Insecurity

Monica Osborne writes on Jewcy.com:

Last night, I was out to dinner with about twenty-five other scholars of Jewish and Jewish American literature. As we waited for a table large enough to accommodate us at the Cheesecake Factory, one male scholar approached me and a friend of mine who is also attending the conference.

He was very nice — formally introduced himself, and began chatting with us. But it suddenly took an ugly turn.

"I’m always amazed to see non-Jewish people attending this symposium, and I’m always interested in why people who aren’t Jewish would want to study Jewish literature," he said, looking at both my friend and me.

I was speechless. I couldn’t believe he would make such a terrible assumption knowing nothing about me. And, in all honesty, as someone who has chosen Jewishness as her "mode of being" and has essentially devoted her life to all things Jewish, I was completely insulted.

Surprisingly, I guess, this has never happened to me before. It doesn’t usually enter people’s minds, and if it does, they usually ask timidly, or with a sincere curiosity, whether I am "actually" Jewish. So I was floored, and offended because, if truth be told, I probably know more Talmud than him and I bet he ate bread during Pesach.

First. I suspect that any Jew who wonders why non-Jews find Jewish literature compelling has an empty Jewish identity.

Either Judaism has something to say to the world or it is an irrelevant ethnic club.

Seond. The only reason that such an innocent remark would set one off is if one is insecure in his Jewish identity.

As a convert to Judaism, and a flagrant sinner with the goyisha name of Luke, I too at times feel the rage you describe. But that only says something about me and my insecurities.

When non-Orthodox Jews rage at Orthodox Jews who do not regard non-Orthodox streams of Judaism as legitimate, that reveals more about the insecurity of those non-Orthodox Jews who so desperately seek the authentication of the Orthodox than it does about the mean Orthodox. Those non-Orthodox Jews who are secure in their Jewish identity are not upset that Orthodox Jews do not regard their religion as authentically Jewish.

My theory holds for all rage when one’s identity is questioned. I remember when I was 19 and covering the San Francisco 49ers for radio stations KAHI/KHYL in Sacramento. I was hanging out in the press room at the 49ers training camp at Sierra Community College and a veteran writer asked me what I was doing there.

I told him and then questioned what he was doing there.

I was annoyed at being challenged precisely because I was insecure in my own bonafides as a reporter.

Feeling Jewish does not make one Jewish. For instance, I’ve noticed that the people who describe themselves as proud Jews and as having "Jewish values," are invariably the most ignorant Jewishly and the least observant. Jews who practice Judaism every day feel no need to assert their Jewish values nor their Jewish pride and they have no insecurity about their Jewish identity.

If one ever feels insecure about their Jewish identity, they need to learn Hebrew, study Torah, do mitzvot and pray daily with a minyan. If you do so, I guarantee that within a few weeks, your insecurity on this score (and many others) will dramatically diminish. But if one does not do these things, then you are a Jewish fake and no assertions of Jewish pride will mask your inauthenticity.

No Luke Ford blog post is an authentic Luke Ford blog post without a mention of sex, so here goes:

In my experience, women overwhelmingly regard anything they feel as right and legitimate. I rarely encounter a woman who is able to say that something upset her but looking at it rationally she realizes a truth that goes contrary to her feelings.

I would never tell anybody in the situation above to not get upset. They feel what they feel and all feelings are legitimate, but that does not mean that the thinking that creates such feelings is smart.

I usually get upset when somebody (particularly when they are in authority) points out to me bad things I am doing, but that does not mean that they are not right and that I am not wrong (even if I am not able to admit that in the moment). In some instances, what is true and right and good is more important than what we feel.

As Michael Medved says, "Liberals say — follow your heart. Conservatives say — do your duty."

This man’s response to Monica was a fact of life. He felt comfortable enough with her to say what was on his mind. He probably could not have engaged her honestly until this matter had been dealt with. That’s just how the world works.

