Rabbi Yisrael Rozen of the Alon Shvut settlement in Gush Etziyon — you know, the liberal religious settlement — has called for the creation of unauthorized Jewish militias to wage attacks against Palestinians in response to rocket fire from Gaza. “The eternal response to terror is counter-terror, an eye for an eye,” said Rozen.
Blowhard Charles Krauthammer attacks the premise of the Borat film, claiming that antisemitism isn’t a problem in America, despite all evidence to the contrary.
After an Israeli soccer victory over France, a Jewish fan of the Israeli team escaped a near-lynching by French fans after a police officer opened fire into the mob chasing him, killing one.
Jewish congressman Henry Waxman announced his intentions to launch several investigations into the ongoing misconduct of the Bush administration.
Israel will spend a quarter-billion dollars to increase tourism to Israel. The 25% of Israelis living below the poverty line have obviously had their needs met.
Democrats attack Carter for calling Israel an apartheid state.
46 thoughts on “Mishegaas”
I just heard Carter on the CBC. Speaking of “blowhard”…he prefaced every response with “Now, I’m not taking sides but…”. Y’know, I learned something in highschool…when a girl tells you that “She’s not really a slut but…”. Well, you can fill in the rest.
It hurts my soul when Jews who know better start throwing around the term “an eye for an eye” as if it meant anything other than ‘fair monetary compensation’.
Carter is a brave man who has love in his heart for both Jews and Palestinians. God bless him for taking sides: for peace and against apartheid. It’s about time.
Krauthammer isn’t saying that antisemitism isn’t a problem in America. He’s saying that antisemitism in America is nowhere near the problem it is in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and (even) Latin America.
He’s taking Baron-Cohen to task for being so quick to skewer Americans when much viler antisemitism can be found elsewhere. And he’s questioning the assertion that the “antisemitism” found in the Arizona bar is evidence of the same kind of tolerance for hatred that allowed the Nazis to do what they did.
I don’t totally agree with him, but it’s actually one of the most well-thought criticisms of the movie since it came out.
What’s up with the “slut” comment? There was a need to offend extra people today? We haven’t reached our quota of mindless sexism yet?
You couldn’t just say, “Anyone who prefaces their comments with, ‘now I’m not taking sides, but,’ is almost certainly taking sides,” or something like that?
Rebecca,
Of course, I would normally react exactly the same way, but you probably have to cut some slack for the distorted perceptions of an really extraordinary superstud like Streimel. After all, it must have been incredibly stressful for Streimel as hordes of beautiful girls breathlessly chased him down, trying to control themselves while saying anything they could to induce him to grace them with the gifts of his legendary sexual prowess.
From a far less delusional perspective, on the other hand, the more more realistic experience from which Streimel might have drawn a lesson from his younger days was all the girls who’ve said to him. “No Streimel, it’s ok; it has nothing to do with your penis size. Really.”
Given the attention that this site gives to anti-Semitism I was surprised that the French mini-riot was not covered as a feature.
Voluntary militias not controlled by the State? That sounds like something anarchists have been advocating since the 19th century. Why are you opposed to individuals taking the initiative to defend themselces?
Israeli aparthied is a myth and Carter is just as much of a blowhard as Krauthammer, imho.
Krauthammer defense of America against so-called charges of Anti-Semitism is myopic. The very myopia that Cohen seeks to uncover. In his Rolling Stone interview, Cohen states that Anti-Semitism is to him little different than any other Racism. So, true, Jews are more vicimized in Europe. But to call Cohen names because of it? Perhaps Krauthammer saw a different Borat film than I did. His version of the film must have been missing the homophobic spewage, and the long scenes of joyous homoerotic (yet still homophobic) nonsense. Can Krauthammer hear his own myopia (and my mixed metaphors) when he completely ignores the homophobia in Borat and whines incessantly about the very little Anti-Semitism that is actually displayed by the Americans? Krauthammer focuses in on the alleged Anti-Semitism to belabor the typical position that American foreign policy is good for the Jews. Yeah, right. How about all the rampant homophobia? In not mentioning it at all, Krauthammer is probably revealing a little bit of his own position. Remember the saying, “first they came for the gays…”
“Look. Harry Truman used to tell derisive Jewish jokes. Richard Nixon said nasty things about Jews in government and elsewhere. Who cares?”
This sums it up, in my opinion.
The amount of fascism towards Jews in America is bad. I’ve noticed escalating aggression in the past years, and that’s from the perspective of a non-Jew. In America, Jews aren’t as exposed to the rampant disinformation flying about, at least not as much as the ‘goyim’.
For Chirstians, Arabs and most of the mid and lower classes in the US, it’s more culturally accetable to insult and catagorize the Jews with sweeping statements based on hyperbole. I could throw some of this rhetoric out here, but it’s disgusting, so I won’t.
Europe and the Mid East are different cultures, but if the growing fascism here in the US is miniscule in comparison, then the proliferation of the culture of hate and fear is far worse than I imagined, and I have an extensive imagination.
