Part 1: Intersectionality
(יח) עֹשֶׂ֛ה מִשְׁפַּ֥ט יָת֖וֹם וְאַלְמָנָ֑ה וְאֹהֵ֣ב גֵּ֔ר לָ֥תֶת ל֖וֹ לֶ֥חֶם וְשִׂמְלָֽה׃ (יט) וַאֲהַבְתֶּ֖ם אֶת־הַגֵּ֑ר כִּֽי־גֵרִ֥ים הֱיִיתֶ֖ם בְּאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם׃
(18) He doth execute justice for the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment. (19) Love ye therefore the stranger; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, Faith in the Future, p. 78
"The Hebrew Bible contains the great command, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’ (Leviticus 19:18), and this has often been taken as the basis of biblical morality. But it is not: it is only part of it. The Jewish sages noted that on only one occasion does the Hebrew Bible command us to love our neighbour, but in thirty-seven places it commands us to love the stranger. Our neighbour is one we love because he is like ourselves. The stranger is one we are taught to love precisely because he is not like ourselves.”
"The Hebrew Bible contains the great command, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’ (Leviticus 19:18), and this has often been taken as the basis of biblical morality. But it is not: it is only part of it. The Jewish sages noted that on only one occasion does the Hebrew Bible command us to love our neighbour, but in thirty-seven places it commands us to love the stranger. Our neighbour is one we love because he is like ourselves. The stranger is one we are taught to love precisely because he is not like ourselves.”
David Schraub, "Why Jewish Feminism Should Embrace, Not Fear, Intersectionality"
Indeed, while intersectionality is often dismissed as a high-handed academic impracticality, its roots lie in a very grounded critique of antidiscrimination law. Imagine a Jewish woman who contends she is being discriminated against by her employer. The employer seems to view Jewish women with hostility: he thinks of them as shrill, unladylike, and obnoxious. He has no similar problem with gentile women (whom he considers pleasant and sweet), and he likewise has no quarrel with the Jewish men in his office (he deems them smart and hardworking). What remedy does this Jewish woman have? If she claims sex discrimination, the employer can refute it by reference to his treatment of gentile women—clearly, he has no problem with women qua women. And if she argues religious discrimination, the employer’s positive treatment of Jewish men too serves as a rebuttal. Even in a case where robust protections existed against antisemitism and sexism, she may be out of luck.
Notice that the problem here is not that Jewish women are more oppressed than anyone else. It’s subtler than that: it’s that when we think about the oppression of women, we don’t tend to have Jewish women in mind; and when we think about the oppression of Jews, we don’t tend to have Jewish women in mind. Yet most Jewish women are well aware of a whole nexus of particularized stereotypes and indignities they face that are at best imperfectly related to those faced by “Jews” or “women” categorically.
Indeed, while intersectionality is often dismissed as a high-handed academic impracticality, its roots lie in a very grounded critique of antidiscrimination law. Imagine a Jewish woman who contends she is being discriminated against by her employer. The employer seems to view Jewish women with hostility: he thinks of them as shrill, unladylike, and obnoxious. He has no similar problem with gentile women (whom he considers pleasant and sweet), and he likewise has no quarrel with the Jewish men in his office (he deems them smart and hardworking). What remedy does this Jewish woman have? If she claims sex discrimination, the employer can refute it by reference to his treatment of gentile women—clearly, he has no problem with women qua women. And if she argues religious discrimination, the employer’s positive treatment of Jewish men too serves as a rebuttal. Even in a case where robust protections existed against antisemitism and sexism, she may be out of luck.
Notice that the problem here is not that Jewish women are more oppressed than anyone else. It’s subtler than that: it’s that when we think about the oppression of women, we don’t tend to have Jewish women in mind; and when we think about the oppression of Jews, we don’t tend to have Jewish women in mind. Yet most Jewish women are well aware of a whole nexus of particularized stereotypes and indignities they face that are at best imperfectly related to those faced by “Jews” or “women” categorically.
