fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

September 12, 2016

Pain is Pain is Pain

Leave a Comment / Culture /

This past July, after four years, my family held a dedication of a monument for my deceased uncle. The Jewish tradition is for families to hold a dedication around one-year from a person’s death, however due to a laundry-list of reasons this ritual did not take place until this summer. My uncle passed away during the most hectic time of my life. My wife was in her second trimester with our first child and I was in the midst of a fortunate month of interviewing for my first job out of Rabbinical School. I spent the entire month flying from New York to Minnesota to Maryland to Dallas. But along the way I made an emergency stop in Chicago for my uncle’s funeral. This was the first funeral I ran as a solo officiant and quickly realized that I was on the other side of mourning; helping those around me to heal without allowing myself the proper time to mourn.
I am often faced with this dilemma as a Rabbi; when is it okay for a Rabbi to mourn? Since my placement at Temple of Aaron in St. Paul Minnesota I have done more funerals than I care to count. There were, of course, funerals of individuals I have never met. There were also certain funerals where holding it together for everyone else has not been easy. On a few occasions tears ran down my face during the intake and once where I struggled through the entire introduction of my eulogy. The sorrow can be so overwhelming for the clergy both because of the care for the person lost and from holding in the pain the family was feeling.
My father, a physician, is not nearly as visually emotional as I am. I can count on one-hand how many times I have seen my father in tears. The first time was for a patient who my father felt particularly close to. This patient’s art hung in our home which had very little original art displayed.
Maybe because of my father and because of my own profession I have often wondered if/when it is okay for the Rabbi to mourn. How does a Rabbi bury so many people and not feel pain? Tragically, this summer a young man named Seth Rich was shot and murdered. I have known Seth for many years through the Jewish camping world. While I was not his counselor or particularly close to Seth, his brother was a bunkmate and more recently I befriended his father. For some reason Seth’s passing struck me very hard. Certainly, the way in which he left this world was unsettling, but as a Rabbi I have witnessed tragedy on all levels. Maybe feelings reemerged of a camp friend of mine who passed when I was in High School and I recalled the pain that pulsated through my group of friends. But the more and more I think about why Seth’s passing hit me harder than most was because of the pain being felt in the world right now.
As a strong Zionist I am quick to sympathize and mourn Israeli lives. But in Israel we are often forced to be resilient during mourning. Like a Rabbi, Israelis far too often must hold it together for the collective whole. America in many ways is becoming numb to death. And just maybe the repressed pain of a country poured out from me when we tragically lost Seth. I truly hope that we are not cornered into living in a world where mourning is glanced over.  I hope that you will all go into the Holidays, with the most observed Yizkor of the year and truly take the time to mourn those who you have lost. I am not sure it matters how close you were to the person, pain is pain is pain, and everyone deserves the time to process the loss of a loved one. Shedding tears has never been limited to those in one’s immediate family and it’s fair to say we all must cry from time to time.

Pain is Pain is Pain Read More »

Not Your Parents’ Religious School

Leave a Comment / Blogs, United States /

There is a tension in Jewish Education and I think it stems from the dissonance between two well-known Rabbinic teachings – both from Pirkei Avot, the wisdom of our forefathers in the Mishnah.  On the one hand, the first chapter of Pirkei Avot contains a teaching, “Yehoshua said, ‘Make for yourself a teacher.’”  On the other hand, chapter four of Pirkei Avot begins, “Ben Zoma says, ‘Who is wise? Whoever learns from everybody.’”

Making a teacher for yourself involves finding a point of view and learning a perspective.  It involves trust and demands loyalty.  The teacher molds the student.  Even with the best of intentions, the teacher’s knowledge along with the teacher’s flaws are often transferred upon the student.  

Conversely, learning from everybody is pluralistic and democratic.  It involves context and nuance and empathy for others’ opinions.  It encourages the student to wade in the water of life and allow the waves to wash over.  There is no guarantee that anything will stick.  There is no predicting how the water will mold the formation of the student.