Ha….ha…I love…LOVE what get’s people all riled up on Jewschool. The values on this site are so ass-backwards sometimes…incredible. Yes, I used the word slut. Yes, I did. I can’t help but think that if I was gay, I mean really, really gay, that it would be ok to talk about…hell post photos about my promiscuous bath house weekends…in detail…and folks on Jewschool would applaud my liberated adventures.
So yes, I used the word slut. And yes, I knew some in highschool.
Ha….ha…I love…LOVE what get’s people all riled up on Jewschool. The values on this site are so ass-backwards sometimes.
I don’t think anyone got all riled up. They just said you’re an asshole. On the other hand, you do have a valid point; there certainly are bigger assholes in the world. I can’t help but think that if I was gay . . . folks on Jewschool would applaud my liberated adventures.
No they wouldn’t. They’d just call you a gay asshole.
“Israeli aparthied is a myth”
tell that to Ha’aretz — this is their editorial on Sept. 13:
“…the apartheid regime in the territories remains intact; millions of Palestinians are living without rights, freedom of movement or a livelihood, under the yoke of ongoing Israeli occupation, and in the future they will turn the Jews into a minority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.”
Streimel,
The reason I feel that the word slut is a sexist term is because it gets applied to women, and not to men, who are sexually active. It also pathologizes and dehumanizes people and sexuality. It doesn’t seem to serve a purpose other than humiliating people (often young people) and warping the way men and women see each other.
Just so you know what my reasoning was behind bringing this up. To me it’s an ugly term. That said, I’m not accusing you of being evil…. I’ve made many a faux pas in my day…. felt misunderstood, etc. That’s life. Sometimes I got educated, sometimes I got mad. But people are allowed to have their say if they get offended.
“I don’t think anyIne got all riled up.”
David Smith…you spent two entire paragraphs poking fun of my wee wee. You got riled my friend.
“Seriously, Shtreimel, if you have a sexually active woman come in for therapy, do you think in your head, “slutâ€?”
Seriously EV, it’s a blog. Chill out.
Ah hell, once we’re on it…
1) I love a good bloody hockey fight…the more blood the better.
2) And a good bloody steak
3) I believe men and women are different…very different. And yes, I believe men ARE physically stronger.
4) I enjoy a good military show now and then. And really enjoy the might of the IDF.
5) I think women say many things in university, grow up, and want most of the things that their mother’s and grandmother’s desired.
6) Freud is still right about many, many things.
Gotta run.
About the Alon Shvut thing, I was wondering when this would start happening. When people would start distorting our jihad concept (Bava Metzia 84-85, “getting rid of the thorns from the vineyard”). When self-defense, killing a rodef, would turn into a solely racist interethnic war with battle lines drawn by language and religion.
The thing is, who would be next in such a scenario and who would the “enemies” be? Palestinians or “Arabs” — even the Jewish ones or the Christian ones or the Palestinian-American visiting relatives before he goes back to his cushy job at a Jewish-owned company in America? Many Jews are on the “against us” team in such a mindset.
*sigh*…”if G-d wasn’t running things, I’d slit my wrists…”
Thanks for the laughs, everyone, which were much needed after reading all the headlines.
…can’t wait to see how much media coverage the demonstrations against “the siege of Gaza” will be getting on Friday…
The word slut is used in sexist ways, just like the word bitch. I’m really careful about using those words. But just between you and me, I’ve actually met sluts and bitches. Even a slut-bitch or two. And yes, manwhores two.
I encourage men and women to only think these terms, and not speak them or write them in blogs. Those words are best transitioned from nouns to adjectives.
1) I love a good bloody hockey fight…the more blood the better.
Is that Torah values? 2) And a good bloody steak Me, too. As long as its kosher. 3) I believe men and women are different…very different. And yes, I believe men ARE physically stronger. Depends upon what you mean by different. We’re certainly not as different say as cats and dogs. Statistically speaking, individual humans of any gender are more different than men and women are as groups. SO what? 4) I enjoy a good military show now and then. And really enjoy the might of the IDF. so do camp followers. Your point? (perhaps this would come under your supposition that if you were gay…. 5) I think women say many things in university, grow up, and want most of the things that their mother’s and grandmother’s desired. You’d be right. You just have no idea what their mothers and grandmothers wanted – and couldn’t get. Just who do you think it was who fought (and for that matter, continue to fight) the fights of feminism? It was our mothers and grandmothers. 6) Freud is still right about many, many things.
Actually, scientifically, he was right about pretty much nothing. I don’t believe you any longer when you claim to be a practicing therapist – have you read a psych journal in the last 20 years?
Kol…arguing the scientific validity of psychodynamic ideas is about as useful as the Dawkins/Harris crusade about the validity of the “God claim”. The question is…does it help people…IN THE LONG TERM. And in my experience, psychodynamic therapy is the only the therapy that takes into consideration the multi-complex layers that clients present in the therapists office. CBT has been “scientifically proven” to work as well. And while I’ve been trained in, and use CBT, it rarely works for relational issues (a majority of the reasons why people seek out therapy), but does wonders if you’re afraid of spiders (sometimes).
