze there for a second, wondering if I should tell the truth or not. Who knew why he was asking. I'm not paranoid, but I'm less than willing to depart with personal information to someone who currently has several tons of steel at his disposal. I'm compulsively honest, though, so I said, "Yeah, why?"

He explained that I spoke just like his ex-girlfriend, who was also Jewish. He's Afghani and we spoke at length about anti-Semitism (of all Semites) and what it would be like to live under a world dominated by the PRC. I then explained, at length, the difference between Chinese, Soviet, and Marxist communism and the historical progression of socialism as a theory of government. Some days, I love living in this city. All right, ever day.

So what's my point? (I find that I ask myself that a lot, recently, but enough about my existential crisis.) I yearn to be part of a community and to be included, but I've made choices that have set me apart from a specific subset of my community. That saddens me, but it's a choice that I embrace because it truly represents who I am and accurately reflects my Judaism, my Jewish (Jewish) identity. I've spoken here before about sacrifices. Sometimes, proudly stating who you are and in what you believe closes doors and that's got to be okay if its honest.

Native Dress

2007-08-17T11:00:00.001-04:00

In the Guardian, I learned that a Nobel Prize-winning native Mayan advocate was almost kicked out of a Cancun hotel for looking "too local."

While there's a lot to be said about ethnic prejudices in Latin America, this blog is not "Mayabiquitous," and in fact, the article got me to thinking about prejudices regarding clothing in our own community. Are we too quick to prejudge other Jews based on how "observant" their clothing is?

Generally, we're not kicking people out of hotels (in the US, anyway), but I get the feeling a lot of assumptions are made, and I'm not just saying that this is only a problem for the more secular/modern Jews.

Hillel was a Democrat

2007-08-16T16:22:00.000-04:00

Rabbi Irwin Kula, President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership in New York and brother to my childhood cantor, posted the following in The Washington Post:

An excerpt:

Imagine if liberals would argue and teach conservative positions and conservatives would argue and teach liberal positions before they fiercely fought for their own truth. Imagine if “pro-life” and “pro-choice”, “anti-war” and “pro-war”, traditionalists and New Agers, secular and religious, blue states and red states, Republicans and Democrats…would commit to really learning and exploring each others views before arguing their own.
At the very least our debates would be far more intelligent and substantive and at best we might even begin to see more clearly a different perspective on reality…maybe even a hint of God’s perspective: “These and These are both the words of the living God.”

Mmmm...I relish the rare opportunity when the intersection of religion and politics does more than make me want to either gag or move to Canada.

Fight of the Long Knives

2007-08-16T16:03:00.000-04:00

In the latest Forward, there's a recounting of a fascinating custody battle: evidently the custodial ex-husband, a recent convert to Judaism, wants to have his twelve-year-old son circumcised now, and the non-custodial ex-wife is against it. The twelve year old's wishes? In dispute.

As a guy Jew, I've never felt that circumcision has had a net negative on me; having not had to learn either the term or the meaning of "smegma" until I started watching Red Dwarf seems to be a net plus, in my opinion. Plus, circumcision reduces the risk of one of the last great dread diseases were I charming and jerk enough to engage in promiscuous unprotected heterosexual intercourse.

Still, this case raises issues. It's somewhat imperious (and not very Jewish-seeming) to just yank kids into the religious fold a year before their bar mitzvah. On the other hand, most complaints against circumcision are so broad that they make Jewish ritual male circumcision seem like the most barbaric thing ever.

The Courage of Their Convictions

2007-08-16T13:50:00.000-04:00

Max Blumenthal, of The Nation, The Huffington Post, and Media Matters fame (and son of Sidney Blumenthal, aide to Bill Clinton in his presidential years), composed the following brief piece at the College Republican National Convention (hat tip: Eli Valley):

Don't Know Much About History: Plea II

2007-08-16T12:07:00.000-04:00

I warned you guys that I'd be periodically reposting this question, so here it goes:

As you may or may not know, I spend a great proportion of my work hours thinking deeply about Jewish history; so much so that it hurts my brain. I've been having lengthy discussions about gaps in knowledge, areas of interest, points of disagreement, and I was wondering if you, the various variegated readers of Jewbiquitous, could help me out with a very unscientific survey.

I have two questions for you:

(1) If you could go back to any period in Jewish history, when would it be?

(2) What gaps are there in your Jewish history knowledge that you wish would be filled?
Feel free to answer however you like, even if you're unsure if it actually responds to either question. I'll be re-posting these periodically, in the hopes of getting responses from new readers.

And a self-serving question: does anyone know of any good, scholarly books written about the history of the Devil (how the idea emerged, how it changed over time, how it was incorporated into religious and cultural traditions)?

Thank you, again! You know, you're my favorite.

For Honesty's Sake

2007-08-16T10:54:00.000-04:00

I realize that you are all anticipating one of my long, thoughtful, intelligent posts on something important and all that I keep posting are little snippets that I find interesting. I will deliver on that content sometime soon, sometime after the seismic shift that is Annie's departure stops rattling me to the core of my being and I can concentrate once more. And also, I have a lot of work to do, now that there's only one of us.

That said, while you wait, look at what Fox has done! That's brilliant. There's no other word for it. Why are you still here reading? Look at what Fox has done!

Passing the metaphysical collection plate

2007-08-14T14:02:00.000-04:00

The Onion: Churchgoer Tips God For Excellent Week

Unused to the collection plate, the notion may seem rather gauche to many Jews, but I find the sentiment behind it to be rather—echoing Harley’s delicious wordchoice—titillating (yup, that would be Mammary Mention #2 for me). I think that there is something profoundly spiritual about having a tangible representation of the blessings in one’s life.

Most people tend to do most of their “God-talk” when they need something or when things aren’t going well. Case in point: I sincerely doubt that Janis Joplin’s famous Mercedes Benz song would have had such staying power if she had been singing about how happy she was that she had actually gotten the luxury items that she wanted.

Now I’m not advocating that synagogues incorporate a collection plate or anything into their services (although synagogue-sponsored luxury vehicles are always welcome and appreciated), but I wonder what spiritual impact might be had from actually stopping once in a while and looking around and saying, “You know what, things are going okay. If that’s Your doing, thanks.” Maybe it would make the world a slightly better place because people would be a little less bitter and unhappy. And you know, even if religion is just a social construct, I’m okay with a construct that encourages me to stop and appreciate the blessings in my life.