People who are born Jewish can usually tell when someone was not born and raised Jewish. When you ask them not to mention this, you are asking them to ignore what is primary in their mind and you ask them to dance around the matter in conversation until the time you choose to divulge your conversion. My name and my face and my behavioral patterns scream shaygetz. That’s just the way it is. What I find surprising is how little Jews have used this against me.

As I once heard, it is better in these matters to become fascinated rather than aggravated. 

I don’t think we should expect the world to change for us. As long as we get annoyed on this score, it will keep happening to us, and precisely when we exude confidence in our Jewish identity and not get annoyed, it will happen to us less often.

I remember davening with my tefillin at Young Israel of Century City and the guy next to me, a yerushalmi, correctly intuited i was not born Jewish (in part because I had the tefillin on my head tangled, I had had them tangled for many months, but this visitor was the first person to mention it to me and to help me with the problem — eventually the rabbi bought me new tefillin out of his own pocket).

Posted in Judaism | Comments Off on Insecurity

Hitchens, Sharpton and Faith

From The New York Times:

You could tell from the background music that played beforehand – alternating recordings of James Brown and Gregorian chant – that this was going to be an unusual debate.

The question under debate (“Is God great?”) and the speakers — two men who are often depicted in harsh caricatures by their critics — might have caused some to expect something like a circus. Perhaps surprisingly, it turned out to be the public intellectual event of the evening, a bit like Bertrand Russell vs. C. S. Lewis.

Taking the atheist position was Christopher Hitchens, the journalist and author of a new book arguing that “religion poisons everything.” In defense of God was none other than the Rev. Al Sharpton, a man of the cloth who is perhaps even better known for his political and civil rights activism than for his training as a preacher.

Posted in Christopher Hitchens, Religion | Comments Off on Hitchens, Sharpton and Faith

Y.U. Rabbis Talk God

One thing that surprised me when I entered Jewish life was how little Jews, even religious Jews, spoke about God. Sure, they might say "Baruch HaShem" a lot but they rarely spoke spontaneously about God. I’ve met over a dozen Orthodox Jews who say they don’t believe in God.

From the Forward.com:

Spirituality, said Rabbi Marc Penner, director of professional education at Y.U.’s Center for the Jewish Future, “is an issue that’s missing not only from the Y.U. curriculum but from the entire day school curriculum. The goal here is to begin to put it on the table. It’s the spice that makes everything more meaningful.”

Penner, who in addition to his position at Y.U. is a pulpit rabbi at the Young Israel of Holliswood, in Queens, described a sort of spiritual malaise in Modern Orthodoxy today. “Everyone feels that in our synagogues, there’s a lack of spirituality. There’s less singing. There’s a lot of rote behavior,” he said.

What, exactly, is Y.U. talking about when it speaks of spirituality?

“What we’re addressing is how we are supposed to envision God when we are speaking to him. That’s something we just don’t talk about. We talk about the laws of prayer, but we don’t really talk about how prayer works,” Penner said. “These are the kinds of things that beginners ask, but those who’ve been to yeshiva all their life don’t necessarily ask these questions. And that’s too bad, because they’re important questions.”

Posted in Yeshiva | Comments Off on Y.U. Rabbis Talk God

Evil White Men – Is There Any Other Kind?

Allison Samuels writes in her new book:

Both Denise and Diahn say they’ve stripped at parties for both black and white clients and maintain the attitudes are much more different than people might expect. "When it’s a group of all white men, drunk and young, they really get aggressive and lose it," says Denise. "I also think they have less respect for black women because of what they’ve seen on TV or heard. It’s like they think they can do or say things to us they can’t with other women. Black guys are usually more laid-back about it. They don’t just go nuts because a naked woman is in the room. They enjoy, but’s not the same thing."