Freud’s ideas (along with Kohut, Jung, Erikson) will be around a long, long time. The CBT/Solution-Focused folks will pass like bad gas.
Well, it’s nice that in your experience … but your experience doesn’t, as far as you mention, hapen to be scientifically validatedthrough blind studies …or any other kind of measurable and validatable method. That makes it scientifically, not worth a hill of beans. OTOH, thestudies there are show that Freud’s theories don’t actually produce any long term gains. Hell, just ask Woody Allen. THe guy must have been seeing a Freudian therpist for what, 40 years? And he still married his daughter. *shiver*
“thestudies there are show that Freud’s theories don’t actually produce any long term gains”
And I can post counter studies to refute those stuies (See “Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain” on Amazon). But hell, most folks want to pop a sleeping pill and few mg of Effexor and get back to their X-box. Anyway, this is a silly discussion. I’m assuming I’m debating a non-therapist; if you practiced, you’d recognize the contributions of Freud (Dreams, Unconscious, Talking therapy, repetitious complexion) in your practice.
Unless I were a cognitive bewhavioralist. Although I’ll give you talk therapy, it’s such a trivial give that I can hardly feel bad about it.
I certainly wouldn’t give you the unconscious, which although it has entered the realm of folk psychology is hardly undebated as a phenomenon. Same with dreams. And perhaps you meant…. repetition compulsion?
“Although I’ll give you talk therapy, it’s such a trivial give that I can hardly feel bad about it.”
If by “talk therapy” you mean blah, blah blah…then yes, trivial indeed (something many, many therapists are guilty of). But if you’re referring to the healing process of transference/projection…heavy stuff indeed.
“I certainly wouldn’t give you the unconscious, which although it has entered the realm of folk psychology is hardly undebated as a phenomenon. Same with dreams.â€
Right. Sorta like God, Love, etc. You can’t prove it, but people sure dedicate their lives to worshiping/obtaining it. Dreams…a true shame that most shrinks haven’t been trained, and hence, don’t know what to do with them. Suffice to say a psychiatrist/anaylty I know put it this way: “The next time you bump into a neuroscientist who states that dreams are the random firings of neurons…tell him/her to justify their “sex dream with the next door neighbor†to their spouse with the comment: “Honey, it’s only random electrical impulses, don’t take it too personallyâ€.
“And perhaps you meant…. repetition compulsion?”
Yes, you’re quite right. I’m not even sure who typed “repetitious complexionâ€. I must’ve been thinking about adolescent acne. Damn all that slut talk.
Shtreimel,
Freud’s theories were as objectively accurate as those of any other coke-addicted, megalomaniacal neurotic living in abject terror of strong women in late 19th century Vienna.
Mobius: “y, i hate to break it to you, but if this is g-d at the wheel, you have ever more reason to slit your wrists”
Sorry to intrude on your conversation Mobius, but if G-d isn’t running the show who is?
EV…stop being petty. Freud’s original ideas were developed in the early 20th century. They’ve evolved and bloomed into all sorts of rich and significant therapies (self-psychology). And of course, like all original thinkers/ideas, certain theories have been debunked and proven false. Can you think of innovator that has escaped this truism? Freud’s brilliance and creativity is unmatched within the field of psychotherapy. But of course, since you’ve trained as an analyst, rather than conducting a quick wikipedia search, you know all of this already.
Curious, what type of therapy do you practice?
I don’t practice therapy, Shtreimel. You’re the self-proclaimed “shrink” hereabouts. And if you think only “analysts” are qualified to have educated opinions on the topic of human development and the mind and sexuality, I beg to differ. In fact, considering that Freudianiasm is a theology more than a science, it’s probably best considered from outside a “ba’al teshuvah” perspective, if you will.
But if you must know, I equate Freud with other dreamy theologians like Shabbetai Tzvi and Karl Marx. Fascinating theories from the lit-crit perspective (what better way to understand surrealism and film than through Freud?), but scientifically and historically shattered by everybody except diehard converts. True, certain general therapeutic premises of psychoanalytic technique have held up, but the details of his theories of individual and societal development have been thrown out. I don’t disagree that he was brilliant and “creative” — look at Moses and Monotheism! That’s great stuff. But it’s also preposterous. I don’t use cocaine, but when I’m curious what it’s like to use cocaine, I read Freud.
Back to you, Shtreimel. Do you view sexually active female patients as “sluts”? Indulge me. This is, as you say, just a blog.
