mouthporn.net
#epic length post – @transfaabulous on Tumblr
Avatar

Cranky

@transfaabulous / transfaabulous.tumblr.com

Myron (he/him). I draw sometimes (lie). Cantakerous forest hermit (displaced). Adult, been one for a while. Header by @keymintt, icon by @aceneutrality!
Avatar
reblogged

"it's 2024 antisemitism isn't a problem anymore you just want to be oppressed."

here's a non-exhaustive list of antisemitic incidents, attacks, and pogroms during my lifetime. if you're not jewish, i am guilting you into reading this entire list. i really do not care if it takes forever or makes you feel bad. read it.

1993

  • state farm settles a $30mil lawsuit after it was revealed that state farm kept a list of prominent jewish lawyers referred to within state farm as "the jewish lawyers list" where any claims made by those attorneys were automatically forwarded to state farm's fraud unit, purely on the basis of the attorney's jewish identity. state farm employees testified confirming the list had been used to discriminate against ethnic minorities.

1994

  • four days after the cave of patriarchs massacre, a man shot at a van full of jewish students, killing one and injuring three others. he is reported to have shouted "kill the jews" as revenge for the cave of patriarchs massacre.
  • a white supremacist fired ten rounds at a synagogue in eugene, oregon.
  • a jewish community center in buenos aires, argentina was bombed, killing 85 people and injuring 300.

1995

  • a japanese magazine ran an article that stated "the 'holocaust' is a fabrication. there were no execution gas chambers in auschwitz or in any other concentration camp. today, what are displaced as 'gas chambers' at the remaints of the auschwitz camp in poland are a post-war fabrication by the polish communist regime or by the soviet union, which controlled the country. not once, neither at auschwitz nor in any territory controlled by the germans during the second world war, was there 'mass murder of jews' in 'gas chambers'."

1996

  • in turkey, an islamic preacher distributed thousands of copies of a book called "the holocaust lie."

1997

  • jean-marie le pen was convicted and fined for remarks minimizing the holocaust, and then accused the president of france of being "on the payroll of jewish organizations, and particularly of b'nai b'rith."

1998

  • osama bin laden stated that israel's ultimate goal was to annex the arabian peninsula and the middle east and enslave its peoples. he claimed that the us state department and department of defense were controlled by jews for the sole purpose of serving israel's goals. he also claimed that israeli jews controlled the governments of the us and uk, directing them to kill as many muslims as they could.

1999

  • iran arrested 13 iranian jews, accusing them of being spies for israel, including a 16 year old boy. ten of them were sentenced to 4-13 years in prison, and eventually when they were freed they left iran for israel.
  • a man was arrested in paris for attacking a bartender because he "believed she was jewish."
  • several synagogues in sacramento were set on fire by a group of eight or nine men.
  • a man shot and killed one person and injured five at a jewish community center in los angeles.

2000

  • a man broke into a jewish woman's house, shot and killed her, then set her house on fire. he then drove to the synagogue where she was a member and fired into the windows of the synagogue, then exited his car and spray-painted two red swastikas on the building. he drove to another synagogue where he shot and shattered the synagogue's glass windows.
  • on yom kippur, two molotov cocktails were thrown at a synagogue.
  • a synagogue in syracuse, new york was set on fire by a man who reportedly yelled "i did this for you, god!"
  • a sukkah was destroyed at a synagogue in st. paul, minnesota.
  • a synagogue in harrisburg, pennsylvania was set on fire before yom kippur.
  • during the 2000 presidential election, lee alcorn, president of the dallas naacp branch, criticized al gore's selection of senator joe lieberman for his vice-presidential candidate because lieberman was jewish. alcorn said "if we get a jew person, then what i'm wondering is, i mean, what is this movement for, you know? does it have anything to do with the failed peace talks?" ... "so i think we need to be very suspicious of any kind of partnerships between the jews at that kind of level because we know that their interest primarily has to do with money and these kinds of things."

2001

  • in belgium, the vice president of one of the country's largest parties gave an interview on dutch tv where he cast doubt over the number of jews murdered by the nazis during the holocaust. in the same interview he questioned the scale of the nazis' use of gas chambers and the authenticity of anne frank's diary.

2002

  • osama bin laden stated in a letter that jews controlled the civilian media outlets, politics, and economic institutions of the united states.
  • a synagogue was set on fire in toronto, ontario, canada.
  • men rammed two cars through the courtyard gates of a synagogue in lyon, france, then rammed one of the cars into the prayer hall before setting the vehicles on fire. eyewitnesses reported seeing between 12 and 15 attackers. this was the first of a series of attacks on jewish targets in france in a single week - which coincided with passover - including at least five other synagogues.
  • a synagogue in marseille, france was burned to the ground.
  • a synagogue in strasbourg was set on fire.
  • a synagogue in paris was firebombed.
  • "richard nixon tapes" were declassified, which confirmed that billy graham, a famous evangelist and civil rights advocate, had agreed with nixon that jews controll the american media, calling it a "stranglehold."
  • a synagogue in tunisia was bombed, killing 20 and injuring 30.
  • a gunman opened fire at the airline ticket counter of el al, israel's national airline, at the la international airport. two people were killed and four were injured. federal investigators concluded that the gunman had hoped to influence us government policy in favor of palestinians and that the incident was a terror attack.
  • in an interview for a french magazine, a french actor, comedian, and activist dieudonne m'bala m'bala described "the jews" as "a sect, a fraud, which is the worst of all because it was the first."
  • white supremacists planned to bomb a series of institutions and people associated with the black and jewish communities. targets included the united states holocaust museum, the new england holocaust memorial, and steven spielberg.

2003

  • terrorists attempted to bomb a jewish cemetery, and succeeded in bombing a jewish community center and jewish-owned italian restaurant in morocco. 45 people in total were killed.
  • a molotov cocktail was thrown through the windows of a synagogue in los angeles, california.
  • the prime minister of malaysia drew a standing ovation for his speech. an excerpt: "[muslims] are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. the nazis killed 6 million jews out of 12 million. but today the jews rule this world by proxy. they get others to fight and die for them. they invented socialism, communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong so they may enjoy equal rights with others. with these they have now gained control over the most powerful countries. and they, this tiny community, have become a world power."
  • two synagogues in turkey were bombed, killing 55 and injuring over 750.

2004

  • romania officially denied the holocaust occurred on its territory up until 2004.
  • the film 'the passion of the christ' was released, causing backlash against the jewish community for protesting the antisemitic tones of the movie.
  • a jewish school library was firebombed in montreal, quebec, canada.
  • jewish cemeteries were defaced with swastikas and a funeral home set on fire in wellington new zealand.

2005

  • m'bala claimed during a press conference that the central council of french jews was a "mafia" that had "total control over french policy exercise", called the commemoration of the holocaust "memorial pornography" and claimed that the "zionists of the centre national de la cinematographie" which "control french cinema" prevented him from making a film about the slave trade.
  • the muslim brotherhood leader denounced what he called "the myth of the holocaust" in defending iranian president's denial of the holocaust.
  • a polish radio station during the polish election promoted antisemitic views, including denial of the jedwabne pogrom. their support of right-wing conservative law and justice party is considered a major factor in their electoral victory.
  • a group of 15 members of the state duma of russia demanded that judaism and jewish orgqanizations be banned from the country. 500 prominent russians demanded that the state prosecutor investigate ancient jewish texts as "anti-russian" and ban judaism.
  • islamic extremists planned to bomb a number of synagogues and an israeli consulate in california.
  • iranian president denied the holocaust during a speech in zahedan. "they have invented a myth that jews were massacred and palce this above god, religions and the prophets." he suggested that if the holocaust had occurred, that it was the responsibility of europeans to offer up territory to the jews.

2006

  • a man stabbed nine people at a synagogue in russia.
  • the iranian state-sponsored "international conference to review the global vision of the holocaust" opened, with its focus being to question the facts of the holocaust. the iranian foreign ministry spokesperson stated "the holocaust is not a sacred issue that one can't touch. i have visited the nazi camps in eastern europe. i think it is exaggerated."
  • mel gibson was arrested for a dui, and reportedly yelled at the police officer, "fucking jews... the jews are responsible for all the wars in the world. are you a jew?"
  • m'bala was fined for defamation after calling a prominent jewish tv presenter a "secret donor of the child-murdering israeli army."
  • ilan halimi, a french moroccan jew, was kidnapped, tortured, and murdered. he was dumped on the side of the road, 80% of his body covered in burns, and died from his injuries on his way to the hospital. the kisnappers thought halimi was wealthy because he came from a jewish family, and the gang confessed that they believed all jews to be rich which motivated them to target several jews. the halimi family reports being told that if they could not raise the money for the ransom then they should get it from the jewish community.
  • a man targeted the jewish federation of seattle when the organization showed up in search results after he typed the phrase "something jewish" into a search engine. he forced his way through the building's security door with several guns, a knife, and ammunition, taking a 14 year old girl as a hostage. he is reported to have said "i'm only doing this for a statement" and "i'm a muslim american; i'm angry at israel" before the shooting spree began. he then took a pregnant woman hostage, saying "now since you don't know how to... listen, now you're the hostage, and i don't give a fuck if i kill you or your baby." the woman reported him stating "that he was a muslim, and this was his personal statement against jews and the bush administration for giving money to jews, and for us jews for giving money to israel, about hozbollah, the war in iraq, and he wanted to talk to cnn."

2007

  • holocaust survivor elie wiesel was attacked by a holocaust denier in san francisco.
  • jewish professor elizabeth midlarsky had a swastika spray painted on her office door.

2008 - gaza war

  • a leading member of hamas made a statement that israelis "have legitimized the murder of their own children by killing the children of palestine... they have legitimized the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people."
  • a belgian jewish magazine received a dozen death threats on its website, including a threat to carry out a suicide attack to "avenge the suffering of the palestinians."
  • protestors in indonesia shut down the country's only synagogue, threatening to drive out the country's jews. they stated that "if israel refuses to stop its attacks and oppression of the palestinian people, we don't need to defend [the synagogue's' presence here." the synagogue has been shuttered since.
  • a man sent a letter threatening to bo b the ida crown jewish academy in chicago. the letter said that explosives would be set off around the school unless violence in gaza stopped by january 15 2009.
  • south african deputy foreign minister was quoted saying "[jews] in fact control [america], no matter which government comes into power, whether republican or democratic, whether barack obama or george bush... the control of america, just like the control of most western countries, is in the hands of jewish money and if jewish money controls their country then you cannot expect anything else." she later claimed she "conflated zionist pressure with jewish influence."
  • antisemitic graffiti, including swastikas, appeared all over turkey. a sign was put up at the door of a civic group's office saying "jews cannot enter, dogs can." anti-jewish articles began appearing in turkish newspapers, and there were several hundred documented examples of antisemitic messages. as a result, turkish jewish immigration to israel increased.
  • in yemen, jews experienced verbal and physical harassment. jewish children were injured, one seriously, when muslim students threw stones at them. anti-israel protestors also attacked several jewish homes, smashing windows and pelting them with rocks, and injuring at least one jewish residence. a yemeni jewish family was extricated from yemen to israel after suffering continuous antisemitic attacks and death threats. a grenade was also thrown into the courtyard of the family's home in raydah.
  • a molotov cocktail was thrown. at a synagogue in brussels. rocks and other objects were thrown at a jewish school. a jewish home was the subject of arson. afterwards, hundreds of protestors tried to march toward the jewish neighborhood but were held off by police.
  • a man opened fire on three israeli cosmetics salesmen and two customers in a shopping mall. the shooting, which followed a period of harassment against the cosmetic stand, resulted in two israelis being hit by the shots. the perpatrator explained that he was motivated by the middle east situation.
  • sixty-six antisemitic incidents were reported in france, home to europe's largest muslim and jewish populations. numerous synagogues were attacked with petrol bombs and damaged in various towns. a car was rammed into the gates of a synagogue in toulouse and set on fire. a petrol bomb was thrown at a synagogue which set fire to an adjacent jewish restaurant. offensive graffiti was also sprayed on synagogues throughout the country. in paris, a rabbi's car was torched, a. jewish student was attacked and stabbed four times, and a 15-year old girl was assaulted by a gang.
  • a jewish community in germany was daubed and later stoned, and the central council of jews in german reported a significant increase in the number of hate mails and death threats during the conflict.
  • synagogues in multiple cities in greece were vandalized and suffered arson attacks. in athens, the walls of a jewish cemetery were sprayed with antisemitic graffiti "jews israelites murderers." neo-nazi slogans like "ax and fire to the jewish dogs" were used at anti-israel protests. a monument commemorating the murder of greek jews was vandalized with slogans like "greece - palestine no jew will remain." a seminar at the jewish museum of thessaloniki was cancelled after receiving threats, and the leftist parliamentary party of coalition of the radical left declined to attend the greek national day of remembrance of holocaust heroes and martyrs because of the attendance of the israeli ambassador. in ioannina the local jewish cemetery was vandalized with several tombs broken. the corfu synagogue was vandalized with graffiti such as "shit on israel" "jews nazis" and "murderers." the shoah memorial was also vandalized with graffiti regarding gaza. in larisa both grouns from the extreme right and extreme left targeted the local community. leftist and palestinian demonstrators attempted to vandalize the synagogue during a march, while later the same day groups linked to neo-nazi groups vandalized the shoah monyment and organized protests in front of the synagogue asking for the expulsion of jews from larisa. jews were attacked as "christ killers" and "smelling of blood" "they are the worst thing of the 20th century" and an eminent member of the greek orthodox church spoke of "zionist monsters with sharp claws" and "jews puhished for killing christ" and being "god killers."
  • italian trade union flaica-cub issued a call to boycott jewish-owned shops in rome in protest at the israeli offensive. it was condemned as antisemitic and reminiscent of the italian race laws under fascism in the 1930s.
  • a molotov cocktail was thrown at a jewish owned building in amsterdam following an attempted arson of a jewish institution in arnhem. a synagogue and jewish owned building were targeted by stoning. at an anti-israel demonstration in utrecht, some demonstrators shouted "hamass, hamas, jews to the gas."
  • during the 2009 oslo riots, the largest anti-jewish riots in norwegian history, muslim youth attacked the israeli embassy and yelled anti-jewish slogans in arabic, including "death to the jews" "kill the jews" and "slaughter the jews." in one incident, young men beat a 73 year old man who was carrying an israeli flag while shouting "bloody jew - get him!" they only stopped attacking him when they realized he was not jewish.
  • a jewish burial chapel in sweden was the target of an arson attack and a jewish centor was set on fire twice in three days.
  • there were approximately 225 recorded antisemitic incidents in the uk during the war. synagogues were firebombed, jews received verbal and digital abuse, and a gang tried to force their way into jewish restaurants and shops, specifically focusing on the london jewish family centre. a jewish motorist was also dragged from his car and assaulted. antisemitic graffiti with slogans including "kill jews" "jews are scumbags" and "jihad 4 israel" were sprayed in jewish areas across london and manchester.
  • a molotov cocktail was thrown at a tample in chicago, and in lincolnwood a synagogue's glass doors were shattered by a brick and "free palestine" and "death to israel" were spraypainted on the building. a jewish preschool in california was graffitied with swastikas and antisemitic messages.
  • argentinian jews wearing kippot were physically attacked on public buses and jewish cemetaries were defaced. a gang attacked argentinian jews near the israeli embassy in buenos aires.
  • in bolivia, vandals removed a star of david from a monument from the plaza israel and started spraypainting "plaza palestina" on jewish murals.
  • during shabbat, the caracas synagogue, venezuela's oldest synagogue, was defaced with "property of islam", and an armed gang of 15 unidentified people broke in and the security guards were bound and gagged while the gang destroyed the offices and the repository where the holy books were stored. they daubed the walls with antisemitic and anti-israel graffiti that called for jews to be expelled from the country, and also stole a database that listed jews who lived in venezuela.

2008 - cont

  • the harvard crimson school paper ran a paid holocaust denial ad.
  • a chabad house in mumbai was taken over by two attackers and several residents were held hostage. a rabbi and his wife, who was six months pregnant, were murdered with four other hostages in the house by the attackers. according to radio transmissions, the attackers "would be told by their handlers in pakistan that the lives of jews were worth 50 times those of non jews." injuries on some of the bodies indicated that they may have been tortured.

2009

  • hamas refused to allow palestinian children to learn about the holocaust, which it called "a lie invented by the zionists" and referred to holocaust education as a "war crime."
  • an irish journalist claimed "there was no holocaust... and six million jews were not murdered by the third reich. these two statements of mine are irrefutable truths."
  • tapes were released in which billy graham is heard in conversation with richard nixon referring to jews as "the synagogue of satan."
  • four men were arrested in new york in connection with a plot to blow up two synagogues in the bronx.
  • a neo nazi entered the united states holocaust memorial museum in washington dc and shot and fatally wounded a security officer.

2010

  • the last surviving romaniote synagogue in greece was targeted for an arson attack.
  • a synagogue in cairo, egypt was bombed.
  • a synagogue in sweden was attacked with explosives.

2011

  • six jewish institutions were attacked by vandals in montreal, including four synagogues and a school.
  • j.z. knight stated "fuck god's chosen people! i think they have earned enough cash to have paid their way out of the goddamned gas chambers by now."
  • the manhattan terrorism plot to bomb various targets in manhattan, including a synagogue.