Daisy, age thirty-three, stripped for five years at a variety of clubs in the Los Angeles area and says that mainstream society’s attitudes toward African American women may have played a big factor in the Duke scandal, and those attitudes forced her to quit the business sooner than she’d planned. "I think blakc women are seen as the lowest of the low in society. We don’t county, so why not violate us?" says Daisy, who now works as a paralegal. "I saw that attitude in the clubs when white customers would come in. They would make me feel really dirt, and that’s not how I normally felt up there. I’d be cool when I left the stage, unless a white man was up-front and center looking at me in a way that sent chills up my spine."

Evil white men always looking to rape black women. This made me so mad I looked up the statistics.

It turns out that it verges on the impossible to find a case of a white man raping a black woman.

According to this site (and its statistics are accurate):

When whites do violence — rape, murder, assault — how often do they choose black victims? Shouldn’t a nation of bigots target blacks most of the time? At least half of the time? Of course, it does not. When whites commit violence, they to it to blacks 2.4 percent of the time. Blacks, on the other hand, choose white victims more than half the time. [317]

In those cases in which the race of the killer is known, blacks kill twice as many whites as whites kill blacks. Black-on-white robberies and gang assaults are twenty-one times more common than white on black. In the case of gang robbery, blacks victimize whites fifty-two times more often than whites do blacks. [318]

The contrasts are even more stark in the case of interracial rape. Studies from the late 1950s showed that the vast majority of rapes were same-race offenses. Research in Philadelphia carried out in 1958 and 1960 indicated that of all rapes, only 3.2 percent were black-on-white assaults and 3.6 percent were white-on-black. Since that time, the proportion of black-on-white rapes has soared. In a 1974 study in Denver, 40 percent of all rapes were of whites by blacks, and not one case of white-on-black rape was found. In general, through the 1970s, black-on-white rape was at least ten times more common that white-on-black rape. [319]

Because interracial rape is now overwhelmingly black on white, it has become difficult to do research on it or to find relevant statistics. The FBI keeps very detailed national records on crime, but the way it presents rape data obscures the racial element rather than clarifies it. Dr. William Wilbanks, a criminologist at Florida International University, had to sift carefully through the data to find that in 1988 there were 9,406 cases of black-on-white rape and fewer than ten cases of white-on-black rape. [320] Another researcher concludes that in 1989, blacks were three or four times more likely to commit rape than whites, and that black men raped white women thirty times as often as white men raped black women. [321]

Interracial crime figures are even worse than they sound. Since there are more than six times as many whites as blacks in America, it means that any given black person is vastly more likely to commit a crime against a white than vice versa.
 

Notes

317. "What Should Be Done," US News & World Report (August 22, 1989), p. 54. See also Department of Justice, Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1987 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989), p.7.

318. Department of Justice, Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1987.

319. Gary D. LaFree, "Male Power and Female Victimization: Toward a Theory of Interracial Rape," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 88, No. 2 (September 1982).

320. William Wilbanks, "Frequency and Nature of Interracial Crimes," submitted for publication to the Justice Professional (November 7, 1990). Data derived from Department of Justice, Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1987, p. 53.

321. Andrew Hacker, Two Nations, pp. 183, 185.

 

 


Jared Taylor, Paved with Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America (New York: Carrol & Graf, 1992), 92-93.

According to FrontPageMag.com (Lawrence Auster):

Like Ahab’s search for the Great White Whale, liberals’ search for the Great White Defendant is relentless and never-ending. When, in 1988, Tawana Brawley’s and Al Sharpton’s then year-old spectacular charge that several white men including prosecutor Steven Pagones (whose name Brawley had picked out of a newspaper article) had abducted and raped the 15 year old was shown to be completely false, the Nation said it didn’t matter, since the charges expressed the essential nature of white men’s treatment of black women in this country. When the Duke University lacrosse players were accused of raping a black stripper last year, liberals everywhere treated the accusation as fact, because, just as with the Nation and Tawana Brawley, the rape charge seemed to the minds of liberals to reflect the true nature of oppressive racial and sexual relations in America.