Reason #322

2007-08-13T17:34:00.001-04:00

Why I love David Roskies.

A Tremor in the Force

2007-08-13T11:07:00.000-04:00

I wish that the Queen of the World had lived to see this happen.

So this is goodbye...

2007-08-12T20:58:00.000-04:00

I had planned to write some intense piece about how much blogging has meant to me and all of that, but, on this, the eve of my new job, I find that I'm just too jittery to focus on anything but nervousness.

What I do want to say, besides, you know "goodbye, and it's been fun" is that I would like to keep in contact with those bloggers whom I feel are friends. So if we've been emailing, please, keep it up, I'll continue to email from Anniegetyour@gmail.com, even if I won't blog so much.

As I take some time to acclimate to the new job (read: to corporate toolery) I am probably going to take a break from all things blog, both reading and writing, but I hope at some point to come back and comment, and maybe even blog again. CJ has a super-secret, actually anonymous blog (one where he does not call himself CJ) and has asked me to contribute, so I might show up there. And if I ever feel the fire of righteous indignation for some social injustice, which I'm sure I will, POLJ offered to let me guest post, an offer I hope that he intends to keep.

So this is not farewell, but instead lehitraot.

Jews Love: Comedy and Not Chosen

2007-08-12T20:41:00.000-04:00

It's been months since Jewbiquitous has mentioned Not Chosen and it's not because we had a falling out or because we don't still super duper *heart* him (I think I just threw up a little bit in my mouth). Rather, Not Chosen quit his job and went on a four month blogging reprieve while working on his book, the publication of which we've been restlessly anticipating since his absence began.

What's the hold-up? Is there anything we can do to further your progress? Do you need editorial help, NC? Should we bug your publisher, clamoring for an advanced copy of your book?

And just a note on your most recent post, NC. Your uncle, while very prodigious with the advice (and likely with the best intentions), is wrong about a central point, and one that I think speaks most aptly to your work: comedy ("stimulate laughter and entertainment") is a good in and of itself and requires no further justification for it's production. Comedy is good. Surely, if you learned nothing else from the Jews, it's that if all else fails, you can always laugh at yourself. And others. Especially others.

Six Degrees of Stargate

2007-08-12T18:47:00.000-04:00

I am right this very moment watching Stargate on SciFi with my roommate and I recognized the lead actor as the douche from Mannequin without realizing that he is none other than James Spader, an actor I adore as much for his turn in 2002's Secretary (with the dishy Maggie Gyllenhaal, whose brother resembles a friend of mine, rendering all of our interactions fraught with sexual tension because holy crap Jake is such a hottie, a fact we've discussed in this space before, but which always bears repeating), as for his caustic and vaguely heartless shenanigans on Boston Legal.

Upon looking up Mannequin on IMDB, I was surprised to learn that I recognized the name of the actress who played the titular character (ha! "titular"): Kim Cattrall. For real. Kim Cattrall played the mannequin in that very weird 80's movie about a woman trapped in a mannequin's body who falls in love with the socially awkward guy who designs the windows for a large department store. Who thought of that plot and what were they smoking?

Speaking of people whom you imagine must be under the influence: an older (read: my dad's age), male colleague on Friday asked if I aspired to be "Samantha from Sex in the City."

Why would any person in their right mind ask a much younger, female colleague if they aspired to be a notoriously sex-obsessed character from a racy HBO show primarily focused on sex? Because I volunteered to help a friend with his P.R. and Samantha ran a P.R. firm. Basically, I stared at him in disbelief, before stuttering, "No!" and throwing a look at him that I hoped would disintegrate his insides or at least highlight the impertinence of his suggestion.

All of this occurred before he asked if I wanted to share his seat as we watched a demonstration. Now, I don't think he was trying to be inappropriate. I don't even think he realized the extent to which his offers and allusions were uncomfortable for me. And to be honest, I have had these odd interactions with men before: where they seem uncertain what to do with me, their brains seemingly incapable of straddling the image projected to them in media of hot, young women and the reality of one sitting before them.

More probably, it's the false dichotomy established between the hot, young women and their ability to think and act as agents outside of their young hottness: the dichotomy between women as objects and women as agents. Being a woman who is attractive is not mutually exclusive to being a woman who is able to think and act as a human being. It's not "hot or smart," as Beauty and the Geek may suggest. Sometimes, it's hot AND smart (as all the people who write for this website are).

In that moment, in that meeting, I wanted to say: "It's okay, don't worry. I'm a person, you can treat me like one. I won't bite, I swear." Or, more accurately, "Hey, you there, think of me like a guy. Just another guy. Talk to me as if I were not a girl, a fact that clearly makes you uncomfortable and uncertain of how to deal with me."

For ages, I dressed in a way that discouraged such discomfort. Prettyboy still claims that I dress conservatively, but he didn't know me back in the days before I owned shorts or wore sleeveless shirts, when I always, always, always wore layers to obscure my curves, before I even owned jeans. I did not cover myself because of any notions of tzniut, but because I was simultaneously embarrassed by my body and nervous that I would never be taken seriously if I was any more than a walking brain.

Then I got tired of dressing so modestly. Frankly, I got sweaty one summer and invested in a tank top, imperfect arms be damned. As I got more comfortable with my body, I realized that, so long as I was dressed appropriately for the situation, maybe it was okay if I occasionally revealed that I had curves under all these layers. Further down the line, after graduating college, I even bought clothing that emphasized the more pleasant characteristics of my body (i.e., clothing that fit).

What is it that makes us feel so uncomfortable about our bodies? Why do I feel so guilty when someone else feels uncomfortable around me, even when I am doing nothing wrong? When I'm wearing perfectly appropriate attire and behaving in a entirely professional manner. And even if I weren't dressed appropriately, even if I were living in some alternate universe where I was dressed in an entirely inappropriate way for any situation, have I somehow brought strange and unnerving behavior upon myself? Or are people responsible for their responses to a situation: is the onus for an appropriate response on each individual?

In this long, rambling post, what I'm really trying to say is that men have and will respond to me in an openly uncomfortable, awkward, vaguely creepy way, and that nothing I do or have done seems to deter them. I'm not sure they can deter themselves. All of which leads me to wonder: is there any thing I can do, any way I can dress, any magical incantation I can say, to stop these situations from occurring? Given that the answer's probably "No," I think I'll continue to dress and act as I do and just perfect my angry death stare.

What does any of this rambling have to do with Stargate or James Spader? James Spader is awesome and Stargate is an excellent movie.