2012

  • a man killed four jews, including three children, outside a school in toulouse, france.
  • a synagogue in sweden was attacked with an explosive decide, shattering a window.

2013

  • alice walker expressed appreciation for the works of antisemitic conspiracy theorist david icke. she said that icke's book "human race get off your knees" would be her choice if she could have only one book. the book promotes the theory that the earth is ruled by shapeshifting reptilian humanoids and "rothschild zionists."
  • louis farrakhan delivered an antisemitic speech, referring to jews as "satanic jews" and "the synagogue of satan", controlling america's government and other sectors, reportedly saying that president obama "surrounded himself with satan... members of the jewish community." farrakhan also said that the jewish people "have mastered the civilization now, but they've mastered it in evil... who's the owner of hollywood that creates images and makes the people think that what is created on screen is the way we should live? that's satan... satan has devoured so much of humanity. ... the people that own hollywood are the same people that control your press, the same people that control your media, the same people who are the publishers, the same people who are the distributors, the same synagogue of satan, and they put you before the world in this disgraceful manner. ... jesus was the last hope for the jewish people but they rejected him. they are now in control of the media and the airwaves, gaining access to the 'sacred territory' which is in the minds of the people."
  • the supreme leader of iran grand ayatollah ali khamenei questioned the validity of the holocaust, saying "the holocaust is an event whose reality is uncertain and if it has happened, it's uncertain how it has happened."

2014

  • kkk leader killed three non jewish people at a jewish community center and jewish retirement home in kansas, the day before passover.
  • residents of a village in spain called "castrillo matajudios" ("jew-killer camp") since 1627 voted to change the name of the village.

2015

  • four jews were killed when a gunman attacked a kosher supermarket in paris where the gunman held 15 other hostages and demanded that the kouachi brothers not be harmed.
  • iran organized the international holocaust cartoon competition, a competition in which artists were encouraged to submit cartoons on the theme of holocaust denial.
  • louis farrakhan accused jews of involvement in sept 11 attacks.
  • swastikas were spraypainted on a jewish fraternity at uc davis on the 70th anniversary of the liberation of auschwitz.
  • a french settlement named "la mort aux juifs" or "death to jews" finally changed its name after a denied attempt in 1992.
  • a synagogue in copenhagen was taken by a gunman during a bat mitzvah celebration where one jewish man on security duty was killed.
  • stanford university student senate candidate molly horwitz was asked by a student group how being jewish would affect her decision-making.
  • two synagogues and a jewish neighborhood in san antonio, texas were vandalized with antisemitic graffiti.

2016

  • natasha waldorf of alameda was subjected to two boys sending her text messages that included antisemitic slurs, two other students joked about the holocaust and when she confronted them they told her that "hitler should have finished the job."
  • the campus chapter of students for justice in palestine at the university of california irvine was sanctioned because they disrupted a program hosted by a jewish campus group and intimidated jewish students.

2017

  • alice walker published a poem on her blog titled "it is our (frightful) duty to study the talmud", recommending that the reader should start with youtube to learn about the evils of the talmud.
  • a huge wave of threats, including bomb threats, were made against jewish community centers and other institutions in the united states around the high holy days.
  • sarah halimi was murdered in paris.
  • the chicago dyke march organizers singled out and approached a group of women carrying jewish pride flags and began to question them on their political stance in regards to zionism and israel, and then expelled them from the event. the organizers attributed the reasoning to the star of david on the flag as a "zionist expression." the organization's twitter account also used the phrase "zio tears" in a now deleted tweet. "zio" is a slur originated by david duke.
  • the new england holocaust memorial was smashed with a rock.
  • in ukraine, the space of synagogues holocaust memorial display was vandalized by neo nazis.
  • the chairpersons of the chicago slutwalk wrote, "we still stand behind dyke march chicago's decision to remove the zionist contingent from their event, and we won't allow zionist displays at ours." the organizers made the following declaration about the star of david: "its connections to the oppression enacted by israel is too strong for it to be neutral."
  • a jewish cemetery in missouri was vandalized.
  • the unite the right rally took place in charlottesville, virginia, where white nationalists chanted slogans like "blood and soil" "jews will not replace us" "the goyim know" "the jewish media is going down."
  • a synagogue in sweden was firebombed.

2018

  • trayon white, an american politician, posted a video to his official facebook page showing snow flurries following, and alluding to the rothschild family conspiring to manipulate the weather.
  • an israeli man wearing a yarmulke was attacked in berlin; the attacker reportedly beat him with a belt and shouted "yehudi" ("jew")
  • tamika mallory, an american activist and one of the organizers of the womens march, attended an antisemitic speech by louis farrakhan, a figure she had previously refused to denounce. during the three hour speech, farrakhan claimed that "the powerful jews are my enemy" "the jews have control over agencies of those angencies of government" like the fbi, thta jews are "the mother and father of apartheid" and that jews are responsible for "degenerate behavior in hollywood turning men into women and women into men."
  • a republican candidate for senate in california openly called for a united states "free from jews."
  • 11 people were murdered at the tree of life synagogue. on social media, several people made the claim that they "should not be mourned if they were zionists."

2019

  • belgium outlawed kosher slaughter.
  • rep ilhan omar tweeted an allegation that american support for israel was rooted in money spent by pro israel lobbying organizations.
  • several mps quit the labor party under jeremy corbyn citing "culture of extreme antisemitism and intolerance."
  • a subway poster in brooklyn with a picture of ruth bader ginsburg was valdalized with the writing "die jew bitch" and a swastika.
  • multiple violent attacks occured in brooklyn.
  • a synagogue in turkey is attacked with a molotov cocktail.
  • one person was killed and three were injured during a shooting at a passover seder in california.
  • a synagogue was attacked by a lone shooter in germany.
  • a kosher grocery store in jersey city, new jersey was attacked and five people were killed.
  • jersey city mayor steve fullop said a trustee of the jersey city board of education should resign in the wake of her comment after the above shooting about "jew brutes" that according to her have "threatened, intimidated, and harassed" black residents. the trustee asked whether the public is "brave enough" to listen to the shooters' message, and said the local rabbis were selling body parts. she remained on the board until 2022.
  • a jewish elder was killed and four others were injured at the home of a hasidic rabbi during hanukkah in new york.

2020

  • the tomb of esther and mordechai in iran was subjected to an arson attack.
  • the jewish center at the unitersity of delaware was subjected to an arson attack.
  • six igbo synagogues in nigeria were razed by soldiers, and at least 50 people were killed.
  • a synagogue in portland was subjected to an arson attack.

2021

  • george washington university's chapter of tau kappa epsilon fraternity reported that their house was broken into and vandalized, and their sefer torah destroyed.

2022

  • four hostages were taken at a synagogue in colleyville, texas. the attacker believed that the rabbi could call another rabbi in new york and secure the release of aafia siddiqui, a pakistani operative imprisoned for attempted murder and other crimes. siddiqui tried to dismiss her lawyers on the grounds that they were jewish. she said the case against her was a jewish conspiracy theory, demanded that no jews be allowed on the jury, and that all prospective jurors be dna tested and excluded from the jury at her trial if they had "zionist or israeli" dna. she wrote a letter to president obama, asserting, "study the history of the jews. they have always back-stabbed everyone who has taken pity on them and make the fatal error of giving them shelter... and it is this cruel, ungrateful back-stabbing of the jews that has caused them to be mercilessly expelled from wherever they gain strength. this is why 'holocausts' keep happening to them repeatedly! if they would only learn to be grateful and change their behavior!"
  • kanye west states that he "likes hitler" and is a "nazi." he still occasionally goes on an antisemitic twitter bender.

2023-2024 - current war

  • in october, an egyptian police officer shot and killed two israeli tourists and an egyptial tour guide in alexandria.
  • a jewish man walking to synagogue in johannesburg was accosted by a male jogger screaming antisemitic insults at him. the jogger then assaulted the man, knocked him over, and kicked and punched him while he lay on the ground.
  • a jewish cricket player was stripped of the captaincy by cricket south africa, claimed to have been a measure to reduce protests at the world cup.
  • a synagogue in tunisia was severely damaged during anti-israel riots with hundreds of people filmed setting fire to the building.
  • in armenia, unknown assailants set fire to a synagogue in yerevan and disseminated the arson attack on social media.
  • the associated press noted a rise in antisemitism on chinese social media. an israeli employee of the israeli embasee in beijing was stabbed and injured on october 13.
  • a 16 year old in australia was arrested after planning to attack a synagogue in vienna.
  • gravestones in belgium were damaged and many stars of david were stolen from a cemetery. only the jewish section was vandalized.
  • danish police arrested at least four operatives who were planning attacks on jewish or israeli targets in denmark.
  • in paris, stars of david were painted on multipe spots on several building fronts in a southern district. similar tags appeared over the weekend in other suburbs. antisemitic chants were filmed on the paris metro, "fuck the jews and fuck your mother, long live palestine. we are nazis and proud of it." a woman in lyon was stabbed and a swastika was graffitied on her home.
  • overall, french jews have noted a huge increase in antisemitism, with a surge of 1200% since october 7.
  • in berlin, the houses of several jews were marked with a star of david. two molotov cocktails were thrown at a synagogue.
  • israeli students in riga, latvia reported receiving hate texts and threats from other students.
  • lectures on the holocaust at utrecht university of applied sciences in the netherlands were postponed indefinitely.
  • a norwegian medical student at a rally in warsaw was pictured holding a poster of the flag of israel in a trash can alongside the text "keep the world clean." far right polish lawmaker grzegorz braun used a fire extinguisher on a lit menorah and removed it from the wall during a hanukkah celebration, saying "there can be no pace for the acts of this racist, tribal, wild talmudic cult."
  • residents of dagestan gathered near the flamingo hotel after reports that refugees from israel were being accomodated there. the protesters demanded that all hotel residents come to the windows to look at them. when the guests did not do this, stones were thrown into the building. the residents demanded to check the basements and let them into the hotel. police arrived and allowed protestors to check the hotel to make sure it was "jew free", and after this a message was posted outside the hotel that jews were prohibited from entering.
  • an antisemitic ralley was held in cherkessk, demanding the "eviction of ethnic jews."
  • a local jewish religious national-cultural community center under construction was set on fire in nalchik with the attackers writing "death to the yahuds" on the wall.
  • a mob stormed the uytash airport in dagestan after the arrival of a red wings flight from tel aviv. messages spread on telegram that a direct flight from israel was arriving, with calls to come to the airport and prevent the plane from landing. dozens of protestors stormed the airport and reached the runway, some of whom managed to climb up onto the plane's wings. 20 people were injured, two of whom were seriously injured. there are reports from passengers of rioters checking cars going to and from the airport for jews.
  • a synagogue in melillah, a spanish enclave in north africa, was attacked by a mob chanting "murderous israel" while waving palestinian flags.
  • pro palestinian demonstrators burned an israeli flag and chanted "bomb israel" outside a synagogue in. sweden.

i have to break up the sections because tumblr apparently has a character limit.

  • multiple cases of antisemitism were reported by students at concordia university with jewish students facing verbal and physical threats from both other students and faculty members. footage of a professor yanise arab shouting at jewish concordia students to "go back to poland, sharmuta (whore)" went viral alongside another video of a student using the slur "kike."
  • two jewish schools in montreal were targeted with gunfire overnight, and one was struck with gunfire a second time a few days later.
  • a jewish community center in montreal was attacked with a molotov cocktail.
  • jewish students and teachers of the peel district school board reported antisemitism and violent threats, including a teacher posting "jews are the problem" in a private facebook group.
  • a sukkah at caltech was vandalized with anti-israel graffiti. a man threw rocks through the glass doors of a synagogue and cafe in fresno, the second with a note reading "all jewish businesses will be targeted."
  • at columbia university, a woman assaulted an israeli man with a stick after he confronted her for ripping down posters with pictures and information abuot kidnapped israelis.
  • a man was arrested for sending threatening emails to a. synagogue in charlotte, north carolina.
  • a man in new york's grand central terminal punched a woman in the face and told her it was because she was jewish.
  • seven members of "white lives matter" california held a demonstration, holding up signs reading "no more wars for i$rael."
  • professor russell rickford spoke at a rally, saying he had found hamas's attack "exhilarating."
  • the illinois comptroller's office fired one of its lawyers, sarah chowdhurt, over antisemitic remarks she made on the instagram of another lawyer who is jewish.
  • a building next to a jewish fraternity at upenn was vandalized with antisemitic graffiti reading "the jews r nazis."
  • a man broke into a jewish family's home in los angeles, yelling "free palestine" and "kill jews."
  • threats against the jewish community at cornell university were posted online, threatening to shoot rape, and murder jewish students and encouraging violence against them.
  • paul kessler, an elderly jewish man, was killed at a rally after being struck in the head by a megaphone by a pro palestine protester, causing him to fall.
  • a woman was arrested after ramming her car into a black hebrew israelite school in indiana, mistakenly believing it to be an "israel school."
  • a man fired two rounds from a shotgun into the air outside a synagogue in albany and made threatening statements. he is alleged to have said "free palestine" at some point during the attack.
  • a game between the girls' varsity teams from the leffell school and roosevelt high school early college studies in yonkers was stopped when roosevelt students began to hurl antisemitic slurs at leffell students, with one yelling "i support hamas, you fucking jew", and during the third quarter became aggressive and violent during the play resulting in injuries of leffell's players.
  • participants in a pro-palestine rally in sydney changed "gas the jews", and several individuals in melbourne made death threats against jews, one group harassing a rabbi and his son, and another asking where to find jews, saying they were "hunting for jews."
  • a man in new south wales threatened to kill four jewish teenagers in a car with an israeli flag draped on it.
  • neo nazis marched in melbourne, displaying a banner reading "expose jewish power" and distributing neo nazi literature.
  • a sydney jewish man was verbally abused for wearing a kippah.
  • pro palestine graffiti was spray painted on the fence of a synagogue in auckland, and an unsuccessful attempt was made to set the property on fire. google maps had mistakenly listed the property as the local israeli consulate.
  • new zealand jews report a surge in antisemitic threats.
  • in new zealand, one child was physically assaulted and another had a swastika and a star of david drawn side by side on their school shirt. children were greeted by their peers with nazi salutes, being called "dirty jews", being told "jews control the world", and jokes about jews being gassed, and the blood libel claim that jews "chop off babies heads."
  • the us and israeli embassies in buenos aires received bomb threats via email, including one which said "jews we are going. tokill you all."
  • three people were arrested under suspicion of planning an attack on the maccabiah games.
  • brazilian authorities arrested two suspects in a. hezbollah backed terror plot to attack synagogues and other jewish targets in the country.
  • a column on the israeli embassy on colombia was vandalized with a swastika, start of david, and the word "terror" in hebrew.

if you made it to the bottom of this list and actually read everything, reblog with the tag "heard." that's really it. i just want to know that people hear us begging for people to speak up.

To back up op-here's some reading on where exactly OP got their stuff from. And, I want to make it absolutely clear-the only ones to blame for antisemitism are the ones doing it. No 'but!' BS. The ones doing it chose to do it. They weren't forced.

Avatar
anemoia-soul

I'm gonna take this oportunity to talk about The AMIA attack in 1994.

(More so, I'm probably just copy, translate, and paste some articules about it.)

The AMIA attack involves both former and current important political figures, including multiple presidents, and the government of Iran. Nobody has been arrested, and Judges and Prosecutors who tried to uncover the truth have been sentenced or killed.

30 YEARS WITHOUT JUSTICE.

What is "El Atentado a la AMIA"?

« The attack on the AMIA was the largest terrorist attack in Argentine history. It has become, over the years, an endless maze full of irregularities on the part of the Justice system. In fact, at present, it is completely stalled, with no prospects of improving its situation. The attack occurred on July 18, 1994 when a car bomb crashed into the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA), leaving a toll of 85 dead and 300 injured. More than a quarter of a century after the attack, none of the perpetrators have been arrested or tried, nor has a single suspect been judged. It was not the only attack carried out. »

Why nobody was arrested?

« The prosecutor Alberto Nisman (The one in charge of the investigation) was found dead in the bathroom of his apartment in Buenos Aires. Just four days earlier, he had presented a complaint to the justice system against President Cristina Kirchner and four other individuals accused by him of covering up Iran's involvement in the terrorist attack »

« It is worth noting that the death of Alberto Nisman is being investigated as a homicide by the Argentine justice system, and it is directly linked to the role and work he carried out from the Special Prosecutor's Unit for the Investigation of the AMIA Case, as determined by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. »

Source: amia.org.ar

What does Formen President Menen has to do with it?

« This Thursday, a court convicted the first judge who investigated the case, Juan José Galeano, and the Secretary of Intelligence at the time, Hugo Anzorreguy, for having diverted the investigation, but acquitted the highest political authority of the time, former president and current senator Carlos Menem (1989-99) of the same charge. »

« Specifically, he was accused of having protected a Syrian-born merchant named Alberto Kanoore Edul, a suspect in the case, who allegedly had ties to the presidential family. »

Source: BBC

Who is Cristina Fernández de Kirchner?

« Fernández de Kirchner, who already had experience as a deputy and senator, was First Lady from 2003 to 2007, and then served as President of Argentina twice between 2007 and 2015. »

« After a return to the Argentine Senate during the presidency of Mauricio Macri (2015-2019), Fernández de Kirchner—or CFK, as she is also known—was elected Vice President and assumed office alongside President Alberto Fernández in December 2019. »

« In the role of Vice President, CFK has continued to exert significant influence on the government and on the political life of the country. »

Source: CNN

What does Cristina Fernández de Kirchner has to do with this?

