Shira

And if we don't protect them all, we can't protect any.

If you would justify the shooting of Israeli Embassy workers attending a peace conference, then you would have collected souvenir photographs of the mass graves filled with the bodies of Jews.

Nazis (including civilian party members) also believed they were saving society from Jewish terrorists, the use of Zionist to qualify the statement means nothing.

Jew Hatred has always been the popular opinion and social position for thousands of years, the last 50 years of peace experienced by Western Jewry was a historical aberration. Unless there is a miraculous change in attitudes... our lives prior to the Jubilee of Jewish deaths that was October 7, it will be remembered as a Jewish Golden Age like the Sephardic Silver Age of Al-Andalus brought to an end by the Reconquista/Alhambra Decree and Isabella and Ferdinand betraying their promise to treat Jewish and Muslim subjects well under a unified Spain.

Tl;dr: the Christian categories of “moral” and “ceremonial” law that are used to justify Christians invoking Leviticus while simultaneously following none of Leviticus are extra-textual, inconsistent, and clearly self-serving on their face.

“Rules about my money and my property become optional. Rules about your genitals and your sexuality do not.”

The Kohanim still bless the congregation (in many communities in Israel, every day, and in the diaspora either every Shabbat or on Yom Tov depending on community tradition), the Levi'im still wash their hands. Every day that there is Torah reading, a Kohen (if present) still gets the first Aliyah, and a Levi (if present) still gets the second (or the first if there are no Kohanim present). Kohanim are still bound by the special laws of impurity and marriage. They can't come in contact with the dead (outside of immediate family) (and if I understand right this is still observed by Reform Judaism) and they still aren't supposed to marry divorcees or converts (I'm actually unclear on what Conservative Judaism's ruling on this one is, I've seen some fascinating responsa about it, but I haven't found a conclusive official ruling (I'm sure it's out there I just haven't found it), and this is something that definitely still gets debated in Orthodox Judaism even if overall mainstream norms haven't changed yet). Non-Kohanim and non-Levi'im still redeem their firstborn sons to a Kohen. Kohanim and Levi'im are still often given honours at weddings, feasts, and other life cycle events. There are still very much privileges and restrictions to Kohanim and Levi'im in contemporary Judaism.

It's true that we don't have a Temple and we don't have animal, incense, or produce offerings there anymore (although Terumah and Maaser still must be taken by produce grown in the land of Israel, Challah must still be taken, (although anything designated for a Kohen is instead disposed of rather than given to them in a post-Temple world) Shmita is still observed by observant Jews around the world), and Kohanim and Levi'im are allowed to own (in as much as "ownership" is a social construct, where private land ownership is much different on a governmental level and anyway most private ownership isn't permanent) land in Israel. But we still recognize the classes of Kohanim and Levi'im and they are still treated, at least in some capacities, as distinct and sacred classes. We still recognize the lineage of Kohanim and Levi'im.

We absolutely have changed as a people, but there are plenty of Jews who still consider themselves bound by the Halachot of Leviticus. Yes, we don't do animal offerings on Yom Kippur (or any day of the year) but that's because we don't have a Temple, it would be impossible to do so. But just because some Jews don't do something, doesn't mean that it's universal. There are still plenty of Jews that try to observe all the laws of the Torah to the best of their abilities except for the ones that require a Temple. But plenty of Mitzvot don't require a Temple.

I understand what you're trying to say in terms of LGBTQ acceptance but that argument is moot when there are absolutely Jews who do still do these things, including LGBTQ Jews. Hi, hello, I'm one of them, I'm queer and I consider myself Orthodox, and I go to an Orthodox synagogue where I am not ostracized or treated as anything lesser. There are absolutely ways to include and affirm LGBTQ Jews without throwing out the entirety of the book of Leviticus or indeed all of Halacha or disparaging Jews who still follow it.

It's a dick move when Orthodox Jews act like they're the sole inheritors of Judaism, but it's just as bad when Reform Jews do it as well. Reform Judaism isn't the "final form" of Judaism, and neither is Orthodox Judaism. Orthodox Jews aren't archaic, less-evolved Jews.

"There is an evil empire next door to you, and they keep trying to invade"

"Well, just let them? Borders aren't real, silly!"

"When they invade they want to stop you from passing down your culture, ban your language, stop you from celebrating your holidays, kidnap your kids and scatter them to the four winds."

"Well, I would just stop them, I would say no! I'd hashtag RESIST!"

"Then, they will kill you, and everyone who tries to resist."

"Well then I would fight back, I'd form a resistance movement against them, we'd train with weapons and learn to make bombs and..."