And now, 10 minutes later, upon re-reading this post, I realize that I sound terribly immodest. But it's worth it to sound like a goober, I guess, if it means that I'm starting a dialogue (or more probably, filling up the time that you would otherwise spend working, making a spreadsheet or something).

Reason #452

2007-08-10T11:16:00.000-04:00

Why I love Jewcy.

My Mom is Hilarious

2007-08-09T20:38:00.000-04:00

Now that my baby brother is off at college, my mom has more time to pursue her own interests. To that end she's started taking classes. She signed up for a Melton Hebrew class, and then looked around to find an Israeli dance class, only to see that they were on the same night.

So what did she do? My mother decided that if she couldn't do Israeli dance, she'd do the next best thing... Country Line Dancing. No joke. Every Thursday night my mom drives to the Lutheran Church near us (there are 4 churches in walking distance of my house. At least.) and does an hour of Country Line Dancing. I went with her this week, and it was a hilarious social experiment.

First of all, the class is almost entirely women, and mostly retirees, or women whose attire shouts "mom." Secondly, one of the two guys is named Larry. Larry must be 70, at least, but he drives to class on his Harley, wears a different Harley t-shirt each time (I am told), and dances like a pro. He shook his hips to the "cha cha slide" in a way that I am entirely sure was meant to be provocative. He's also wiry, tattooed, and utterly charming in that Southern gentleman way.

CJ watch out, I might have a new flirtation...

An Open Letter: Machal/Bnei Akiva

2007-08-09T16:22:00.000-04:00

Dear Machal/Bnei Akiva,

I actually am not sure what your governing organization is, because my only information is gathered off of the backs of teenagers t-shirts.

You see, I was in Washington, DC yesterday (and it was so fricking hot) to see the National Museum of the American Indian. It was pretty lame, but we can talk about that later. As I walked around the Mall I saw 5 or 6 groups of young teenagers (with no discernible supervision!) in yellow t-shirts, carrying signs, and accosting strangers. The t-shirts said something like "help our captured soldiers" on the front, and on the back said "Machal" "Shevet Shvut" and the date. I googled "shevet shvut" and the only thing that came up was Bnei Akiva sites, and that seemed about right so I'll go with that.

At any rate, you may be wondering why I am writing this letter. You see, whomever you are, I think that your behavior in sending out young teenagers to accost strangers in DC, asking them to write their congresspeople to ask for the release of the captured soldiers bothers me for a number of reasons:

1) You are forcing/coercing kids to do this for you. Presumably these kids are on a Summer program, did they sign up for this specifically? It is pretty hot out there, and an unpleasant job. Are their parents aware that this is what their minor children are doing? It seems rather exploitive to me, and even dangerous, giving the heat, lack of supervision, and the fact that you have left small groups of children/teenagers alone in a city.

2) Even if these children are consenting, I have a problem with those who cannot vote lobbying those who can. There are other ways to influence politics, and if they wanted to raise money for a PAC, or hold a consciousness-raising event, fine. But it sits ill with me for them to ask constituents to lobby their representative when those asking are not in a position to do so. They can take none of the "risk," and don't really have to put themselves out there in the same way, so it seems unfair to ask others to do so.

3) I am a Zionist (CJ would say post-Zionist, but we can talk about that later), I am an American, and I am ticked. By lobbying people on the streets of DC, you are helping to spread the belief that Jews vote in America based on Israel. I hate when people do that, and I hate when people think that, that is the case. I would consider this a chillul hashem*, as you are, in fact, hurting other Jews. I have a Jewish friend who wants to work in the government, and he has to answer awkward questions about his allegiance to Israel in interviews. And that is just anecdotal. It is well known that Jews in the intelligence community have to answer many more questions than non-Jews, and why? Why? Because people like you behave in a way that makes Americans think that Jews are first Jews and second Americans, when for many people, that is not the case. We live in America, and I firmly believe that America's foreign policy should not be decided based on what is best for a third party state. I love Israel, I love the land, and I believe that the soldiers should be returned, but I don't think that there is any benefit in lobbying Congress. Lobby the UN, or the states that are giving sanctuary to Hamas and Hezbollah, but not Congress.

I hope that you will read this, and maybe identify yourself as whichever organization, so that I can properly address my complaints.

Sincerely,
Annie

*A chillul hashem is an act that makes Jews look bad, and a crime against G-d.

Fascism of the Mammaries

2007-08-09T13:42:00.000-04:00

http://wcbstv.com/local/local_story_212165519.html

A brief disclaimer:
Ordinarily, I am a big proponent of breastfeeding. It is part of my game plan for the stewardship and care of future Autodidacts. But the idea of not having the option to do so on my own terms incenses me beyond belief.

Last week, New York City health officials announced that formula would no longer be given out for free in city hospitals. This effectively shackles women to their babies and to their homes, reversing years of women’s progress in the workplace. Not every woman has a job that is compatible with the demands that breastfeeding makes on a woman, both physically, emotionally and economically. And it is precisely the women whose jobs make it impossible to breastfeed who rely on free formula.

Furthermore, just because some women DO have jobs that might yield to the demands of breastfeeding does NOT make it okay for them to be forced to do so or judged for not doing so. And the ban sadly ignores situations in which the health and habits of the mother renders the “breast is best” maxim untrue, as in cases of babies born to mothers living with AIDS or various addictions.

I can already hear the choruses of dissent out there, waving the specter of the trans-fat ban and pointing out to democrats like myself that this is a prime example of reaping what one has sown. But it is not. The trans-fat ban was a crucial public-health measure. While the vast majority of diners are free to exercise personal choice as to what and from where they will consume, there is a large population in our city whose choice is usurped by the simple economies of putting food on the table. Why would someone making minimum wage favor a few paltry items of fresh produce when they could have an entire meal for a buck?

