'Don't call me BAME': Why some people are rejecting the term - ""'Don't worry, you'll do well because you're BAME,' 'BAME is the new trend,' 'Everyone is looking for a BAME actor to add to their books.'" When 24-year-old Nicole Miners first heard the term - which stands for black, Asian and minority ethnic - she was at drama school... "It misleads people into thinking that everyone who isn't white English should come under the term 'BAME'. And on top of that, I'm mixed, which, for me, is even more confusing... "My experience as a British person who is half Bangladeshi and half Pakistani is very different to a British black male or any other Asian." Using "BAME" is misleading, he says, and a way for the authorities not to deal with individuals from a community... "The only thing I know we definitely have in common with other people in the 'BAME' group is that we all have really good food."... "There is also a problem in that the terms BAME and BME aren't always associated with white ethnic minorities such as Gypsy, Roma and Traveller of Irish Heritage groups, which we know are among some of our most marginalised and disadvantaged communities""
Allie Beth Stuckey on Twitter - "Kendi said in a recorded talk posted on Twitter recently that while Jesus is not a savior, but "antiracism" is. "It can literally save humanity," he said. Here, Warnock says we can "save ourselves." Same concept by these 2 Liberation Theology advocates: we are our own gods."
Public fed up with virtue-signalling police who should be locking up burglars, says police chief - "The public are “fed up” with police officers' virtue-signalling rather than locking up burglars, one of Britain’s most senior police officers has said. Stephen Watson, the new chief constable of Greater Manchester Police (GMP), said police officers' traditional impartiality is being put at risk by “making common cause” with campaign groups by, for example, taking the knee or wearing rainbow shoelaces. He believes the public's tolerance of “woke” policing is at a “high water mark” and needs to be rebalanced. Asked if he would take the knee in uniform, he said: “No, I absolutely would not. I would probably kneel before the Queen, God, and Mrs Watson, that’s it.” Mr Watson, 53, has been handed one of the toughest jobs in policing: to turn around one of Britain’s biggest forces after excoriating criticism of its poor performance and the premature departure of its previous chief constable... he has a no-nonsense style which includes spurning social media except where it helps in the pursuit of criminals and informing the public. He has said empathy with the public is an important part of policing but the way it is being done is too often “cack handed”. “Whether it be through adulterating the uniform with pins and tabs and badges or whatever, and having all manner of florid social media accounts. These are all things which I think leave the public cold, and I just personally don't think they have a place in policing”... Mr Watson acknowledged declining detection rates for burglary and theft are partly due to police “screening out” so-called minor crimes and using it as an “inappropriate method to manage demand”... He starts from the principle that “all crime should be investigated” and that the significance of any offence is not whether it is categorised as “minor” but its impact on the victim. Cases he cited included a plumber whose tools are stolen from their van or a corner shop owner facing persistent shoplifting, both of which are business-threatening events... he is concerned the police could be overwhelmed by moves to create new “hate crimes” which “sought to criminalise what people think about difficult social issues, as opposed to what they do”... He warned that any legislative attempt to get behind that “originating thought” will be “very difficult” and could end up “populating your crime records with literally thousands and thousands of additional crimes”. And that gets us back to where we started. He said officers would be “chasing their tails in ever decreasing circles” which would “detract” from their core role of tackling not only “higher” crimes such as child sexual exploitation and organised crime groups but also locking up burglars, robbers, car thieves and “thugs who decide to thump you” in a drunken rage on a night out."