To see the real truth of the matter, let us take a look at the Department of Justice document Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2005. (Go to the linked document, and under "Victims and Offenders" download the pdf file for 2005.)

In Table 42, entitled "Personal crimes of violence, 2005, percent distribution of single-offender victimizations, based on race of victims, by type of crime and perceived race of offender," we learn that there were 111,590 white victims and 36,620 black victims of rape or sexual assault in 2005. (The number of rapes is not distinguished from those of sexual assaults; it is maddening that sexual assault, an ill-defined category that covers various types of criminal acts ranging from penetration to inappropriate touching, is conflated with the more specific crime of rape.) In the 111,590 cases in which the victim of rape or sexual assault was white, 44.5 percent of the offenders were white, and 33.6 percent of the offenders were black. In the 36,620 cases in which the victim of rape or sexual assault was black, 100 percent of the offenders were black, and 0.0 percent of the offenders were white. The table explains that 0.0 percent means that there were under 10 incidents nationally.

The table does not gives statistics for Hispanic victims and offenders. But the bottom line on interracial white/black and black/white rape is clear:

In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.

What this means is that every day in the United States, over one hundred white women are raped or sexually assaulted by a black man.

The Department of Justice statistics refer, of course, to verified reports. According to the Wikipedia article on rape, as many as half of all rape charges nationally are determined by police and prosecutors to be false:

Linda Fairstein, former head of the New York County District Attorney’s Sex Crimes Unit, noted, "There are about 4,000 reports of rape each year in Manhattan. Of these, about half simply did not happen…. It’s my job to bring justice to the man who has been falsely accused by a woman who has a grudge against him, just as it’s my job to prosecute the real thing." No wonder there was such absolute belief in the guilt of the Duke students among the leading sectors of liberal America. A drug-addled, half-deranged, promiscuous black stripper accused three young white men of raping her. There are virtually zero rapes of black women by white men in the United States, and half of all rape charges against specific individuals turn out to be false. But in the gnostic, inverted world of liberal demonology, the white students had to be guilty.

Meanwhile, in the real America, week after week, the newspapers report the rapes of white women by black men—though, of course, without ever once using the words, "a white woman was raped by black man." Just last week in the New York Post there was a story about a serial black rapist who invaded women’s apartments on Manhattan’s Upper West Side; you knew the rapist was black from a police drawing accompanying the story, and you knew the victims were most likely white from the neighborhoods where the attacks occurred. But even when news media’s reports of black on white rape make the race of the perpetrator evident (which the media only does in a minority of instances), no explicit reference is ever made to the racial aspect of the case. Each story of black on white rape is reported in isolation, not presented as part of a larger pattern. There is never the slightest mention of the fact that white women in this country are being targeted by black rapists. In the inverted world of liberalism, the phenomenon does not exist.

I love how Samuels describes one black stripper getting pregnant outside of marriage: "…Diahn learned she was pregnant with her son when she was eighteen and about to start her first year at a junior college in her hometown."

She "learned she was pregnant." Not that she screwed around and made stupid choices, no, this girl passively "learns she was pregnant."

Posted in Race, Rape | Comments Off on Evil White Men – Is There Any Other Kind?

Bryan Loves You

Seth Landau emails me:

Just wanted to let you know what a valuable resource your lukeford.net is and how it specifically helped me tonight.

This movie that I just completed, "Bryan Loves You", is a tough sell in a sense that it’s a horror without a ton of gore (to me, "Ju-on" was the scariest movie ever made). But Morris Ruskin‘s company Shoreline Ent called me this week, saying they loved "Bryan" (they screened it over the weekend) and want to sell it.

And so I always do my research (I’m a former reporter) and of course came across a Google hit for your in-depth interview w/ Morris. And while it was from several yrs ago, the essence of his character I feel was evident, making me much more likely to sign w/ his company, which I meet w/ later this week.

…Today [May 7, 2007] all of the contracts were signed and "Bryan Loves You" is officially rep’ed by Shoreline Entertainment. You’re free to use the initial Myspace mail I sent you for the blog or Web site.

