why do jews get a pass when it comes to racism?

[Malthus]

@Capitaine_Zombie

I have a question a bit related to the OP.
Even though it doesnt appear that the tendencies in some Jews to want to get in a relationship with another Jew rather than a Gentile is as massive as what the OP made it out to be, the behavior does exist. I thought that even for Orthodox Jews, the prime question of assessing if someone is Jewish or not is that the mother be Jewish.
In that case, why would Jews who think that it is really important that their numbers dont decrease be concerned over Jewish girls marrying or having kids with Gentiles? Shouldnt thye be concerned only about male Jews doing that, and not females? After all, in a mixed Jewish-Gentile couple, if it’s the mother that’s Jewish, ultimately the kids will be Jewish. Yet, on stories related to that subject (like that letter from Orthodox rabbis back in December in Israel), the focus seems far more on female Jews marrying outside of the faith than on males doing so.
So?

Also, another question:
if the mother thing is that important, is there some kind of reverse China syndrome?
That is the Chinese (but also the Indians I hear. And come to that, it is quite frequent in a lot of other places as well) far prefer to have male kids rather than female ones. So, with the concern over the Jewishness of the mother necessary to transmit the status (cant think of a better word there), is there some kind of similar behavior among some Jews, but this time focusing on having girls instead of boys?
The vast majority of Jews that I can say I know well are North African Jews, and there’s really no difference on that point with North Africans in general, boy is usually prefered. But logically, it should be the reverse, if there was to be any preference. Does that exist in some Jewish communities?

First, North African Jews would be Shephardic, I think - the vast majority of North American and European Jews are Ashkenazic. The Shephardic Jews may have very different methods of determining who is a Jew - I simply do not know (and most N. American Jews would be equally clueless).

Second, holding to the matrilinial transmission of Jewishness is actually stronger the more Orthodox the Jew, rather than the reverse - that is, Reform Jews are more open to having Jewishness transmit through either line (so long as the child is brought up Jewish). Though this is a reasonably recent development.

As to your questions – I think you may be incorrect on the point that having Jewish women marry outside of the faith is a “bigger deal”. The reason I have for thinking that, is that Jewish bigotry (Jews are as capable of being bigoted as anyone) focuses on the figure of the “shiksa”, which is a perjorative term used, rudely, to refer to a non-Jewish woman:

Shiksa

Urban Dictionary: shiksa

This person is, basically, a figure who is always portrayed as going out of her way to attract Jewish men - she chases after them. She’s a ‘dirty, bad girl’ who is attractive because will do things no good Jewish woman would. She’s a figure of threat, because the Jewish men may give in to her blandishments and marry outside the faith … there is an equivalent term for “non-Jewish men” but it is nowhere near as commonly used or popular in dirty jokes and the like.

My take on this is that Judaism, as a group, has more anxiety over the sexual “threat” posed by non-Jewish women then by non-Jewish men. Non-Jewish mnen are not seen as “dangerously sexy” in the same way at all (indeed, the trope preyed upon, for whatever reason, is that Jewish men are highly desireable by Jewish and non-Jewish women alike).

In addition - marrying outside the faith is still of concern, even for women, because of the threat the woman or children thereof will convert to the faith of the father.

As for “reverse China syndrome” - I’ve never seen any evidence of that. Traditional Jewish culture was as sexist as anywhere else, and the birth of a son was considered superior than that of a daughter (for one, daughters needed dowries). Also, men were preferred because they could perform religious duties forbidden to women, a big deal. Modern Judaism is, depending on the denomination, quite egalitarian - for example, there are many female rabbis these days, something unheard of a hundred years ago.

[Capitaine_Zombie]

@Malthus

First, North African Jews would be Shephardic, I think - the vast majority of North American and European Jews are Ashkenazic. The Shephardic Jews may have very different methods of determining who is a Jew - I simply do not know (and most N. American Jews would be equally clueless).

Really? I thought most North African Jews were Mizrahis, and that the Sephardic thing was just a bad understanding of what Spehardi means. I also thought matrilinearity was something shared by all communities, though.