« President Cristina Kirchner and Foreign Minister Héctor Timerman were accused by the prosecutor of the AMIA case, Alberto Nisman, of having made a secret agreement with Iran in exchange for reestablishing commercial relations. »

« According to the prosecutor, the evidence demonstrates that the plan aimed at removing Iran from the AMIA case originated in the President's prior decision to approach that country geopolitically and restore commercial relations. »

« The evidence collected allowed to affirm, without a doubt, that - at least, to carry out this criminal plan - the government set up a parallel communication channel between Argentina and Iran in order to transmit and implement the orders issued by the President and, thus, achieve the illicit objectives. »

« The intelligence personnel involved in the case manipulated evidence, individuals, and actively participated in fabricating the false hypothesis to illegally divert the course of the judicial proceedings, exonerate the Iranian defendants, and - at the same time - falsely accuse innocent third parties, attributing to them, with forged evidence, responsibility for the attack. »

What impact does it have on the Jewish community of Argentina?

This, this I'm going to talk about from experience.

THERE'S NOT A SINGLE JEWISH INSTITUTION WITHOUT ANTI-CAR BOMB ARCHITECTURE.

You can LITERALLY KNOW if the building you are standing in front of is Jewish BY ITS ARCHITECTURE.

In the club where I work (WITH KIDS), WE HAVE A DOUBLE HEAVY DOOR IN THE FRONT, WITH CAMERAS. AND IF THEY DON'T KNOW YOU, THEY WON'T LET YOU IN. The door is heavy because IT'S MADE TO BE AN ANTI-TERRORIST MEASURE.

Do you understand that? Nobody CARES. They VOTED CFK AS PRESIDENT TWICE SINCE THE AMIA ATTACK.

Do you understand what this means? DO YOU?

Think about this when you say that antisemitism isn't relevant anymore.

« Bonadio accuses the former president of "treason against the homeland," a criminal charge that carries a penalty of between 10 and 25 years in prison. »

Source: BBC

additional antisemitic attacks or incidents since making this post:

  • in february 2024, an imam at the belgian parliament recited a verse from the quran explicitly calling for muslims to kill and take jews captive.
  • in april 2024, a swastica was spray-painted on the home of a holocaust survivor in fleron, alongside the words "gaza free."
  • in august 2024, the federation of jewish communities in the czech republic reported 4,328 antisemitic incidents in the country in 2023, an increase of 90% from the previous year. from october to december, 1800 incidents occurred, accounting for almost 42% of the incidents of the entire year.
  • on march 1st, 2024, a jewish man was assaulted by a muslin teenager and was called a "dirty jew" after leaving a synagogue. the victim was hospitalized.
  • between may 13th and 14th, vandals graffetied several sights around the marais, a historic district home to many jews, with red handprints, a symbol used by pro-hamas activists. sites vandalized included schools, nurseries, and the wall of the righteous, a memorial that honors individuals who saved jews during the nazi occupation of france.
  • on may 17th a synagogue in rouen was set on fire by an algerian arsonist.
  • on june 19th, two teenagers were charged with the gang rape of a 12 year old jewish girl in courbevoie while making antisemitic remarks. a third boy was also charged for making antisemitic insults and death threats to the girl. the girl was reportedly called a "dirty jew" and the motivation for the rape was allegedly palestine.
  • on july 27th 2024, the paris prosecutor's office launched an investigation into antisemitic crimes in a football match between paraguay and israel during the 2024 summer olympics, including the group that shouted "heil hitler" while doing the nazi salute at the israeli team.
  • on august 24th, a 33 year old algerian man set fires at the beth yacoov synagogue in la grande-motte in an attempt to burn it down. the suspect said he had attacked the synagogue in support of palestine and wanted to provoke a reaction from israeli officials.
  • on february 2nd, a pro-palestinian college student in berlin assaulted a jewish classmate until he was hospitalized after an argument about the israel-hamas conflict. according to the police, the jewish student was punched in the face until he fell to the ground, after which he was kicked in the face while lying on the ground before the attackers fled the scene.
  • on april 5th, an unknown individual threw an incendiary device at the door of a synagogue in the northern city of oldenburg.
  • on august 29th, it was discovered that vandals had graffitied a holocaust memorial dedicated to the non-jewish family of german jews who had tried to protect them from being deported to concentration camps. the vandals spray painted "jews are committing genocide" and "free palestine" with a palestinian flag on the monument.
  • on july 4th, greek authorities arrested a greek, afghan, and iranian for their involvement in an attempted arson attack against a synagogue in athens.
  • on july 17th, three indivuals attacked fahad qubati, an arab-israeli tourist, in malia, crete, suspecting that he was jewish, resulting in injuries to his head and jaw. the attackers fled after a tunisian national showed them a cross that qubati was wearing to prove that he was a christian.
  • on april 25th during the march in celebration of liberation day in milan, a group of north african youths wearing keffiyehs and palestinian flags attacked the participants of the jewish brigade in piazza del duomo with kicks, punches, and sticks. a 19 year old egyptian man was arrested for beating a security guard with a stick.
  • following the israel-hamaz war, several rega stradinš university students from israel were reported to have received hate texts from other foreign students, with one person contacting the state security service in connection with antisemitic expressions and threats.
  • on march 22nd, a memorial for 6000 jewish victims of the holocaust in soroca jewish cemetary near cosǎuti was vandalized with graffiti that read "free palestine."
  • on february 3rd, the historic synagogue of middleburg was found to be defaced with swastikas.
  • on march 10th, the national holocaust museum in amsterdam was inaugurated by king willem-alexander in a ceremony attended by a number of holocaust survivors and their descendants, jewish community leaders, and foreign dignitaries, which included president isaac herzog of israel. in response, about a thousand pro-palestinian demonstrators gathered at the event at the portuguese synagogue where they jeered at ceremony guests, threw projectiles, vandalized police vehicles, and skirmished with riot police.
  • a concert by lenny kuhr in waalwijk on march 24th was disrupted by four people who unfurled a palestinian flag and called her. aterrorist and accused the singers family in israel of genocide.
  • on july 2024, a statue of holocaust victim anne frank on the merwedeplein in amsterdam was discovered to be defaced. the statue's feet had been daubed in red paint and the word "gaza" was sprayed onto its pedestal.
  • on august 4th, the 80th anniversary of the frank family's arrest, the statue was again smeared with red paint. this time the text "free gaza" was sprayed onto the pedestal and the statue's hands were also daubed in paint. later in august an information board in gouda describing frank's persecution and the publication of her diary was left illegible after a palestinian flag was sprayed on it.
  • a periodic survey of 8000 jews in 13 eu member states published on july 11th 2024 showed that 97% of the dutch respondants had experienced antisemitism in their daily lives in the year leading up to the survey.
  • on yom hashoah, may 2024, a group of pro-palestinian protestors disrupted the march of the living, a remembrance march from auschwitz to berkenau to commemorate the jewish victims of the concentration camps.
  • on february 3rd, a housing protest in porto escalated into an antisemitic demonstration where participants held signs assigning blame to jews and zionists for economic challenges. some signs called for the 'cleansing the world of jews.'
  • in april 2024, a woman wearing a shirt with the date october 7 and an anti-fascist symbol was arrested by spanish police after insulting and assaulting another woman for being jewish during a pro-palestine march in madrid.
  • on march 2, an orthodox jew was stabbed by a 15 year old in zurich. the teen later said he was doing the attack on behalf of al-aqsa, alluding to jihadist concepts.
  • a teacher in the peel school district posted "jews are the problem" in a private facebook group
  • on may 29th, a jewish school in montreal was struck by a gunman.
  • on may 31st, a man set fire to the entrance of a synagogue in vancouver.
  • on august 21st, around 125 jewish institutions in canada, including synagogues, jewish community centers, and hospitals, were sent bomb threats through email.
  • on february 11th, a gunman opened fire. ina lakewood church. her gun had a sticker with the word "palestine" and police uncovered antisemitic writings.
  • on may 29th, a man was arrested after saying antisemitic statements and attempting. toram pedestrians with his car outside of an orthodox jewish school in nyc.
  • on june 10th, a demonstration by within our lifetime took place near a memorial exhibit in lower manhattan for the victims of the re'im music festival massacre, in which over 360 people were murdered. some participants chanted antisemitic slogans, waved hamas flags, and celebrated the deaths. two days later, five houses belonging to jewish leaders and board members, including brooklyn museum director anne pasternak, were vandalized with red paint and pro palestinian graffiti. red triangles were sprayed onto one of the houses.

breaking up the section.

  • on june 23rd, a pogrom occurred outside of adas torah synagogue when pro palestinian demonstrators attempted to block people from entering through the main entrance and congregants began to fight back. demonstrators shouted antisemitic insults and beat a jewish woman at the scene.
  • on august 9th, three columbia university deans resigned during an investigation into antisemitic texts they exchanged in may while students expressed concerns about antisemitism on campus during a speaking event.
  • on august 10th, a 22 year old stabbed a jewish man near the headquarters of the chabad in crown heights while yelling "free palestine."
  • a committee in santa ana deliberately excluded jews from ethnic studies courses, one of the members accused a jew of having a "colonized jewish mind", and members intentionally planned to schedule votes during jewish holidays to avoid having to acknowledge jewish feedback or pushback.

i'm sure there are plenty more instances but these are just a few.

Can I add that in 2021 two agents from the Iranian revolutionary guard were caught planning to murder three jews in Sweden? Not that the list is too short... but this was a plot that was years in the making and I think more people should know about it.

Avatar
Avatar
makabunni

Spent a long time on this art resource/reference masterpost! If you have a request for resources for me to find OR have a resource you want me to add, just send me an ask :D 

General Anatomy/Human stuff:

Poses:

Hands:

Diversity:

Animals/Creatures:

Furry/Anthro:

Backgrounds:

Perspective:

Coloring:

Expressions/ Meme / style:

Pixel Art:

Clothing / Accessories:

Misc:

Brushes:

Avatar

There’s a book out there that’s either one of the last great unsolved cyphers or a massive medieval hoax. Welcome to the weird world of the Voynich Manuscript. And no, it isn’t solved yet.

I did this comic for The Nib last year (The Nib is an amazingly great place for comics on Medium if you don’t know that already). You can follow all my work on Medium here.

Avatar

THIS IS SO COOL

Avatar
spookyram

woah

This is from ‘Beasts of Burden’, a really cool comic about a bunch of dogs (and one cat) protecting their town from the supernatural things that threaten it. It’s spooky and sad and really just fantastic. At one point they teamed up with Hellboy. Everyone should read it (if you don’t mind some pretty dark things happening. it is not a cheerful comic but it is a good one).

Avatar
malafight

Hey! So, I loved this comic, and still think about it occasionally, and tonight it was linked to me again with just the right timing so that I hyperfocused and squirreled off to go read everything! They aren’t really numbered well, but the Wikipedia page has a list of them in release order and what anthologies to find them in!

But given that it’s a pain to seek out each one one by one, I’ve got a list of links in order a smidge further down! Please try to support Dark Horse Comics if you can, but if you’re broke like me and still want to read, the Internet is a beautiful place. According to the wiki page, there are at least two more installments to come, scheduled for May 1st and June 5th, but there’s no real update schedule for the series as a whole.

Do note: they are graphic, gory, and sad, with a lot of body horror. But they’re really fantastic.

Beasts of Burden: Animal Rites contains: 1. Stray 2. The Unfamiliar 3. Let Sleeping Dogs Lie 4. A Dog and His Boy 5. The Gathering Storm 6. Lost 7. Something Whiskered This Way Comes 8. Grave Happenings

Beasts of Burden: Neighborhood Watch contains: 10. Food Run 11. Story Time 12. The View From The Hill (the one in this post!)

This is one of my favorite series ever and I’m so glad it’s finally getting proper collections instead of one-off anthology appearances.

Warning, though, the story about Hazel and her pups will *destroy* you.

Avatar
Avatar
mellifexfarm

whats the best way to trim the crest+beard of a silkie? this lady can barely see with all that floof! 

apparently some people use little headbands to keep the fluff out of their eyes

80s chickens

Avatar
yemenitehole

yo im late but when i first got my polish frizzle bantams years ago from their breeder their crests were up to keep them out of the mud (because they’re show birds) and the result was amazing

chef hats/make-up brush hair

i love them thank you for the advice

Avatar
draconym

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Avatar
clickthefrog

I had to Google what frizzles looked like normally and

Avatar
Avatar
animentality

So, okay. You know that post about how some posts that appear to be just be saying innocent feminist stuff end up having a totally different context if they're made by TERFs?

This is that. Just A Simple Artificer (@CraftyCatDad) is the latest Twitter handle of Andrew Blake aka thanfiction, a grifter so prolific that he has an entire Fanlore page about him.

His past behaviors include but are not limited to starting two different cults, sexually and emotionally abusing multiple people (some of which he himself has admitted), committing documented fraud and identify theft, and in general lying about literally anything you can imagine someone lying about: having a terminal heart condition, being sold into sex slavery as a child, fighting on "both sides of the Troubles," having an evil twin sister who was really the grifter, and, notably, everything about the nature and extent of his past crimes and abusive behavior.

I am extremely abridging the entire saga: this is a history that spans over twenty fucking years. There is not a single fandom he has entered that he hasn't tried to grift.

Why am I bringing this up on a post that's not about fandom?

I have zero problem with the sentiment being expressed. But knowing the context of his past behavior – including his pattern of couching his abusive behaviors as "empowering" – it stops being a thoughtful meditation on the nature of gender and more him admitting that he knows exactly how to trigger people in order to exploit them, as well as a ploy to gather followers he knows are going to be vulnerable to that exact tactic.

since my post isn't visible in the notes for some reason, I'm just reblogging again to say that the guy that this is coming from has a 20+ year long history of abuse and should not be trusted no matter how much he tries to claim that he's an ally. (also tagging @theteablogger because their blog is the most extensive collection of Andy's history as a grifter and cult leader)

It's also worth adding that he has a history of specifically positioning himself as a progressive activist/expert in order to gain trust and followers and attention, which appears to be what he is doing here. Notice how he shifts his focus at the end of the thread to make it about himself, and how important the things he personally is doing are to solve the problem he has laid out. Normally, this wouldn't necessarily be a red flag - but in the context of his histo,-ry, it fits into a pattern of concerning behavior. (Aka, there is absolutely no reason to believe he has changed is any less dangerous now than he was back when he was running his cults. Do not engage with this man or give him the benefit of any doubt.)

He's already whining on twitter that the big meanies are deadnaming him to disrespect his gender or whatever.

Buddy, nobody gives a shit about your gender or your genitals. It's your grifting and your long history of being an ASSHOLE that we're red-flagging. No amount of "I just wanna post pics of my birds" can paper over those patterns of behavior.

Young fans and new fans in my followers, read that Fanlore page and stay away from this person.

Avatar
Avatar
cryptotheism

Tbh I'm kinda surprised at the "cultural Christian" discourse. Like is it that hard to accept that maybe spending your whole life in a Christian nation may have affected your worldview somewhat

Avatar
max1461

I think the problem is that that's not how the notion gets used, or at least, that's never how I've seen it used.

It's usually used, in my experience, to deny that atheists with any Christian heritage, even if they've been atheists all their lives, are meaningfully different from Christians. The argument often implicitly goes "there are atheist Jews who are still Jews, there are atheist Muslims who still identify as Muslims, therefore atheists of a Christian background are really just Christians". This ignores, of course, all the atheists of Jewish or Muslim background who don't identify as Jews or Muslims, who actually identify as "atheists" full stop. But cultural Christianity is often used as a cudgel in the repertoire of people who are interested in painting atheism-full-stop as something inherently bad, inherently a product of privilege, and so on. As a result, the term is often used in a nonsensical way and leaves a bad taste in the mouth of many.

I do think the OP is correct as stated—growing up in an ambiently Christian culture does carry with it certain ideological baggage that, if not consciously rejected, may potentially take root. The thing is, insofar as this affects atheists, especially those with a Christian family background many generations back but no actual life history as a Christian... it stands to reason that it likewise affects Muslims, Jews, and so on who grow up in the US. Which is in fact probably true, but I imagine this fact would draw the ire of many people who use the term.

But the reality is that most of the time, on tumblr at least, calling someone "culturally Christian" is a way of saying "even if you have rejected Christianity, in fact even if you have never been Christian and your parents have never been Christian, if your family was Christian at any point in the past then you still count as a Christian to me". It is sensible that this would ruffle the feathers of atheists.

yeah like, the term gets applied very broadly and very inappropriately on tumblr from what ive seen. like ive even seen people argue that atheists of jewish and muslim backgrounds in america are "culturally christian" because the usa is a christian country, which i dont think i need to explain why it's incredibly offensive and also nonsensical. i mean, china is an atheist country, but nobody's going to argue that christians, jews, and muslims in china are "culturally atheist", and yet people do that for atheists living in the usa. its just a really unfair double standard that i dont think people using the term on tumblr are realizing theyre doing

yeah, it’s a bit silly how much of this site has taken “being an atheist doesn’t make you ontologically incapable of holding Christian/conservative values” and ran with it so far that they’re just as hostile to atheism as Christian hegemony is

God yeah. The decontextualization treadmill works faster when it comes to internet religious conversations but it seems like for this term specifically it got turned up to 11 and I wonder why that is.