It is this latter group of people who are getting creamed by this latest “public health” initiative. Somehow, I don’t think it will make things any better to know that at least that cream is trans-fat-free.

i do what i want: part uno

2007-08-08T10:34:00.000-04:00

yesterday a friend sent me this article about how a new york city council member is trying to ban the word "bitch"... i say "wha?" honestly, i don't even feel like ranting about it because everyone i shared it with did it for me. however, i thought i was doing a dishonesty to my new status as blogger to not share this with you. read this. talk amongst yourselves.

my comments:

first of all, how can you ban a word?? is that first amendment only around for show and for when the government wants to protect the minute men and all those folks protesting outside of abortion clinics?
old (usually white) people don't understand rap and this appears to be yet another racist attempt to squelch something the ruling class doesn't know, understand or appreciate. funny when juxtaposed with this article in am ny today. do first amendment rights end when it bothers some folks "sensibilities."
however, it is a federal offense to scream "fire" in a crowded theater. so language can't be used to incite a riot. but thats context... can a word be all bad? does it matter who says it?
what about ho, dyke, fag, kike*, etc etc... they arent bad enough to make legislation? are women's rights that much more pc than freedom from hate crimes in general?
if they ban "bitch," my sister may just have to learn to call me by my real first name.
you can NOT change culture by banning a word, an action or an experience. you can never really truly ban these things on their own. hello racism for example. you can make it illegal to discriminate against someone based upon the color of their skin, but no legislation can force you to stop being a hater. the only way to end [insert something bad like racism] is to change the system that profits and benefits from said bad thing. sexism and racism can't end by getting rid of words.. you have to change the system. ::fist in the air::
this is totally ridic

politically correct bitch

** bad words used merely to illustrate a point and not meant to cause offense.

Nonsense is the Fruit of Boredom

2007-08-07T14:34:00.000-04:00

Things you don't know about me:

(1) I'm an excellent cook. Tonight, I will make steak and avocado fajitas, rosemary and garlic roasted potatoes, and green bean salad. (Annie is also a superb cook, by the way. I miss you, Annie! I'm bored!!! It's lonely back here, all alone.)

(2) I used to collect rocks as a child. Sometimes the fancy ones, but usually just ones I found on the street. If I'm in an interesting place or see a cool rock, I will still pick it up and put it in my pocket, which accounts for why my enormous bag is very heavy. That and the books.

(3) I am obsessed with vegetables (it frightens Prettyboy, but I usually don't make him partake. And I chew gum after broccoli, so he's not subjected to the smell. Wimp).

(4) I'm an avid g-chatter and a compulsive status-message-changer. I chalk that up to my desire to always be accurate. So, for example, if I'm back from lunch, "Out to Lunch" is no longer accurate (nor is it very clever, but I can't always be perfect, people). Right now it says, "holy crap entertain me I cannot focus on work and I'm slowly losing my mind!" I don't hold to the same grammar rules in status messages that I hold to in other correspondence. Actually, that's inaccurate, I do obsessively check my grammar, even in my status messages, but the impact of the sentence rests in the absence of punctuation (things you did know: I am a nerd).

My status messages are not always a reflection of my current state of being. Sometimes, it's a response to a news item or a wish for something chocolaty or "avocados are nature's mayonnaise."

Periodically, my messages get me into trouble, particularly if I'm alluding to a private conversation and, taken out of context, the statement makes me appear to be (A) a psycho-crazed loony, (B) seriously sexually confused, (C) evil in an unfunny way, or (D) all of the above.

Plus, I have to be even more careful of its contents now that my mom has gmail. She has yet to figure out g-chat, but just give it time.

(Hattip: Nataliedee)

And now you know far more about me than you ever wanted to know. Any questions?

Once More into the Breach

2007-08-07T12:05:00.000-04:00

It's nearly impossible to discuss the Israel/Palestine conflict without everyone getting up in arms. We come into each discussion with so many preconceived notions, so many past hurts, so much baggage that even a discussion between friends can devolve into shouting matches. I spent most of my time at the seminary with my mouth shut as a result, thinking that I could do more good addressing the many other complicated international situations, situations that I could discuss without that sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach that I was somehow pissing off everyone.

This morning, Zie, a long-time Palestinian rights activist, and I had a lengthy discussion about the problem of addressing the issue without sound like an asshole. She and I are in the same ballpark, but I don't always agree with her labels. (I'm not sure "Zionist" is always the right label for those on the more conservative side of the issue nor am I sure if it's always a bad word. I use "conservative" side to denote those traditionally referred to as Pro-Israel. I don't like that distinction, either. So let's call them "right-wing zionists," to clarify their politics.) Regardless of where either of us fall on the issue, we both want to do it justice, so here it goes:

Zie: Is the Israel/Palestine too controversial a subject for the blog?
Harley: It's not too controversial and I would never advise you to step lightly. Just remember to be as respectful and keep the discourse as high as possible. A high level of discourse: no ad hominem attacks, nothing below the belt. Not that you would EVER do that.
Zie: Ok, I get it, but this Abbas meeting is too good to pass up.
Harley: We keep a broad readership because we have different opinions but are always [Ed: “always” being a relative term here, I’ll admit] even. Do it
Zie: Oh and Bush meeting with the "president" of Afghanistan
Harley: Just do it in a way that's informative and not inflammatory (or aim at that-- I usually fall short)
Zie: Ok, I'll do my research. and merely provide a few facts
Harley: you can provide commentary, of course. I don't want you to feel that you can't say whatever the hell you want. You can and should
Zie: But I'll be nice
Harley: That'd be great
Zie: The paper is funny today. One article of settlers being forcefully taken from their homes and right next to it an article on the wall that states the the building of the wall steals 10% of Palestinian land... next to another article saying Olmert is committed to a two state solution, but its "just not time yet." Hmmm. It’s so old news, it’s almost boring; there’s nothing new. I feel like reading Ecclesiastes
Harley: that's why I haven't touched the conflict almost at all
Zie: I noticed
Harley: It's so hard for me not to sound really angry every time I write about it
Zie: Yeah thats going to be a challenge
Harley: And I figured if I was just going to add anger to the discourse, well, that's not really an addition at all
Zie: Yes it is!
Harley: no, if I were doing something active, that would be adding
Zie: Sorry, I don't subscribe the whole "discourse" B.S. Zionists can say they are willing to chat about it, but Palestinians are getting screwed. I agree about action.. but speaking out is action!
Harley: I feel the same way about all human rights issues and all issues period. Speaking out is action, but speaking out when anger undermines your content is just adding venom to the mix and that's not useful, it's polarizing. No one listens
Zie: The world is already polarized.. People just don’t like having their nice lives disturbed. Me included. I think we need to make some noise if we want to be heard. Otherwise, people have no reason to listen. We don’t have to be mean about it, but presenting the facts is one of the strongest forms of opposition
Harley: I agree entirely. Presenting facts in a way that will be heard, even better. I agree that the world is polarized and that we should speak out, loudly, against injustice, but I want to change people's minds, you know? And I know that antagonizing them is not the way to do it. We have an audience with a variety of views, some of which I vehemently disagree with, but I want to rise above the fray and counter anger with calm, even though that sometimes seems impossible and I often fall short of it
Zie: Well, that’s the all time struggle, but I think people hide behind talking about "discourse"
Harley: I'm not hiding behind a discussion of "discourse," but I am tired of all the talk about honesty and straight talking if it's only going to be justification for vitriol; that does nothing for a cause; it just gives people reasons to continue to ignore you
Zie: I understand and I agree that being rude never helps. I am so confused about how to make change. But I know one thing- the seeds of the future have to be clearly represented in our methods today.. anger will only lead us to anger.. violence to violence, you know. But how do you fight guns with stones? I think it comes down to numbers, which comes down to class. Discussion is sooo important, but what’s more important is who you are talking to. Will the other person change their mind or are they dependant on the society/problem/situation?