Police told to stop wasting time on Twitter disputes ‘simply because someone is offended’ - "Police should stop “wasting time” investigating when people are offended, a senior police chief has said. Stephen Watson, chief constable of Greater Manchester, admitted police had been overzealous in recording trivial online spats and legitimate debate as hate incidents at the expense of tackling mainstream crimes. “I do think that the balance has got somewhere out of kilter,” said Mr Watson, who last week revealed how his “back to basics” approach to crime-fighting had turned his failing force into the most improved in Britain... “In certain circumstances, there are actually first-class examples of where we’ve just completely got this wrong.” One case involved a Bedfordshire man who ended up with a police file for whistling the theme tune to Bob the Builder at his neighbour, who perceived racial hatred. Earlier this year Harry Miller, a retired policeman who was visited by his local force after tweeting about transgender rights, won a battle over free speech with the College of Policing. The Court of Appeal ruled the guidance breached Mr Miller’s human rights. Mr Watson welcomed revised guidance by the College of Policing, the national standards body, as a “move in the right direction”. It has decreed that police officers should no longer investigate legitimate debate or treat trivial online spats as hate incidents. The guidance, hailed as a victory for free speech, said people contributing to political and social debate must not be “stigmatised simply because someone is offended”. Mr Watson warned that without changes, police credibility would be undermined"
LAWSUIT: Professor suspended for redacted slurs in law school exam sues University of Illinois Chicago - "UIC suspended and launched an investigation into Kilborn after he posed a hypothetical question — which he has asked in previous years — using redacted references to two slurs, in a December 2020 law school exam. The question about employment discrimination referenced a plaintiff being called “a ‘n____’ and ‘b____’ (profane expressions for African Americans and women)” as evidence of discrimination. But even redacting the terms didn’t save Kilborn from discipline by university administrators... in November, under pressure from UIC’s Black Law Students Association and Jesse Jackson, UIC reneged on its agreement with Kilborn and is now requiring him to participate in months-long “training on classroom conversations that address racism” and compelling him to write reflection papers before he can return to the classroom. In a stunning display of unintended irony, the individualized training materials include the same redacted slur that Kilborn used in his test question (see page 5 for the redacted slur). “UIC crucifies Kilborn for using a redacted slur, then turns around and forces him into anti-racism training that uses that same slur,” said Ronnie London, head of FIRE’s Faculty Legal Defense Fund. “Kilborn is effectively showing up to re-education and being handed his own text.” By requiring Kilborn to submit to ideological re-education, not only has UIC violated his right to academic freedom, but it has also gone back on its original agreement with Kilborn."
How The N-Word Dies - "I’m talking about rendering it utterly and permanently obsolete. Some think the best way to achieve this is to police who can say it. Black people, yes. White people, no. Others argue that nobody should be allowed to say it, that we should heighten its taboo until nobody dares to use it. If either of these approaches were likely to work, I’d be happy to support them. But sadly, language (and human nature) doesn’t work that way. Words don’t lose their impact as they become more taboo. In fact, the opposite happens. Our sensitivity to them increases. Take, for example, Greg Patton, a professor at the University of Southern California, who was suspended following complaints about his use of a Chinese word that sounds like the N-word during a communications lecture... ex-New York Times reporter Donald G. McNeil Jr. was forced out of his job one year after using the N-word during a private conversation in which a student specifically asked him to give his opinion about its use. The Times released a statement clarifying: “We do not tolerate racist language regardless of intent.” Or there’s Slate podcast host Mike Pesca, who was “indefinitely suspended” for his part in a discussion about whether a White person could ever use the N-word legitimately. He didn’t even use the N-word during the conversation, yet a Slate staffer said she felt outraged simply because he’d had the conversation... this type of overreaction is precisely the reason why racists use the word... Normalising behaviour like this suggests that Black people are so emotionally immature that we can’t understand when we’re being attacked. Or that it’s reasonable for future Black lawyers to have heart palpitations at the sight of the first letter of a slur. It portrays us as fragile creatures who shouldn’t be expected to differentiate between English and Chinese when taking offence. Is there any other group of people that we expect so little from? Are there any other adults whose right to claim offence is free from intent or context? Are we supposed to believe that Black people are so powerless that a single word can bring us to our knees?... as long as we treat the N-word as the Black person’s “Avada Kedavra,” we give power to that idea. When I was a kid, I remember being mystified by the variety of terms for Black people: Negro, coloured, Black, Brown, the African diaspora, people of colour. I could never understand why nobody did the same for White people. Why did the colour of my skin need to be referred to so much more carefully than theirs? White people are just “White.” Nobody worries about being insensitive or “causing harm” by using the wrong term. Words like “cracker” and “honky” are freely available for use as slurs. Yet virtually nobody does. Nobody makes the argument that only White people can say them. No asterisks or hyphens are required. The words are simply dead... Lurking behind the angst about the N-word is the belief that White people hold some immutable power over Black people. That a word from their lips harms us in a way that carries unique weight. These “apologies” aren’t apologies at all. They’re performance art that gently affirms their belief in that power by professing the desire to relinquish it."