I didn’t think so EV. It’s lazy and dishonest to critique something that:
a) You haven’t experienced for yourself
b) And have little to no practical training in (because all analysts/psychodynamic therapists understand that apprenticeship is as, if not more important, than the theory)
Since I’m a musician, I’ll provide you with an example. One could read all the books published about Led Zeppelin. You can read the guitar tab, read the lyrics and read the record reviews. Hell, you can even give Jimmy Page a back rub. But until you LISTEN to the music, learn how to PLAY the guitar, spend countless hours PLAYING with guitar pedals and amp setting to uncover Page’s genius…you have no authority, none whatsoever, to comment on his guitar playing. Of course you COULD comment. And many do. But their opinions are meaningless. And so goes for many of the critics of psychodynamic therapy. Their full of opinions about what does and does not work, but have never seen or studied/practiced their ideas. You AREN’T a therapist. You probably have never SEEN an analyst. But you’ve read some Freud so you know a thing or two.
It’s best to experience those things we’re going to critique a fair shot.
“Back to you, Shtreimel. Do you view sexually active female patients as “slutsâ€? Indulge me. This is, as you say, just a blog.”
EV, when I was 16, yes. Yes, yes and yes. The same way I was more concerned with back acne, than RRSP’s. And the context of my original comment was “in high school”.
Have I ever used the term “slut” with a client? No. So does that clear everything up? Somehow I don’t think so.
“but scientifically and historically shattered by everybody except diehard converts. ”
On why you’re wrong on all accounts (and not written by a “dreamy theologian” but by a doctor…oh my): http://www.amazon.com/Healing-Soul-Age-Brain-Unconscious/dp/0140254897/sr=8-2/qid=1164762852/ref=sr_1_2/002-7780035-1703222?ie=UTF8&s=books
Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain, Elio Frattaroli, MD
Oh and EV…you better brush up on your Freud if you’re going to take on the entire Mount Sinai Psychiatry Department (University of Toronto Medical School), who teach and encourage their residents to read Freud and know how to do Psychodynamic therapy.
Shtreimel Writes:t’s lazy and dishonest to critique something that:
a) You haven’t experienced for yourself
b) And have little to no practical training in (because all analysts/psychodynamic therapists understand that apprenticeship is as, if not more important, than the theory)…It’s best to experience those things we’re going to critique a fair shot.”
Actually that’s exceptionally bad science. Science does not require us to experience something in order to analyze it. Rather it requires us to examine it as an observer, and analyze it in a form that is verifiable and repeatable. As a matter of fact, experiencing something is very poor way to know the truth of something. Science (the verifiable kind) informs us that human beings are actually quite bd as self-reporting. We are nt good at being able to identify and describe our own states, and in fact, we can’t usually even identify the states we’ve reprted over time. For example, when people are asked to reflect on whether they’re hapy or not, over time, they are very bad at telling whether they were happy in general, or at a particular time. (I.e. if we look back, we can’t remember whether we were happy or not at an earlier period because our current state tends to overshadow even just what we report as being our state (let alone what our actual state was as identified by various physiological markers).
I know that hard sciences aren’t scholastically emphasized for therapists, since they don’t work in labs, but surely you had to take a few classes about how to do studies (since you might write articles and papers someday)and about the ethical requirements of only using verified treatments. Or maybe only social workers do that?
INany case, to have an honest and fair conversation about a subject all one needs to do is have read the relevant literature. That’s all I need to do to be able to evaluate whether a practise is efficacious or not. Now as to whether it’s fun, or moving, or I dunno, annoying or embarrassing, then I might need to experience it. But that doesn’t tell me anything about accuracy or efficaciousness of treatment. And of course, I don’t know whether I would be able to report those things accurately, given all the problems with self reporting.
I have to add that I can’t believe I’m having this conversation at all. I think I’d better stop before I stop breaking out all my grad school textbooks and start using jargon.
Kol…psychodynamic therapy is inter-personal. Hence the healing is encountered via the relationship. Now you’re right…one CAN measure change with respect to mood over a significant amount of time (Just last night I read a study in a Psychiatry Journal about the benefits of short-term psychodynamic therapy over CBT).
This catalyst for this discussion had to do with the word “slut”. It morphed into a critique about how I can practice psychotherapy while using such a loaded term on a blog as “slut”. My shock at the reaction to the use of “slut” had to do with what often passes as “cool” and “business as usual” on this blog. For example, we live in world where one can say “George Bush should be anally raped and die of Aids” and that’s super duper cool. But mention that a gay pride parade counters Torah Law and shouldn’t pass through a holy city…well, well now you’re violating human rights.
Shtreimel, it bothers me that someone would say that BG should be anally raped and die of AIDS. See, it’s that connection between sodomy and disease that is problematic. It just fuels homophobic prejudice. It would have been better to hope that he have vanilla sex with Laura, catch aids and die. After all, aids doesn’t discriminate, and married monogamous straight women both catch and transmit it. That sends a much better message. Who among us wouldn’t want to sit next to Mrs. Rosenberg and watch over some creep in the final death agonies of a horrible disease?
Of course, it is lashon hara, and it’s does feel kind of creepy to wish another person ill. Better to simply hope for the messiah to arrive!