I interviewed Seth by phone Monday afternoon. Part One Audio. Part Two.

Seth is related on his father’s side to the Noda B’Yehuda (Ezekiel Landau) and manufacturer-philanthropist Aaron Feuerstein.

Posted in Seth Landau | Comments Off on Bryan Loves You

Her Mother Loves Torah

Eva writes:

My mother is an extremely spiritual person. As such, she has a need to attend as many chassidus shiurim as possible on a daily basis. I’ve attended a few with her, and for me the real inspiration was not from the lecture, but rather from seeing my mother’s reactions. She takes every word the rabbi or speaker says literally and I can see her face light up as though she’s hearing something for the first time in every shiur.

One speaker used a phrase- I forget which one- and he said it was regarding people who their entire lives revolve around torah, people who have no negiah to this world other than torah. My mother asked him if kollel boys were included in this concept. "No, I’m talking about people who don’t even do any errands around the house, they’re totally immersed in torah," was his response.

My mother was visibly moved. "Wooow," she said with great enthusiasm.

Posted in Orthodoxy | Comments Off on Her Mother Loves Torah

Sociologist Steven M. Cohen Visits Los Angeles

Dr. Cohen says he comes from a non-observant Orthodox home (their Sabbath ended around noon). Though somewhat observant of Jewish law, he is no longer Orthodox. But he was the scholar in residence at a local Orthodox shul this past weekend.

In each of his three speeches, he mentions that only 8% of American Jews his age (he’s a young vigorous and sharp 57) are Orthodox but that 23% of American Jews under 18 are Orthodox. This means that within 30 years, the Orthodox will make up about half of identifying American Jews and their organizations.

Dr. Cohen says that Reform, Reconstructionist, and Conservative Judaism are all valid expressions of Jewishness. He described Philip Roth novels as "richly Jewish."

Then what is Jesus Christ? Super-richly-Jewish?

Steven is an awkward public speaker. He’ll deliver shattering points and then return to mumbling.

Cohen presided over a Jewish house at Columbia circa 1972 and among its 28 members were Joseph Telushkin and Leon Wieseltier.

Friday night, Cohen got a response from left-wing Conservative rabbi Sharon Brous (of Ikar) and Saturday afternoon he got one from a professor at Hebrew Union College (Reform).

Giving platforms to these non-Orthodox intellectuals in Orthodox auspices is unusual and occasioned numerous complaints from the keepers of the faith (though everybody who showed up to the talks seemed stimulated by them).

A friend asked me what I thought of the program. As I started to voice a complaint, he said, "You always have something critical to say."

With Cohen and company, it was not easy. They were so interesting I had a helluva time thinking up nasty things to blog about them.

Cohen said that 88% of Jewish families (both spouses are Jewish, and they have kids) belong to synagogues and that intermarried Jews don’t do much Jewishly and perpetuate even less.

A great predictor of future Jewish involvement is zip code. If you live around Jews and eat, drink and, when appropriate, have sex with them, you’re more likely to perpetuate Jewish life.

Cohen said don’t send your kids to UCLA or Berkeley or Stanford, no matter how good their Hillel programs and no matter if there are kosher eateries on or near campus. Send your kids to a university in the North-East where there’s concentrated and vibrant Jewish life.

Cohen said that about 50% of Jews are intermarried, that 60% of Jews who are living with somebody outside of marriage are living with a non-Jew and that if you count by the last person a Jew has had sex with, the figure goes to about 70% goyim. (It was the Sabbath and I couldn’t take notes but for some reason the sex stuff stayed on my brain, rattled around and tormented me for hours later.)

Posted in Conservative Judaism, Judaism, Los Angeles, Orthodoxy, Reform Judaism, Sociology, Steven M. Cohen | Comments Off on Sociologist Steven M. Cohen Visits Los Angeles

Rabbi Joseph Telushkin Needs A Blog

I was rereading You Shall Be Holy on Shabbos and found this on page 312:

I know, for example, that on days when I am consumed by anger against someone, I rarely get worthwhile work done. Every time I begin something, the angry thoughts intrude and distract me.