"Wouldn't it be easier if you had already trained that resistance before people were dying? Maybe, get them to learn how to hold a rifle or pilot a drone before they have to do it in secret?"

"Yeah, probably."

But the thing is, it absolutely does. People from the countries that haven't known war for decades or have always been the aggressor are equating any military with evil. Even if they say they discern between the perpetrator and the victim fighting back, there's still this underlying feeling of contempt and mistrust. And it is very much interfering with Ukraine's ability to defend itself.

At the beginning of the full-scale invasion, plenty of the so-called 'progressive' westerners were opposing arming Ukraine because 'weapon bad', berating queer Ukrainians posting about taking up arms to fight russia, asking others to disregard charities related to the military needs. People were willing to donate to foodbanks etc, but not to charities collecting money for the frontline needs. Which is fine as a personal preference, and we are grateful for any help, but when it turns into a stance where supporting the military is considered bad, it's equals holding a person's hands back while they're being attacked with a knife so that they can't defend themselves, and then nobly tending to their wounds.

And what's worse, it leads to complete disregard of the victims in the military. While the civilian deaths can draw at least some attention, the deaths in the army are met with indifference. And no, not in all instances it's by design of the military as a system made to kill, so the argument 'if it wasn't for the military, they'd be alive' doesn't work in Ukraine's case. In Ukraine's case, if it wasn't for the military, they'd be just as dead, and many more people would be dead as well.

And still, I remember a post of a female Ukrainian war medic interacting with the foreigners, and realizing that her fellow figters and veterans do not even make it to the list of those deserving sympathy in their eyes despite defending the others (with the adult Ukrainian civilians being far at the bottom of the list way below animals and 'great russian culture', but that's a different conversation). And the military are one of the most vulnerable groups in the Ukrainian society at the moment due to constant danger, exhausting 24/7 work and life-changing injuries. The only way they could become even more vulnerable would be if none of us were given weapons and trained in defense at all, an entire society becoming a target with zero chance of fighting back. So, you know, if there was no military.

people (non-jews) seem to view Anne Frank as a martyr of some sort. i think this comes from a couple of perspectives and none of them are respectful or correct.

a martyr is a person who suffers or is killed for their beliefs, for what they stand for. the most famous example is probably Jesus (read "everyone's (second) favorite dead jew" from People Love Dead Jews by Dara Horn). this is also seen in catholic saints, in movements surrounding political activists, and in Islamist (not Islamic, Islamism=extremist Islamic fundamentalism) groups where becoming a martyr is considered an honor. martyrdom is somewhat present in some texts in Judaism. however, it isn't a central, core part of the religion or culture of the Jewish people. It's not a thing we really talk about in the same way that Christians and Muslims do. (this is NOT me saying that Jews are better. I am just pointing out cultural differences)

Judaism does not focus on death in the same way that Christianity and Islam often do. Judaism generally focuses on how to live a good and fulfilling life and to contribute to the world while you are alive. In many other religions, there is a bigger focus on being a good person with the intent to get into heaven after death. And that's fine, I think it motivates a lot of people to truly be good to others and to the world. but that isn't what Judaism is about. we are not raised to feel sorrow for the death of a deity. we are not forced to constantly remind ourselves of our inherent original sin. the afterlife is a highly debated subject in Judaism and there are many different ideas and interpretations about it - however, we do not generally believe in hell or eternal damnation after death. we are asked to be good people in life because it's the right thing to do, not because we have to ensure a spot in heaven. in Judaism there are a lot of specific traditions around death, burial, and mourning. the key one I want to focus on is memory: we say "may their memory be a blessing" rather than "rest in peace", we spend periods of time on remembering and honoring the life and legacy of the deceased, we place stones on graves rather than flowers because flowers are temporary and rocks will last a long time. a person who has died is kept alive through memory.

I explain this so that you can understand the cultural context of people applying the idea of martyrdom to Anne Frank.

Anne Frank was a child who was slaughtered brutally by the Nazis. she was a real person, and she did not die "for a cause". she died because of her ethnicity, her perceived "race", for the fact she was a Jew. you cannot remove the fact she was a Jew from this.

she was also not a singular case. the nazis murdered countless Jewish children just like her. it just happens that her diary was saved and became one of the most commonly known primary accounts of the atrocities of the holocaust.

i am going to insert this quote from People Love Dead Jews:

"The line most often quoted from Frank’s diary are her famous words, “I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart.” These words are “inspiring,” by which we mean that they flatter us. They make us feel forgiven for those lapses of our civilization that allow for piles of murdered girls – and if those words came from a murdered girl, well, then, we must be absolved, because they must be true. The gift of grace and absolution from a murdered Jew (exactly the gift that lies at the heart of Christianity) is what millions of people are so eager to find in Frank’s hiding place, in her writings, in her “legacy.” It is far more gratifying to believe that an innocent dead girl has offered us grace than to recognize the obvious: Frank wrote about people being “truly good at heart” before meeting people who weren’t. Three weeks after writing those words, she met people who weren’t."