@Malthus

Second, holding to the matrilinial transmission of Jewishness is actually stronger the more Orthodox the Jew, rather than the reverse - that is, Reform Jews are more open to having Jewishness transmit through either line (so long as the child is brought up Jewish). Though this is a reasonably recent development.

I can see why you might think I meant that, considering my wording. What I meant is that Orthodox Jews being far stricter in what defines Jewishness, the mother thing would be just one criteria among many. But it would be enough for less strict Jews.

@Malthus

As to your questions – I think you may be incorrect on the point that having Jewish women marry outside of the faith is a “bigger deal”. The reason I have for thinking that, is that Jewish bigotry (Jews are as capable of being bigoted as anyone) focuses on the figure of the “shiksa”, which is a perjorative term used, rudely, to refer to a non-Jewish woman:

I’m not holding a position on anything I’ve asked but the few things I’ve read about it were happening in Israel, and the concern seems to have been way more about Jewish females marrying outside of the faith, than males doing the same.
Maybe that’s just because it is more likely to become news. Maybe not. Or maybe, the concern is vastly different for American Jews and Israelis. That said my question was encompassing all Jews, not necessarily restricted to American Jews nor to Ashkenazis (I understand from your answer that you’re both American and Jewish, hence the focus, but you might have knowledge of what happens in other communities).

P.S:Is the shiksa thing a feature of Ashkenazis Jews? I had heard the term but never from North African Jews (nor an equivalent).

[Malthus]

@Capitaine_Zombie

Really? I thought most North African Jews were Mizrahis, and that the Sephardic thing was just a bad understanding of what Spehardi means. I also thought matrilinearity was something shared by all communities, though.

From what I understand, the Jews of North Africa mostly came from Medieval Spain (and vice versa), and are generally classified as Shephardim.

Sephardic Jews

Moroccan and other North African Jews are sometimes known as “Maghrebim”, and are closely associated with the Sephardim proper (Jews of Iberian descent), both because the Jewish community of Al-Andalus was itself partly of Maghrebi Jewish origin and because many Sephardim settled in North Africa after their expulsion from Spain.

I have no idea if they are matrilineal or not, is my point; for all I know, they could be. I just don’t know.

I can see why you might think I meant that, considering my wording. What I meant is that Orthodox Jews being far stricter in what defines Jewishness, the mother thing would be just one criteria among many. But it would be enough for less strict Jews.

Again, oddly enough it works the other way around - for less strict Jews, descent is more likely to be only one factor among many, wereas for the Orthodox, it is enough.

I’m not holding a position on anything I’ve asked but the few things I’ve read about it were happening in Israel, and the concern seems to have been way more about Jewish females marrying outside of the faith, than males doing the same.
Maybe that’s just because it is more likely to become news. Maybe not. Or maybe, the concern is vastly different for American Jews and Israelis. That said my question was encompassing all Jews, not necessarily restricted to American Jews nor to Ashkenazis (I understand from your answer that you’re both American and Jewish, hence the focus, but you might have knowledge of what happens in other communities).

I’m Canadian and Jewish - while I’ve been to Israel, I can’t claim to understand their culture thoroughly. I have no idea whether female Jews marrying non-Jews is a big concern or not.

P.S:Is the shiksa thing a feature of Ashkenazis Jews? I had heard the term but never from North African Jews (nor an equivalent).

The term is definitely going to be restricted to Askenazim, because it is Yiddish, a language which only Ashkenazim will have spoken - though as with many Yiddish words, it has migrated into English use, by people who by and large do not speak Yiddish (a mostly-dead language now).

Of course, the Shephardim may have a similar word, derived from Ladino, I dunno.

[Farmer_Jane]

@furt

I am heading out of town and won’t be back until Sunday at the earliest. In the meantime, in post #507, I quote CitizenPained misrepresenting me for purposes of calling me an anti-semite. I’d like to know if you agree with him.

First of all, that’s Ms. Citizen Pained. Second: I didn’t call you an anti-Semite. Please do not make false claims.

[Farmer_Jane]

In Israel, female Jews marrying non Jews can be a big stink because of concern of decreasing Jewish majority. Some Orthodox are super jerks about it. It’s the same in Brookyn.