Hmmm… is it lashon hara to call for someone’s death? It’s not really gossip…. and is it lashon hara to use the word ‘slut’ in general, without referencing a particular person, but a class of people defined by behavior? Aaah, the joys of Jewish blogging…
I just heard Carter on the CBC. Speaking of “blowhard”…he prefaced every response with “Now, I’m not taking sides but…”. Y’know, I learned something in highschool…when a girl tells you that “She’s not really a slut but…”. Well, you can fill in the rest.
It hurts my soul when Jews who know better start throwing around the term “an eye for an eye” as if it meant anything other than ‘fair monetary compensation’.
I thought tekoa was the liberal religous sect – with the peacenik Rabbi Froman?
Fruman is the one who brought the Muslims together with the Jews against the gay pride parade. Some liberal.
Carter is a brave man who has love in his heart for both Jews and Palestinians. God bless him for taking sides: for peace and against apartheid. It’s about time.
Krauthammer isn’t saying that antisemitism isn’t a problem in America. He’s saying that antisemitism in America is nowhere near the problem it is in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and (even) Latin America.
He’s taking Baron-Cohen to task for being so quick to skewer Americans when much viler antisemitism can be found elsewhere. And he’s questioning the assertion that the “antisemitism” found in the Arizona bar is evidence of the same kind of tolerance for hatred that allowed the Nazis to do what they did.
I don’t totally agree with him, but it’s actually one of the most well-thought criticisms of the movie since it came out.
since when do we use the word slut? it’s the most sexist word I know of. or one of them.
What’s up with the “slut” comment? There was a need to offend extra people today? We haven’t reached our quota of mindless sexism yet?
You couldn’t just say, “Anyone who prefaces their comments with, ‘now I’m not taking sides, but,’ is almost certainly taking sides,” or something like that?
Rebecca,
Of course, I would normally react exactly the same way, but you probably have to cut some slack for the distorted perceptions of an really extraordinary superstud like Streimel. After all, it must have been incredibly stressful for Streimel as hordes of beautiful girls breathlessly chased him down, trying to control themselves while saying anything they could to induce him to grace them with the gifts of his legendary sexual prowess.
From a far less delusional perspective, on the other hand, the more more realistic experience from which Streimel might have drawn a lesson from his younger days was all the girls who’ve said to him. “No Streimel, it’s ok; it has nothing to do with your penis size. Really.”
Given the attention that this site gives to anti-Semitism I was surprised that the French mini-riot was not covered as a feature.
Voluntary militias not controlled by the State? That sounds like something anarchists have been advocating since the 19th century. Why are you opposed to individuals taking the initiative to defend themselces?
Israeli aparthied is a myth and Carter is just as much of a blowhard as Krauthammer, imho.
Krauthammer defense of America against so-called charges of Anti-Semitism is myopic. The very myopia that Cohen seeks to uncover. In his Rolling Stone interview, Cohen states that Anti-Semitism is to him little different than any other Racism. So, true, Jews are more vicimized in Europe. But to call Cohen names because of it? Perhaps Krauthammer saw a different Borat film than I did. His version of the film must have been missing the homophobic spewage, and the long scenes of joyous homoerotic (yet still homophobic) nonsense. Can Krauthammer hear his own myopia (and my mixed metaphors) when he completely ignores the homophobia in Borat and whines incessantly about the very little Anti-Semitism that is actually displayed by the Americans? Krauthammer focuses in on the alleged Anti-Semitism to belabor the typical position that American foreign policy is good for the Jews. Yeah, right. How about all the rampant homophobia? In not mentioning it at all, Krauthammer is probably revealing a little bit of his own position. Remember the saying, “first they came for the gays…”
“Look. Harry Truman used to tell derisive Jewish jokes. Richard Nixon said nasty things about Jews in government and elsewhere. Who cares?”
This sums it up, in my opinion.
Shtreimel,
I don’t understand the “slut” comment. Are you really a practicing therapist? Do you bring those views into the therapy chamber?
The amount of fascism towards Jews in America is bad. I’ve noticed escalating aggression in the past years, and that’s from the perspective of a non-Jew. In America, Jews aren’t as exposed to the rampant disinformation flying about, at least not as much as the ‘goyim’.
For Chirstians, Arabs and most of the mid and lower classes in the US, it’s more culturally accetable to insult and catagorize the Jews with sweeping statements based on hyperbole. I could throw some of this rhetoric out here, but it’s disgusting, so I won’t.
Europe and the Mid East are different cultures, but if the growing fascism here in the US is miniscule in comparison, then the proliferation of the culture of hate and fear is far worse than I imagined, and I have an extensive imagination.
Ha….ha…I love…LOVE what get’s people all riled up on Jewschool. The values on this site are so ass-backwards sometimes…incredible. Yes, I used the word slut. Yes, I did. I can’t help but think that if I was gay, I mean really, really gay, that it would be ok to talk about…hell post photos about my promiscuous bath house weekends…in detail…and folks on Jewschool would applaud my liberated adventures.
So yes, I used the word slut. And yes, I knew some in highschool.
Word to Steg.
Ha….ha…I love…LOVE what get’s people all riled up on Jewschool. The values on this site are so ass-backwards sometimes.