1,000 ancient genomes uncover 10,000 years of natural selection in Europe - "Ancient DNA has revolutionized our understanding of human population history. However, its potential to examine how rapid cultural evolution to new lifestyles may have driven biological adaptation has not been met, largely due to limited sample sizes. We assembled genome-wide data from 1,291 individuals from Europe over 10,000 years, providing a dataset that is large enough to resolve the timing of selection into the Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Historical periods. We identified 25 genetic loci with rapid changes in frequency during these periods, a majority of which were previously undetected. Signals specific to the Neolithic transition are associated with body weight, diet, and lipid metabolism-related phenotypes. They also include immune phenotypes, most notably a locus that confers immunity to Salmonella infection at a time when ancient Salmonella genomes have been shown to adapt to human hosts, thus providing a possible example of human-pathogen co-evolution. In the Bronze Age, selection signals are enriched near genes involved in pigmentation and immune-related traits, including at a key human protein interactor of SARS-CoV-2. Only in the Historical period do the selection candidates we detect largely mirror previously-reported signals, highlighting how the statistical power of previous studies was limited to the last few millennia. The Historical period also has multiple signals associated with vitamin D binding, providing evidence that lactase persistence may have been part of an oligogenic adaptation for efficient calcium uptake and challenging the theory that its adaptive value lies only in facilitating caloric supplementation during times of scarcity. Finally, we detect selection on complex traits in all three periods, including selection favoring variants that reduce body weight in the Neolithic. In the Historical period, we detect selection favoring variants that increase risk for cardiovascular disease plausibly reflecting selection for a more active inflammatory response that would have been adaptive in the face of increased infectious disease exposure. Our results provide an evolutionary rationale for the high prevalence of these deadly diseases in modern societies today and highlight the unique power of ancient DNA in elucidating biological change that accompanied the profound cultural transformations of recent human history."
So much for not enough time having passed for racial differences to appear (which is simultaneously true with too much time having passed for the environment of evolutionary adaptation being relevant)
6 things to know about babywearing and cultural appropriation - "Modern baby carriers that we see and use today are based on traditional baby carriers that have been used all around the world for hundreds of thousands of years. In fact, early humans may have started making carriers from animal skins, plants and other natural materials about half a million years ago as a necessity to keep their babies safe while attending to daily life. And according to James McKenna, an anthropology professor from the University of Notre Dame who studies mother-infant relationships, these carrying devices were some of the first tools ever created. This is why it’s so important to respect the cultures our babywearing knowledge comes from, as this ancestral practice existed long before it was popularized in the West."
Of course, anyone can use Western technology
Meme - "In her 30s still making first breakup music. Go sell some drugs."
"REMINDER that Tay's done more for queer allyship/POC than anyone else in the last decade. Her scope/reach are insanely large due to bigest fanbase & she uses it for GOOD. Just say you don't think that B L M and move on. This tweet is at best disgraceful, at worst abelist/ fascist."
Taylor Swift Removes Moment Where Scale Says “Fat” From “Anti-Hero Video - "Taylor Swift's music video for “Anti-Hero” has been edited to remove a scene that originally showed the artist weighing herself with the scale display reading “fat,” a moment that some fans and viewers have called “fatphobic.” The original video for the lead single of her 10th studio album, “Midnights,” angered some fans, but the artist says that it’s meant to portray her “nightmare scenarios and intrusive thoughts.”... Swift has been open in the past about her experiences with an eating disorder and disordered eating. In the 2020 documentary “Miss Americana,” she admitted to starving herself when she received negative comments about her body."