It’s more about survival in Israel than straight bigtory. Fine line, but there’s a pretty legit reason to fear Israel as we know it won’t exist (or won’t be able to exist in any kind of democratic fashion) if a nonJewish majority rises in government. The same is echoed elsewhere, albeit a different level.

There are a couple of explanations for the Jewish matrilineal idea: One is that there is never a question of paternity. Two; mothers are (were) supposed to be in charge of child rearing and parts of Jewish education. Three (arguably); mitochodnrial DNA is the thing that links everyone. Four; Jewish women had less mobility so it was assumed she would take a Jewish male spouse. (See Finn’s note of that “Messianic Jew” story about the rabbi’s daughter.) Five; men who were raised in typical Jewish communities would be very invested in that community and thus, less likely to marry a non Jewish woman. There are a lot of sayings in the Orthodox about how you should marry the woman whose house you want to emulate because that is what you will become. (Ie, if you are a vegetarian and your wife eats meat, you will eventually start eating meat. Women “run the house”.) The rate of conversion into Judaism is higher among women than men for a reason, nu?

The system actually worked pretty well for several centuries. Now there is less of a stigma in marrying outside of the religion, but it does hurt the Jewish people. It’s not a matter of bigotry - it’s a love of one’s culture. I think others here have explained why it hurts.

The Reform argues that if they take interfaith couples and children of non Jewish mothers, it will prevent Jewish assimilation into majority culture. That hasn’t worked very well…then you have a generation of kids who grew up feeling Jewish or something and then they find out that 50 per cent of the Jewish community doesn’t think them so. Ouch.

Personally, I’d rather see interfaith couples not practice Judaism than half ass practice Judaism. Or, if you say you’re going to raise your children to be Jewish, then really do so.

If my son married a non-Jewish woman, I’d have a coronary. My reasoning is this: there’s more than one person in the world for you. One of them has to be Jewish. shrug That’s why I don’t date non-Jews. It removes the “Oh i couldn’t help it, I didn’t mean to fall in love, but…” aspect. I’m not even militant on matters of Judaism. But there’s a clear case against intermarriage (because it’s basically just assimilation) and that would be the death of Judaism.

Oddly, the fact that Jews were a suppressed minority and usually not allowed/expect to marry non-Jews aided their reproductive rates.

So this Jewish man fell in love with a non Jewish woman and they just had to get married. His mom was upset, but the woman agreed to convert. The man was so happy. She spent two years becoming part of the Jewish community, learning Torah, Hebrew, and rules of kashrut. Finally, after her conversion, the man said, “Now we can get married!” The woman looked at him and said, “Are you kidding? What kind of a self respecting Jewish woman would marry a man who didn’t care if she were Jewish? You take me for a shiske?”

[Jackmannii]

@Malthus

First, North African Jews would be Shephardic, I think - the vast majority of North American and European Jews are Ashkenazic. The Shephardic Jews may have very different methods of determining who is a Jew - I simply do not know…

For them it would appear to be a matter of strict genetic lineage, requiring a particular mutation affecting bilirubin metabolism. End result: their shit doesn’t stink.

…Jewish bigotry (Jews are as capable of being bigoted as anyone) focuses on the figure of the "shiksa…This person is, basically, a figure who is always portrayed as going out of her way to attract Jewish men - she chases after them. She’s a ‘dirty, bad girl’ who is attractive because will do things no good Jewish woman would.

You may have something there.

[Farmer_Jane]

@Malthus

The term is definitely going to be restricted to Askenazim, because it is Yiddish, a language which only Ashkenazim will have spoken - though as with many Yiddish words, it has migrated into English use, by people who by and large do not speak Yiddish (a mostly-dead language now).

Of course, the Shephardim may have a similar word, derived from Ladino, I dunno.

It’s basically the same idea as someone emigrating to America and complaining about loose American women with no morals.

Now (when I hear it) shikse is just ‘not a Jewish woman’ and doesn’t have the same prejorative sense. Unless she’s Catholic. Then you’re done for.

eta: Sephardim vary.
And the Reform movement really changed in the 80s - “Who is a Jew” resurfaced again because everyone was fighting about the definition, and then the Reform broke off from negotiation, and then the Orthodox.

