Just saw Chappelle's #SNL monologue. With the caveat I'm terrible at predictions I expect: 1. People will be annoyed (either for the monologue itself or as an excuse for other things he's said) 2. People (including Jews) will defend him (either on principle or substance)
3. It's not that I think Chappelle is bulletproof (though he's close) he's very intelligent in what he says and how he says it. But bec of his status and stature, he also becomes a proxy for a lot of other fights.
In any event, I don't see his career being meaningfully impacted
4. As I understood Chappelle's monologue, the key point is that there are double standards regarding who can say what about whom.
If my Twitter feed is any indication, everyone agrees this is a problem though there's rampant disagreement over the details.
5. I think the most contentious line will be the "taking it out on black people" which will largely depend on experiences and track records.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. There's a lot to unpack in this story and with strong opinions, you're also going to find some bad-faith arguments.
And as it happens so often with Israel, this is one more conflict of religious and political interests. 🧵 timesofisrael.com/ben-gvir-calls…
2. Without getting into the details of Jewish law, the standards of converting to Judaism implemented by Reform Judaism generally do not meet the criteria defined by halakhah.
3. For the Jewish communities that define Jewishness based on halakhah, non-halakhic conversions are invalid and the individuals who went through this process would not be considered Jewish until they undergo a halakhic conversion.
I'm Starting something new. Since having the baby I've been unable to keep up with my Midrash podcast. However, I've also set myself a goal of completing the entire Midrash Rabba starting with Bereishit through the 5 Megillot.
I've gone through several chapters already but I'm happy to double back and highlight some midrashim that stood out for one reason or another.
My thinking is: 1. It's useful for retaining information 2. Having it on Twitter is useful for searching (as I've found with Daf Yomi) 3. There are many ideas found in canonical midrash that aren't discussed (if not suppressed) 4. If it's not on Twitter, did it really happen?
I have many objections to the rhetoric of "Jewish values" but if you're looking for precedence, I think Maimonides' Laws of Charity 10:7 (cited in next Tweet) might work (or at least, it's not nearly as much of a stretch as other claims I've seen).
Note that he's talking about charity for helping someone start their own business which I don't think would constitute a "Conservative" value (at least not if said "charity" is from the state).
1. I deleted a long thread about the Dobbs decision and Korach (this week's Torah reading in Israel where Shabbat ended abt an hour ago) because it wasn't going anywhere useful. I will highlight a few points though:
2. @AkivaMCohen's thread is really important but this observation is most critical. The surest way to lose legitimacy is to not play by one's own rules. This is exceedingly dangerous for the highest court in the land.
3. @lone_rides' thread is no less important from a social perspective. I suspect one's reactions will depend entirely on one's political and ideological persuasions.
1. In light of this recent tweet, I'd like to go out on a limb and attempt a corrective at what I consider to be misreadings or misinterpretations of certain rabbinic texts regarding gender in Judaism.
2. I want to be clear that this is *not* a thread on gender in Judaism in general; that would be a *much* longer discussion and I see no way to do that responsibly over Twitter.
3. The issue I'll be addressing is specifically the use of certain rabbinic concepts and texts that have been cited as proof the Rabbinic Sages did not hold of a gender binary.
This is not an exhaustive thread on gender binaries in Rabbinic Judaism, rather only on this args
1. Over the past several months I've been reading about merit and meritocracy (and going back further, on the related concept of personal responsibility). Prompted by @ETVPod, I have some thoughts. 🧵
2. I think people have an intuitive sense of what is meant by "merit" and "meritocracy" but there can be important nuances depending on how they're formulated.
3. For the purposes of this thread, I'll be using "meritocracy" as referring to a system where people get what they deserve with "merit" being the criteria for how we determine what people deserve.