Anne Frank did not write her diary with the intent of it being read by the general public. she did not write it to make you feel good about yourself in your white savior complex looking ass twitter posts. she did not write it to teach people in the future about morals and ethics and to be quotable. she wrote it for the same reason I wrote in a diary as a kid. to write down my thoughts and feelings and to remember my everyday life.

she was a child who was murdered for being Jewish.

do not use her name as a political talking point. she did not die for your cause. she did not die so that you could treat her as a martyr. she died because people hate Jews.

you cannot possibly claim to know what a girl who was murdered decades ago would have to say about the current political climate in a part of the world she never lived in. you cannot claim to speak for her. you cannot project your own political views onto her. you cannot use her as a symbol.

she is not a symbol. she is not a metaphor. she is not a name you can invoke to talk about other tragedies.

“Jews are eating kids! you’re a Jew, I smell the kids!” very normal world we’re living in.

combatantisemitism:

NYC, May 31, 2026: A 23 year old Jewish woman sent CAM footage of her assault on a subway train.

The incident began around 2:15 PM when a woman started speaking about Jews “stealing wealth” before turning her attention to her. The woman then told her she could “smell the babies” she had eaten and repeatedly yelled that “Jews eat babies,” a centuries old antisemitic blood libel.

The encounter quickly turned violent. The victim was choked, thrown to the ground, punched, beaten, and had her hair ripped out as passengers attempted to intervene too late.

13.2K likes on an explicitly antisemitic post, saying that no jews should have ever lived in Palestine past, present and future. The juice box emoji is a dogwhistle for jews because jews and juice sound similar.

No one should have to adhere to certain beliefs or opinions in order to be afforded basic dignity and rights, I'm 100% fully on board with that.

"There's nothing inherently less respectable about someone with 'Death to America' as a watchword as 'God bless America'" -No. Absolutely not. You have completely lost me here. Proudly and publicly calling for the death of an entire country and everyone who lives there is inherently less respectable actually and it fucking should be.

“Kafkaesque” stop it. get his name out of your mouths.

The Holocaust had a survival rate of about 30%. Millions of people disappeared from European cities and towns over several years. Everybody knew because it was happening all around them.

Gaza has a survival rate, despite the worst and most deadly and horrible periods of the war, of 97%.

All the dead Jews were noncombatants. A large percentage of the dead Gazans were combatants.

And the Jews of Europe, even as their millennia-old civilization was being systematically wiped out, wanted nothing from the societies that surrounded them except to be allowed to live in peace.

Gaza's leadership of religious fanatics, meanwhile, wants every last Israeli dead and gone, is willing to fight to the last Gazan to achieve that aim, has said so publicly and worked for decades to blow up every peace attempt -- and even now believes that Gaza's destruction would be a worthwhile sacrifice to lay on the altar of Israel's destruction, because their god told them so.

So Israelis can reasonably believe, given those features of the Gaza war that aren't true about any genocide ever, and were pretty much the opposite of what was happening in the Holocaust, that Gaza's suffering is a bad and painful war, but not remotely a genocide.

But the point of it all, of course, is not to analyze Gaza, but specifically to lump it together with the Holocaust -- to cast the Jews as the new Nazis.

The only reason this person would dare to make such an insanely ahistorical and immoral parallel is because this is the heart of the bigoted propaganda campaign in which he enthusiastically participates: The point of it all is to make the Jews into the Nazis.

A culture that obsessed about Jews being evil and was then shocked by the Holocaust into obsessing about dead Jews as the apotheosis of righteous victimhood is now obsessively engaged in knocking Jews off that moral pedestal they themselves put them on.

That's why they don't care one whit about Hamas massacres of Gazans, about genocidal wars in Syria or Yemen (even when they've funded and armed the sides), about flotilla activists currently held by the Libyans...literally nothing triggers a response except Jews.

They still, even after all these generations, no matter what else is happening in the world or in their own societies, can't stop thinking about Jews.

And as we Jews learned in the 1940s -- the actual, historical 1940s, not the weird fantasies conjured up by these bigots -- a whole society can be in the grip of a callous, destructive bigotry and still believe it is true and righteous.