The Autodidact is here

2007-08-06T23:13:00.001-04:00

The Autodidact has arrived.

Hey there kids, it looks like I'm to be joining this here lil' party.

Harley, I hope you know what you're doing...

Ready for a bit of the old ultraviolence, eh?

Mrs. Autodidact has a First Name

2007-08-06T16:19:00.000-04:00

Unsatisfied with merely existing under the shadow of her better half, Mrs. Autodidact has decided, by the grace of the inimitable Harley, to enter the world of blogging. Therefore, let it be known that henceforth, she shall be referred to as Duchess. Also, she shall speak of herself in the 3rd person, apparently.

Jewish geography and general tidbits:

Duchess studied at the same seminary as Harley (connection to Jewbiquitous--established).

She once lived with a relative of Annie's (two--two Jewbiquitous connections--ah, ah, ah, ah!!!).

She has at times considered herself a poster child for the Conservative movement.

She wrote her college thesis on the dirty things that people do with their Barbies.

For an example of the intersection of these two disciplines, click here (don't worry; it's safe for work).

welcome to me

2007-08-06T11:33:00.000-04:00

yo. I'd like to officially welcome myself! Woot! Woot!

i am Harley's bffae (to basically explain my connection to said blog)... Though we met in (Conservative) seminary, i hail from Reform roots. i've been believer, atheist, agnostic and back again. Mmmm.. wrestling with Gd.. quite the mental/emotional exercise. Throw in a little Marxism and a bit of anarchism and you have a person with quite the ongoing religious and political crisis. word.

[i also hate capital letters and proper sentence structure when not writing egghead papers... so you are forewarned. however, i do love commas and the always useful ellipsis!!]

Soon, oh so soon, I will be a student at a nondenominational divinity school in the Midwest. There I will spend my days studying comparative theology and in whatever time leftover i will be messing around with graphic design, art and planning a fabulous lesbian wedding (!!)

My B'Sheret*, who will be herein called B'Sheret (sorry if there are any homophobes offended by this term, actually i lied, i couldn't care less if you are offended), is a Jew by choice and the coming year will be all about making that official before the wedding.

So with the warning that i am an emotional, cultural, even superstitious Jew, not halakhic, my first Jewish question to throw out there to the open minded: Did Gd, if there is a Gd of course, send her to me in part because she is bringing me back to Judaism? Dude, twenty bucks says we are keeping Shabbos by Pesach!

**B'sheret means soul mate, it can also mean fated.

Bye Bye, Love

2007-08-06T11:21:00.000-04:00

With Annie's impending departure for greener pastures, I've invited some collaborators to Jewbiquitous. Most of them you'll recognize from their various mentions and responses in past posts. They represent a fascinating cross-section of Jewish life, culture, and interest, and I know that their thoughts will add breadth and depth to this blog. As they each write their first post, they'll introduce themselves more completely.

I'll also offer a more complete adieu to Annie when the thought of it doesn't make me all teary and silly-looking.

Don't Know Much About History

2007-08-06T11:08:00.001-04:00

As you may or may not know, I spend a great proportion of my work hours thinking deeply about Jewish history; so much so that it hurts my brain. I've been having lengthy discussions about gaps in knowledge, areas of interest, points of disagreement, and I was wondering if you, the various variegated readers of Jewbiquitous, could help me out with a very unscientific survey.

I have two questions for you:

(1) If you could go back to any period in Jewish history, when would it be?

(2) What gaps are there in your Jewish history knowledge that you wish would be filled?

Feel free to answer however you like, even if you're unsure if it actually responds to either question. I'll be re-posting these periodically, in the hopes of getting responses from new readers.

Thanks, everyone!

Home is Magic

2007-08-06T10:25:00.000-04:00

So I'm at home, in the bosom of my family, for the week between jobs. Basically, it's awesome. As I don't live here regularly, I'm not expected to take part in the regular upkeep of the house (ie painting the garage, or gardening) but only to clean up after myself; something I do on a regular basis.

As a result of this, I have had plenty of time to read, work out, and watch TV. These are the things that I've discovered:

1) Prep by Curtis Sittenfeld is insightful, well-written, but towards the end I just wanted it to be over, as it was agonizing to read (mostly because I remember those awful teen feelings).

2) Throwdown with Bobby Flay might be my new favorite TV show. Not only because of my love for Bobby Flay, but also because it is a charming, and good-natured competition. I watched Bobby lose "competition meatloaf" on the basis of the fact that his wasn't as "comforting" as the other.

3) The JCC gym near me is awesome. No one is ever there, there are TVs eternally set to Law and Order, and I am the youngest person by 20 years. Magic.

4) I am no longer MTV's target audience.

That is basically all. Now it is time for me to go try on some bridesmaid dresses. *sigh*

Sick and Sickened

2007-08-03T13:36:00.000-04:00

I was out sick for a week with a virus that made me want to pull a Max Cohen and put a drill through my frontal lobe (am I the only one who thinks of Pi imagery when I'm feeling really under the weather? Does that indicate some severe mental issues on my part?). Yet, I didn't feel truly nauseated until I read Norman Lamm's response to Noah Feldman's New York Times article in the Foward (lots of possessives there, sorry-- the Feldman piece was in the Times, Lamm's response was in the Forward).

We've been over this issue again and again. You all know both how I feel about in-marriage and how I feel about the absurdity of our attitudes towards exogamy. We've discussed at length how I think that our attitude toward out-marriage and patrilineal descent (and by "our," I'm referring to the more traditional strains of Judaism, who don't recognize P-descent) alienates Jews and shrinks our community unnecessarily, how I think that it instills bigoted attitudes, and reinforces a tribalism that's unhealthy for anyone who lives in a global community.

