Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

lettersfromnj.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 75 posts

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#51

Post by mannykannot »

jacobush wrote: post #23
mikorym wrote: post #7

I think that modern religions and the way they learn to part with certain medieval ways is critical. The Jewish religion has been arguably successful with this, producing exceedingly prestigious scientists and mathematicians. The risk is always the "fundamental" factions.

They are higher risk, but sometimes come with great rewards too. I'd say Martin Luther King was pretty fundamental, as was Gandhi and a bunch of other people I have to credit with doing a lot of good.

Fundamentalism is not a appropriate term for the sort of leadership that King and Ghandi gave. Fundamentalism has come to mean a preoccupation with obeisance to formal rules, taken literally.

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#52

Post by true_religion »

microcolonel wrote: post #33
exelius wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, exactly. I have more than one (female) Orthodox friend and they’re constantly having to stand up to elders within their own communities for respect. The older generations still believe women shouldn’t work.

Disagreement with orthodoxy is heterodox. You can't be orthodox and heterodox at the same time, that makes no sense.

You can be mostly orthodox except for one practice. Absolutism is hard.

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#53

Post by [deleted] »

darylfritz wrote: post #47
dalbasal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? It's about not being fine with it.

I feel like bjourne is referring to the hypocracy that society commonly accepts the Jewish practice, whereas the Muslim practice is generally rejected. I don't think bjourne is suggesting that Deborah accepts the practice.

[deleted]

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#55

Post by baud147258 »

comunii wrote: post #8

What private religious groups do in their own publications is one thing, what's more concerning, and evident from this story, is the way some parts of Wikipedia are mostly run by fringe groups and operate under their own rules. I have seen other examples of this in the past. Pages about Hasidic rabbis will mention miracles they performed as undisputed fact, and will not mention facts about them that may be unflatteri…

Do you have any link to such pages?

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#56

Post by nkurz »

bigiain wrote: post #29
Geeek wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who grew up Hasidic (and spoke only Yiddish until 17) I am also not sure what the article is attempting to do here. Is she trying to bring attention to the sexist attitudes of the Hasidic community? They wanted something, she wanted something else, they paid as per the new conditions. End of story.

They weren't the photographer's "new conditions". The original agreement said she wanted credit for he photos with her full name. Quite reasonably in my opinion, especially given the zero price offered under those conditions. After having agreed, and right towards the end of the publication process, the editors refused those originally agreed conditions. They paid according to new conditions imposed by them. (Apparen…

After having agreed, and right towards the end of the publication process, the editors refused those originally agreed conditions.

From my reading of the article, I don't think this is accurate. The original agreement was between an independent writer and the photographer. The editors had never agreed to publish her name. While I strongly disagree with their editorial policy, I don't think it's fair to consider them bound by an agreement made by a third party without their consent.

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#57

Post by mgoia »

mikorym wrote: post #26
celticninja wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there anything wrong with highlighting the sexism of the Hasidic community? Shouldn't religious intolerance be called out wherever we see it? All sexism is bad, regardless of its root cause.

Again, why is this being downvoted? Sexism should be highlighted. Many of the comments here are trying to rationalise injustice.

Some people think sexism is only bad when Christians do it. Other religions have their reasons, of course!

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#58

Post by ajuc »

basetop wrote: post #48
mikorym wrote: post #7

I think that modern religions and the way they learn to part with certain medieval ways is critical. The Jewish religion has been arguably successful with this, producing exceedingly prestigious scientists and mathematicians. The risk is always the "fundamental" factions.

I wouldn't credit the religion ( fundamental or not ). After all, much of modern science was created by "fundamental" priests, clerics, adherents, etc ( from copernicus to newton to mendel ). Rather, the jewish scientists benefited from living in wealthy colonial europe which provided opportunities ( though there were anti-semitic roadblocks as well ) for research. There is a reason why most of the prominent jewish s…

I don't know about the others, but Kopernik was hardly a "fundamental" priest. He organized the defense of Prussian towns who sided with Poland against a Teutonic Knights army who had the permission of the pope to "baptize" these "pagan" lands.

Polish/Prussian side (which Kopernik supported, even including participation in the defence of the besieged city) argued that pagans had the right to live and defend their land, and that faith alone is not a sufficient justification to conquer foreign countries.

And it's not even sure if Kopernik was a priest at all. He was a canon at Frombork Cathedral, but at the time you didn't have to be a full-blown priest, he could have just been a deacon or even a subdeacon (and that's the currently favoured theory).

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#59

Post by dalbasal »

darylfritz wrote: post #47
dalbasal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? It's about not being fine with it.

I feel like bjourne is referring to the hypocracy that society commonly accepts the Jewish practice, whereas the Muslim practice is generally rejected. I don't think bjourne is suggesting that Deborah accepts the practice.

Where is the example of "society commonly accepting the Jewish practice?" Not hn society, as you can see in the thread. Not Jewish society, as you can see in the article.

In any case, this is not a Jewish practice. The practice in this article is specific to certain hasidic sects, within the haredi minority... And very few outside of the haredi minority are accepting of sexism within the community. It's a big point of conflict.

Re: Call Me by My Name: Deborah Abrams Kaplan

#60

Post by panzagl »

bliblah wrote: post #50
mikorym wrote: post #7

I think that modern religions and the way they learn to part with certain medieval ways is critical. The Jewish religion has been arguably successful with this, producing exceedingly prestigious scientists and mathematicians. The risk is always the "fundamental" factions.

Interesting because in a way the Islamic faith has been dealing with the opposite problem. During the Medieval era a lot of the most prominent scientific discoveries in Europe were done by Muslim scholars in a wide variety of fields. However the modern radical approach to the religion has definitely resulted in many scientists having to abandon their countries and faith due to a variety of reasons.

The medieval Arab world was the inheritor of a Greco-roman culture that they initially ruled with a light hand as a aristocratic minority. As the Arab and eventually Turkish culture asserted itself and turned inward those remnant disappear. By the time modern fanaticism rose, that brief flourishing had been gone for at least 500 years.
Post reply on HN