How are we supposed to follow these two teachings as Jewish parents, role models, teachers and Rabbis?  How can we expect our children and students to learn a specific Jewish perspective and at the same time be a citizen of society at large?

I would argue that in the past Jewish religious school education has tried to form a perspective through the age of thirteen and in some cases through high school.  The student finds a teacher in the form of religious school.  This forms a foundation for understanding Judaism.  Then, beginning with high school or college, the student is let loose into the world to learn from everyone.

The truth is that Jewish education must never stop.  There is never an appropriate time, 13, 17 or any other age, for one to shed their Jewish outlook for a different one.  Much like we do with secular education, we must adopt Jewish teachers and continue to grow and adopt new Jewish teachers.

To wade in the water of the world demands a strong identity.  To learn from everyone demands that first the student know who the student is.  And that formation of identity cannot be accomplished by religious school teachers only two times per week.

That’s why a synagogue community must include seniors and parents and children all learning Judaism, living Judaism and loving Judaism side by side.  That’s why our students and their families at Adat Shalom’s new religious school – the Jewish Education Center – are encouraged to participate in so many community programs and services together.    

That’s the way in which I read the Torah last week when it said, “Judges and guards shall you appoint.” (Deut 16:18)  We need the entirety of the Jewish community, people of all ages and all levels of education, to participate in Jewish education to maintain a vibrant robust community of learners.  We need teachers to correctly judge curriculum and pace, to calibrate the learning, and we need to train a new generation of students to safeguard the tradition for the future.

The two statements from Pirkei Avot don’t need to be at odds.  One should never stop learning as a Jew.  Torah is a lifelong endeavor.

In 2016, we cannot ask our children to live and enjoy and excel in society at large without first providing them with a strong Jewish education.  A strong Jewish identity allows our children to visit others and learn from others without worry that the first challenge or the first attack on Judaism or the State of Israel will shatter their worldview.

Our children should not want to shed their Jewish lens even as they walk their own path through the world.  The Jewish lens should empower them to walk through the world with a clearer principled approach and a strong moral compass.

The Jewish magnetic compass must always be set to point toward God, Torah and Israel.  It must demand that we shine more light of Torah in an ever darker, more complicated world.   It must embolden us to stand proudly with the State of Israel.  And it must connect through the generations back to Abraham and Sarah, who taught the world of the one God, who gave us both the Torah and the entire world to love and to cherish.

Not Your Parents’ Religious School Read More »

Greta Friedman, Jewish refugee and subject of iconic World War II photo, dies at 92

Leave a Comment / Obituaries /

​Photo by Alfred Eisenstaedt

Greta Friedman, who came to the United States as a Jewish refugee and unwittingly became the subject of an iconic World War II photo, died Sep. 8 of pneumonia at a Richmond, VA hospital. 

The black and white image of a sailor kissing a girl amidst the hubbub of thousands celebrating the surrender of Japan and the end of World War II in New York City’s Times Square, was taken by famed LIFE magazine photographer Alfred Eisenstaedt on Aug. 14,1945.

Although initially the photo was buried in an inside page of LIFE, over time it came to symbolize “the exuberance Americans felt at the end of the war,” The New York Times observed. Arguably, the photo stands second only to the one of six Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima as the most recognized and reproduced image to come out of World War II.

Friedman was the unlikely focus of the Times Square photo. She was born Greta Zimmer in Wiener Neustadt, Austria, one of four daughters of Max Zimmer, a clothing store owner, and his wife Ida. Following the annexation of Austria by Nazi Germany in 1938, the Zimmer parents sent their daughters to safety.

Greta and two of her sisters went to the United States in 1939 and a fourth went to what was then Palestine. The parents stayed behind and were killed during the Holocaust.

On V-J Day, the then 21-year old Greta Friedman, wearing a white uniform, was working as a dental assistant in an office near Times Square, and hearing the commotion went outside for a closer look.

Arriving at Times Square, she was suddenly grabbed by a sailor, who bent her slightly backward and planted a kiss, while Zimmer tried to maintain her balance.