I don’t think anyone got all riled up. They just said you’re an asshole. On the other hand, you do have a valid point; there certainly are bigger assholes in the world.
I can’t help but think that if I was gay . . . folks on Jewschool would applaud my liberated adventures.
No they wouldn’t. They’d just call you a gay asshole.
Seriously, Shtreimel, if you have a sexually active woman come in for therapy, do you think in your head, “slut”?
“Israeli aparthied is a myth”
tell that to Ha’aretz — this is their editorial on Sept. 13:
“…the apartheid regime in the territories remains intact; millions of Palestinians are living without rights, freedom of movement or a livelihood, under the yoke of ongoing Israeli occupation, and in the future they will turn the Jews into a minority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.”
Streimel,
The reason I feel that the word slut is a sexist term is because it gets applied to women, and not to men, who are sexually active. It also pathologizes and dehumanizes people and sexuality. It doesn’t seem to serve a purpose other than humiliating people (often young people) and warping the way men and women see each other.
Just so you know what my reasoning was behind bringing this up. To me it’s an ugly term. That said, I’m not accusing you of being evil…. I’ve made many a faux pas in my day…. felt misunderstood, etc. That’s life. Sometimes I got educated, sometimes I got mad. But people are allowed to have their say if they get offended.
“I don’t think anyIne got all riled up.”
David Smith…you spent two entire paragraphs poking fun of my wee wee. You got riled my friend.
“Seriously, Shtreimel, if you have a sexually active woman come in for therapy, do you think in your head, “slutâ€?”
Seriously EV, it’s a blog. Chill out.
I think everyone seems pretty chilled out about this.
Also: You’re a total schmuck.
rebeccas right. i would never call a sexually promiscuous man a slut. i’d call him a manwhore.
Balaam’s Donkey…I may be a shmuck, but this shmuck was busy in high school 😉
Ah hell, once we’re on it…
1) I love a good bloody hockey fight…the more blood the better.
2) And a good bloody steak
3) I believe men and women are different…very different. And yes, I believe men ARE physically stronger.
4) I enjoy a good military show now and then. And really enjoy the might of the IDF.
5) I think women say many things in university, grow up, and want most of the things that their mother’s and grandmother’s desired.
6) Freud is still right about many, many things.
Gotta run.
About the Alon Shvut thing, I was wondering when this would start happening. When people would start distorting our jihad concept (Bava Metzia 84-85, “getting rid of the thorns from the vineyard”). When self-defense, killing a rodef, would turn into a solely
racistinterethnic war with battle lines drawn by language and religion.The thing is, who would be next in such a scenario and who would the “enemies” be? Palestinians or “Arabs” — even the Jewish ones or the Christian ones or the Palestinian-American visiting relatives before he goes back to his cushy job at a Jewish-owned company in America? Many Jews are on the “against us” team in such a mindset.
*sigh*…”if G-d wasn’t running things, I’d slit my wrists…”
y, i hate to break it to you, but if this is g-d at the wheel, you have ever more reason to slit your wrists
Thanks for the laughs, everyone, which were much needed after reading all the headlines.
…can’t wait to see how much media coverage the demonstrations against “the siege of Gaza” will be getting on Friday…
The word slut is used in sexist ways, just like the word bitch. I’m really careful about using those words. But just between you and me, I’ve actually met sluts and bitches. Even a slut-bitch or two. And yes, manwhores two.
I encourage men and women to only think these terms, and not speak them or write them in blogs. Those words are best transitioned from nouns to adjectives.
1) I love a good bloody hockey fight…the more blood the better.
Is that Torah values?
2) And a good bloody steak Me, too. As long as its kosher.
3) I believe men and women are different…very different. And yes, I believe men ARE physically stronger. Depends upon what you mean by different. We’re certainly not as different say as cats and dogs. Statistically speaking, individual humans of any gender are more different than men and women are as groups. SO what?
4) I enjoy a good military show now and then. And really enjoy the might of the IDF. so do camp followers. Your point? (perhaps this would come under your supposition that if you were gay….
5) I think women say many things in university, grow up, and want most of the things that their mother’s and grandmother’s desired. You’d be right. You just have no idea what their mothers and grandmothers wanted – and couldn’t get. Just who do you think it was who fought (and for that matter, continue to fight) the fights of feminism? It was our mothers and grandmothers.
6) Freud is still right about many, many things.
Actually, scientifically, he was right about pretty much nothing. I don’t believe you any longer when you claim to be a practicing therapist – have you read a psych journal in the last 20 years?
I believe that trolling is tiresome.
Kol…arguing the scientific validity of psychodynamic ideas is about as useful as the Dawkins/Harris crusade about the validity of the “God claim”. The question is…does it help people…IN THE LONG TERM. And in my experience, psychodynamic therapy is the only the therapy that takes into consideration the multi-complex layers that clients present in the therapists office. CBT has been “scientifically proven” to work as well. And while I’ve been trained in, and use CBT, it rarely works for relational issues (a majority of the reasons why people seek out therapy), but does wonders if you’re afraid of spiders (sometimes).