Well… the term was coined by an Israeli Jew who, while intending mostly to talk about people from Christian families/heritage, also mentioned that they have noticed American Jews have elements of being culturally Christian as well. Which makes sense!

I think it got turned up to 11 because the concept of cultural Christianity comes from a fundamentally Jewish understanding of religion and culture, and can’t really exist in a Christian or Christian-informed one. Then that combined with people’s trauma, and then it also combined with people’s residual weird ideas about Jews (as sort of… simultaneously Wrong and also The Most Christian) that they haven’t deconstructed.

I'm an American Orthodox Jew and let me tell you, spending time in countries that aren't predominantly Christian was such an eye-opener. Christianity is baked into every aspect of American society and culture-- the language, the calendar, the role of the community and the individual, what makes someone "good" or "bad", what an ideal society looks like, what an ideal government looks like, the definition of religion itself... There was so much I'd internalized without realizing it, and I bet there's still stuff rattling around in my head that I'm not aware of.

This isn't saying that I'm "really a Christian" or whatever. It's saying that I've absorbed ideas from the world around me. And again, I'm an observant Jew, I'm decidedly not a Christian anything-- but I am a product of American culture, and that culture is pretty damn Christian. It's not a moral judgement. It's just something to be aware of.

I don't think anyone's really disputing that people who grow up in a largely Christian culture will be affected by that in some way. The disagreement is over whether "culturally Christian" is the appropriate term for it. It kind of sucks having people apply a label to atheists, including ex-Christians, that they have explicitly rejected (and I say this as a lifelong atheist).

Just call it "Christian hegemony" or "Christian-normative" or point out specific behaviors and beliefs that stem from Christianity (like the last poster began to do); but applying "culturally Christian" to individuals who reject Christianity just seems imprecise to me, not to mention potentially offensive, as other people have said.

Am I - a person who has never been to church, does not understand most things about Christianity, and grew up in a very unreligious community in the US - the same as a person who went to church every week as a child but left Christianity as an adult? No. And the person who went to church every week but ended up rejecting Christianity may or may not have unlearned the various beliefs and assumptions that came with their Christian upbringing, and you will only really know if you talk to that person. Everybody is different.

Why don't we talk about the ways in which Christian normativity manifests itself, instead of labelling individuals as this or that?

Avatar
tuulikki

But the specific point is that it’s the culture. “Culture” is the most accurate term for the whole constellation of concepts we’re trying to describe: collective norms, behaviours, notions of time, cosmologies, spatial relations, shared symbols and systems of meaning, social hierarchies, traditions, and other communicated collective programming.

The normativity most people are usually talking about is a result of the hegemony attained by various Christianities around the globe. Christian hegemony needs to be understood as related to many of our experiences of cultural Christianity, but they’re not interchangeable. Hegemony is about the primacy and breadth of influence one culture attains. But culture is about culture. An atheist raised in Mongolia is culturally Buddhist, an atheist raised in Indonesia is culturally Muslim, and an atheist raised in East Timor will have a different kind of cultural Christianity than one raised in England.

Culture doesn’t mean that we all share the exact same ideas. As an image: Lots of different kinds of tropical fish live will live in the same lagoon. Everybody is different—in the diverse context of lagoon. But the shared symbologies and values philosophies of Christianity are our cultural environment as the tropical sea is for fish. And either you’re a tropical fish or you’re a fish from, say, the North Atlantic. No one is a blank slate, devoid of culture—and since culture and the social data encoded in religion are profoundly interrelated, no one should be surprised to learn that they are a product of their culture.

Normativity doesn’t cut sufficiently deep into the heart of the matter because cultures are what produce norms. In a culturally Christian society, it is normative to express a strong disbelief in Christian doctrine by not attending church. In other cultures, attending regular rituals presided over by religious specialists may indicate nothing about your spirituality either way. The culture determines the symbols and acts of the norms of atheism, starting with notions of “religion” as pertaining to individual belief or disbelief. That’s not just hegemony—that’s culture shaping the fundamental way a person interprets the world and their interactions with it. They may never have even heard of Jesus, but the cultural Christianity will be there.

If you’re a white American you have white privilege, even if you’re aren’t racist and went back in time to personally kill Jefferson Davis, because you still have white privilege under white supremacy. You can hate everything about the culture, but the objective nature of it exists independent from any individual, and the individual is inextricable from the culture.

Avatar

when christian artists change the line in hallelujah from “maybe there’s a God above” to “I know that there’s a God above” >:c

it’s also because Leonard COHEN (!) was Jewish and this is a quintessentially Jewish line, and changing it to that level of Annoying Certainty is stripping it of its Jewish meaning and imbuing it with that particularly American smug evangelical Christian attitude that makes me tired, so very tired

THAT IS EXACTLY WHY

Avatar
hachama

I don’t think I’ve heard any cover artist sing my favorite verses You say I took the name in vain I don’t even know the name But if I did, well really, what’s it to you? There’s a blaze of light In every word It doesn’t matter which you heard The holy or the broken Hallelujah I did my best, it wasn’t much I couldn’t feel, so I tried to touch I’ve told the truth, I didn’t come to fool you And even though It all went wrong I’ll stand before the Lord of Song With nothing on my tongue but Hallelujah

Avatar
cutecreative

I will always hit the reblog button so hard for Hallelujah but ESPECIALLY mentions of the elusive final verses which are just about my favorite lyrics ever. Why do people always omit the best part of the song??

In Yiddish

In Hebrew

Yeah, I wonder why the verses that reference specific Jewish mystical and chassidic concepts that aren’t readily understood by American “I love Jews, you know, Jesus was Jewish!” Christians never get any airtime. Funny that.

You say I took the name in vain I don’t even know the name But if I did, well really, what’s it to you? There’s a blaze of light In every word It doesn’t matter which you heard The holy or the broken Hallelujah

These are specifically about Chassidic Jewish theories of the holy language, how each letter and combination of letters in Hebrew contains the essence of the divine spark and if used correctly, can unlock or uncover the divine spark in the mundane material word. And of course, there are secret names of God which, when spoken by any ordinary human would kill them, but if you are worthy and holy and righteous can be used to perform miracles or even to behold the glory of God face-to-face. The words themselves have power. Orthodox Jews often won’t even pronounce the word “hallelujah” in it’s entirety in conversation, because the “yah” sound at the end is a True Name of God (there are hundreds, supposedly) and thus too holy to say outside of prayer.

None of this is to mention how David’s sin in sleeping with Batshevah (the subject of much of the song, with a brief deviation to Shimshon and Delilah) is considered the turning point in the Tanach that ultimately dooms the Davidic line at the cosmological level and thus dooms Jewish sovereignty and independence altogether. From a Christian perspective this led to Jesus, the King of Kings, and that’s all very well and good for them, but for the Jews, the Davidic line never returned and is the central tragedy of the total arc of the Torah. Like, our Bible doesn’t have a happy ending? And that’s what this song is about? There’s no Grace - you just have to sit with the sin and its consequence.

Of course, Cohen is referencing all of this ironically, and personalizing these very high-level religious concepts. Like the point of this song is that Cohen, the songwriter, is identifying with David, the psalmist, and identifying his own sins with David’s. The ache that you hear in this song is that the two thousand year exile that resulted from one wrong night of passion and Cohen feels that the pain he has caused to his lover is of equally monumental infamy. Basically, in a certain light, the whole of Psalms is a vain effort for David to atone for his sin and I think Cohen was writing this song in wonderment that David could eternally praise the God who would not forgive him and would force him and his people into exile. But he ultimately gets how you have to surrender to the inexorable force of God in the face of your own inadequacies and how to surrender is to worship and to worship is to praise - hence, Hallelujah. You can either do the right thing and worship God from the start, or you can fuck up, be punished, and thus be forced to beg for His forgiveness. It’s the terrible inevitability of praise that’s driving him mad.

Like honestly, I identify with this song so strongly as an off-the-derech Jew, I sometimes wonder what Christians can possibly hear in this song, as it speaks so specifically to the sadomasochistic relationship that a lapsed Jew has with their God. It’s such a different song from a Christian theological perspective it’s almost unrecognizable, man. This song continues to be a wonder of postmodern Jewish theology and sexuality from start to finish. Don’t let anyone give you any “Judeo-Christian” narishkeit. This is a Jewish song.

(Sorry about the wild tangent it’s just 2AM and I love this song so dang much, you guys.)

holy shit. woah.

Avatar
dduane

This.

That last bit from @stoneandbloodandwater, that’s a great articulation of the well of feeling, memory, storytelling, and culture packed into one of the most Jewish songs ever to get real famous. The song is both surrender and defiance, and that those are actually a single path together, not two opposite choices.

Avatar
jewishnursey

A small addition: This song is such a deeply resonant Jewish touchstone that every synagogue I have ever attended uses its melody in services from time to time.

It is so important, so powerful, so spiritually resonant that we use it in prayer.

If memory serves me, the cover we most often hear came about specifically because Jeff Buckley was like “man, this song is badass but I don’t know that I can do its concepts justice” and Leonard Cohen was like “you need different verses? Here, I wrote over eighty of the fuckers, pick what you want to use” and so Buckley put together verses that spoke to him as a non-Jew about sexuality and this idea of a failed relationship.

Which wouldn’t be an issue if Christians didn’t then take his adaptation (done, I emphasize again, with Cohen’s blessing) and rewrite it in ways THAT DO NOT COME FROM THE ORIGINAL VERSES.

Yes, this.

Considering how passionately erotic many of the lyrics are (and this is deeply aligned with Jewish tradition), I don’t know if I should laugh or cry at this being turned into some tepid meditation about faith.

Avatar
reblogged

In the latest instalment of ‘JKR is good at observing people but not really at understanding them,’ a guest feature by my ever-present unprocessed shit:

Can we just take a moment to appreciate HOW naive and/or arrogant Dumbledore was for trusting Snape, not only at the beginning but the whole time? Obviously this is a pro-Snape blog, and this is not about his untrustworthiness so much as it is yet another criticism of Dumbledore, but this guy defected overnight for all we’re told. There are a lot of reasons people disengage from hate groups and cults and gangs, and for some of those people it might be a single event that happens all of a sudden as opposed to a longer, gradual process, and so I don’t think it’s unrealistic for him to change sides with the threat of Lily dying. And maybe after she dies he’s so wracked with guilt and/or disillusioned that for the moment he has no desire to return to Voldemort. Ok, but here’s the thing: a lot of people in real life situations like that relapse. And disengagement isn’t synonymous with deradicalisation. Disengagement means you stop hanging around those people and you stop overtly identifying with it, but it doesn’t mean you’ve done any work as far as changing your beliefs or working on whatever things made that appealing to you in the first place. In order for him to have thoroughly deradicalised, he would need a lot more support. And while it’s true that in some cases a former extremist may either be recruited to go undercover or may simply get cold feet about it and turn informant (like happened with the case that’s been in the news recently involving the attempted kidnapping of the governor of Michigan), it seems very unlikely to me that anyone could continue to hang around the same people and keep up the pretence for very long without sliding back into it for real without a lot of constant support, especially if they didn’t actually get much of a chance to do thorough work on it before being asked to go back, and basically impossible if they don’t even have basic social support outside of it. In real life there is very little support and that’s what makes it so hard for a lot of people. But even if you successfully jettison that, even if you undo a lot of the beliefs you may at one point have genuinely held, all it takes is some bad turn in your life to fall back into it, and you cannot convince me that a guy who’s literally turned repression into a CV-worthy skill, cannot for his own safety and the success of his role talk to anyone about it or even admit to himself what he’s feeling most of the time lest it be discovered, and is still thoroughly hated by pretty much everyone on the side he’s now allegedly on has been able to even come close to doing the kind of work he’d have to do to fully protect against backsliding. And his sole reason for changing was out of the picture and not there to make sure he stayed on the right path. And he had every opportunity to switch allegiance and no one would know until the critical moment. It’s like finding an alcoholic who wakes up after a particularly bad binge saying “ugh, never again” and deciding that this person should be put in charge of taste-testing liquor with a bunch of hard-drinking frat boys, while also forbidding them from attending support groups or therapy or telling anyone they have a problem with alcoholism. It’s not a question of initial sincerity or trustworthiness. It’s just dropping them into the worst temptation you could come up with and not letting them have any support and thinking that surely there’s no way this could possibly get out from your control.

I’m just saying that Dumbledore was really a fucking bastard by just taking it for granted. And that’s not even dealing with the emotional price he was asking from him, just the practical. No acknowledgement of what drove him to it and no help and it’s just expected that he’ll never be tempted back to it despite every chance. Let’s be real, would Dumbledore even fucking notice if he were? He’d just be like *old man voice* “you gave me your word, Severus” fucking bastard

Avatar
sideprince

*sets aside the knowledge that JKR obviously didn't think about these characters and their choices carefully enough*

I think this analysis can also lead to an inference that Snape would have gone in a different direction if other options were available to him. We can assume that he was overlooked by his teachers from the fact that he wasn't in the Slug Club despite his brilliance, and given that this story is set in the UK, this is probably because of classism and his background. This would have meant leaving school without recommendations or connections other than the people he knew from his house at school, and having to find a job on his own unless they helped him. He would have likely been a different person if he'd been sorted into another house, and we're told he chose Slytherin, and did so because his mother had been one so it's likely she talked the house and it's values up to him before he got to school (and as much as the movies would have you believe Slytherin is just where evil people go, I think the books make it clearer that it's for people who value cunning and ambition and it's not about morals, but life philosophy).

So if he fell into being a DE for lack of other options, rather than having been radicalized into a rabid follower, he may have been waiting for a reason to get out of it. Maybe he went into it like Draco, high on ideology and a sense of power, and then realized it involves witnessing and being culpable in a lot of senseless violence, but by then it was too late to get out and he had no one to go to even if he did. I also wonder if he had already been looking for a way out and Dumbledore knew this. Of course, Dumbledore could have also just not overlooked him while he was at school, like all his other teachers. But then, it's Dumbledore, so if we're going to talk about how "disengagement isn’t synonymous with deradicalisation" then we have to acknowledge that Dumbledore would have done the same thing Voldemort did, just with different methods. Two sides of the same coin, right? Dumbledore keeps Snape at his side through emotional manipulation and coercion, and his hubris leads him to think this will last even after he's dead. Dumbledore counts on the fact that Snape has literally no one in the world, and that he's the only one (besides Lily) who ever showed him that he saw anything worthwhile in him.

Yeah, he definitely did manipulate him and remind him of what he supposedly owed Dumbledore at every turn, but I still think it’s foolish of Dumbledore to think that’s enough. Just look at his death: Snape kills him with avada kedavra, which we’re told you really have to mean, you really have to want to hurt the other person, and the book describes his face as being full of loathing and hatred when he does it. He’s loyal to him, but god, the resentment he must’ve had about that. He’s not stupid, and he is the head of the house of cunning and manipulation; I can’t believe he didn’t know Dumbledore was using him shamelessly. I think it’s just his guilt and lack of self-esteem that makes him go along with it. At least Voldemort doesn’t pretend to be the one with untouchably lofty morals.

Since both of them thought he was their spy and therefore had reason to play chummy with the other, he could’ve switched sides at any time and no one would ever know until it was too late. And I don’t think he had much of a reason to believe the ideology when he was not even a pureblood himself, although neither was Voldemort and you could argue that he hated muggles because he hated his father, but if you’re around that for too long, it just becomes normal, and you start absorbing it whether you intended to or not. I do think that the fact that he turned so easily, along with everything else about his personality, indicates that he was an opportunist rather than a purist fanatic. He wanted power, he wanted to be somebody, he wanted to fit in, maybe at first he felt he had to go along with it because he lived with these people. But there’s no indication he sincerely believed it. Even so, all of those things he wanted are things he still lacks outside his involvement with them. Even the fact that he’s important to the OotP depends on his involvement with the Death Eaters. The closest it comes to Dumbledore showing any concern at all is when he asks him if he’s tempted to flee like Karkaroff, and he says no, and Dumbledore accepts that. But I do think Dumbledore has a vested interest in making sure Snape doesn’t heal in any way, and that’s fucked up in addition to being foolish.

Someone else said the point is that the power of love conquers all, and I do think that’s what JKR was getting at, I just don’t think she actually has much of a clue about what she’s describing.

Just get this guy some therapy

Ah, ok, BUT. Describing his face as being full of hatred and revulsion was a parallel Rowling was drawing to how she had described Harry in the previous chapter when he'd made Dumbledore drink the potion in the cave. It's meant to be a clue that Snape, like Harry, was acting on Dumbledore's orders and doing something terrible "for the greater good," implying that the hatred and revulsion on his face was directed at himself, not at Dumbledore:

Harry in the cave:

Snape on the astronomy tower:

Snape's hatred and revulsion are deliberately framed as being part of his facial expression, but it's not clarified who or what they're directed at.

I mean, on the one hand I think that JKR's intention was that Snape DID mean it when he cast Avada Kedavra to kill Dumbledore, but there can be more than one way to mean a killing curse. What I mean is that Snape meant it because he knew it needed to be done and had agreed to it, but it wasn't in the same way that someone like Voldemort would murder someone.

On the other hand, I think JKR's intentions and canon bible are full of holes and weaknesses so, ya know...

But yeah, what you wrote is basically what I mean by Dumbeldore's hubris. He thought that his manipulations were enough. Which is what Voldemort thought too. Snape deserved better tbh.