The advance by the amorous sailor did not particularly upset Friedman. In a later interview with the Veterans History Project of the Library of Congress, she recalled, “I felt that he was very strong. He was just holding me tight. I’m not sure about the kiss. It was just somebody celebrating. It wasn’t a romantic event.”

The sailor did not give his name or asked for Friedman’s, but he was later identified as one George Mendonsa. He subsequently explained that he had good memories of Navy nurses attending him during the war, assumed that Friedman was one of them, and impulsively kissed her. Later reports had it that Mendonsa had celebrated the end of the war with a few drinks.

Curiously, Friedman herself never saw the photo until the 1960s, when she leafed through a book of Eisenstaedt’s photos and instantly recognized herself.

She notified the LIFE editors, who, however, proved skeptical, pointing out that in the meanwhile 11 men had come forward claiming to be the photo’s sailor, while three women insisted on being the nurse.

Eventually, the claims of Friedman and Mendonsa were verified as the genuine ones. 

In later years, as the photo’s fame continued to spread, the story took another odd turn. While in the chauvinistic 1940s, the picture was simply accepted as an impulsive and joyful moment during a national celebration, the view changed in the more sensitive 21st century.

In 2012, a writer at the website Crates and Ribbons denounced the sailor’s advance as a “sexual assault by modern standards,” the New York Times reported.

Two years later, in 2014, TIME ran a story on the iconic picture and noted that “many people view the photo as little more than the documentation of a very public sexual assault, and not something to be celebrated.”

Friedman married a U.S. Army scientist, Dr. Mischa E. Friedman, in 1956, and went on to earn an arts degree from Hood College, Maryland. She established a studio nearby where she painted and created silkscreen prints.

She is survived by a son and daughter and was buried next to her husband at the Arlington National Cemetery.

Greta Friedman, Jewish refugee and subject of iconic World War II photo, dies at 92 Read More »

‘Earning Admission’: Make your child’s dream school a reality

Leave a Comment / Culture, Education /

The fall season is upon us, which means it is time for high school seniors to apply to college. Given the competition for admission to the University of California schools and many elite private colleges, plus the high cost of tuition, the process understandably causes anxiety in students and parents. But instead of simply worrying, you can use the next few months to help your child create compelling applications that demonstrate your child’s value to admissions officers and increase the likelihood of earning admission. 

Consider the following to maximize his or her odds of admission and decrease the cost of attendance.  

Write a focused personal statement

Colleges seek students who have perspective, maturity and personality that will add to the life of the campus and their classmates’ education. The personal statement is your child’s opportunity to use her voice to demonstrate what makes her unique.  

A great personal statement is like an interesting snapshot, not a rushed movie. Your child should focus on one instance that is either meaningful or demonstrates something significant that ties to the application prompt. Most colleges limit the personal statement to 500 words. With this word limit, your child does not have the space to cover more than one. 

Your child may be tempted to discuss how well she did in a particular class or extracurricular activity. She shouldn’t. The rest of the application already includes her academic and extracurricular accomplishments. Use the essay to demonstrate additional value she will add to that college — through skills, interests, passion or perspective — that isn’t captured in the rest of her application. 

Whatever snapshot she presents, make sure your child reflects on its importance to her. College admissions officers want to understand what excites your child and what will drive her success on their campuses. And make sure your child’s essay connects this snapshot of her life to her plans for college. By identifying how she will add to the college, your child takes the guesswork out of assessing that for the admissions officer. 

Consider a Jewish studies major or minor

Some colleges take into consideration a student’s choice of a major or minor. If your child is interested
in Jewish studies, he can boost his odds of admission by selecting this as a major or minor. Because these programs receive fewer applicants
than more popular majors, such as psychology or economics, this choice could be enough to make your child stand out in a sea of highly qualified applicants. 

Applicants who have a demonstrated interest in Judaism through community service, or involvement with a Jewish youth group or their synagogue, are good candidates to consider this option. Many selective colleges offer such programs, and they provide an excellent opportunity to learn about our faith, history and culture. 