So much for the validity of one's own labels and feelings, or how "raising awareness" is good
Taylor Swift fans are furious the singer used the word ‘fat’ in new music video - "other fans hit back at the criticism and said Taylor is allowed to talk about her own struggles with body image. One said: “You do realize that Taylor Swift is talking about a eating disorder correct? I hate how fat people minimize skinny peoples body dysmorphia because that’s the weight they wouldn’t mind being.” Another shared: "People have been saying that they think this moment in Taylor Swift’s music video is fatphobic but…to me it very clearly seems like a critique of fatphobia.""
Hodgetwins on Twitter - "This would be breaking news on every major station if this was a Republican man choking a black female Democrat. But it’s not, because the lady being choked is a Republican.@leezeldin supporter."
Zeldin supporter attacked, choked at Hochul event speaks out: ‘Can’t have debates without it getting violent’ - "The supporter for GOP gubernatorial candidate, Rep. Lee Zeldin, seen on video allegedly being attacked and choked at a New York City event for Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul spoke out for the first time... Angelica Torres, who showed up with an anti-Hochul sign at an event for the Democratic governor outside the Stonewall Inn in Manhattan on Saturday, recalled how an unidentified woman grabbed her sign and threw it. When Torres was trying to retrieve her sign, she said an unidentified man, who she described as bigger than her in stature, came up and grabbed her by the neck. Meanwhile, the Zeldin supporter said New York City Councilmember Crystal Hudson was also grabbing her by an arm... The New York City Police Department, however, told Fox News that the man seen in the video grabbed Torres by the throat "was actually helping her"... No arrests have been announced in connection to the caught-on-camera incident."
Meme - Chloe @dekashoko: "When these people discover that friendship exists they're gonna be staggered."
Jim Draws I science rules @jimli...: "growing up is realizing pocahontas has a gf and john smith has a bf"
Wilfred Reilly on Twitter - "In a sentence: the USA and modern West did evil things everyone else did (slavery, war), but also great things no one else did."
Jungle Cruise criticised over ‘blink-and-you’ll-miss-it’ gay scene featuring Jack Whitehall - "Jungle Cruise has been criticised after details emerged of a “blink-and-you’ll-miss-it” reference to the sexuality of a character played by Jack Whitehall. The Disney fantasy film stars Dwayne Johnson and Emily Blunt as a pair of adventurers who attempt to find a mystical relic buried in the deepest recesses of the jungle. Whitehall plays Blunt’s brother, her reluctant assistant. Despite early buzz boasting that Whitehall’s character in the film is gay, new details of his “coming out” scene have led to a backlash. According to Variety, the character does not explicitly confirm that he is gay, and only suggests that he broke off a number of engagements as his “interests happily lay elsewhere”. The character then thanks his sister for supporting him after he was shunned by the rest of their family because of his “interests”, and then leads a toast to “elsewhere”. Fans have been quick to condemn the scene. “A blink-&-you’ll-miss-it moment,” tweeted one person. “Disney doesn’t care about genuine representation, & that has been proven time & time again.” “Disney continually wants prizes for doing the bare minimum,” added another. “Any time Disney has had a gay character it’s either only been implied in the movie, the moment lasts like five seconds or it’s only said in a passing line,” wrote someone else... Playwright Jeremy O Harris also mocked the casting of the heterosexual Whitehall to play the character"
When you try to cater to grievance mongers and the developing world at the same time, nothing will ever work
Orwellian Othering - "I recently characterized “diversity and inclusion” as a deeply Orwellian movement – doublethink all the way...