I definitely agree that it’s ambiguous about who he hates, and I think at least some of it is at himself. But he also has a couple of moments where his resentment seems to slip through in The Prince’s Tale, so I think it’s both. I don’t know if he really hated him deep down, but it’s definitely a one-sided relationship from what we see. I hadn’t made the parallel between that and the scene in the cave; that’s interesting to think about for sure.

Yeah I think there are just significant inconsistencies between the intentions JKR reveals in her writing and the motivations of characters in different parts of the story. Some of it is going to subjective analysis, but some of it just logical inferences that any storyteller (whether a writer, actor, etc) would make. I would imagine there's a layer of resentment Snape feels towards Dumbledore that I'm not sure JKR even thought of, which is that in taking him under his wing (for lack of a better way to describe it), Dumbledore becomes kind of a father figure to him. And you can't be a father figure to a guy with daddy issues without garnering resentment.

Interesting point. I wonder what JKR imagined Dumbledore’s intentions to be. It’s clear at the end when talking about Dumbledore’s past that he carries his own guilt and belief in the greater good, so he isn’t entirely put on a pedestal in the series, but I wonder if she was intentionally writing him to be a kind of anti-Snape in the sense that they are both actually morally grey characters driven by the motivation of a loss they felt responsible for, but with Dumbledore being set up throughout the whole series as an unquestionably good guy, only to be revealed as grey, and Snape being set up as the villain, only to be revealed as grey, or if she really does believe she was writing the actions of someone with good morals. From the Fantastic Beasts movies it’s obvious she was trying to make him murkier, but who knows how she initially envisioned him.

Something related to that I saw a long time ago was a post talking about how the person couldn’t really get behind Severitus because Snape never had a parental role towards Harry and it seems unlikely given his baggage that he could actually heal enough to be a good father figure, but that they did have a lot of similarities to siblings with a big age gap, with Dumbledore as both of their father figures but having treated the older much more poorly than the younger and the resentment that comes with that. Snape’s reactions to the sparest of compliments from Dumbledore indicates how little affection he gets from anywhere, while Dumbledore is never anything but kind to Harry. In the end, they were both two sides of the same coin, with Dumbledore grooming Harry into sacrificing himself despite doing so with kindness, and imo Dumbledore failed them both. Since it can’t be said that he learned better since treating Snape so callously, the only options left are that he still carried a lot of prejudice against Snape after all of it, or that he simply calculated that Harry would respond well to affection and poorly to harshness, because Harry is distrustful of authority and Snape in contrast is already beating himself up so much it’s more effective to just leverage that. I don’t know that I’d fully agree with the interpretation that Snape saw Harry as competition for Dumbledore’s affection, but there are a couple times when it seems like that might be a factor, like when he bitterly complains about Dumbledore trusting Harry but not him, despite everything he’s done on his orders without fail.

My interpretation of Dumbledore was always that Rowling tried to make him more interesting with his backstory, and show that everyone has flaws, but in the end her intention was for him to be redeemed in the reader's eye and stay on his pedestal. He shows up at "King's Cross" when Harry dies as this Xtian God-like character and Harry makes peace with him, which to me shows that Rowling still venerates him. He doesn't resolve or regret his choices as an older man, such as his treatment of Snape, his manipulations of people, or the people he sent to their deaths for his cause, including Harry. People talk about how you can see JKR's prejudices in the books (and valid), but I look at how she wrote Dumbledore and I think you can tell so much about the ways in which she has serious issues to work through and how inherent she considers them that she doesn't even think they're problems.

Stepping away from her and her ability to write a character with as much thought as analysis can give it, I think a key difference in his relationship to Snape and to Harry is that he spent 7 years overlooking Snape at school and held Harry as a baby and left him on Petunia's doorstep. He knew Harry's parents, both at school and probably as neighbors, and even had a bit of a history with Lily's sister. Snape, on the other hand, was someone who completely escaped his notice until he overheard the prophecy and then came back to defect. It takes bravery to risk your life like that and as far as we know, no one else had found the courage or integrity to betray Voldemort. I can imagine Dumbledore feeling some measure of guilt for overlooking this guy, and the more they work together and the more he realizes Snape's admirable qualities, the more he would try to justify to both himself and Snape (whether deliberately or unconsciously) this gap in his treatment of one of his former students. So I think part of why Snape and Harry are treated differently is not just that Dumbledore has completely different histories with each of them, but that Dumbledore pities Harry, while he sees in Snape a constant reminder of his own shortcomings.

I dunno, I think someone as apparently capable of gentleness as he is towards Harry (or at least, he recognises its usefulness and how to fake it) and who generally seems to have the measure of people failing to see how he couldn’t gotten just as much from him with honey as with vinegar, and in doing so make up for having overlooked him, doesn’t entirely mesh with his character. But I do think that Snape is a reflection of Dumbledore’s failings to himself in two ways: 1, Snape realising his involvement with a dark wizard led to the death of someone he loved is very similar to Dumbledore’s break with Grindelwald, and I think Dumbledore may be unwilling to have mercy towards him because he is unwilling to have mercy towards himself, and 2, because he knows that he failed Snape, not for having overlooked him (although I think he should at least have the decency to feel bad that his inattention to a student in his care pushed that student into the arms of radicals, but the contempt with which he treats young Snape seems to go against him ever seeing it that way) but because he really did fail to live up to his side of a bargain Snape upheld anyway at the cost of his own life. It was not entirely his fault that the Potters chose Peter to be their secret-keeper, but ultimately he did fail to protect them, and when Snape shows up distraught about it, Dumbledore deflects the blame in a weird way, by saying they put their faith in the wrong person…rather like you. That last bit is such a weirdly unnecessary insult on top of injury that the only way I can wrap my head around it is to think that he meant himself as much or more than he meant Voldemort. So yes, I do think he saw a reflection of his own failings in Snape, but rather than treating that with compassion, he treats it with more harshness, and he is either unaware of or doesn’t care that holding him to the same moral strictness he might hold himself without offering any help or concern is taking a big risk he could’ve avoided by simply having been nicer.

The only way in which treating him like shit is actually more useful is in case Snape’s occlumency fails and Voldemort sees his true feelings about Dumbledore. As long as it seems like he has reason to hate Dumbledore I guess that’s a certain fence.

Oh oh ok I was just thinking about this yesterday, because I'm listening to Deathly Hallows again, and I was thinking about what @princesideprince pointed out about the parallels between Harry forcing Dumbledore to keep drinking the potion and Snape being forced to kill Dumbledore, how these two are so often set up in parallel (and specifically, they are set up in parallel in a way that Harry - and therefore the reader - misinterprets at the time and only comes to understand later, because the constant theme of their interaction is that Harry sees Snape as his polar opposite and enemy when in reality they have quite a lot in common, but he lacks the requisite context and maturity to understand it until later)

I listen to The Prince's Tale as background noise whenever I'm feeling moody, so I'm very familiar with that. Probably heard it a dozen times in the last six months. But yesterday I was at the part of the book that is post-wedding, pre-extended-camping-trip, where the gripe at the forefront of Harry's mind is that no one seems to "want him to know the truth." Rita Skeeter's book, Muriel, and Elphias Doge's evasive answers have Harry doubting if he really knew Dumbledore at all. He is frustrated by the way everyone seems to downplay his concern, but more importantly, he is troubled by the realisation of how much he didn't know about Dumbledore, when for the past 6 years he's had unquestioning faith in Dumbledore and is following his orders at great risk to himself and his friends. He has been asked to have complete faith in Dumbledore even after his death, and while he probably would still have tried to defeat Voldemort without these instructions, he is nonetheless still acting on faith that Dumbledore was correct. He has not yet found out that it will be necessary for him to die, but he is aware that he is risking death, and Dumbledore says in The Prince's Tale that he thinks that Harry suspects it. That is a lot to ask of anyone, much less a teenager. And we know that Harry is not one to put his faith in anyone else or to simply take "because I said so" as an answer. He has followed Dumbledore so completely and willingly because Dumbledore was a kindly father figure to him when he had never had one, and with the revelation that maybe Dumbledore wasn't the saint he'd built him up to be in his head, it must feel like a betrayal. And Dumbledore really has been grooming him this entire time; just because it was done "nicely" doesn't mean it wasn't still the intention all along.

An interesting tangential thought: Harry beats himself up for not asking Dumbledore more about himself, which tells us something interesting about Harry, because the more-objective reader knows that Dumbledore would not have told him anything he didn't want him to know anyway, and this was never a relationship between colleagues or equals, and it was not Harry's role in this dynamic to enquire about Dumbledore's life in the same way it was Dumbledore's to enquire about Harry's, but it seems more comfortable for Harry to think that he was the one who had acted self-absorbedly than to admit that Dumbledore used him.

Anyway. Harry grumbles in 12 Grimmauld Place:

He lay on the floor, and he thought of the horcruxes, of the daunting, complex mission Dumbledore had left him. Dumbledore. The grief that had possessed him since Dumbledore's death felt different now. The accusations he had heard from Muriel at the wedding seemed to have nested in his brain like diseased things, infecting his memories of the wizard he had idolised. Could Dumbledore have let such things happen? Had he been like Dudley, content to watch neglect and abuse as long as it did not affect him? Could he have turned his back on a sister who was being imprisoned and hidden? Harry thought of Godric's Hollow, of graves Dumbledore had never mentioned there. He thought of mysterious objects left without explanation in Dumbledore's will, and resentment swelled in the darkness. Why hadn't Dumbledore told him? Why hadn't he explained? Had Dumbledore actually cared about Harry at all? Or had Harry been nothing more than a tool, to be polished and honed, but not trusted, never confided in?

I actually had kind of zoned out listening to this because I knew he was about to find the letter in Sirius' room and I was off in my own emo world, but the last sentence snapped me back to attention so hard I had to go back and listen to it over again, because we hear a nearly-identical complaint 23 chapters later:

The office disappeared, and now Snape and Dumbledore were strolling together in the deserted castle grounds by twilight.
"What are you doing with Potter, all these evenings you are closeted together?" Snape asked abruptly.
Dumbledore looked weary.
"Why? You aren't trying to give him more detention, Severus? The boy will soon have spent more time in detention than out."
"He is his father, over again!"
"In looks, perhaps, but his deepest nature is much more like his mother's. I spend time with Harry because I have things to discuss with him, information I must give him before it is too late."
"Information?" repeated Snape. "You trust him? You do not trust me."
"It is not a question of trust. I have, as we both know, limited time. It is essential that I give the boy enough information to do what he needs to do."
"And why may I not have the same information?"
"I prefer not to put all of my secrets in one basket, particularly not a basket that spends so much time dangling on the arm of Lord Voldemort."
"Which I do on your orders!"
"And you do it extremely well. Do not think that I underestimate the constant danger in which you place yourself, Severus. To give Voldemort what appears to be valuable information while withholding the essentials is a job I would entrust to nobody but you."
"Yet you confide much more in a boy who is incapable of occlumency, whose magic is mediocre, and who has a direct connection into the Dark Lord's mind?" ...
"After you have killed me, Severus-"
"You refuse to tell me everything, yet you expect that small service of me?" snarled Snape, and real anger flared in the thin face. "You take a great deal for granted, Dumbledore! Perhaps I have changed my mind!" ...
"You have used me!"
"Meaning?"
"I have spied for you, and lied for you, put myself in mortal danger for you, everything was supposed to be to keep Lily Potter's son safe! Now you tell me you have been raising him like a pig for slaughter!"

Anyway I had something else I was trying to say here but now I've bummed myself out again TT__TT my point is just that this is another parallel between them. They both feel used by Dumbledore and resentful that he does not trust them the same way he expects them to trust him. The main difference is that, theoretically, the relationship between Snape and Dumbledore should be one of equals, while the relationship between Harry and Dumbledore was always mentor-student and not actually expected to go both ways. Dumbledore's behaviour towards Snape is therefore additionally and intentionally (notice that Dumbledore repeatedly calls Snape by his first name, while Snape always calls Dumbledore 'Dumbledore') reinforcing a power dynamic that should no longer exist now that Snape is an adult and a colleague, because he has to remind Snape who's in control here. Ironically, I think Snape is actually less likely than Harry to defy Dumbledore, because acknowledging that he's being treated unfairly enough to go against his promise would require more self-esteem than Snape has. I think that by the end, Harry has a much more mature and healthy view of things than Snape ever did, even though Snape was privy to more information and for longer.

Oh wow. I've always been aware of the parallels between Harry and Snape (and Harry an Voldemort, and to some extent Snape and Voldemort, because "three lost boys" etc.), but I never realized how much Dumbledore ties Harry and Snape's experiences together and is the crux of them. But yeah, now I think about it, Dumbledore allowed Snape to be bullied, and was also the one to drop Harry at the Dursleys and let him stay there for 16 years without intervening. Neither Harry nor Snape would defy Dumbledore, because they're too dependent on him (though I think the main reason Snape is less likely to is more because Harry is prone to recklessness and his job and livelihood aren't entirely dependent on Dumbledore not rejecting him. Harry has a place at Hogwarts and Dumbledore can't expel him easily, whereas he can fire staff members for insubordination).

Those are just the first things that popped into my head, but I'm sure there's a lot more going on there.

I dunno, Harry seems upset in the times when it seems likely he’s going to be expelled, and Snape is too valuable for Dumbledore to fire him. Dumbledore needs him to maintain his cover and reason for being at Hogwarts. I get the impression Snape would have loved to jump ship if he had the opportunity. One of my favourite funny headcanons is that he didn’t actually want to teach DADA at all but knew that if he got that job he’d be dead, insane, or fired before the year was out and that’s why he was the only one who ever wanted the job.

We aren’t shown it, but the anxiety of growing up with people who obviously don’t want you there would realistically get to a kid. He is reckless and does not think through the consequences of his actions, but he would be very upset if he got kicked out of Hogwarts, and he didn’t think “nah, Dumbledore would never” in those occasions. But he has a better sense of injustice about being treated poorly than Snape does.

I think Dumbledore exploits these dependencies in both Harry and Snape. That said, the times Harry thinks he's going to be expelled don't pan out, and on occasion Dumbledore himself intervenes. I also think that after several experiences of thinking he's about to be expelled, only to find he isn't, Harry might have developed a bit more of a sense of security. He's not fully secure ever, I think, but after you get away with flying a car to school and are just given detention, and breaking the statute of secrecy and get told to spend two weeks in a hotel room and a magic promenade full of shops, and then break the statute of secrecy again and are given a full scale trial and get off, if you're still breaking into teachers' offices to talk to your fugitive godfather, you probably have some semblance of a sense of security when it comes to your place.

My point is that I think if Harry had wanted to push back more and argue with Dumbledore, he wouldn't have been afraid that Dumbledore would expel him from school. He may have been afraid that it would damage their relationship or Dumbledore would push him away, but not that he would lose his place at Hogwarts (and even if he had, he has a pile of gold he can fall back on ). Snape, on the other hand, needs to stay on Dumbledore's good side or he could lose his job and with it his home. He doesn't have much to fall back on (even if he'd saved his salary for a decade+ it wouldn't be enough to live on for long), and is much more vulnerable than Harry in a lot of ways. He was important to Dumbledore, and I think Dumbledore knew this, but I think he also exploited Snape's vulnerability - both practical and emotional.

So it's not so much about just the practical ways that Harry and Snape would have each been dependent on Dumbledore (or not), but how they perceived themselves to be. Dumbledore had different relationships with both of them. Harry could ask him anything, and knew Dumbledore might not give him an answer if he didn't want to. He could push back against Dumbledore and would find resistance, but not necessarily reprimand. Snape, on the other hand, knew that Dumbledore always kept him at arm's length and made sure he felt it. If he had pushed back, he wouldn't just find resistance, he would find rejection, and risked it being not just short term but possibly even long-term depending on the offense and his stubbornness. That relationship was always more fragile because where Harry was someone Dumbledore took under his wing, Snape was someone Dumbledore allowed there conditionally.

Yeah I think Harry having friends and teachers who liked him were “corrective healing experiences” or whatever therapists call it. He learned to be more secure, or at least strong enough in his convictions about right and wrong that he was willing to risk it. He would have friends even if he got kicked out. But definitely Dumbledore made sure Snape felt the fragility of his position. Which brings me back around the the first part of the post, because Dumbledore could very easily have pushed Snape too far (and really, how could you even tell when that line was crossed?) and created the greatest weapon against himself in the process.

Avatar
reblogged

Was reading on wikipedia about how lots of ancient cultures had beliefs and traditions where you had to offer prayers and/or sacrifices if you wanted to cut down a tree because you were basically killing the spirit that lived within the tree and if you did that without good reason bad stuff would happen to you

we should bring that back. if you want to clear cut a forest you have to pray and sacrifice on behalf of every single tree

The more I learn about ecosystems, the more I realize that characterizing "animistic" belief as superstitious and primitive is one of the dumbest lies ever told

I, as well, am an animist (knows what a soil microbiome is)

Now I don't know all the details about these religions all over the world with beliefs and practices like this.

But this way of believing says that a stream or a tree isn't just a Thing, you can't just use it however you want, it's a Life and you owe it respect. And if you want to cut down a tree, you have to think really hard about whether you really need to use that tree, because there's a Process, and you have to really think about and dwell on the fact that you're killing something that's alive and that gives life.