Demonstrate leadership

Admissions officers seek the next generation of student leaders among the applicant pool. By demonstrating leadership through a club, community service, sport or student government, your child proves that she is able to propel the college forward.  Even if your child has not done so before her senior year, it is not too late for a student to demonstrate leadership. Encourage your child to either start her own club or community service project, or to assume a leadership position in an existing one. Starting a club or community service project also demonstrates entrepreneurship, which is coveted by undergraduate business programs.

Decrease the cost of college

The only thing more daunting than getting into college is figuring out how to pay for it. Colleges award financial aid through both merit scholarships and need-based financial aid; applicants may be eligible to receive both. When deciding which schools to apply to, your family should keep an open mind, regardless of tuition cost. If your child is at the top of the applicant pool based on his grades and SAT scores, he may qualify for a large merit scholarship that could make an expensive college an attractive option. 

Many private colleges also offer generous need-based financial aid packages. Some elite colleges, such as Stanford and the University of Pennsylvania, have financial aid policies that offer grants covering the cost of tuition to admitted students whose families earn up to $150,000 per year, if they apply for financial aid. Even families earning more than $150,000 are eligible to receive need-based grants at these schools. 

Regardless of where your child applies, your family also should apply for federal financial aid by completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), after he has submitted his applications. Some private colleges require students who apply for college-based aid to also submit a FAFSA.

In addition to scholarships offered by colleges and the federal government, your child is also eligible to apply for private, independent scholarships. Once your child’s applications are complete, he should spend time searching for these scholarships. Locally sponsored scholarships sometimes receive few applicants and provide your child with excellent odds of receiving one. There are also many Los Angeles Jewish organizations that offer scholarships. Consult with your child’s high school guidance counselor and temple youth director, and visit scholarships.com to find applicable
scholarships.

GREG KAPLAN is a college application strategist, co-founder of Soaring Eagle College Consulting and the author of “Earning Admission: Real Strategies for Getting Into Highly Selective Colleges.” He is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School of Business and UC Irvine School of Law, where he received close to a full tuition scholarship. He lives in Newport Beach. Visit earningadmission.com for more information.

‘Earning Admission’: Make your child’s dream school a reality Read More »

Governor Brown should veto flawed BDS law

Leave a Comment / Opinion /

Since March, the California legislature has struggled to draft a bill aimed at thwarting BDS – the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.  As readers of these pages know, BDS is a movement that promotes South Africa-style boycott and divestment strategies to oppose Israel and its policies. For many of its supporters, BDS is a way to challenge the very legitimacy of the Jewish state.

[OPPOSITION: In support of AB 2844]

After a torturous path of amendment and revision, the State legislature now has in AB 2844 something it thinks it can live with.  But the revised bill, however well-intentioned, remains seriously flawed.  Governor Brown should veto it.

Earlier versions of the bill would have created a list of companies that participate in BDS – defined to include boycotts targeting Israel or settlements – and prohibited companies on the list from becoming state contractors (a blacklist). After being cautioned by its own legal counsel that economic boycotts qualify as protected free speech under the First Amendment, the legislature abandoned its original scheme and converted AB 2844 into a generic anti-discrimination law.

The new law requires state contractors to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they comply with California’s anti-discrimination laws, including the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Act.  The bill does not mention BDS, but it cautions that any policy maintained by state contractors “against a Sovereign nation or peoples, including but not limited to the nation and people of Israel,” may not be used to discriminate in violation of those laws.

If this sounds a little confusing, it is.  It is not clear whether AB 2844 prohibits any conduct that is not already illegal under California law, because state contractors are already required to certify that they comply with anti-discrimination laws. And the formal findings and analyses that accompany the bill do not explain what, if anything, the new bill would add to existing rules.

The bill does send a symbolic message that California opposes BDS.  And AB 2844 avoids the pitfalls of many anti-BDS bills and regulations recently adopted in other states, which unconstitutionally penalize participation in BDS, and which will almost certainly face credible legal challenges.

