Hamantaschen are named after a specific individual character - the antagonist in the book of Esther. Naming something after one specific named individual person is the opposite of what we’re discussing here.
There are numerous things named after one prominent person. King Alfred’s Cakes, St George’s Mushroom, St Anthony’s Fire, Samphire (St Peter’s Herb), etc. Maybe there are some cases of these that are so named because of a stereotype or some such, but I can’t think of one.
Yeah, the story of Esther needed a villain, and obviously whoever that villain was, he’d be a member of some ethnic group or another. That in no way implies that all members of whatever-that-ethnic-group are villains.
That seems to support the case that “Judas’s ear” is OK.
Since this is IMHO, I never liked that name. I don’t know how mycologists move on it, but Linnaeus originally called it auricula, full stop. Hence we can derive “ear fungus”, “wood ear”, etc.
I think it would be OK. There’s another tree that also has the story of Judas’ suicide attached to it - called ‘Judas Tree’ - I won’t say I think it’s a lovely name, but I don’t think it’s a problem that it’s called such.
A further distinction however is the longstanding historic Jew hating bit of Judas morphing into Jews as a group as Christkillers. Used to justify many a historical massacre.
Ignorance fought and conquered. I’ve known several plants with the name “Wandering Jew,” and I always thought it was in reference to the Jews wandering the desert for 40 years following their escape from Egypt.
To learn the name came from some terrible Jew-bashing myth is disturbing.
There are far, far too many “nicknames” to common objects that are inflammatory, prejudicial, or just plain mean. Brazil nuts is one example that pops into my mind.
~VOW
I am not Jewish, but would default to it being problematic. I would be open to being convinced otherwise.