I don't care if it's halakha or if it's biblical; it's not an argument to which I'll concede; laws codified several hundred years ago (not to mention those that come from a text written when selling your daughters was legal and considered normal) don't hold moral suasion to me, now.

Norman Lamm says that it makes him weep that Noah Feldman has undergone "self-imposed alienation" due to his "weakness of the flesh"? He asks:

For Heaven’s sake, do you prefer that religion — any religion — deal with any
thing but that which is important in life? Is this the Judaism you want? One
that will make you feel warm and fuzzy and cuddly, one that will make
grandiloquent pronouncements and issue pretty pieties — anything but what is
really an “important life decision”?

I think that Noah may wish for a Judaism that doesn't enshrine bigotry as tradition, that provides his wife with the opportunity to have a Jewish household or to exist in a Jewish world, that treats her like a human being, even if she chooses not to convert. Who wants to convert into a religion that will only have anything to do with you on the condition that you convert; that only values you as a wife and mother if you convert; that looks beyond the fact that your children attend shul and that your husband engages in Jewish life because you chose not to convert? That may not be the intent, Jews do value non-Jews, but the effect is to devalue Feldman's wife as a person, even before she was his wife.

And the argument that a major value of Orthodox and Conservative Jewry is in-marriage and so that justifies their attitudes is specious, to me. Maybe it's time to question a "value" that "forces" the community to treat a human being like a sack of air or that denies membership to a valued scholar because of whom he marries.

I think Noah may wish for a Judaism that has moved beyond the mindset that Judaism can only survive if we fend off assimilation. I know I do.

I know that outside influences change and shape Judaism, but I refuse to see those changes as dilution. I refuse to look back fondly on shtetl life, a ghettoization we were forced to live under for hundreds of years, and see it as an optimal way to live my religion. The Judaism that exists today is new and different: different from that of a Jewish nation in ancient Israel and Judea, different from that which thrived in kahalim across Europe, different from the pockets of competing traditions that peopled the Lower East Side at the turn of the century.

We spend so much time being afraid of losing ourselves, we spend so much time focusing on what we had, that we no longer look to the richness of what we could have.

I realize that what I say means very little. As a liberal, atheist, non-halakhic Jew, I might as well be speaking gibberish. Change comes from within and, like Noah, I've put myself without by the nature of my views and my choices. But when people like me opt out because they no longer see Judaism as a tenable choice, no longer see the community as one with which they can struggle, what does that say about Judaism?

I attended the (Conservative) seminary because I was fascinated with the history of Judaism and its texts. After thousands of years, we have so much to offer the outside world, so much wisdom, so much ritual, so many intricacies. Since when is halakha more important than humanity? Where's my Judaism? I would hate to accede to The Rooster, especially because I know how much he'd enjoy it and I'd hate to give him the satisfaction, but Jews like Norman, who'd cut off his nose to spite his face, all in the name of law, make it so difficult. Law may be all we have, but when it forces us to act inhumanely, we have to look closely at our values and wonder if the great, often liberal (for their time) rabbis were alive today, would they approve or our exclusivist, reactionary take on the religion they molded?

I hope not.

An Open Letter: Cabot Cheese

2007-08-03T09:55:00.000-04:00

Dear Cabot Cheese,

I'm not sure how to say this, but, I love you. You have replaced Tillamook in my affections as the best kosher cheese. I discovered you a few summers ago when I was working on a farm that hosted my local 4-H fair. You donated a large number of single-serving cheeses, and I was hungry, I figured that there was no chance of a heksher*, but I checked, just to be sure. Lo, and behold, the tablet K.
It was like magic. Tasty, tasty magic. Yes, so I know that some people don't think that tablet K is an acceptable heksher, but a heksher plus the fact that cheese manufactured in America (meaning only cow milk unless specifically indicated otherwise) is good enough for me.

But Cabot, not only are you kosher, a qualification which Tillamook shares, but you also are hekshered in a number of varieties. While I can only enjoy Tillamook's yellow cheddar, you have many different options. Reduced fat, both 50 and 75%, reduced fat Jalapeno, horseradish, Harpoon IPA, and many more. I cannot tell you how much this means to me. Good cheese options! Reduced fat options! This is magic.

Cabot, I love you. Please never forsake me.

Love,
Annie

*A heksher is a symbol that certifies that a product was created under the supervision of a Rabbi, and is kosher according to his authority

This is Adorable

2007-08-02T12:26:00.000-04:00

Courtesy of the Videologist, this couple's first dance was the one from Dirty Dancing. I think that this might be the cutest thing I've ever seen.

Bad Day Again

2007-08-02T09:42:00.000-04:00

So today is my penultimate day at my job, and it is already sucking. Why? Because:

1) It took a million years to get to work, and in the meantime I was stuck in a sweaty, sweaty environment. So much for looking nice for my date tonight.

2) A bird pooped on me as I exited the bus. No joke. Actual bird poop, on me. And then I had to walk a couple blocks before I could do anything about it.

3) I am exhausted, so I decided to get coffee (unusual for me), and the guy was out of skim milk. Now I am drinking coffee that I don't really want, and it's fattening. Awesome.

4) I couldn't figure out what I wanted to wear this morning, and the roommate (she is my fashion consultant) left before me, so I look sort of like an idiot.

5) Harley is really sick, so I have no one to play with.

At least a bridge didn't collapse under me... which, by the way, is one of my biggest fears. I am always worried about falling through the subway grates, and I rush over bridges because I'm worried about them. I hate when my irrational fears become rational.

Philandering Italian Politicos are Magic

2007-08-01T16:15:00.000-04:00

In Italy, Christian Politician Found With Two Prostitutes
By MALCOLM MOORE
The Daily Telegraph August 1, 2007

ROME Â-- An Italian politician whose party represents Christian values has been embroiled in a scandal involving two prostitutes, a hotel room, and a large amount of cocaine.
Cosimo Mele, 50, a Christian Democrat UDC MP, was caught out when he had to call an ambulance to the hotel in Rome after one of the girls suffered breathing problems.
The property entrepreneur, whose wife is pregnant with their fourth child, has now resigned from his party.

The scandal's timing is sensitive since the UDC Party has been calling for all MPs to take voluntary drug tests.

Mr. Mele said, "I did nothing other than go to dinner with a friend who introduced me to this girl. Since it was late, she came to bed with me. How many politicians go to bed with young girls?"