Freud’s ideas (along with Kohut, Jung, Erikson) will be around a long, long time. The CBT/Solution-Focused folks will pass like bad gas.
Well, it’s nice that in your experience … but your experience doesn’t, as far as you mention, hapen to be scientifically validatedthrough blind studies …or any other kind of measurable and validatable method. That makes it scientifically, not worth a hill of beans. OTOH, thestudies there are show that Freud’s theories don’t actually produce any long term gains. Hell, just ask Woody Allen. THe guy must have been seeing a Freudian therpist for what, 40 years? And he still married his daughter. *shiver*
“thestudies there are show that Freud’s theories don’t actually produce any long term gains”
And I can post counter studies to refute those stuies (See “Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain” on Amazon). But hell, most folks want to pop a sleeping pill and few mg of Effexor and get back to their X-box. Anyway, this is a silly discussion. I’m assuming I’m debating a non-therapist; if you practiced, you’d recognize the contributions of Freud (Dreams, Unconscious, Talking therapy, repetitious complexion) in your practice.
Unless I were a cognitive bewhavioralist. Although I’ll give you talk therapy, it’s such a trivial give that I can hardly feel bad about it.
I certainly wouldn’t give you the unconscious, which although it has entered the realm of folk psychology is hardly undebated as a phenomenon. Same with dreams. And perhaps you meant…. repetition compulsion?
“Although I’ll give you talk therapy, it’s such a trivial give that I can hardly feel bad about it.”
If by “talk therapy” you mean blah, blah blah…then yes, trivial indeed (something many, many therapists are guilty of). But if you’re referring to the healing process of transference/projection…heavy stuff indeed.
“I certainly wouldn’t give you the unconscious, which although it has entered the realm of folk psychology is hardly undebated as a phenomenon. Same with dreams.â€
Right. Sorta like God, Love, etc. You can’t prove it, but people sure dedicate their lives to worshiping/obtaining it. Dreams…a true shame that most shrinks haven’t been trained, and hence, don’t know what to do with them. Suffice to say a psychiatrist/anaylty I know put it this way: “The next time you bump into a neuroscientist who states that dreams are the random firings of neurons…tell him/her to justify their “sex dream with the next door neighbor†to their spouse with the comment: “Honey, it’s only random electrical impulses, don’t take it too personallyâ€.
“And perhaps you meant…. repetition compulsion?”
Yes, you’re quite right. I’m not even sure who typed “repetitious complexionâ€. I must’ve been thinking about adolescent acne. Damn all that slut talk.
Shtreimel,
Freud’s theories were as objectively accurate as those of any other coke-addicted, megalomaniacal neurotic living in abject terror of strong women in late 19th century Vienna.
Mobius: “y, i hate to break it to you, but if this is g-d at the wheel, you have ever more reason to slit your wrists”
Sorry to intrude on your conversation Mobius, but if G-d isn’t running the show who is?
EV…stop being petty. Freud’s original ideas were developed in the early 20th century. They’ve evolved and bloomed into all sorts of rich and significant therapies (self-psychology). And of course, like all original thinkers/ideas, certain theories have been debunked and proven false. Can you think of innovator that has escaped this truism? Freud’s brilliance and creativity is unmatched within the field of psychotherapy. But of course, since you’ve trained as an analyst, rather than conducting a quick wikipedia search, you know all of this already.
Curious, what type of therapy do you practice?
I don’t practice therapy, Shtreimel. You’re the self-proclaimed “shrink” hereabouts. And if you think only “analysts” are qualified to have educated opinions on the topic of human development and the mind and sexuality, I beg to differ. In fact, considering that Freudianiasm is a theology more than a science, it’s probably best considered from outside a “ba’al teshuvah” perspective, if you will.
But if you must know, I equate Freud with other dreamy theologians like Shabbetai Tzvi and Karl Marx. Fascinating theories from the lit-crit perspective (what better way to understand surrealism and film than through Freud?), but scientifically and historically shattered by everybody except diehard converts. True, certain general therapeutic premises of psychoanalytic technique have held up, but the details of his theories of individual and societal development have been thrown out. I don’t disagree that he was brilliant and “creative” — look at Moses and Monotheism! That’s great stuff. But it’s also preposterous. I don’t use cocaine, but when I’m curious what it’s like to use cocaine, I read Freud.
Back to you, Shtreimel. Do you view sexually active female patients as “sluts”? Indulge me. This is, as you say, just a blog.
I didn’t think so EV. It’s lazy and dishonest to critique something that:
a) You haven’t experienced for yourself
b) And have little to no practical training in (because all analysts/psychodynamic therapists understand that apprenticeship is as, if not more important, than the theory)
Since I’m a musician, I’ll provide you with an example. One could read all the books published about Led Zeppelin. You can read the guitar tab, read the lyrics and read the record reviews. Hell, you can even give Jimmy Page a back rub. But until you LISTEN to the music, learn how to PLAY the guitar, spend countless hours PLAYING with guitar pedals and amp setting to uncover Page’s genius…you have no authority, none whatsoever, to comment on his guitar playing. Of course you COULD comment. And many do. But their opinions are meaningless. And so goes for many of the critics of psychodynamic therapy. Their full of opinions about what does and does not work, but have never seen or studied/practiced their ideas. You AREN’T a therapist. You probably have never SEEN an analyst. But you’ve read some Freud so you know a thing or two.