[Malthus]

@CitizenPained

In Israel, female Jews marrying non Jews can be a big stink because of concern of decreasing Jewish majority. Some Orthodox are super jerks about it. It’s the same in Brookyn.

It’s more about survival in Israel than straight bigtory. Fine line, but there’s a pretty legit reason to fear Israel as we know it won’t exist (or won’t be able to exist in any kind of democratic fashion) if a nonJewish majority rises in government. The same is echoed elsewhere, albeit a different level.

There are a couple of explanations for the Jewish matrilineal idea: One is that there is never a question of paternity. Two; mothers are (were) supposed to be in charge of child rearing and parts of Jewish education. Three (arguably); mitochodnrial DNA is the thing that links everyone. Four; Jewish women had less mobility so it was assumed she would take a Jewish male spouse. (See Finn’s note of that “Messianic Jew” story about the rabbi’s daughter.) Five; men who were raised in typical Jewish communities would be very invested in that community and thus, less likely to marry a non Jewish woman. There are a lot of sayings in the Orthodox about how you should marry the woman whose house you want to emulate because that is what you will become. (Ie, if you are a vegetarian and your wife eats meat, you will eventually start eating meat. Women “run the house”.) The rate of conversion into Judaism is higher among women than men for a reason, nu?

The system actually worked pretty well for several centuries. Now there is less of a stigma in marrying outside of the religion, but it does hurt the Jewish people. It’s not a matter of bigotry - it’s a love of one’s culture. I think others here have explained why it hurts.

The Reform argues that if they take interfaith couples and children of non Jewish mothers, it will prevent Jewish assimilation into majority culture. That hasn’t worked very well…then you have a generation of kids who grew up feeling Jewish or something and then they find out that 50 per cent of the Jewish community doesn’t think them so. Ouch.

Personally, I’d rather see interfaith couples not practice Judaism than half ass practice Judaism. Or, if you say you’re going to raise your children to be Jewish, then really do so.

If my son married a non-Jewish woman, I’d have a coronary. My reasoning is this: there’s more than one person in the world for you. One of them has to be Jewish. shrug That’s why I don’t date non-Jews. It removes the “Oh i couldn’t help it, I didn’t mean to fall in love, but…” aspect. I’m not even militant on matters of Judaism. But there’s a clear case against intermarriage (because it’s basically just assimilation) and that would be the death of Judaism.

Oddly, the fact that Jews were a suppressed minority and usually not allowed/expect to marry non-Jews aided their reproductive rates.

So this Jewish man fell in love with a non Jewish woman and they just had to get married. His mom was upset, but the woman agreed to convert. The man was so happy. She spent two years becoming part of the Jewish community, learning Torah, Hebrew, and rules of kashrut. Finally, after her conversion, the man said, “Now we can get married!” The woman looked at him and said, “Are you kidding? What kind of a self respecting Jewish woman would marry a man who didn’t care if she were Jewish? You take me for a shiske?”

I don’t suppose now is a good time for me to confess that my father isn’t Jewish and neither is my wife …

When my son grows up, he’ll be given the choice: I plan to teach him all about both his heritages, and he can freely choose which, and how much, to partake. If he wants to self-identify as Jewish, he can - if necessary, by conversion. Personally, I have my own religious views - closer to Spinoza’s pantheism - which I’ll tell him about, when he’s ready; all I hope is that he is curious and interested in such matters as his heritage, what and who he is, and his relationship to others and the world, and approaches these things with an open mind and a loving heart. If so, whatever he decides, is right.

I suppose I’m the poster boy for assimilation: all of my friends are a serious mix of everything - my best friend is one of the few actually believing Christians I know of, and he’s married to a Persian woman who is of course Muslim (and from a traditionally Sufi family); my wife is Catholic, but not a believer …

[Malthus]

@Jackmannii

You may have something there.

As I said, my wife isn’t Jewish.

[Malthus]

@CitizenPained

It’s basically the same idea as someone emigrating to America and complaining about loose American women with no morals.

Now (when I hear it) shikse is just ‘not a Jewish woman’ and doesn’t have the same prejorative sense. Unless she’s Catholic. Then you’re done for.

eta: Sephardim vary.
And the Reform movement really changed in the 80s - “Who is a Jew” resurfaced again because everyone was fighting about the definition, and then the Reform broke off from negotiation, and then the Orthodox.