And the important thing is, if you see the trees and plants and rivers as sacred and living, dumping toxic radioactive waste in the water and clear cutting the forest is an unthinkable act of sacrilege. If you see that the mountains are sacred and have spirit, you can't rip them wide open to blast and dig out coal with dynamite and pickaxes.

You know that if you violate the water, or the forest, or the mountains, with such destructive greed, something terrible will happen.

But animism is not a metaphor and it’s literally not true…

Unseen forces must have evidence to be believed in, not mere vibes!

Trees are literally alive and the welfare of forests literally affects us directly

That’s not what animism is!

thude, animism is literally an anthropological word, and describes general beliefs about nature being alive. it's a descriptor, like "pagan," not a strict set of beliefs and values.

also animism can be used as a metaphor, because, uhhh. that's how the English language works. *thumbs up*

animism is not a metaphor for cell theory; ‘nature’ is not alive! that is not a true statement except via wordplay that does not conform to the broader standards of use in the world—

—animism is concerned with souls (not real except by metaphor) and overwhelmingly includes inanimate objects such as rocks or phenomenon such as weather; neither of which are alive (contain living cells)

animism can only ever be redundant or incorrect; if it’s just a fun way of saying certain actions have consequences, it’s redundant—

—if it’s taken literally; then it will cause untrue conclusions; such as spiritual pollution from cutting a tree down being the cause of human suffering rather than a chain of material changes that can be accounted for

a common effect of the conflation will be the injection of ethics into material questions—whether it is possible to do something becomes synonymous with whether it can be done ethnically (in accordance with at bare-minimum quasi-spiritual framework)

Avatar
vergess

1) You are willfully ignoring the fact that 'alive' means one specific thing in cellular biology and has different technical meanings in other fields. Using the wrong framework on purpose makes you seem less informed, not more.

2) You are citing outdated, disproven and incorrect information, again seemingly rooted in cellular biology rather than anthropology, theology, ecology, zoology, botany, or any other applicable field.

3) Putting in your tags "I know what I'm talking about because I almost went to school for it, but chose not to" also doesn't make you seem well informed or add any weight to the sense of authority you are trying to speak with.

4) That's also not how the words 'metaphor' and 'animism' would be used by someone approaching this conversation in good faith from a modestly informed perspective.

It's fine to be ignorant about things! We all are!

But you're using that ignorance to condescend to other people in an attempt to cut off a discussion you aren't comfortable seeing. That's uncool.

If you have questions, then ask them. But giving unprompted and unwanted "corrections" that are themselves untrue and outdated is NOT the same as 'trying to overcome discomfort or ignorance.'

1. There is no scientific field in which alive means invested with spiritual energy.

2. Theology is not an applicable field! This is exactly what I’m talking about: theology is only relevant to the study of beliefs, not material reality.

3. It clearly tagged personal lore because it’s just a bit of characterisation for my personal blog and to counter any claims that I lack appreciation for the field. Even so, multiple years of study is still greater investment than the vast majority of people ever will spend on a subject. It is certainly above a Wikipedia scroll-through.

4. Words are either being used in a real way or metaphorically or in a provocative (philosophical if feeling charitable) manner in which the gap is muddied by playing around with the definition of real.

Clinical to call me condescending in the same post as:

It's fine to be ignorant about things! We all are!

'Theology is not a relevant field of expertise in this theological discussion.'

Yeah, okay, you definitely know the first thing about any of this. I was being nice. I'm done now.

The fact that you keep calling it "science" instead of cellular biology is a dead giveaway of your stunning ignorance. Every "real scientist" knows that "science" is the application of reproduceable testing to reach data backed conclusions.

And even in scientific fields which discuss the interconnectivity of the biosphere have been acknowleding since the 1960s that our technology and understanding of that interconnectivity is limited.

Your insistence on universalizing the cellular biological technicalities of one term to apply to all other fields, scientific or otherwise, is at best more of the presumtuous, colonial attitude being discussed.

You are in no uncertain terms a moron.

Unlike the glee you took in describing your ignorance and then making a coy joke about it, I actually AM a sociologist, and a statistician.

I actually do have training in relevant fields.

You are not only mistaken about cellular biology, but about every single field I listed previously. Because every one of them has more valuable data and insight on animism than cellular biology alone.

But I'll meet you at your level, you wanton and cheerily ignorant fuck.

CELLULAR BIOLOGY ALSO HASN'T DEFINED LIFE LIKE THAT FOR DECADES.

The while "life is reaction, growth and reproduction" model hasn't been meaningful outside of children's schooling for so fucking long that even referencing it in this way makes me doubt you're actually a biologist either, no matter how much you keep using their vocabulary.

You are speaking out your ass.

You are lying about all kinds of scintific fields so you can piss all over cultures and religions you don't understand.

You're a bad scientist, and a bad human being.

Try the fuck again.

Avatar
Avatar
sayruq

It annoys me how Dumbledore tells Snape that perhaps they "sort too soon". Basically imo implying that because of his actions (protecting Harry at great risk to himself) he actually belongs in Gryffindor, and that's not the case at all. Yes Snape was brave, but he is a Slytherin through and through imo, & that's not a bad thing. That being said though although there is a lot of narrative bias against Slytherin, it's not overlooked like Hufflepuff & Ravenclaws sometimes are

Avatar

it annoys me too but it’s fascinating. i bet snape thinks his life went to hell when he was separated from his only friend so dumbledore was rubbing salt in his wound. snape also craves validation and praise from authority figures which includes dumbledore, who tends to withhold affection so when he does give it, it overwhelms snape and probably made him more likely to carry out dumbledore’s plans. imo ‘we sort too soon’ applies to dumbledore who is machiavellian when it comes to snape (and to smaller extent harry).

dumbledore is jkr’s mouthpiece so snape willingly putting his life on the life finally makes him worthy enough for the golden club. i don’t know how to feel about that because slytherin is very obviously the house for evil people and snape did his best to rehabilitate it (very few students joined voldemort compared to slughorn’s tenure as head of house) but the idea that he finally elevated himself so that he was now good enough for gryffindor is so interesting because he did it by protecting harry who is canonically gryffindor’s heir.

that conversation says a lot about jkr. read this post about harry potter being colonial fantasy and realise snape occupies a different spot than harry. he’s not sporty or overtly brave, he’s a spy with features that might be considered ethnic. someone many years ago (i hope @deathdaydungeon can confirm or deny) said that in the old english books (from the 19th and 20th century), there’s usually an english male character who is athletic and often pursues the affection of an english woman who has a foreign suitor, usually french or from another european country. this person has greasy hair and hooked nose, etc. if this is true then dumbledore’s quote could be read as snape transcending his otherness to become worthy of standing on the same line as the heroes.

regardless there’s some form of elitism going on and without a doubt gryffindors are considered elite since they inherit the ministry and run it the ‘right’ way.

Avatar

Ah, alas, I’m not very strong on classic English Literature - however, I’ve certainly read/watched media in the past where the female lead falls for a foreign suitor, only for the world to be astonished when she rejects the - as you describe - English, athletic, dashing, handsome, rich hero (possibly even a war hero).

Of course, the wider world doesn’t realise that the Englishman isn’t the desirable hunk that he’s assumed to be but is likely instead a complete bounder.  In choosing the suitor, she’s choosing romance - and that’s certainly the trope, the triumph of true romance over the desire to be in the right society circles.  Indeed, making such a choice could be regarded as the reckless rejection of riches and status and wealth (and thus, safety and security for both her and her children) in favour of love.

@raptured-night, @idealistic-realism00, do you happen to know more about this?

There are a few posts by @professormcguire that might fit. I’ve also written a bit about Snape’s coding and how it follows a tradition in Western literature of framing characters with “dark features” (e.g. dark clothes, hair, eyes, and occasionally the character may be described as swarthy or sallow to hint to race) and “wild and/or tempestuous” moods as a foreign “other” symbolic of danger, violence, and predatory desires for “noble/pure (i.e. white) women.” 

WELL

Since I-

1.       Am very strong on Classic English Literature

2.       Am already used as a source in this post (the colonial fantasy bit)

I might as well completely hijack the rest of it and talk about my special interest: Gothic fiction from the mid-18th century to the early 20th century.

Gothic fiction, forming as an opposing force for the 1700-era enlightenment sentiments, has ever since its early days made a good use of the “demon lover” trope. Gothic as a genre has forever been mainly a genre written by women (and sometimes by men using a female pseudonym) and mostly consumed by women, and therefore female experience has usually been in the centre of the (classic) Gothic novel. And as many Gothic novels are an allegory for the female experience in a patriarchal society, the plot tends to manifest itself in the form of the heroine having to face two opposing forces that pulling her into two opposing directions (virtue vs danger)

Lutz in her book, The Dangerous Lover: Gothic Villains, Byronism, and the Nineteenth-Century Seduction Narrative, sees the figures of the Gothic narrative through three main players: The Heroine, the dangerous lover/villain (the demon lover), and the virtuous lover. The heroine is the one who embarks on the journey of self-discovery and peril, the stand-in for the reader, the object of love for the virtuous lover, and an object of lust/obsession for the demon lover. Meanwhile the two opposing lovers create a kind of metaphor for the heroine’s internal struggle between the warring desires for virtue/motherhood and lust/freedom. And because Gothic is all about revelling in the 18th/19th century unspeakable, the demon lover has a tendency to be more memorable character than the virtuous lover. “The Gothic enemy moves, changes, hides a riveting past and future, while the Gothic [virtuous] lover’s insipidity comes from his stasis as a character, his ability to be only one thing” (Lutz, 31).

In the classic 18th century Gothic, these lines stayed quite simplistic and audience expectations were rarely, dare I even say never, subverted. Good was good and evil was evil and usually the fault of the Catholics. The Gothic novel of the 18th century almost always took place in some southern European (Catholic) country, (Most often in Italy) reassuring the readers that such horrors could never take place in the English soil and that 90% of the demon lovers in the world are Italian. (The rest are from some other foreign non-protestant country, or even from literal hell. but is there really even a difference.)

Some examples of Classic Gothic novels and their demon lovers are:

Ann Radcliffe, Mysteries of Udolpho: Signor Montoni.

Matthew Lewis, The Monk: Ambrosio

Ann Radcliffe, Italian: Father Schedoni

Ann Radcliffe, Sicilian Romance: both Mazzini and De Luovo

Eliza Parsons, The Castle of Wolfenbach: Count Wolfenbach

Eleanor Sleath, The Orphan of the Rhine:  Paoli

Etc.

When physically describing these catholic bad boys, the Gothic author would stick to the same old tried and true formula:

“His Nose was aquiline, his eyes large black and sparkling, and his dark brows almost joined together. His complexion was of a deep but clear Brown; Study and watching had entirely deprived his cheek of colour.” (Lewis, The Monk, p. 5)

“His figure was striking, but not from grace; it was tall, and, though extremely thin, his limbs were large and uncouth and as he stalked along, wrapt in the black garments of his order, there was something terrible in its air; something almost superhuman. His cowl too, as it threw shade over the livid paleness of his face, increased its severe character. [-] and his eyes were so piercing that they seemed to penetrate, at a single glance, into the hearts of men, and to read their most secret thoughts” (Radcliffe, The Italian, 35)

“Black hair, eyes and eyebrows, black cowls, black veils, and “swarthy” complexions signify something frightening, suspect, evil, and distinctly other than the implied reader- [something…] villainously Latin”.   (Eugenia DeLamotte, “White Terror, Black Dreams: Gothic Construction of race in the Nineteenth Century)

Then in the 1800s, the game slowly started to change. There was still:

Count Fosco, creepily in love with the English Marian, in Wilkie Collins’ best-seller novel, Woman in White, goes back to the classics and has the villain to be an Italian count with “Napoleonic Features” (This means to have yellowish pallor to your skin and a curved nose).

But mostly the Gothic and Sensation fiction of 1800s was more concerned with other type of villain. The readers and writers of Gothic were starting to suspect that the villainous foreign lover might be coming from inside the house all along. It was time to bring out the English-Foreigner hybrid. The half-blood.

As the empire forced the foreign lands onto British consciousness, it obviously brought with it some anxieties for the British people. Like: what’s going to happen when all these foreigners want to immigrate here from the lands we forcibly conquered? Or: what will happen when racially pure Brits interbreed with these other people?

Catholic Italy lost its title as “the scary terror place” and with it the Italian counts and monks disappeared from Gothic literature. But the black-eyed, brooding, mysterious demon lover did not. It just moved in to be neighbours with the racially pure virtuous lover and the heroine, who no longer needed to be dragged all the way to Italy in order to be terrorized.

Heathcliff, “black-haired”, ”dark-skinned gypsy”, with “sallow cheeks” and “eyes full of black fire”, is found on streets of Liverpool as an infant, and grows up to be the exact demon lover that everyone would expect him to be with his appearance. But the imperial guilt is starting to build between the pages, with a slight suspicion that maybe Heathcliff’s abuse in the hands of his pure English peers might have had something to do with how everything turned out. Still, to love something like Heathcliff means to die, as Catherine does. The Victorian audience might like to play with the idea of the heroine choosing wild sexuality instead of domesticity, but such an ending cannot be written down. To choose sex is to die. (And during this era of literature, the love triangle is always presented between sex and chastity. Put away all your ideas of love triangle revolving around anything else.)

In Jane Eyre, the demon lover Bertha Mason, Mr. Rochester’s creole wife, has to die so that Mr. Rochester and Jane can choose virtue together. The half-English mad-woman in the attic still has many of the same characteristics as our former demon lovers, where foreignness mixes with hellishness.:  “the lips were swelled and dark; the brow furrowed: the black eyebrows widely raised over the bloodshot eyes”, with “dark hair” and “discoloured black face”. Most importantly, she is still the third point of a love triangle where foreign degeneracy is ruining virtuous English marriages.

The vampire obviously arrived all the way from Transylvania to be the ultimate demon lover and making women all over England feel wild and voluptuous, “clad in black from head to foot”, “aquiline, with high bridge of the thin nose” and “extraordinary pallor.” Dracula got modelled after his predecessors, the evil Italian monks that Radcliffe and Lewis had established about a century ago. But the scary thing about Dracula was that he was able to “pass” in the English society, buying property and walking the streets of London like any other Englishman. The anxiety about someone with foreign blood having the ability to “pass” was rooted right in the hysteria against interbreeding with foreigners. “Fear of race mixing, of “miscegenation,” which allows racial others to pass for whites and continue secretly to infect their blood” (Malchow, Gothic Images of Race in Nineteenth-century Britain 148)

Alec D’Urberville, the bane and doom of Tess, has “an almost swarthy complexion”, “touches of barbarism in his contours” and a family that immigrated to Trantridge from who know where and changed their name to better fit the idea of an old rich English family. Even the local friendly demon rapist lover has some of that sweet foreign air about him.

The half blood took over the cheap sensational/Gothic novels and became the staple of the popular culture. “The emergence of the half-breed threat as an overt device in the turn of the century Gothic. […] Half-breed Gothic is densely commonplace” (Malchow, 233)

For example:

Annie Linden: Half-Caste, (black eyed half blood villain seduces English native and then dies.) Marryat: Blood of the Vampire, (black eyed half blood villain seduces several English natives and then commits suicide) Fanny Stevenson: The Half-White, (Black eyed half blood is a reason for a generational illness) are just few of the many novels where a half blood seduces and then dies, as “enslaved by their perverted, unnaturally constructed bodies. Their only ultimate recourse is self-destruction” (Malchow, Gothic Images of Race in Nineteenth-century Britain, 172).

But after the success of Woman in White Wilkie Collins also wanted to subvert audience expectations and wrote the character of Ezra Jenkins in his novel Moonstone to throw a curveball for the contemporary reader. Ezra, who bears all the markers of Gothic villain:

“His complexion was of a gipsy darkness; his fleshless cheeks had fallen into deep hollows, over which the bone projected like a pent-house. His nose presented the fine shape and modelling so often found among the ancient people of the East, so seldom visible among the newer races of the West.” (Moonstone, p. 699)

“Why is he so unpopular?” “Well, Mr. Franklin, his appearance is against him, to begin with. And then there’s a story that Mr. Candy took him with a very doubtful character. Nobody knows who he is— and he hasn’t a friend in the place. How can you expect one to like him, after that?” (Moonstone, p. 700)

However, Ezra Jennings, whose status as a half-blooded Englishman hybrid scares and unsettles everyone he comes across, (The maid faints the first time she sees him) is also the one who in the end is able to solve the mystery of the Moonstone and save the full-blooded Englishman Blake from infamy and misery. Ezra is nothing but kind, gentle, and helpful and he also has to die in order for the full sympathies to stay on his side. Suffering from an incurable illness, Ezra is from the start only a visitor in the social circle of Blake and his friends. Therefore, Ezra isn’t a threat that could permanently change the way class and race boundaries are set in the characters’ lives. Blake is more than happy to offer his friendship to Ezra, but this offer of friendship is understood to be very one-sided affair. Ezra helps out Blake, but Blake in return doesn’t have to return the favour in any way, as Ezra’s fate is already sealed. “I am indebted to Mr. Franklin Blake,” he said, “for having seen some happy days. Don’t distress him, Mr. Candy— don’t distress him” (Moonstone, 998). Ezra’s insistence to not cause any distress to his friends makes him exotic but safe companion for the English characters who do not wish to question the boundaries that Ezra’s whole existence is questioning. In the end, they have to do nothing but bury Ezra in an unmarked grave, personally mourning the loss of their friend but at the same time erasing any trace of the racial hybrid amongst their society. This personal mourning is allowed, as it does not threaten the wider racial boundaries of the society.  