It’s best to experience those things we’re going to critique a fair shot.
“Back to you, Shtreimel. Do you view sexually active female patients as “slutsâ€? Indulge me. This is, as you say, just a blog.”
EV, when I was 16, yes. Yes, yes and yes. The same way I was more concerned with back acne, than RRSP’s. And the context of my original comment was “in high school”.
Have I ever used the term “slut” with a client? No. So does that clear everything up? Somehow I don’t think so.
“but scientifically and historically shattered by everybody except diehard converts. ”
On why you’re wrong on all accounts (and not written by a “dreamy theologian” but by a doctor…oh my):
http://www.amazon.com/Healing-Soul-Age-Brain-Unconscious/dp/0140254897/sr=8-2/qid=1164762852/ref=sr_1_2/002-7780035-1703222?ie=UTF8&s=books
Healing the Soul in the Age of the Brain, Elio Frattaroli, MD
Oh and EV…you better brush up on your Freud if you’re going to take on the entire Mount Sinai Psychiatry Department (University of Toronto Medical School), who teach and encourage their residents to read Freud and know how to do Psychodynamic therapy.
Shtreimel Writes:t’s lazy and dishonest to critique something that:
a) You haven’t experienced for yourself
b) And have little to no practical training in (because all analysts/psychodynamic therapists understand that apprenticeship is as, if not more important, than the theory)…It’s best to experience those things we’re going to critique a fair shot.”
Actually that’s exceptionally bad science. Science does not require us to experience something in order to analyze it. Rather it requires us to examine it as an observer, and analyze it in a form that is verifiable and repeatable. As a matter of fact, experiencing something is very poor way to know the truth of something. Science (the verifiable kind) informs us that human beings are actually quite bd as self-reporting. We are nt good at being able to identify and describe our own states, and in fact, we can’t usually even identify the states we’ve reprted over time. For example, when people are asked to reflect on whether they’re hapy or not, over time, they are very bad at telling whether they were happy in general, or at a particular time. (I.e. if we look back, we can’t remember whether we were happy or not at an earlier period because our current state tends to overshadow even just what we report as being our state (let alone what our actual state was as identified by various physiological markers).
I know that hard sciences aren’t scholastically emphasized for therapists, since they don’t work in labs, but surely you had to take a few classes about how to do studies (since you might write articles and papers someday)and about the ethical requirements of only using verified treatments. Or maybe only social workers do that?
INany case, to have an honest and fair conversation about a subject all one needs to do is have read the relevant literature. That’s all I need to do to be able to evaluate whether a practise is efficacious or not. Now as to whether it’s fun, or moving, or I dunno, annoying or embarrassing, then I might need to experience it. But that doesn’t tell me anything about accuracy or efficaciousness of treatment. And of course, I don’t know whether I would be able to report those things accurately, given all the problems with self reporting.
I have to add that I can’t believe I’m having this conversation at all. I think I’d better stop before I stop breaking out all my grad school textbooks and start using jargon.
Kol…psychodynamic therapy is inter-personal. Hence the healing is encountered via the relationship. Now you’re right…one CAN measure change with respect to mood over a significant amount of time (Just last night I read a study in a Psychiatry Journal about the benefits of short-term psychodynamic therapy over CBT).
This catalyst for this discussion had to do with the word “slut”. It morphed into a critique about how I can practice psychotherapy while using such a loaded term on a blog as “slut”. My shock at the reaction to the use of “slut” had to do with what often passes as “cool” and “business as usual” on this blog. For example, we live in world where one can say “George Bush should be anally raped and die of Aids” and that’s super duper cool. But mention that a gay pride parade counters Torah Law and shouldn’t pass through a holy city…well, well now you’re violating human rights.
Shtreimel, it bothers me that someone would say that BG should be anally raped and die of AIDS. See, it’s that connection between sodomy and disease that is problematic. It just fuels homophobic prejudice. It would have been better to hope that he have vanilla sex with Laura, catch aids and die. After all, aids doesn’t discriminate, and married monogamous straight women both catch and transmit it. That sends a much better message. Who among us wouldn’t want to sit next to Mrs. Rosenberg and watch over some creep in the final death agonies of a horrible disease?
Of course, it is lashon hara, and it’s does feel kind of creepy to wish another person ill. Better to simply hope for the messiah to arrive!
Hmmm… is it lashon hara to call for someone’s death? It’s not really gossip…. and is it lashon hara to use the word ‘slut’ in general, without referencing a particular person, but a class of people defined by behavior? Aaah, the joys of Jewish blogging…