Nevertheless AB 2844 is unsound.  The bill’s lack of precision creates a serious risk that courts will give it unexpected interpretations, and it could become a victim of the law of unintended consequences.  On top of all that, it is unfair to put contractors at risk of perjury – with potential criminal sanctions – by requiring them to sign a certification for such a confounding statute.

The legislative history of waffling and revision on the proposal will likely subject the legislature to embarrassment and ridicule for pandering to anti-BDS, pro-settlement forces in the Jewish community.  After learning that it could not prohibit state contractors from exercising their constitutional right to participate in BDS, it looks like the legislature scrambled to come up with something, anything, to please these groups.  And yet, in a backhanded way, the bill legitimizes BDS. It states, in effect, that it is perfectly fine to support BDS, so long as you don’t discriminate in the process. And although some claim that BDS is by its very nature anti-Semitic, if there is one point of clarity in AB 2844, it is that BDS is not intrinsically discriminatory against Jews or others.

Finally, there lurks beneath the bill a difficult and complex question about what it means to have a policy against “the nation and people of Israel.”  There are many strong supporters of the State of Israel, including our organization Americans for Peace Now, who oppose the extreme positions of BDS, but who support a boycott of economic activities that further Israel’s dangerous settlement policies in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Does the “the nation and people of Israel” in AB 2844 include settlements that the United States government has long declared illegitimate and that are clearly illegal under international law?  

Whether state government should get involved in foreign policy issues is always a difficult question.  That state government needs to be particularly sensitive when entering the thicket of the Israel-Palestine conflict should be self-evident. The fact is, there is no pressing BDS problem that warrants this amount of legislative attention. Nobody is claiming that hordes of state contractors are boycotting Israel, let alone using BDS as a pretext to discriminate against women, the disabled, racial minorities or Jews.

The California experience shows that efforts to defeat BDS legislatively will, ineluctably, run into serious constitutional hurdles and likely will result in ineffective if not counterproductive laws.  Here, AB 2844 will give exposure to the BDS movement, but it’s just not clear what else it will do – and it’s not clear as of now whether that exposure will harm the movement. The BDS controversy is best left to those who can educate, persuade and influence.  This is an issue for public discourse, not confusing and muddled legislation.

Steven J Kaplan and Sanford Weiner are Americans for Peace Now National Board Members. Steven J Kaplan is Chair of the Los Angeles Region of APN.

Governor Brown should veto flawed BDS law Read More »

A new vision for the secular left: How do we need to change ourselves in order to change reality in

Leave a Comment / Opinion /

I am a human rights professional, peace and anti-occupation activist and have been committed to these values for as long as I can remember. All these years, my colleagues and I have been working to change the reality in Israel by removing the blindfolds of Israeli society, exposing the wrongdoings and violations of the occupation, the discrimination against those who are marginalized in society (such as Palestinian citizens of Israel, African asylum seekers and migrant workers), and the implications of the dire social and economic gaps between the center and the periphery.

But there is a blindfold we are ignoring: the one covering our own eyes.

Our blindfold is made up of two layers. The first is the inability to see what is looking at us in the mirror: most of us are Jewish, white, Ashkenazi, secular. We are the privileged elite: Israel was built in our image and our image only, in culture, narrative, politics, history and traditions.

The second layer is a result of the first: our blindness to the validity of points of views that are different from ours, points of view that are deeply rooted in worlds of justification that are sometimes the opposite of ours — not liberal, not leftist, not secular. Our expectation to change everything around us is flawed so long as it insists on avoiding the need to change ourselves, to remove these layers of blindness.

My vision includes a first step: to remove my blindfold before or at least concurrently to the process in which I ask other Israelis to remove theirs.

