Orders must be followed, however evil

A New York Jewish newspaper is banned from publishing photos of women by rabbinic authority, so when it printed the White House situation room photo it naturally removed Hilary Clinton and Audrey Tomason from it.

It's the blithe disregard for what this actually means that shocks. Sexism is prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex, according to the online OED. Here's some snippets from the statement issued by Der Tzeitung, the offending rag:

Our photo editor realized the significance of this historic moment, and published the picture, but in his haste he did not read the “fine print” that accompanied the picture, forbidding any changes.

Yes, the 'fine print' is more important than the equal standing of women, apparently.

The allegations that religious Jews denigrate women or do not respect women in public office, is a malicious slander and libel.

Of course! Air-brushing women out of important historical photographs is in every way consistent with respect for them, isn't it?

The Jewish religion does not allow for discrimination based on gender, race, etc.

Well, you just did, and do, discriminate based on gender because, as you go on to say:

In accord with our religious beliefs, we do not publish photos of women...

See. Not, you do not publish photos of men, or children, but women. That is discrimination based on gender.

...which in no way relegates them to a lower status

Again, of course not! Air-brushing women out of important historical photographs is in every way consistent with granting them equal status, isn't it?

Publishing a newspaper is a big responsibility, and our policies are guided by a Rabbinical Board.

That is a surprise.

Because of laws of modesty, we are not allowed to publish pictures of women, and we regret if this gives an impression of disparaging to women, which is certainly never our intention.

Sigh.

So the argument goes, it's not sexist; they're not doing it because they're women, but because the Rabbis tell them so.

They're only following Holy Orders.

Read more »

Howard Jacobson - The History of Christianity

Howard Jacobson made the case for the Jewish view of Jesus Christ in this Channel 4 documentary. I thought it was quite interesting, although I was aware of much of it already; he talked about Jesus' very Jewish life, his Jewish views, his Jewish disciples; the fact they were never baptised as Christians (!), his failure to fulfil prophecy. He was reclaiming Jesus for the Jews, as, I guess, they always have. Fair enough. Also talked about anti-semitism and the (long) history of blood libel (the RC church finally conceded in 1965 that the Jews were not responsible for the death of Christ).

Anyway, he concluded that

...whilst the holocaust cannot be called a Christian crime, Christians connived in it, but suffered in it too; the holocaust was a crime against humanity. But centuries of Christian vilification of Jews enabled it, clearing a path for irrational loathing in the hearts of men, burdening Jews with a mythic guilt it was almost a duty to avenge; for some Christians the holocaust was payback time.

Undeniable, I would say.

Read more »