When I was growing up, it was pretty perjorative; sort of like calling someone a “whore”, only with a dash of bigotry added to the mysogeny. Not something you said in polite company (you would not, for example, call your boss’s wife a “shikse”, not to his face, not if you liked working for him).

Maybe it has lost that edge over the years, I’d still be very uncomfortable about using it merely to mean “woman who is not Jewish”.

[Cheshire_Human]

@Malthus

We’ve looked at your cites, and pointed out that even the most cursory glace at the alleged “testimonials” contained therein conclusively demonstrates that they were (a) not actually written by Jews and (b) not even edited, overseen or proofread by a Jew - since to anyone actually growing up Jewish, no matter what they may have converted to, they contain quite incredible and obvious mistakes, such as the “I was educated in the Reform tradition, but I always thought Jews were the majority”.

These are in the cites you have provided - in fact, in the very first cite you list.

You know, I, too, wonder about this. I have no reason to doubt it, but as far as my direct knowledge goes, J4J is ‘a bunch of ex-Jews who converted, are now evangelical Christians, and are just as annoying as the rest of that crowd. They just mostly bother Jews about it, instead of us goyim’, so I, too would like to see some support for the contention that they are actually goyim in Jew clothing, rather than actual ex-Jews. Pointing to flaws in the “testimonials” at furt’s link doesn’t do it, as far as supporting the position goes, because in my experience, evangelical Christians of any stripe are largely idiots or willfully ignorant types, and I expect ‘da Joos’ to have as many of those as any other group.

Pointing to sentences in “testimonials” that only add up to “I are an ignorant fool who believes something totally counterfactual” only means you’ve established that Jews can display the same types of stupidity that evangelical Christian goyim regularly display. OK, your idiots abandon Judaism for Fundie Christianity, because they are willfully ignorant of their own traditions. You then go on to say that you..

pointed out that even the most cursory glace at the alleged “testimonials” contained therein conclusively demonstrates that they were

…problematical. I cannot see the problem, there, because I do not share your cultural or educational background. All I see is you pointing to an idiot who failed to learn what was a) taught, and b) there for you to see, if you have eyes.

That describes fundie Christians, perfectly, but it also describes willful fools of any community perfectly well, too. How does pointing out that it was written by a moron establish that it was written by a fake Jew? Please, show that they are NOT Jews, not that they are ignorant or stupid, but still maybe Jews. You haven’t shown that.

[FinnAgain]

@Cheshire_Human

I, too would like to see some support for the contention that they are actually goyim in Jew clothing, rather than actual ex-Jews.

The contention is not a positive one, it’s a negative one. We have no reason to believe the testimonials, claims or membership figures of groups like JfJ whose very MO is deception and dishonesty, and individuals can be evaluated on a case by case basis. A cite has already been provided, however, showing that in terms of the congregations for “Messianic Jewish” groups, actual converted Jews are either not a majority, or are a distinct minority, depending on estimates.

What we have (I think) all agreed on is that 100% of actual converts to these groups will be Jews, because they never convert anybody else. But their membership, leadership, and the composition of their congregations is another matter entirely.

@Cheshire_Human

All I see is you pointing to an idiot who failed to learn what was a) taught, and b) there for you to see, if you have eyes.

Well, there, some of the errors are so massive as to beggar credulity. If, for instance, an organization was formed (for all I know such organizations already exist) which aimed at converting Christians to Islam, and had “testimonials” of featuring claims like “I was brought up in a devout, highly bible-centered household where we read the Gospels from cover to cover, over and over again. But the stories of how Jesus fought a tyrannosaurus rex with his bare hands never really sounded convincing, so I joined Islam and so should you.”
Well… that might raise some red flags, right?

Orthodox Jews not knowing basic facts of Judaism? American Jews thinking that they were the majority in the nation? Polish Jews thinking that things were pretty much hunky dorey there for Jews other than some standard European-style anti-Semitism? It’s fighting-the-T-Rex level “Bwah??”