Even in Moonstone, the novel that got famous for subverting audience expectations and taking Gothic tropes and completely upending them, certain character archetypes are best either villainised or buried. (Before we buried our gays, we buried our racially ambiguous side characters.)  

NOW if you made it all the way here, congratulations!! I’m FINALLY going to start talking about Harry Potter. The first thing to do, is to point out that in light of all of English Gothic literary history, describing Snape like this-:

“Teacher with greasy black hair, a hooked nose and sallow skin” (Philosopher’s stone, 138)

“His eyes were black- […] They were cold and empty and made you think of dark tunnels” (Philosopher’s stone, 150)

“And there he was, at a table right behind Harry. Harry stared. Snape-the-teenager had a stringy, pallid look about him, like a plant kept in the dark. His hair was lank and greasy and was flopping onto the table, his hooked nose barely half an inch from the surface of the parchment as he scribbled” (Order of the Phoenix, 641).

“There, his black robes rippling in a cold breeze, stood Severus Snape. He was a thin man with sallow skin, a hooked nose, and greasy, shoulder-length black hair” (Chamber of Secrets, 66)

“On Professor Sinistra’s other side was the sallow-faced, hook-nosed, greasy-haired Potions master, Snape” (Goblet of fire, 175)

-Is and obvious reference to said Gothic literary history. Someone like me (Who has a catalogue of English written Gothic novels in her head) cannot sidestep the fact that Snape is nothing more than a bundle of Gothic villain tropes taped together. And the fact is, that when you tape together 300 years of Gothic villain tropes, you also end up opening a pandora’s box of racial discourse.

THE IMPORTANT THING to remember is that I firmly believe that Rowling during no part of writing the novels thought of Snape as anything else as ethnically Caucasian. The whole James/Lily/Severus love triangle is played between three white characters.

BUT by using a quick short-cut of coding Snape to “look like a villain” comes also all this baggage.

And at this point I started to think about talking the entire construction of a love triangle in literary historical sense and the Jungian analysis of love triangles always representing the protagonist pushing her inner struggles with animus/anima into two separate suitors/representations of self, but I’m not going to even go there, because 1. right now I’m making things more deep than they in reality are and 2. Let’s be honest nobody’s reading this post at this point anymore.

So to conclude: Yes, there is a history of racial tension in Snape’s characterization and I also I need to get a hobby beyond writing literary essays in tumblr.

 Bibliography: 

DeLamotte, Eugenia “White Terror, Black Dreams: Gothic Construction of race in the Nineteenth Century”,  The Gothic Other: Racial and Social Constructions in the Literary Imagination, Ed. Bienstock, Howard. McFarland & Company, 2014

Malchow Howard, Gothic Images of Race in Nineteenth-century Britain, Stanford university press, 1996

Lutz, Deborah. The dangerous lover: Gothic villains, Byronism, and the nineteenth-century seduction narrative. The Ohio State University Press, Columbus. 2006.

Reed, Toni. Demon-Lovers and Their Victims in British Fiction. The University Press of Kentucky, 1988

@ankkaneito​, I can’t tell you how happy I was to see this post.  Thank you so much for taking the time and effort to lay it out.  

What’s curious to me is how deeply embedded these images are in our culture - it’s as if my subconscious knew this but I couldn’t recognise where it originated from.  It’s curious how we take in these descriptions via cultural osmosis and everyone in that shared culture understands and accepts that the depiction = X.

The section regarding half-bloods is also extremely interesting when read through the lens of Snape being revealed as the Half-Blood Prince.

I also think this element of your post was interesting:

THE IMPORTANT THING to remember is that I firmly believe that Rowling during no part of writing the novels thought of Snape as anything else as ethnically Caucasian. The whole James/Lily/Severus love triangle is played between three white characters.

BUT by using a quick short-cut of coding Snape to “look like a villain” comes also all this baggage.

We’ve all talked before about how JKR (frankly, like most white British authors) writes white as default, but it is astonishing to me how many prefer to cast James as a different ethnicity to add another layer to why the Dursleys openly reject Harry, when there is already a clear explanation of Petunia’s resentment which neatly fits into classism.  

And whilst art, headcanons, fic etc are super interesting (I’m as guilty of this, I’m forever queering the text to find depictions that represent my sexuality), I think the popularity of such stances then starts to bleed into fandom and affects meta - or, at least, some readers’ understanding of it.  

Ultimately, it leads to a really surreal situation where the canonical depiction of James vs Severus as being “an upper class, privileged teenager openly bullying a working class teenager who is presented with hybrid coding” is altered to being “an ethnically diverse teenager openly bullying a ‘white boy’” - and when you have a post like this, which explains the root of Snape’s coding, it demonstrates just how bizarre such an interpretation is.

It’s interesting to me that we’ve talked about Snape and how his villain coding creates a depiction of insufficient masculinity - he’s male, but not overtly so - and this analysis demonstrates that his villain coding also creates a depiction of being insufficiently white - he’s white, but perhaps, not overtly so.

A lot to think about here.

It’s also really interesting to me how JK Rowling seems to have absorbed gothic tropes but shows no signs in her writing (at least in HP, I haven’t read her other works) of the kind of research and deeper understanding that ankkaneito added to this post. It feels very similar to the way she created clear parallels between the Death Eaters and neo-nazis/the KKK/western racist ideologies in general I guess, but shows no deeper understanding of what that means. She doesn’t do research and her ideas and perspectives are unexamined by her. A lot of it gets filled in by fandoms, and a lot of it is, I think, stuff she stumbled into because she’s good at studying people, but not necessarily at understanding them. I saw a post once where someone was talking about how if JKR would have understood how fascism takes over a society, we would have seen Hogwarts students having arguments and conflicts regularly, and seen the markers of a society grappling with rising fascism in ways that anyone doing basic research on 1930s Germany would, or that many of us experienced during and leading up to Trump’s presidency. We see blatant propaganda, but not confusion. Anyway, not to derail this, my point is basically that Rowling applied the gothic tropes she absorbed when studying English lit but, like many other aspects of the HP series, didn’t go beyond what she already knew. I feel like she has a vast and brilliant imagination, but limited curiosity.

I love posts like these because I also truly think that JKR did not consciously use tropes understanding that they are tropes, but nonetheless, she uses them heavily, and like was said very well above, her intention does not remove the baggage.

I do wonder how many of the people who specifically make James non-white in order to add that extra layer as discussed are American vs British. Not that the UK doesn’t have racism, of course not, but the American understanding of social dynamics between groups is extremely heavily based on race, moreso than class, in a way that I don’t think the countries quite share (especially because the US is so much younger of a country and simply does not have the same centuries-old class institutions or a national identity steeped in open pride in colonialism, and because most of the most-visible minority in the American awareness were taken forcefully as opposed to immigrating from the hinterlands, the texture of American racism as a whole is subtly different, except perhaps specifically in areas with large immigrant populations, where xenophobia may be a bigger factor than specific racism).

Also, perhaps this is just my own petty lack of charity towards her, but I can’t actually imagine her writing a non-white character as the hero at the expense of a white character or to intend that to be the dynamic. She’s a cishet white woman with a well-established victim complex and I just can’t see her deliberately going “yeah, I want to talk about my group oppressing others.” The Death Eaters and Voldemort’s ideology are so un-subtly allegories for racism (the way some people try to argue otherwise is frankly ridiculous; she hits you over the head with it constantly) but also like was said above, she doesn’t actually seem to understand what a society would look like in these conditions, and it has always come across, just like her clumsy attempts at making Lupin into some kind of AIDS queerphobia moral lesson while also making Fenrir Greyback a child predator, like she is doing it because she knows on some level that racism and bigotry are Bad and she is desperate to be seen as Good and so she writes about fighting against evil racism without actually ever looking at the far more insidious ways she uses racial and class stereotypes. Like her very public meltdowns about trans people, it is clear that her anti-bigotry stance stops at her own front door and she will choose her own white cishetness over anything else. But like I said, I’m not inclined to be charitable to her.

Avatar

I understand if you want to ignore this ask or block me for it, but I hope you see it as a good faith question. You expressed disdain toward Christians who observe Jewish festivals. Like we are stealing something from you, from your culture, desecrating it. I defiantly agree in regard to those who do it as a fad, without striving for deep understanding. In your opinion, is it possible for those of other religions to observe the Jewish festivals with respect, with empathy?

Avatar

In your opinion, is it possible for those of other religions to observe the Jewish festivals with respect, with empathy?

Yes.  By accepting invitations by Jews to be guests at our festivals when we celebrate them.  Period.  

Any other method is stealing our culture and desecrating it.  Period.

To paraphrase a quote I’ve seen elsewhere, my heritage is not a sandbox for outsiders to play in, not after the number of bodies that you’ve buried in it.  

Avatar

So, @ifitistobeitisuptous​, the wording of this ask has gotten stuck in my brain like a popcorn shell stuck between your teeth, and I want to treat it as good faith, but I need to address a few things.

To begin with, there’s a rhetorical trap here that I want to address.  I don’t “express disdain towards Christians who observe Jewish festivals”.  But “disdain” is an interesting choice of words, and I need to dissect it.  Because first off, it’s fairly mild, as such words go, describing a feeling of contempt, dislike, disgust… but also carries with it the implication that I consider myself superior to those I “disdain”.  

That is not the case, and this is part of why this ask was so hard to treat as being asked in good faith.  Saying that I “express disdain” conveys the implication that I’m somehow the person on top, looking down with scorn at these poor Christians who just want to “observe the Jewish festivals”!  And that ties into antisemitic stereotypes about Jewish supremacists (i.e. “only Jews are good enough,” “Jews are the Chosen People,” etc) and that’s a game I don’t want to play.  

So, no, I don’t “express disdain”, because I don’t hold myself as superior.  I just want my minority culture to be treated with respect and allowed to exist without having to justify it in a Christian context.

Now, with that being said, no, I do not hold them in “disdain”, because, as noted, that word is fairly mild as far as communicating dislike goes.  So let me be clear to communicate the depth of emotion here.  I express boiling outrage and furious loathing for these people.  I loathe them on a level I can barely express without dipping into superlatives.  I have ‘disdain’ for inconsiderate smokers.  I have dislike for “civility over substance, and promoting false balance” journalists.  I have disgust for anti-maskers.  I loathe Christians who “observe Jewish festivals”.  

Because “like we are stealing something from you, from your culture”, desecrating it” is in fact completely accurate–and the fact that you include yourself in that number does not do you any favors, which is why this was so hard to treat as a good faith ask.  

I’ll be blunt: Christianity has an entitlement problem when it comes to other people’s cultures, and always had.  In fact, as non-Christians are so frequently reminded at this time of year, “Christmas” started as a pagan holiday.  So did Halloween.  So did any number of other holidays that were made Christian.  So there’s the whole “learn from history” thing there, where I, and other Jews, would very much like it if our festivals didn’t end up becoming Christianized over the next few centuries.  Because we’ve learned from all of the other religions that Christianity has wiped out and paved over.  That’s the first point.  

The second point is that the reason we have our own festivals is that we inherited them from our ancestors and maintained them despite persecution.  And very often, that persecution was from Christians.  In Christian Europe, the Jewish people were marginalized, tortured, forced to do the horrible work, repeatedly expelled from our homes, legally discriminated against, made scapegoats of, and massacred.  European Christians hated Jews so much that one of the rationales given to legitimize the Irish conquest by England was that they were “Judaizers”!  And that legacy hasn’t gone away.  So after over a thousand years of brutality and violence, Christians don’t get to just “observe the Jewish festivals” as they see fit–because that’s just a continuation of that history of violence.  Just now, instead of expelling the Jews from their homes and taking those homes, like Christians used to do, this mindset is expelling the Jews from our own culture and taking it for yourselves.  

And third, if you want to talk Christians stealing our culture and desecrating it…

Let’s talk about “Messianics”.

Fifty years ago, a bunch of Christians who were dismayed that they were not having much success with converting Jews, which they believe is required in order to bring about the Second Coming, created a fake religion called “Messianic Judaism”–which is literally taking all of the festivals, rituals, and trappings of Judaism and profaning them by making them all about Jesus.  Jewish ritual objects are desecrated with the name of a Christian god.  Our prayer shawls are embroidered with Christian symbols. Our Torah scrolls are handled by bare hands.  Even our foods are reinterpreted in light of Jesus.  And this was all with the goal of tricking Jews into worshiping Jesus and thus wiping out Judaism, as per point one.

And that’s not even counting the fetish Christians have for Jewish paraphernalia.  The Green family (the ones behind Hobby Lobby) have a museum full of Torah scrolls acquired under… questionable circumstances.  Far-Right Christians love blowing Jewish shofars for some reason.  Buying Jewish prayer shawls by Christians is typical.  And on and on and on…

And there’s also the simple fact that, in their interpretation of Christianity–an interpretation that is common enough to be a plot point in those “Left Behind” stories–in order for the Second Coming to come about, all of the Jews must be gathered in Israel, the Gospel preached at us, and then we all die.  And those of us who accept the Gospels (supposedly exactly 144,000) will ascend to Heaven to escort down Jesus, while the remainder go to Hell.  

So our purpose in their worldview is for us to die as a sacrifice to bring back your god.

So for any Christian that wants to “observe the Jewish festivals with respect, with empathy”… yeah.  You have all of that baggage, and the only way to achieve that respect is to come in as a guest.  

So, as a followup to this older post, this crossed my dash the other day:

“These Jewish holidays where Christians used to massacre Jews for not accepting Jesus are now Christian holidays! They’re not “Jewish” anymore!“

Look at this post from @xenanichols , who presents themselves as a nice person, posting “things that make me happy”–which apparently includes taking Jewish holy days and shoving the Christian god on them.

Can this be done with respect? I’d say no.

And the thing is… these are Jewish things. The early Christians said so at the early ecumenical councils of the 3rd and 4th centuries, where they banned Christians from celebrating these holidays.

And if people want to go against those councils–the authoritative decisions of all of the world’s Christians at the time–so that they can celebrate these Jewish holidays, then you also have to give up everything else decided on at those councils.

Things like…

The Trinity. The Holy Spirit. The Divinity of Jesus. Jesus as Messiah.

All of it.

So I had my own post cross my dash, just a few after the “humans love rituals; if you take their rituals away, they’ll make up new ones” post.

And I realized something as a result, a synthesis of history and cultural backgrounds and all of that stuff.

So the people most responsible for this wholesale appropriation of Jewish culture for their own aggrandizement are American Christian Evangelicals and others in their immediate cultural orbit.

The thing is, Evangelicals are culturally descended from the iconoclastic Protestants (iconoclasm is “destruction of icons”, such as religious art); in short, during the Protestant Reformation, the Catholics went for religious iconography and art, and the Protestants went for academics and intellectualism as a way of distinguishing themselves from each other.

Later, much of American Protestantism–especially the Protestant-derived groups in the American slave states–proceeded to throw out most of their intellectual traditions in favor of institutionalized White Supremacy; there’s an excellent article on that here. So what you have left of “Christianity” at that point isn’t much–no art, no sacred objects, very little ritual. Mostly what they’ve got is totemic devotion to the idea of “Jesus”, but–thanks to the anti-intellectualism–very little familiarity with the man’s actual teachings. So it’s this very stripped down faith that is basically designed to operate entirely on appeals to emotion.

Thing is… humans crave rituals and venerated concepts, and the Christianity of the Evangelicals–where they’ve “chiseled God down to fit in a box”–doesn’t offer much of any of that.

But they can’t take back the sacred objects and rites of the Catholics, even though that’s part of their distant cultural heritage–that would be tantamount to admitting that the Catholics were right, and these people hate Catholics. However…

Their religion just doesn’t offer fulfillment on any level–not spiritually, not emotionally, not culturally. Because their own faith is so starved of anything that can give them a sense of meaning.

But they need to find something with emotional substance to it, because they’ve got nothing. Like, the precursor to this post started with me trying to think of something that was a sacred object to American Protestants, and irritably commenting to my sarcastic thoughts that, no, an AR-15 is not a sacred object! But that sarcasm was revealing, because I literally cannot think of anything that is sacred or venerable to Evangelicals that isn’t either a weapon or stolen from somebody else.

And that’s the thing.

They need to steal those bits of culture from someplace else–and the closest source that they can rationalize to themselves as acceptable and legitimate are the rites and sacred objects of Rabbinic Judaism.

Avatar
robinasnyder

Here’s where I’m coming from: preacher’s kid, still attends, have parents who give a damn about church history and traditions. I’m a methodist (aka: about as close as it gets to catholic without being catholic). I can also say that this is based on experience and knowledge, but I could be wrong. And if I run head first into anything that is stupid, painful, harmful, it’s not my intention and I’ll try to fix it asap.

Okay, so here’s the situation. Catholicism has these 7 sacraments. To describe it reductively, they’re the things you have to do to get into heaven. Essentially, baptism, confession, confirmation, marriage or nun/priesthood (which is considered a marriage to God), communion and last rites. These go hand in hand with the ornate chapels, the traditional mass, and the “smells and bells” as I’ve heard it called.

Hypothetically, Protestantism doesn’t need all that. But a lot of those sacraments are still somewhat a thing within the traditions of the church and the different denominations. There’s no confession, just encouragement to tell your pastor/pray. There’s no last rites. I can’t speak for every denomination, but there are traditional hymns and books for worship and traditions which are supposed to be followed. There are sacraments, but I can only think of two which are treated with any importance: baptism and communion (and a lot of squabbling about how/when/where you do these things has lead to many different denominations). But these sacraments are often treated as… not sacred and kind of annoying.