1. The diversity and inclusion movement is nominally devoted to fervent “anti-racism.” In practice, however, they are the only prominent openly racist movement I have encountered during my life in the United States. Nowadays they routinely mock and dismiss critics for the color of their skin – then accuse those they mock and dismiss of “white fragility.”... most of those who denounce “othering” exemplify the practices they denounce. The diversity and inclusive movement has a broad list of odious outsiders they mention with scorn and treat with disdain: “straight cis white males,” adherents of traditional religions, conservatives, moderates, opponents of abortion, and even insufficiently radical liberals and progressives. You might think those who preach against othering would strive to assure the world of their hospitable intentions: “Just because you have other ideas doesn’t mean I’m going to other you.” Instead, they reliably do the opposite, responding to even mild dissent with anger and ostracism... As far as I know, intolerant, thin-skinned, anti-intellectual educators have been around for… well, forever. What has changed is the Orwellian nature of their reaction to dissent. Traditional authoritarians othered openly. Orwellian proponents of “diversity and inclusion” other vast swaths of humanity while giving the evil eye to anyone who doubts their supreme commitment to compassion and acceptance."
The battle for the Supreme Court is tearing America apart - "For sure, Ginsburg had an impressive legal career, worthy of praise. But the adoration of her in life, and the saint-like treatment of her in death, goes far beyond the respect normally accorded to a deceased lawyer or judge, and far beyond what is healthy for a democracy. A justice on the Supreme Court is meant to be impartial, and yet her supporters loved her for being partial – for her apparent support for their favoured political causes, such as women’s rights. Too many Americans have invested far too much of their political aspirations in the Supreme Court, and in Ginsburg in particular. The idea that the fate of liberal politics depended on the sustained health of an 87-year-old woman with cancer was always ridiculous. Yet it became a widely accepted notion for many on the left... Ginsburg’s death has become a catalyst for political upheaval, exposing deep cultural divisions. It would be one thing if the tribal-like rage in response to Trump’s proposed replacement of Ginsburg was limited to hardcore activists, or to unhinged types like the angry woman in that viral TikTok video, screaming in her car at the news of Ginsburg’s passing. But heated rhetoric and threats have spilled over into Congress. Even before Trump had announced his nomination of Amy Coney Barrett, Democrats like Senator Jeff Merkley had said ‘this is an illegitimate nomination’. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer said that ‘nothing is off the table’ in response to Trump moving forward with a Supreme Court pick before the election. Democrats are now threatening a number of explosive counter-measures, including packing the Supreme Court (that is, adding two to four members), if Biden is elected and the Democrats take control of the Senate. They are also talking of adding Washington DC and Puerto Rico as new states to make a Democratic majority more likely, as well as ending the Senate filibuster, which would effectively mean that the Senate reverts to a simple majority-vote system. Seeking to change the nine-member constituency of the court, which has been in place since 1869, would be a radical move that could shred any remaining public confidence in the court as politically independent. Democrats have spent the past four years claiming that Trump is ‘destroying democratic norms’, but their proposals for dealing with this are often even more destructive and anti-democratic than anything Trump has done. It’s fair enough to debate the merits of nominating a Supreme Court justice in the months before a national election. Back in 2016, Republican senators blocked Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland on the grounds that it was in an election year... But the party-political hypocrisy cuts both ways – Democrats, including their Senate leader Schumer, said in 2016 that Supreme Court nominations should proceed in an election year. Moreover, McConnell did state in 2016 that his rationale for waiting until the election outcome was that the Senate and presidency were divided between the parties, which isn’t the case this year. Beyond the partisan back-and-forth, Republicans have the constitutional right to proceed and historical precedent is clearly on their side... While genuine political debate is to be welcomed, the extreme rhetoric – if not hysteria – surrounding Ginsburg’s replacement shows that American politics is going off the rails. Democrats and sections of the media are now claiming that the court vote