But that’s aside from the fact that the burden of proof is on the “Messianic Jewish” groups to show what their membership, leadership and congregations are actually all about. I’ve cited, for instance, how JfJ describes themselves as “Jews” when dealing with the public, but “Christians”, or more specifically “evangelical Christians” when dealing with Christians. Why should we believe their claims on their Jewish connections, then?

[Farmer_Jane]

CH, our point is that j4j self reports low numbers of born jews in their congregations and then say, oh, we have 60,00 members …actually very few religious Jews convert.

It would be like the NAACP being 90% white.

[Malthus]

@Cheshire_Human

You know, I, too, wonder about this. I have no reason to doubt it, but as far as my direct knowledge goes, J4J is ‘a bunch of ex-Jews who converted, are now evangelical Christians, and are just as annoying as the rest of that crowd. They just mostly bother Jews about it, instead of us goyim’, so I, too would like to see some support for the contention that they are actually goyim in Jew clothing, rather than actual ex-Jews. Pointing to flaws in the “testimonials” at furt’s link doesn’t do it, as far as supporting the position goes, because in my experience, evangelical Christians of any stripe are largely idiots or willfully ignorant types, and I expect ‘da Joos’ to have as many of those as any other group.

Pointing to sentences in “testimonials” that only add up to “I are an ignorant fool who believes something totally counterfactual” only means you’ve established that Jews can display the same types of stupidity that evangelical Christian goyim regularly display. OK, your idiots abandon Judaism for Fundie Christianity, because they are willfully ignorant of their own traditions. You then go on to say that you…problematical. I cannot see the problem, there, because I do not share your cultural or educational background. All I see is you pointing to an idiot who failed to learn what was a) taught, and b) there for you to see, if you have eyes.

That describes fundie Christians, perfectly, but it also describes willful fools of any community perfectly well, too. How does pointing out that it was written by a moron establish that it was written by a fake Jew? Please, show that they are NOT Jews, not that they are ignorant or stupid, but still maybe Jews. You haven’t shown that.

This has already been addressed upthread. A cite was provided that definitively proved that the overwhelming majority of the congregations of “messianic Jewish” groups generally are composed of people who are not ethnically Jewish.

For convenience, the site is page 247 of Evangelizing the chosen people: missions to the Jews in America, 1880-2000, which is available online here:

Evangelizing the Chosen People

A futher set of cites demonstrates that in Jews for Jesus, the percentage is even lower than that for messianic groups generally: something like 80-90% are not “ethnic Jews” (cites show actual JforJ leaders lamenting this fact).

They are, by population, majority “ethnicly” Christian, with a sizable minority of “ethnic Jews”.

As for the cite of the guy claiming he was educated as “Reformed” and did not know Jews were a minority - ask any Jew, that goes well beyond the realm of possibility. It doesn’t pass the “smell test”. I can see a person growing up ignorant of many things, but not that. It is like someone claiming to have been born an Earthling, but never having noticed that stuff falls when you drop it.

I know that non-Jews may not “get” this (hence the mistake in the first place), but Jews are educated practically from the cradle to understand they are a minority. Literally, a large percentage of Jewish holidays celebrate the miraculous survival of the Jewish minority, faced with various threats. Reform is also big on such topics of recent Jewish history as the Holocaust and the formation of Israel - there are presented as being part of an age-old Jewish pattern. You can’t go through a Reform Jewish education, and not know Jews are a minority. You simply can’t, and every Jew on the planet, pretty well, knows this (but obviously it is not equally obvious to non-Jews).

[Farmer_Jane]

There is no messianic Jew movement. There is a Christian movement designed to convert Jews. But no Jewish movement. Messianic Jew does not exist.

Eta: its a misnomer.

[DocCathode]

@CitizenPained

There is no messianic Jew movement. There is a Christian movement designed to convert Jews. But no Jewish movement. Messianic Jew does not exist.

Eta: its a misnomer.

I like to call them “Yeshnik mamzers”

I shall explain. They usually refer to Jesus by the Hebrew name Yeshua - thus Yeshniks. Mamzer is Yiddish for bastard.

[Zeriel]

@Malthus

When I was growing up, it was pretty perjorative; sort of like calling someone a “whore”, only with a dash of bigotry added to the mysogeny. Not something you said in polite company (you would not, for example, call your boss’s wife a “shikse”, not to his face, not if you liked working for him).