In white churches, there are almost always *less* people on communion sunday. Confirmation and baptism are either treated like that annoying thing you have to sit through before you can leave church, or an occasion where you get free cake. Also, most protestants don’t do a proper bread and wine, but grape juice. (This is a longer theological debate that I’m not getting into.)

And all of this reductions are in full force just in denominations where the traditions are closer to catholicism/orthodoxy. The further you get from traditions, the wilder it can get.

Considering that basically since the 80s, the church has been bleeding members due to (in large part) alienation caused by the religious right, increased ties to the NRA and the commodification of faith, protestants have been desperately trying to appeal to younger people by way of being more “hip” and “cool”. Rather than doing this by being accepting, helping the poor, supporting reform, making any real internal change, the church has chosen to do this by throwing aside traditions in favor of “modern Christian music” (which is basically shit on a stick, but that’s a passionate rant for a different time), having a “praise band” and basically removing even fundamental things from worship like the Lord’s Prayer and the Apostles’ Creed. There’s now coffeeshops instead of outreach. It’s very rich/middle class and in many ways even more combative toward anyone who is poor or non-white, non-christian, or queer. All of this is also wrapped in a very smug bow.

So basically, even American Protestant denominations which are more steeped in tradition and ceremony have being struggling to find an identity when there’s a general thought that “young people find the traditional stuff borring”. So, when you’ve literally ripped out your identity rather than support any type of change, in a shitty half hearted attempt to appeal to “outsiders” while also still serving the conservative members who pay your bills, suddenly you don’t have an identity. Even our holidays are fucked up. Christmas is honestly nice, but not truly important. Easter is actually important. Like really important. Both are treated as spectacle, pagents, gore-porn, modesty-porn and all ton of other things. But they aren’t ceremonies anymore. Not really.

So, there’s no emphasis on sacrament, ceremony, history, the actual sacred texts or traditions. And those things can’t be re-added because they’re seen as unappealing. (They are also reminders that hypothetically you should be helping other people, not supporting guns, which those loudest/in power don’t want you to remember.) So what are they doing? Appearantly claiming traditions that aren’t ours.

It doesn’t help that so much thought/literature is antisemitic, to the point that I know so many kind, loving people who are just casually antisemitic in the “oh, they don’t know better” way. I’ve taught Vacation Bible School (a week long jesus-themed summer babysitting situation, tbh) a few times. These are basically prefabricayed materials churches can buy and use, and everyone basically does the same one every year because they all buy frlm the same company. I specifically remember one year I was supposed to read (from the script) something that was just so casually antisemitic that I’ve literally changed the whole lesson to avoid using anything written. I’m still haunted by it bc while I could change it, I didn’t know how many thousands of people just read the script as is, or what any of those kids remember.

So, to try and sum up: American Protestants have stripped away their religious identity to either worship at the altar of Republicanism, or to try and draw in younger generations while refusing to move on anything actually important. The antisemitism can be so baked in that even without being openly hostile, there’s a lot of infantilization. As such, the church feels more than happy and welcome to go all grabby hands for “new ideas”, the new ideas being Jewish religious traditions in this case. Because celebrating these holidays is “new” and “exciting” and can both be presented as being more open to diversity (it isn’t), and being more traditional (it also isn’t).

Aaaand that’s about it. I hope this makes sense.

This completely matches a lot of what I’ve heard from other American Christians; one of them commented that they’ve cut down the services and the requirements to the point that they’re basically playing a numbers game in terms of “warm bodies in seats”. My question is pretty much “do you feel that this is a more recent shift or a more historic shift that’s been accelerating over time?” Because a lot of my knowledge on these cultural shifts is focused more on historical eras.

(Also, I have a second question, but one that you don’t have to answer, because it’s purely bile fascination for me, like looking at a car accident on the road: what was that bit that was casually antisemitic from the script? I can tell you if I’ve encountered it “in the wild”, so to speak, from the other side)

I want to add to this, because it’s part of my deconstruction process (former Wesleyan pastor, now…..agnostic I guess? - so this is my experience with Wesleyan/Arminian traditions especially, where it’s possible to “lose salvation”, so this would be Wesleyan, Methodist, Presbyterian I think?, some baptists, probably others. Calvinists tend not to have that issue in the same way)

To add to what’s been said, there’s also two other mindsets that feed into this: 1 - “We don’t need this” - a superiority thing that’s mostly been covered above (rejecting Catholocism and iconography), but further than that, the whole “we have the Spirit and that’s a direct link to God and any ritual is unnecessary “going through motions” mentality runs deep. They genuinely do not see their own rituals (the ways they pray/worship/sing/celebrate/study etc.) as the same thing as the spiritual rites they look down on. The specifics of what is allowed and what is looked down on changes with individual groups. 2 - “This could be demonic” - because of the possibility of losing salvation, there is a lot of fear of “backsliding”, “spiritual influence” and other forms of “opening yourself up to demonic forces”. This is why yoga is bad and praying to the saints is bad and anything that might be occult is bad. If you’re doing an unsanctioned spiritual practice (be it speaking in tongues, meditating, or what have you) then it’s possible whatever is happening is actually from the devil and you’re at risk of losing your ticket to heaven.

So for these people especially, there is a certain appeal to Jewish traditions, because they are less likely to be looked down on as dangerous, and with the built in antisemitism, there’s a sense of ownership/superiority - they will honestly think they’re celebrating “right” and the Jewish way is “wrong” (because there’s no Jesus). It fills the gap that a lot of people are looking for with regards to tradition and ritual with a side bonus of feeding the ego. (as a side note, realizing it is impossible for me to untangle antisemitism, colonialism and white supremacy from the doctrines I had been taught was one of the key reasons I gave up on Christianity. It took me a long time to see these things for what they were, because everything I was taught (as a parishioner and in my pastoral training) reinforced that we (the tradition I was part of) were doing things the “right” way and any resistance to that was the devil, actually, and should be ignored on that basis alone. This is not to excuse it at all, just to point out one of the reasons it is SO HARD to get western evangelicals to actually think about and listen to things like this, because there is genuine fear they will lose their place in eternity. Christianity can really mess people up)

So for these people especially, there is a certain appeal to Jewish traditions, because they are less likely to be looked down on as dangerous, and with the built in antisemitism, there’s a sense of ownership/superiority - they will honestly think they’re celebrating “right” and the Jewish way is “wrong” (because there’s no Jesus). It fills the gap that a lot of people are looking for with regards to tradition and ritual with a side bonus of feeding the ego.

That explains a lot of why they have to treat our rituals like how Immortan Joe treats his property–emblazoned with Jesus on everything.

Like, seriously, I’ve seen them try to explain why matzo is perforated as being symbolic of Jesus… when it’s actually just done that way so it doesn’t bubble up into a balloon when it’s baked. The Hamantashen’s triangular shape is because of the Trinity.

Honestly, part of the prelude thought process that went into this post was me trying to think of something that was sacred to these people that I could compare to get across the degree of violation that comes with their profanation of our cultural objects and traditions.

But I couldn’t think of anything, and now I’ve realized why–because they have nothing.

Avatar
terulakimban

I feel like this is why it’s easier to explain to Catholics what the issue with Christian seders is. 

If I were to say to anyone affiliated with Catholicism, however vaguely, “oh, that communion thing looked cool, and I like the whole thing, so I started doing it, but I took my own spin on it -I used my diva cup as a shot glass to incorporate real blood in celebration of the divine nature of the human body,” they would get it. Immediately. I don’t think I’d need to go quite that far to make my point; that was just chosen for shock value. I could talk about trashing a crucifix or something -my point is that Catholics understand the concept of sacred. Evangelicals, IME, don’t. 

Those pamphlets they throw all over the place with bible verses? The ones they’re expecting people to trash or step on or rip up or deface? I find the carelessness they have for their own holy word distressing. I’m Jewish. Our holy texts as used in ritual are hand-scribed calligraphic art pieces that we ornament. Our holy texts as used in study don’t get placed on the floor, get kissed if dropped, get buried when they can no longer be used. That someone cares so little for what they consider to be holy that they pass it out to be garbage is… disturbing. 

And that people trade their own cultural identity for that emptiness? If it weren’t so scary, it’d be pitiable. And that’s before looking at the megachurches that can’t even provide a sense of community. If you don’t have tradition and you don’t have symbols and you don’t have scholarship and you don’t have ritual and you don’t have community, why have religion? Especially if you also want to strip festivals and music out. What could possibly be worthwhile about that to someone?

This completely matches a lot of what I’ve heard from other American Christians; one of them commented that they’ve cut down the services and the requirements to the point that they’re basically playing a numbers game in terms of “warm bodies in seats”.  My question is pretty much “do you feel that this is a more recent shift or a more historic shift that’s been accelerating over time?”  Because a lot of my knowledge on these cultural shifts is focused more on historical eras.

I am a Lutheran minister, and I have some thoughts on this.

(Also, on an unrelated note, I laughed out loud at the Wesleyan calling themselves “the closest you can get to Catholic without being Catholic” because no. That would be the Anglicans/Episcopalians or the Lutherans. Wesleyans, being descended from Anglicans/Episcopalians, are closer than say the Baptists or Pentecostals, but got rid of the Catholic elements that Anglicans and Lutherans kept. While there are theological differences, the structure of worship is the same in Lutheran and Catholic churches.)

First, the “ritual vs. intellectual” divide when Catholicism and Protestantism first split apart was very real. Martin Luther, the one who kicked open the process of the Reformation, was a university professor; for the first few centuries, most of the major Protestant leaders were very highly educated (many of them being university professors themselves). This is not to say that there weren’t a lot of deeply intellectual and smart Catholic theologians and leaders; but that was largely in support of the existing ritual/mystical/theological edifice, not seeing if they could work Christian theology out from first principles, the Bible, and their (very wrong) understanding of the Bible’s formation and the history and culture surrounding it.

A lot of Catholic ritual and mysticism was good and awesome; some of it was predatory. Consider indulgences, the thing that Martin Luther first broke with Catholicism over: they were basically selling the hope of heaven in order to raise money to pay back a loan that was taken out so that a church official could bribe the Pope to give him a better job. What started as “this specific practice is a problem, and also is not in the Bible so you can’t defend it that way” became “anything not directly commanded in the Bible is unnecessary.” And through schismogenesis (where people define themselves as Different From Those Other Guys and react by making themselves as different as possible) most Protestant groups got rid of everything. (Anglicans and Lutherans took a middle way of only getting rid of stuff we specifically had objections to instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.)

Which left intellectual study as the thing Protestants rallied around. It’s all about having the right understanding, being able to correctly interpret the Bible. There are two main problems with this. One is that humans need ritual on the deepest level, and (aside from Lutheran and Anglican churches) there wasn’t much left (and even most Lutherans and Anglicans had a lot less than Catholics had).

The other problem is that it’s inherently exclusionary. Anyone can have a mystical experience; any member of the church can participate in the Sacraments. Anyone can take comfort in beautiful art and music in the worship service. But not everyone can go to seminary and get a theological degree! Most people can’t!

So starting in the 17th Century you get all these Protestant lay (i.e. not led by clergy) movements that are all about piety and emotion, because they need something. The academic debates of the great scholars at the universities, while interesting on an intellectual level, don’t really fill the spiritual hole that’s been left. There’s a lot of mutual antipathy between the clergy and the lay movements because the clergy are offended at not being in control, and also there are lots of theological “problems” in many of these lay movements (i.e. stuff that contradicts the doctrines being promulgated by the university theologians). The lay people who are members of these movements are offended by the clergy trying to control them and denigrating their heartfelt spirituality. There’s a lot of class conflict involved, because the vast majority of university-trained ministers aren’t peasants, let’s just say. And in most places, the clergy (professional, upper-middle-class, agents of the social hierarchy and sometimes actual government employees) can call on the local social and governmental forces to try and clamp down on and harass these lay movements.

So then you add the American colonies into the mix. Some of the people most likely to go are these lay movements that are being harassed, and they’re hostile to the university-trained theology for very good reasons. One, they find it spiritually sterile, and two, the educated clergy have been using their education as a club to beat them with. You did get a lot of people who were loyal to the standard religious hierarchy and doctrine coming over to settle “America,” too! They were the majority, in fact! … what you didn’t get were many of the university-trained professional clergy who knew the intellectual underpinnings of their brand of Christianity. Because the university-trained professional clergy were middle class people with good jobs, why should they want to move to a foreign place? It took until the late-19th-Century for denominations that wanted educated clergy in the United States to be able to train all their own clergy without needing to import them from Europe.

Meanwhile, those lay movements have spawned and grown and provided an alternative to the traditional intellectual Protestantism that was so hard to do in the United States because there simply weren’t enough universities. Meanwhile, all those European immigrants are getting presented with the Faustian bargain of White Supremacy: you can have all the benefits of whiteness, but only if you get rid of most of your cultural and religious distinctiveness (and are willing to help oppress people of color).

Meanwhile, in intellectual circles in the US and Europe, starting in the 19th Century you get a lot of snobbery about “superstition” and how the difference between Catholics and Protestants is that Catholic religion (and all folk practices of any religion) are just “superstition” and nobody sensible could possibly believe in miracles or nonsense like that. And the Protestant groups that want educated clergy, those are the circles many of the clergy are coming from! Those are the people they want to impress! You get a lot of Biblical interpretation focused on finding alternate “scientific” explanations for miracles and stuff like that. The non-education-centered American Christians see this and are horrified and are confirmed in all their beliefs about how education is the enemy of religion.

Also, the late 18th Century is when literalism started taking hold in European and American thought at all levels. And it got applied to everything (and it still is), including the Bible. By the early 19th Century, Biblical scholars and theologians in universities are noticing that if you take the Bible literally, it’s got a lot of internal contradictions. And also, it contradicts all the things science was beginning to tell us about the world. (And also, then you have to take miracles seriously which is embarrassing when you talk with other people in your intellectual circles.) So they start asking questions like “how would people at the time have understood and interpreted these stories?” (i.e. historical criticism) and other ways of understanding the texts which still take them seriously, but without needing to believe that creation LITERALLY took 6 24-hour days. (This all actually gives space for a rebirth of spirituality that is congruent with intellectual studies, but that took a while to develop.)

Anyway, the anti-clerical American Christian groups took a look at that and hit the roof. It was proof, it was the nail in the coffin that all those over-educated types were absolutely not Christian any longer (if they ever had been) and only the true Christians like themselves (who were now calling themselves Evangelicals) knew how to interpret Scripture, and education could only lead you away from Jesus. And after a lot of debate, that led to the publishing of the Fundamentals starting in 1910 and the birth of Fundamentalism.

And then World War II happened, and by the time it was over, White Christians started flocking to the new suburbs. But crucially, their churches and communities didn’t come with them. They formed new churches and communities, based on nothing more than bland white-bread conformity. And church attendance was at an all-time high! A higher percentage of Americans attended Christian worship during the 50s than during any other decade in American history! Not because the War Generation was any more faithful than their forebears, but because after the labor movements of the 30s and the war in the 40s, they were joiners. They joined everything. Clubs and associations of every kind blossomed in the 50s and 60s! Bowling leagues! Fraternal organizations! Churches! You name it.

Then came the Baby Boomers, who weren’t going to join anything they couldn’t see immediate personal benefits to. And there wasn’t much benefit to those bland suburban churches because there wasn’t any “there” there. No mystic ritual. No deep intellectual discussions of Life, the Universe, and Everything. There wasn’t anything deep there, and there wasn’t anything cool/groovy/fashionable, either. The culture started changing. Alternatives to being Christian sprung up as people looked for a spirituality that was actually … spiritual. It was normal for kids to leave home at age 18 and create new social groups, which made it a hell of a lot easier for them to leave the church if they wanted to.

Evangelicals and Fundamentalists responded by cracking down on controlling their members and indoctrinating them that the world is evil, leading to a rise in religious abuse in Christian communities. Mainline denominations stuck their head in the sand and basically ignored it. (”They’ll come back to church when they have kids!”) The Evangelical/Fundamentalist option was effective in the short run but backfires in the long run; the mainline option wasn’t effective in either the short run or the long run.

And now both groups are panicking because the writing is on the wall. They have no idea what to do that might actually work. And they have no sense of how to create authentic ritual or express the deep theological convictions they have to anyone who doesn’t already share those beliefs.

Rachel Held Evans, a former Evangelical who wrote a lot of books about her experience with Christianity, used to talk about how she’d get asked to speak at these church conferences about how to appeal to Millennials, and she’d talk about the need for authenticity and spirituality and being willing to ask deep questions that there aren’t easy answers to and form communities based on compassion instead of judgment. She’d finish her talk and ask if there were any questions and inevitably there would be a bit of silence and a Baby Boomer would raise his hand and say, “so what you mean is, we need a praise band in worship?”

Avatar
reblogged

On a Leonard Cohen kick right now and hearing his song Amen and contextualizing it as a jonmina song and having Emotions about it

Avatar

🥺 oh my god....

Avatar

😳 I...I don't know if I can handle it.......but for the good of the fandom..I will try............

Come Healing

:3

Oh...okay.........this is fine.......................

You are using an unsupported browser and things might not work as intended. Please make sure you're using the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Edge.
mouthporn.net