I have to face the mirror, acknowledging the many privileges that come with my white skin and blue eyes, and understanding that these privileges mean power, even though in the complex reality of contemporary Israel, we, the left, feel most of the time powerless. We must also admit to our own orthodoxies, the kind that in other groups, we tend to condescendingly disrespect. We have our own kashrut (being vegetarian/vegan, not buying products made or grown in the settlements); we have our own practices (going to the annual/weekly protest against the occupation); we have all sorts of rules of behavior and politically correct language, and we so easily judge anyone who does not comply with them. Just like any other group.

We must also proactively work to see and hear the voices and justifications of those who are not like us: Mizrachim, Orthodox, ultra-Orthodox, right wing, Arabs, Ethiopian Jews, Russian-speaking Jews. We must listen, without trying to persuade or convert, yet without compromising our values and ideology. I have learned that listening opens up so many windows of understanding and empathy.

To make this change, we, the secular left, must also proactively release the power that comes with our privileges: to engage in social change from a humbler approach, not to be the sole leaders, and to be able to join the causes identified and framed by others who may be different than us. Once we release power, a space is made for the articulation of other visions that stem from very different worlds of justification. In this process, we must not be intimidated by the fact that for some, honor and dignity come before equality, and tradition and family are more important values than universalism and secularism. Despite these differences, we can still collaborate, finding shared values and common good to achieve the changes needed to make this a better place.

And so I begin with myself and my professional context. As co-director of the Department for Shared Society at Sikkuy, I am working to promote education for shared society with a focus on Jewish-Arab relationships. In Israel’s sectoralized educational system, to even talk about shared society and Arabs in the religious and ultra-Orthodox streams is a challenge. In order to succeed at this task, I needed to understand that we, as outsiders of those communities, can’t dictate to them what education for shared society means, and how it should be done in their communities. 

Instead, we need to release power: to enable leading educators from within these communities to articulate the problems and proposed solutions, emerging from their own sense of urgency, in dialogue with my colleagues and me. For this purpose, Sikkuy has convened, with the help of Shaharit, a group of Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox educators who have expressed their concerns with the way their education system raises children to treat Arabs, and have engaged in a conversation with them as to how they view the problem, and what could help create a solution. 

In this group, I have a voice, but it is not my voice that dictates the conversation: The dialogue is one of listening and sometimes arguing, but at the end of the process, they will decide what the outcome will look like in their community. 

Releasing power is not an easy task. It does not mean giving up on my identity; on the contrary, it can provide a strong base for my identity to dwell securely and even proudly alongside other identities. But it does mean giving up on my power to decide how to frame the struggle, my power to choose the actions and partners, the strategies and stakeholders. Once this process is in place, we can then reconvene, a diverse group comprising many voices, identities and powers, and begin the task of addressing Israel’s most aching issues, in conversation, together.

Gili Re’i has nearly two decades of work experience in non-profit organizations in the fields of education, social change and human rights. Formerly the Deputy Director of The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), since 2015 she has been working at Sikkuy – The Association for the Advancement of Civic Equality, as co-director of the department for shared society.  While at ACRI, Gili was a member of the steering committee of a dialogue group between human rights professionals and Sephardic Ultra-orthodox rabbis and educators, facilitated by Shaharit.  Gili resides in Jerusalem with her family and also serves as the co-chair of the Parents Committee at the Max Rayne Hand in Hand Bilingual School in Jerusalem, where both her children are students.   

This is the third in a series of essays by writers connected to Shaharit (shaharit.org.il), an Israeli nonprofit that brings together activists to re-imagine local and national politics. Shaharit’s leaders come from across the religious, political and ethnic spectrum of Israeli society, and work together to create policy and strategy built on open hearts, forward thinking and shared vision: a politics of the common good.

A new vision for the secular left: How do we need to change ourselves in order to change reality in Read More »

Book review: ‘The trombone man: tales of a misogynist’

Leave a Comment / Books, Culture /

Ron J. Hutter has written a provocative, entertaining, and thoughtful novel that explores the problem of antisemitism in a very original way. In “The trombone man: tales of a misogynist,” he uses misogyny both as a protest about the treatment of women in various parts of the world and as a metaphor for what the late scholar Robert Wistrich called “the longest hatred,” antisemitism.

