Goyim stop fetishizing Jews challenge. If you reject 90% of us from engaging with your “content” then get our culture and our imagery out your damn mouth.
Update: Looking at their blog, they got an anon ask about this and are saying they’re Jewish. Regardless, my point still stands:
Jews *and* Goyim stop fetishizing Jews challenge. You can be Jewish and also fetishize our own culture. This was clearly a reaction to the Israeli Miku nonsense and if this is your response to art of an *Israeli* character existing (not even anything about i/p) then you are fetishizing us to make a point. And that’s just gross.
178 notes
·
View notes
You do realize that breaking into and occupying an administrative building while destroying property and wearing costumes is exactly what the rioters did on the January 6th attempted insurrection, right? Naming specific governing officers they hate, saying they “can’t hide,” claiming they’re justified because they’re the good guys fighting against the evil people in power.
The January 6th rioters were crazy because what they did was crazy. Not just because they thought Trump won the election.
I get that it’s university government buildings rather than US government buildings, but it’s a really, really clear echo. These protestors are not better just because you think they’re right.
326 notes
·
View notes
When I was in college I learned a lot about social justice from my peers and friends who were muslim women and I know that my experiences aren’t universal but a lot of the weird antisemitism wrt israel and zionism gets me because I’m like wait but didn’t everyone talk about not judging a whole group based on a government ? Or the most zealous believers of a religion or political cause ? No ? Just us at the weird little social justice school ? Sounds fake but ok
68 notes
·
View notes
Earlier today I was having a text conversation with my stepdad (full disclaimer: he’s not Jewish), in which he gave me his analysis of what’s happening in I/P. And you know… I’m starting to think he makes a good point. However, I’m also curious as to Jumblr’s various opinions on it, especially Israeli leftists (obligatory goyim dni warning). So, with his permission, here’s the analysis, word for word:
“Here is the problem with calls for "Cease Fire" in Gaza. Prior to the Hamas attack, there was no cease fire, or calls for cease fire, and Hamas was firing rockets regularly into Israel. It's just that Israel wasn't attacking. During the Hamas attack, there was no cease fire, or calls for cease fire; it's just that Israel wasn't attacking. Calls for cease fire didn't start until Israel fought back, and what they amount to is that Israel should put up with even the most horrible attacks and not fight back.
The most fundamental duty of a nation state is to protect its citizens from attack, so calls for Israel to put up with attacks without fighting back is the equivalent of a call that Israel not exist. And that's what it actually is. The end of Israel is the stated goal of Hamas, and of the Progressive American "Solidarity with Palestine" movement.
That's what "From the River to the Sea" calls for. That's what "Free Palestine" must mean at this point (because there is a Palestinian State, and it is free, so either Palestine is already free or "Free Palestine" means "End Israel").
And there are two problems with "End Israel." First, the modern state of Israel has no less right to exist than Palestine. Both were created in 1948. Both are associated with people who are a mixture of indigineous people and nonidigineous people. Neither has any trumping claim on the region or on existence.
But further, "End Israel" would mean the genocide of seven and a half million Israeli Jews (or a large portion of them). That is the expressed goal of Hamas. Hamas is explicit about that. On the other hand, no Israeli policy related to the Palestinians fits the definition of "genocide" under the International Convention on Genocide (although the settlement policy does fit a definition of another crime against humanity related to ethnic cleansing). Many of the Jews in Israel have nowhere else they can go and would die there if Israel ceased to exist. That did not happen to the Palestinians and the extermination of Palestinians is not and never has been the policy or goal of Israel.
All the arguments otherwise I have seen are "Israel is killing Palestinians; that is genocide." It isn’t. The UN definition specifically states, "To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." That is, genocide is not when the effect of a policy kills members of an ethnic group or religion, it is when the policy kills people with the ultimate goal of eradicating the ethnic group or religion. That is not a goal of Israel with regard to the Palestinians (or even that portion in Gaza). It is a goal of Hamas with regard to the Jews (at least that portion of the world’s Jews in Israel).”
133 notes
·
View notes
Okay so. Not mad, just trying to politely inform. "Old testament g-d" is an anti-semitic dogwhistle. Saying the "old testament g-d" is angry and unforgiving is a further dogwhistle. Thank you for your time
ah, i had no idea, but i did some googling after seeing this ask and i'm now aware that it can be used as an antisemitic dogwhistle, so i'll make sure to be more careful with my words the next time i talk or joke about religion. i hope that the original context of my post being about christian saints (the veneration of which judaism doesn't practice) makes it clear that i wasn't trying to criticize the jewish faith or jewish people even jokingly, as i'm aware of how harmful that can be and that since i'm not jewish it's not appropriate for me to do so, but i also realize that antisemites won't bother to make that distinction, so i understand and apologize if anyone was hurt or concerned nonetheless. thank you for informing me.
425 notes
·
View notes
i apologize in advance for admitting i watch booktok review/drama youtubers anyways to gaze upon wicked gods sounds insane in general but a part of it thats often glossed over which i think is utterly hilarious is how she looked at like the one place the romans didnt colonize and was like what if the romans colonized it instead of the people who actually colonized it
25 notes
·
View notes