Maybe it has lost that edge over the years, I’d still be very uncomfortable about using it merely to mean “woman who is not Jewish”.

As an aside, myself and a close friend who both happened to marry Jewish women despite being non-Jews ourselves have–in the face of some “interesting” abuse from population-worrying Orthodox–started using “shaygetz” in the same way a rapper would use “nigga”.

“Hey Patrick–my shaygetz, my dawg!”

[Capitaine_Zombie]

@CitizenPained

In Israel, female Jews marrying non Jews can be a big stink because of concern of decreasing Jewish majority. Some Orthodox are super jerks about it. It’s the same in Brookyn.

It’s more about survival in Israel than straight bigtory. Fine line, but there’s a pretty legit reason to fear Israel as we know it won’t exist (or won’t be able to exist in any kind of democratic fashion) if a nonJewish majority rises in government. The same is echoed elsewhere, albeit a different level.

There are a couple of explanations for the Jewish matrilineal idea: One is that there is never a question of paternity. Two; mothers are (were) supposed to be in charge of child rearing and parts of Jewish education. Three (arguably); mitochodnrial DNA is the thing that links everyone. Four; Jewish women had less mobility so it was assumed she would take a Jewish male spouse. (See Finn’s note of that “Messianic Jew” story about the rabbi’s daughter.) Five; men who were raised in typical Jewish communities would be very invested in that community and thus, less likely to marry a non Jewish woman. There are a lot of sayings in the Orthodox about how you should marry the woman whose house you want to emulate because that is what you will become. (Ie, if you are a vegetarian and your wife eats meat, you will eventually start eating meat. Women “run the house”.) The rate of conversion into Judaism is higher among women than men for a reason, nu?

The system actually worked pretty well for several centuries. Now there is less of a stigma in marrying outside of the religion, but it does hurt the Jewish people. It’s not a matter of bigotry - it’s a love of one’s culture. I think others here have explained why it hurts.

The Reform argues that if they take interfaith couples and children of non Jewish mothers, it will prevent Jewish assimilation into majority culture. That hasn’t worked very well…then you have a generation of kids who grew up feeling Jewish or something and then they find out that 50 per cent of the Jewish community doesn’t think them so. Ouch.

Personally, I’d rather see interfaith couples not practice Judaism than half ass practice Judaism. Or, if you say you’re going to raise your children to be Jewish, then really do so.

If my son married a non-Jewish woman, I’d have a coronary. My reasoning is this: there’s more than one person in the world for you. One of them has to be Jewish. shrug That’s why I don’t date non-Jews. It removes the “Oh i couldn’t help it, I didn’t mean to fall in love, but…” aspect. I’m not even militant on matters of Judaism. But there’s a clear case against intermarriage (because it’s basically just assimilation) and that would be the death of Judaism.

Oddly, the fact that Jews were a suppressed minority and usually not allowed/expect to marry non-Jews aided their reproductive rates.

So this Jewish man fell in love with a non Jewish woman and they just had to get married. His mom was upset, but the woman agreed to convert. The man was so happy. She spent two years becoming part of the Jewish community, learning Torah, Hebrew, and rules of kashrut. Finally, after her conversion, the man said, “Now we can get married!” The woman looked at him and said, “Are you kidding? What kind of a self respecting Jewish woman would marry a man who didn’t care if she were Jewish? You take me for a shiske?”

That wasnt at all my question, but way to go to prove the OP’s point. I find this kind of reasoning absolutely nauseating, and can only be glad my folks never raised me in such a way. I dont think you make a good advocate for Judaism in any way, if that’s what you thought.
I have never met such bigotry in real life.

[Farmer_Jane]

Calling me a bigot?

eta: If you had read this thread, you’d see that I had already revealed my dating preferences pages ago. Nice try.

[Farmer_Jane]

@Zeriel

As an aside, myself and a close friend who both happened to marry Jewish women despite being non-Jews ourselves have–in the face of some “interesting” abuse from population-worrying Orthodox–started using “shaygetz” in the same way a rapper would use “nigga”.

“Hey Patrick–my shaygetz, my dawg!”

The tinge of self-deprecation probably made you fight right in.