Based on some actual events, “The trombone man” takes aim at populism, political correctness and hypocritical expediency. Near the beginning, the book suggests the theme of dishonesty by mentioning master art fraud Hans van Meegeren, who duped enthusiastic art lovers and experts. This sets the tone for Hutter’s narrative whereby outrageous and deceitful values are embraced by an adoring mindless public.

In other words, be ready for a racy ride through a world that is simply upside-down.

The story involves trombone loving anti–hero Dr Peter Kraus, a behavioral scientist, known for his quirky, innovative ideas, who is also charming, courteous and erudite. While women adore him, most of his dates end in disaster, especially with his on-and-off girlfriend, Bev. Following a particularly bad date, Peter consults his psychoanalyst, Dr Maxine Feinschmecker, who reveals that despite Peter’s being a romantic, considerate and sensuous lover, he is a misogynist.

Stunned, yet never one to give up, Peter forms a “misogyny movement,” publicly presented as a “new addition to the multicultural landscape.” To his astonishment, the movement spreads like wildfire all over the world. Peter becomes an international celebrity. He embarks on an anything-goes venture in a world that seems entirely inside out.

Dr Feinschmecker, Bev, Palestinian refugee Marwan, artists, politicians eyeing opinion polls, and others all join the bandwagon. Concerts, theaters, and other cultural events celebrate this “new addition to multiculturalism.”

Peter’s ventures are not all plain sailing. Indeed, after a hilarious European tour with Bev, promoting misogyny, Peter confronts the quiet and unassuming Dr Sue Goldberg, a feminist, at a public university debate during “Anti-feminism Week,” an event clearly reminiscent of “Israeli-Apartheid Week” on campuses. With Dr Goldberg, the charismatic Peter more than meets his match. The debate is gripping, illustrating with a sarcastic lens both mindless enthusiastic  populism and political correctness, both of which are very topical at the moment in the western world, particularly on campuses.

This compelling story is unusual, sophisticated and in parts very funny, yet never loses sight of its dark message that is relevant to our times. Hutter’s biting and provocative perspective is entertaining and a good read with plenty to think about.

After reading the book, I spoke to Hutter, who told me that while there are many excellent books on feminism and antisemitism by great scholars (such as Wistrich above), he believes we can supplement them by satirizing “the longest hatred”—in so doing making the unpleasant phenomenon accessible to more people who would otherwise not read academic books.

I strongly recommend this original novel to anyone interested in the problem of antisemitism, the problem of misogyny, and entertaining fiction.

The trombone man: tales of a misogynist, by Ron J.Hutter is available through Amazon , Barnes & Noble, Lulu  and other outlets.

Dr Jasmine Albert is a Berlin- based anaesthetist and literary aficionado.

Book review: ‘The trombone man: tales of a misogynist’ Read More »

Donald Trump Jr. posted to Instagram a movie poster parody of himself heroically grouped with others

Leave a Comment / Culture, Sports /

Jerry Reinsdorf, who as owner of the Chicago Bulls has won six NBA championships, was inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame.

Reinsdorf was officially enshrined in the Hall of Fame in Springfield, Massachusetts, on Thursday, alongside players including Allen Iverson, Yao Ming, Sheryl Swoopes and Shaquille O’Neal, as well as others.

Led by superstar Michael Jordan, the Bulls dominated the NBA in the 1990s.

Reinsdorf also is an owner of the Chicago White Sox Major League Baseball team.

He said he became hooked on the NBA, and in particular the New York Knicks, when he entered high school in Brooklyn.

“(O)ne of the benefits of being a high school student in New York was that your student ID card got you into Madison Square Garden for 50 cents,” Reinsdorf recalled. “I was there anytime I could cobble together 50 cents plus the 10 cents for car fare.

“1949 was also the year of my bar mitzvah. A bar mitzvah is the time in his life when a Jewish boy realizes he has a better chance of owning a team than playing for one.”

His son, Michael, president of the Bulls franchise, sat next to him during the ceremony, according to the Chicago Tribune.