I was jarred by these sentiments because I never experience them. I’m guessing that it has been more than a decade since I’ve been so angry that it has interfered with my work.

Why is this? Am I a bigger mentch that Telushkin? Of course not. But I have something that he does not — a blog. When I am angry, I blog. In fact, I do my best writing when emotional.

Even when angry, I strictly limit my public attacks to public figures in their public performances. If I write out my anger about private figures, I rarely use identifying details. Either way, I always give my enemies unlimited space to respond (within the basic boundaries of non-libelous discourse).

From my reading of Telushkin’s books and my experience with the man, I get the feeling he’s so obsessed with being a model of goodness and holiness that he bottles up a tremendous amount of anger and frustration and does not follow the Torah’s commandment to not hate thy fellow in your heart.

When it can be productive, it is best when angry at someone to tell the person (in as non-threatening a way as possible) what’s bothering you. If that doesn’t work, in some cases, you should go public, particularly if it is in the realm of ideas and values and public figures such as the Mordecai Gafni affair.

I know that in my case, Telushkin and his buddies Saul Berman and Stephen Marmer went off on me half-cocked without ever bothering to talk to me. After they distributed their hateful letter, they refused to answer my interview requests.

After they were proved to have been horribly publicly wrong, after it was shown that they deliberately acted badly against a mountain of evidence while lying about having thoroughly investigated the charges against Gafni, Telushkin, Berman, Marmer and co. made only the most circumspect and general apologies and not to the two people they principally attacked in this case (Vicki Polin and me).

I get mad too. I got mad at Telushkin for his letter. But I went to him about it and to Berman and Marmer etc (via email and phone). And when they wouldn’t talk to me, I made my case on this blog and moved on with my life.

If you talk to anybody who knows me well, they’ll tell you that I don’t get obsessed with feuds. I’m almost never incapacitated by anger. Not because I’m so righteous, but because I follow the simple rules above.

I have constructed my life so that I make an independent living and am free to state my views in almost any matter and am willing to lose friends over it because I have sufficient psychic resources to go it alone with unpopular views, for instance pushing the Aron Tendler story forward for 18 months before L.A.’s Orthodox establishment finally, belatedly, when they had no other alternative, did something about it (with Rabbi Avraham Union at the Rabbinical Council of California protesting that his crew had zero tolerance for sexual predators).

I predict that if the day comes when Telushkin grows the balls to pick up the phone to talk courteously to people he hates, his incapacitating hatreds will disappear.

Posted in Marc Gafni, Telushkin | Comments Off on Rabbi Joseph Telushkin Needs A Blog

Dreams

Vanessa writes:

In my dream Luke Ford had been killed by some kind of orwellian secret state police because of his dissident intellectual work. It was a situation like in communist Russia, where dissidents often were made to disappear. I was stunned in the dream because of the unexpected violence and I felt sorry and sad for Luke (even though I have never met him). I was looking at the piles of grey metallic military style file boxes that contained his life writings. It was a lot of boxes, and they were all going to be stored away by the police. I was shocked and kept thinking that Luke was so young and it just felt so wrong and violent that he had been killed. I remember also thinking that it was sad that he hadn’t been give the opportunity to continue writing, and what a loss that was…

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on Dreams

Let Us Build Jerusalem In Pico-Robertson

And did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon Beverwil’s mountains green?
And was the holy lamb of God
On LaCienega’s pleasant pastures seen?
And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic Shuls?
Bring me my Bow of burning gold;
Bring me my Arrows of Desire;
Bring me my Spear; O clouds unfold!
Bring me my Chariot of Fire!
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In Pico’s green and pleasant Land.

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on Let Us Build Jerusalem In Pico-Robertson