Stanford Alternative Spring Break: From Palestine to North America, Trip Description
The idea for this trip came from our own personal experiences and involvement with indigenous issues. As indigenous people to two entirely different contexts, our communities have witnessed similarities in political, economic, and social disadvantages when it comes to our racial, ethnic, and national identities.
[The trip] aims to examine the similarities, differences, and contemporary implications of two separate indigenous struggles for land, resources, and self-determination. A few similarities include the experience of land dispossession and the ramifications of colonial settlement on education, health systems, culture, language and natural resources. We will be looking at the histories of Palestinians and Indigenous North Americans within the frameworks of settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing.
The idea for this trip came from our own personal experiences and involvement with indigenous issues. As indigenous people to two entirely different contexts, our communities have witnessed similarities in political, economic, and social disadvantages when it comes to our racial, ethnic, and national identities.
[The trip] aims to examine the similarities, differences, and contemporary implications of two separate indigenous struggles for land, resources, and self-determination. A few similarities include the experience of land dispossession and the ramifications of colonial settlement on education, health systems, culture, language and natural resources. We will be looking at the histories of Palestinians and Indigenous North Americans within the frameworks of settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing.
Part 2: Microaggressions
וְהַמַּלְבִּין פְּנֵי חֲבֵרוֹ בָרַבִּים... אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּיָדוֹ תוֹרָה וּמַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים, אֵין לוֹ חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא:
One who whitens (embarrasses) the face of another in public... even though he has Torah knowledge and good deeds, he has no share in the world to come.
The Coddling of the American Mind, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt
The term microaggression originated in the 1970s and referred to subtle, often unconscious racist affronts. The definition has expanded in recent years to include anything that can be perceived as discriminatory on virtually any basis.
The term microaggression originated in the 1970s and referred to subtle, often unconscious racist affronts. The definition has expanded in recent years to include anything that can be perceived as discriminatory on virtually any basis.
Email Sent out to Activist Leaders
Take action to help... the communities most affected by the hateful national rhetoric, including the immigrant, undocumented, Latinx, Muslim, Southeast Asian, native, black, disabled, and queer/trans communities.
Take action to help... the communities most affected by the hateful national rhetoric, including the immigrant, undocumented, Latinx, Muslim, Southeast Asian, native, black, disabled, and queer/trans communities.
After an email sent by a Stanford Jewish Freshman, we received a lengthy apology and a pledge "the language will be updated to include the Jewish community".
Part 3: Trigger Warnings
(יד) לֹא־תְקַלֵּ֣ל חֵרֵ֔שׁ וְלִפְנֵ֣י עִוֵּ֔ר לֹ֥א תִתֵּ֖ן מִכְשֹׁ֑ל וְיָרֵ֥אתָ מֵּאֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ אֲנִ֥י יְהוָֽה׃
(14) Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumbling-block before the blind, but thou shalt fear thy God: I am the LORD.
Lindsay Holmes, "A Quick Lesson on What Trigger Warnings Actually Do"
Trigger warnings as we know them today gained steam from blogging platforms that emerged with the digital age, Buzzfeed News reported. They were created as a way to protect users from harmful content that may contribute to pre-existing mental health issues (i.e. sharing photos about an eating disorder that might “trigger” or, worse, “inspire” someone who is currently dealing with anorexia). The debate over using warnings filtered into college classrooms in the past few years.
Trigger warnings as we know them today gained steam from blogging platforms that emerged with the digital age, Buzzfeed News reported. They were created as a way to protect users from harmful content that may contribute to pre-existing mental health issues (i.e. sharing photos about an eating disorder that might “trigger” or, worse, “inspire” someone who is currently dealing with anorexia). The debate over using warnings filtered into college classrooms in the past few years.
Trigger warnings are potentially lifesaving for people who have dealt with traumas like sexual assault, hate crimes or violence. Eliminating these advisories and zones on campus suggests that someone should have to listen to someone who questions their humanity or experience.