He said he had nothing to do with the other girl who had "taken drugs or something else." She had felt ill, and he had called reception.

He added: "So politicians in the UDC do not make love? Of course, I recognize Christian values. But what has that got to do with going with a prostitute? It is a personal matter. This affair has nothing to do with family values. I cannot be branded a bad father and a bad husband simply because after five or six days away from home, an occasion presented itself."

Seriously, how many politicians DO go to bed with young girls? I also love his whole defense. The last paragraph actually made me laugh out loud.

I've never gone this far

2007-08-01T14:36:00.000-04:00

This woman faked her own kidnapping to avoid a blind date.

Thanks Jezebel.

In other news (also from Jezebel) Anna Quindlen (who is a rockstar) interviewed anti-abortion activists to ask what should the punishment be for women who have abortions after they are outlawed. Watch the video, it's fascinating.

What I found was interesting is that the people were interested in prevention of abortions, not the punishment of women who had them. Also the people who said that they had "never thought" of what would happen to the women. I disagree with some of the questions that the guy asked (like "what does it mean for society if we have a law with no punishment?") but I really found the protesters to be reasonable; driven by what they believe is their calling to peacefully protest what they see as a moral wrong.

Do These Kids Know

2007-08-01T14:26:00.001-04:00

That Aqua songs are pretty dirty? The euphemisms are pretty easy to decode. The words are actually "I'm going wham, bam, thank you ma'am."

Also: I actually laughed out loud when the kid got hit by the chair, it was so unexpected.

And I love this song:

Hillary Is Clearly A Slut

2007-08-01T13:04:00.000-04:00

An earlier email conversation with another blogger, I got to thinking about modesty. And the modesty that I've been thinking about has been Hillary Clinton's.

I told my elder brother that I wouldn't touch this issue with a 10-foot pole, but it seems impossible to avoid it. So let's start with the article that touched off the issue: Robin Givhan, a fashion writer (get it? her job is to write about fashion) talked about Hillary's choice to wear a sort of low-cut top to a debate. She then gave a run-down of Hillary's fashion history. Pretty standard, right?

That article has been linked to, by, at last count, 511 blogs. In the days that followed, WaPo alone had something like 7 articles about the cleavage (or according to Andrew Sullivan, the lack thereof), the coverage, the firestorm, the accusations, and the anger of the Clinton campaign. One of my favorites suggested that the problem is that Hillary didn't expose enough cleavage and compared her to a British politician who wears low cut tops and necklaces which show off her "attributes."

And then, Hillary's response: from HillaryHub, a campaign ad that says "pay attention to your hair, because everyone else will" with a display of her many different haircuts. I love it. Finally she shows a sense of humor, or at least her handlers do.

Basically this seems to me like a tempest in a teacup. Mostly stupid. Except that it does say a lot about what we, as a culture think about the sexuality of our female leaders. Mostly that we don't like it. And that whoever is dressing Hillary now is MUCH better than those idiots who handled her while Bill was in the White House.

I'm not even sure what this is about

2007-08-01T11:14:00.001-04:00

WTF is Chocolate Rain?

On Obesity

2007-08-01T10:32:00.000-04:00

So I've been watching Shaq's big Challenge, and I have a couple of thoughts about it:

1) Parental involvement really affects how much weight the kids lose. The parents that were fully on board had kids that lost between 40-60 pounds, those whose parents weren't as involved lost FAR less (25-30). The smallest kid lost the most weight, and actually is a normal weight now, mostly because his parents really helped him along. Which brings me to my second thought:

2) Why didn't his parents also diet? They were already preparing healthier meals for him, why not for themselves? Shaq provided a stair stepper for the kid, couldn't the parents use it too?

3) As great as this program is, how many kids are going to have a trainer to work with them 2 hours a day, 5 days a week? And Shaq to ease the way in their school? This program clearly cannot be implemented on a national level, although the "Shaquille O'Neal wellness wheel" could.

4) Why didn't Shaq provide diets with recipes for the kids? It's pretty standard in most weight loss programs. Dieting (when done correctly) can help to lose more weight than exercise (although it is ideal to do both), yet their wasn't much focus on what it meant to 'eat healthy' other than just to cut out junk food. The only exception was for Chris, whose parents were taught how to make their traditional ethnic food in a healthier way.

5) I just read an article about how some school in Arizona (now can't find it) had the kids protest the vegetables in their cafeteria, and they just won the right to a taste-test of cost effective alternatives. Although, for the record, I don't remember my cafeteria food being that unhealthy. But then again, I always brought my lunch.

This is basically magic

2007-07-31T16:29:00.001-04:00

I love Japanese game shows.

Best. Commercial. Ever

2007-07-31T13:14:00.000-04:00

While watching Shaq's new show (Shaq's Big Challenge) I saw the most awesome ad in the history of ever. For, of all things, Orange Juice.

I ~~can't seem to find~~ found the video, so I'll describe it:

The setting is a children's party, in a backyard complete with pinata. A small child hits the pinata with a bat (or stick), the pinata explodes, and celery comes pouring out. The children yell "celery" and rush towards it. Craziness ensues, and the children run away, clutching their celery, looking sort of like teeny savages, brandashing teeny green spears.

The voiceover says "if only it were this easy to get children to eat healthy. Since it isn't why not start the day with Florida Orange Juice." Or something like that.

I nearly fell out of my chair laughing.

Also, as an aside, I could not love workout/fitness shows more. Biggest Loser, Celebrity Fit Club, the new Shaq show. I love them all. Something is clearly wrong with me.

Music That I'm Listening to RIGHT NOW

2007-07-30T11:00:00.000-04:00

With the end of the 9 days (thank G-d) I'm listening to music again, so here are the songs that I'm listening to over, and over again:

1. Hey There Delilah by Plain White Ts (and they're from Chicago!)

2. I Love You by Luka Bloom

3. Cigarettes and Chocolate Milk by Rufus Wainwright

4. Melt by Phil Roy (I love this song because some woman heard it, was so moved that she started a correspondence with Phil Roy, and now they're married)

5. That Time by Regina Spektor (it reminds me of many of my silly fads, although I never spent a month eating only tangerines)

That's all for now, but I'm taking suggestions.