should be postponed because that was Ginsburg’s dying wish. Apparently she said to her granddaughter, ‘My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed’. But the deathbed wishes of individuals, however revered, do not determine constitutional processes. Like so much of our politics today, this is a form of emotional blackmail, which is supposed to override rational arguments. And on this specific point, Ginsburg’s own words are contradictory. After Obama’s election-year nomination of Garland, Ginsburg made an ill-advised intervention into politics (by no means her only one) when she said, ‘there’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year’. Democrats today ignore that. In a healthy democracy, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice would not feel like an existential political crisis. Recall how crazed the Senate hearings over Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination were... Today the Supreme Court, an unelected body, has too much political power and looms too large in the American political imagination. As Congress has become dysfunctional and weak, courts and judges have seemed only too glad to step in and play the role of politicians in robes. And Democrats are not the only ones who place their hopes in the courts... appointing conservative judges does not necessarily result in the decisions conservatives might expect. Consider how, in June, Trump appointee Neil Gorsuch led the majority decision to back LGBT rights. Investing so much of your political aspirations in justices like Ginsburg, and then threatening to ‘burn down’ the court when you don’t get to name a political ally as her replacement, is fundamentally anti-democratic. Judges should be boring figures, working in the background of politics, not rock stars with huge followings. If you want to change politics, convince others, elect likeminded people and pass laws. If you want to change culture, engage in cultural debate and change the opinions of your fellow citizens. Whether the issue is abortion, healthcare, LGBT rights or whatever, don’t look to the courts and judges to be your saviours. Those who elevate the court to such a high status in politics – equal with elected roles like representatives, senators and the president – are undermining the legitimacy of the court itself."
'Non-binary' Romeo and Juliet set in Nazi Germany apologises for omitting Jews from casting call - "A production of Romeo and Juliet for non-binary performers, with Juliet reimagined as a persecuted Jew and Romeo as a member of the Hitler Youth, has become embroiled in a row over its failure to include Jewish people in a casting call. The London-based Icarus Theatre Collective is staging a version of Shakespeare’s play set in Nazi Germany. The company advertised for “non-binary artists, and/or those of global majority, black or Asian heritage" to join the cast. The call did not include any request for Jewish performers to join the cast of the production, set in the Third Reich, and the company has publicly apologised for the omission. “Please accept our profound apologies for neglecting to mention performers of Jewish background are preferred for the Capulets. This was the initial intention; the director is Jewish and our intention has always been to include this casting preference, as it is fundamental,” the theatre group said."
Jewish Lives Matter - "It seems like the Left is united against hate, even perceived hate, right? Wrong. In just the latest example of the almost complete overlap between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, Jews across the country have been attacked by pro-Palestinian advocates, not because they are Israeli — which would also be a despicable act of bigotry — but because they are Jewish... In recent years, Jews have routinely been assaulted on the streets of Democrat-run cities. While the Left has been lightning-fast — as they should — in their condemnation of anti-Semitic attacks committed by white supremacists or the so-called “alt-right,” the brutal fact which must be recognized is that they represent only a portion of all perpetrators of anti-Jewish hate. There is anti-Semitism in the black community. There is anti-Semitism in the Muslim community. There is anti-Semitism among the far-Left. It appears that, unlike politically-convenient bigotry supposedly directed toward other minorities, Jews simply don’t count. No one will take to the streets to protest the brutal attack of Jews. No one will paint “Jewish Lives Matter” on the sidewalk. Democrats won’t rush to comfort the victims or their families. And why? Because anti-Semitism is the oldest and most resilient form of hatred and can be found in almost every community. In our cynical and racially-driven world of politics, Jews just aren’t useful enough as victims, and so the “outrage” is short-lived as politicians and voters prefer to spend their virtue-signaling currency elsewhere."