 

Donald Trump Jr. posted to Instagram a movie poster parody of himself heroically grouped with others Read More »

Remembering Stanley Sheinbaum

Leave a Comment / Los Angeles /

Stanley Sheinbaum. Who could resist his always charming good humor and mischievous spirit, married not only to the ever gracious Betty, but to serious purpose in life?

Talk about an eventful existence. Stanley had a life of intrigue and exploits that would put many spies, politicians and even secretaries of state to shame. He was a bit of James Bond mixed with the civil rights champion Clarence Darrow.

[RELATED: Stanley Sheinbaum, father of the leftist guard]

Indeed, I have always thought of him as a small Scandinavian state, audaciously leveraging the influence of his unique base as a wealthy “intellectual engage” to shift history at key moments. Springing Andreas Papandreou from jail under the boot of the Greek colonels. Taking the risky leap of faith to not only meet Yasir Arafat, but push behind the scenes to keep him to his word of a “no-terrorism” pledge when he sought to backtrack. Crisscrossing the Atlantic in shuttle diplomacy mode to smooth out the very rough edges between the PLO and Colin Powell, at the time a clandestine go-between for President Reagan and Secretary of State George Schulz, who were inclined at the wind down of their administration to let the whole fraught matter go.

I went with Stanley once to Tunis to see Arafat. We flew in from Paris and hung out at the Tunis Hilton waiting to be contacted. Past midnight a driver with a burly security squad arrived to pick us up. We wove back and forth on circuitous routes through backstreets in the balmy night, ending up at a big white villa. More security guards, Kalashnikovs drawn, met us at the entrance, taking apart and reassembling my tape recorder in case explosives were hidden there. After talking till just before dawn with Arafat and his many aides over Turkish coffee, CNN droning in the background, we broke for an early  meal of hummus, eggplant and pickled vegetables. Apparently, Arafat was a vegetarian. He also had a glass of milk.

I wouldn’t want to be mis-interpreted by saying that Arafat exhibited a genuine fondness toward Stanley, impressed, perhaps even touched, by the risk this American Jew was taking to break bread with the enemy. I remember thinking that Arafat seemed less menacing than hopefully engaging in this informal setting without his trademark checkered kaffiya, which he discarded, exposing his bald head.

As if this wasn’t enough of an adventure for one day, it turned out, if memory serves, that Stanley’s secret absence from L.A. to fly off to Tunis made him miss a critical – but bitterly divisive  — Police Commission meeting. Because he was not there to participate in the bickering, Mayor Tom Bradley asked him on his return to chair the Commission as a compromise candidate able to talk to all sides. From one conflict zone to another.

Together, Stanley and Betty were for many years the nexus between Hollywood glamour and liberal politics. I remember a dinner there with Bill and Hillary Clinton at least a year before he declared for his first presidential run. Hillary was already then keen, articulate and brightly wonkish. Bill was sheepish and almost quiet. Then the governor of Arkansas, he was evidently shy about his grasp of world events in the presence of the legendary New York Times columnist, Flora Lewis, another of the many acquaintances in the Sheinbaum’s vast social and political network. At other times one would find among the Moore sculptures at their home the likes of everyone from Daniel Ellsberg to Shimon Peres, Ted Turner and Jane Fonda.

The most memorable event at the Sheinbaum’s, however, was a reception for King Hussein and Queen Noor of Jordan.

Movie stars, producers and directors abounded – Gregory Peck, Barbra Streisand, Sidney Pollack, Mike Medavoy, Oliver Stone, Warren Beatty and many more. They had come to see a real king who flew helicopters and fought real wars. The King and Queen, in turn, had brought along their brood for the opposite reason – to see the Hollywood royalty up close!

Stanley was larger than life. Though life has now left him, his warm presence remains in the affectionate memories of his many friends and of this city. His was a consequential existence.

Nathan Gardels is editor-in-chief of The WorldPost and co-founder of the Berggruen Institute.

Remembering Stanley Sheinbaum Read More »