UPDATE:

6. Helen by Nizlopi- this is haunting and beautiful.

One Last Thought About Noah Feldman

2007-07-30T10:30:00.000-04:00

I was away this weekend, and I attended services were the women's apparel ranged from dresses to short shorts and tied off t's. And for the record, this was an "Orthodox" service. At any rate, it really got me thinking about the choices we make and how they affect our community acceptance.

I realized that by living with several girls on the UWS, wearing pants, and choosing to work rather than marry young and produce children, that I have opted out of certain Jewish communities. I understand that they have certain norms, I don't conform to them, so I'm not really part of their community (although they'd probably be nice to me if I dropped into davening on a Saturday morning). I've chosen instead to observe in a "Modern" Orthodox way, and this informs my reception in different parts of different communities. Some people think that my observances are anti-Feminist, or outdated, or crazy, and others think that I live a sinful lifestyle. And I'm ok with that, because that's how it works.

Thing is, none of my (current) choices are permanent. I could always start dressing more modestly, start shidduch* dating again, quit my job to move in with relatives, etc, etc. But I've made some choices. Noah has made a choice that marks him as not being of the Modern Orthodox community. A pretty permanent one, I'd say. So while I'd hesitate to say that he's "ostracized" from the community, I'd say that when he chooses to interact with the Modern Orthodox community, that they view him as a visitor, not a member. He's welcome to stop by and chat, but his decisions have made it clear that he doesn't wish to take part in that lifestyle.

I still think that it was rather silly of the school to cut him out of a photo (he did, after all, attend the school and the event), but I can understand their desire not to publicize his marriage or subsequent children. I don't agree, but I can understand. Noah isn't "lost" to Judaism, but he has chosen to absent himself from Modern Orthodoxy, just as I've chosen to absent myself from the Conservative movement in which I was raised, or the Orthodox community I found in college. It doesn't mean that I am locked out forever, I could always make some changes and go back (as could Noah, and I DON'T mean by divorcing his wife), but I've made my bed, and now I have to lie in it. As should Noah. Except not my bed, because that would be weird.

*Shidduch dating is arranged dating for the express purpose of finding a spouse.

America's Next Plop Model

2007-07-26T11:39:00.001-04:00

I love America's Next Top Model. When it's mid-season, my flatmate, El Gigante, and I DVR it and watch it together. Some weeks, I cannot wait to watch it with him and so watch it on my own and then re-watch it when he has the time. He shows the same courtesy to me.

Given that ANTM's last season ended months ago, you may be asking yourself: why is Harley talking about it now, so long after Jaslene won Cycle 8 (over Natasha, whom I so totally loved that I periodically walked around speaking in a fake Russian accent and meowing into the phone to my much older, questionably arranged, husband)?

Well, while voicing a recent segment, Jim Vance, the anchorman for Channel 4 News in D.C., could not stop laughing at a model who didn't have what Miss Jay refers to as "The Walk."

News Anchor Cant Stop Laughing At Model - Watch more free videos

Children and the Military

2007-07-25T16:29:00.000-04:00

WashPo has an article about the baby boom on military bases. Two lines struck me:

1) According to one nurse ""We knew that any time the soldiers are deployed, we knew the one thing they liked to do best when they come home is get a little bit of loving." Amazing.

2) "New mothers are exempt from deployment for four months. But after that, husband-and-wife soldiers have to arrange for child care if they are both sent overseas. Often, relatives or close friends take care of the children."

If I am interpreting this second correctly, it means that the military does not provide aid or childcare for families with two parents deployed overseas. That is completely absurd. To have to rely entirely on the kindness of relatives or friends, for an unspecified amount of time? Really? That is unreasonable.

Yet another example of the army's subtle discrimination policies against women, those that keep them from enlisting, advancing, etc.

Harry Potter and the Lamesauce Ending

2007-07-25T14:15:00.000-04:00

WARNING: SPOILERS

Ross Douthat of the Atlantic online (and greatest last name ever) explains why the last Harry Potter was pretty lame. He argues (and I agree) that Rowling took a lot of cop-outs, and hinted at complexities that might have made it a more interesting book.

In my personal opinion, Harry should have bought it when Voldemort killed him, not some stupid almost-death. Neville should have then killed Nagini AND Voldemort, in a nice ironic twist, showing that it was the prophesy that made Harry great, and that it could just as easily have been about Neville. After all, isn't the whole point that Harry isn't the greatest wizard? Just brave with good friends?

On Education, again

2007-07-25T12:49:00.001-04:00

This concept fascinates me: according to NYTimes, College of the Ozarks has students work off their college tuition so that they can graduate debt-free or nearly so. Tuition is $15,900 per year, and all students must work 15 hours a week, so they earn about $12,000 a year, all of which goes towards their tuition.

I've been thinking about this issue a lot lately, mostly vis a vis grad schools. I have no interest in going $100k or so into debt, especially if the degree will not help me to gain a large enough salary increase to pay it back. You can't really work enough hours while attending school fulltime to pay it off. But you used to be able to. CJ's father worked his way through a (top-10) law school in a factory. I know people who waited tables, or did other minimum wage labor in order to pay for school.

But you can't anymore. Why? In part, at least, because minimum wage, while never very much, is, adjusted for inflation, lower than it used to be. Or at the very least, not increasing proportionately. There's been a great deal of research on how minimum-wage workers can't get by, for instance Nickle and Dimed, and that episode of 30 days with Morgan Spurlock and his girlfriend working for a fast food place.

The cost of college has risen disproportionate to inflation, at something like three times the regular rate. Add to that the recent college loan scandals, and we're in a real mess. The answer? Either serious education reform*, loan reform, minimum wage reform, or all of the above.

*Like encouraging more students to go to technical schools. The United States has an amazing Community College/Technical School system, and we don't do a great job of encouraging kids into those fields, or helping them to decide what fields they could succeed in.

You Are So Beautiful... To Me

2007-07-25T12:05:00.000-04:00

I knew that the New York Times would out me eventually:

Harley Woos Female Bikers

(Hat tip: Mrs. Autodidact)

Shocking!

2007-07-25T10:49:00.000-04:00

According to WashPo BET decided to rename its show "Hot Ghetto Mess" before tonight's debut.

I'm only surprised that it took this long.

Rockin' Rabbis

2007-07-25T10:19:00.000-04:00

There's an odd kind of dissonance when you see one of your favorite professors from seminary on YouTube. Add to that the uncomfortable feeling that he may, in fact, be marginally cooler than you are. Marginally. But still cooler.

Rock out, Robbie!

Now that I think of it, maybe I need to reassess my ideation of what constitutes "cool."