Opinion: The public service does not understand antisemitism - The Globe and Mail - "In his 2021 book, Jews Don’t Count, writer and comedian David Baddiel asks why it is that people or organizations who think of themselves as progressive seem to have a blind spot when it comes to subtle, or sometimes even deadly, forms of antisemitism. His answer: It essentially comes down to the fact that “Jews are the only objects of racism who are imagined – by the racists – as both low and high status.” Similarly, French rabbi Delphine Horvilleur in her book, Anti-Semitism Revisited, suggests “Jews are a bit too much the same and a bit too different.” Ultimately, it is a matter of views that, in this era of heightened identity politics, are antithetical to one another. On one end of the spectrum, Jews are thieving, dirty, even impure creatures who cannot be trusted. On the other end, we are the epitome of power and control; we are too influential, too privileged and, of course, too white... Statistics Canada has found that the Jewish community is the most targeted religious group in the country when it comes to hate crimes, there seems to be little effort in the federal public service to address antisemitism. In fact, in the government’s Call to Action on Anti-Racism, Equity, and Inclusion in the Federal Public Service, the words “Jewish” or “antisemitism” are not mentioned once. Further, of the 90 letters sent from deputy heads to the interim Clerk of the Privy Council detailing departmental implementation efforts related to the Call to Action, only five mention antisemitism... Canadian Heritage provided a $133,000 grant to the Community Media Advocacy Centre for an anti-racism initiative, despite the fact a consultant on the project, Laith Marouf, has suggested that “Jewish White supremacists” are “feces” and that they should get a “bullet to the head,” among other vile things."
Berkeley is slammed for being anti-Semitic after NINE student groups create 'Jewish-free zones' - "Several student groups at the University of California, Berkeley, law school have adopted a bylaw prohibiting pro-Israel speakers at events... Head of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law and Berkeley law alumnus Kenneth L. Marcus said that students involved 'are taking a step down a very ugly road.' 'Berkeley Law wouldn't be Berkeley Law if students didn't engage in a certain amount of wrongheaded political nonsense,' he said. 'This is different, because it's not just a political stunt. It is tinged with antisemitism and anti-Israel national origin discrimination.'... The campus's larger group, the Jewish Students Association, complemented this opinion. 'When an affinity group adopts this by-law or conditions speaking privileges on denouncing Israel, many Jewish people are put in a position all too familiar: deny or denigrate a part of their identity or be excluded from community groups'"
One objection will be that this isn't anti-Semtiic, but since in Germany attacking a synogogue is considered an act of protest against Israel, the reverse can apply here
Is Dual Loyalty still anti-semitic when the Jewish Students Association promotes it (not to mention how Israel is an important issue to many American Jews)?
Joni Mitchell: I felt like a black man - "It got her thinking about casual racism, and that inspired her to play with the cover of her 1977 album, “Don Juan’s Reckless Daughter.” The cover features a young child, Mitchell as herself and someone who looks like a black man. “That’s me. The black guy in the front.” What? Mitchell said that, inspired by someone walking down Hollywood Boulevard, she dressed up – in blackface – like the man for a Halloween party. It caused such a ruckus"
Oops
When Joni Mitchell wore blackface for Halloween - "this glosses over how deeply Mitchell identified with black musicians and songwriters - to the extent that some viewed her as being a black man trapped in a white woman's body. "I don't have the soul of a white woman," she once told LA Weekly. "I write like a black poet. I frequently write from a black perspective." This may have been a response to being pigeonholed by her gender and spotless image, encapsulated by Melody Maker's 1974 description of her as "elusive, virginal… White Goddess of mythology"... This is arguably what drove Joni into what fans call her jazz-period, in which she expressed her affinity with what she called "black classical music". "The black press gets it. I'm not a folk musician," Mitchell told CBC in 2000. "I'm much more related to Miles Davis."... A final word on the context from the photographer whose shot gives us the first glimpse of Art Nouveau. "It was art," says Diltz. "If someone did that at a party today, I'm sure people would be aghast. But back then was a time of peace and love, when things weren't so analysed. "She wasn't demeaning black people, but celebrating them." These days Joni Mitchell is unwell, and she declined to comment for this article except to reassert her often-repeated desire to begin her autobiography, should it ever appear: "I was the only black man at the party.""