Is "Jew" a Slur?

[l33tminion]

A conversation I had with a friend on Twitter this morning:

@Sorcyress: I am kinda weirded out by the idea of "hug a jew day" (girls were discussing in high school class)...
@Sorcyress: ...but I don't really have the background to fight it. Maybe I'm just reacting to the phrasing "a jew", which is a slur? I don't know.
@Sorcyress: (Also problematic in that what if the Jewish people in question don't *want* hugs. Or don't want hugs for that reason.)
Me: @Sorcyress "A Jew" is not a slur any more than "a Christian" or "a Muslim" is a slur.
@Sorcyress: More on "Jew" versus "Jewish" http://bit.ly/b2Myxv --implication is that "Jew" isn't technically a slur, but has a dubious history
@Sorcyress: @L33tminion It seems that "Jew" may not be a slur, but is still tainted by a history of being used as one.
Me: @Sorcyress Are you seriously making anti-Semites your go-to source for the definition of the word "Jew"?
@Sorcyress: @L33tminion Based on my research (bit.ly/b2Myxv, bit.ly/JSch1) "Jew" is not a slur, however it is/was so commonly used as one that...
@Sorcyress: @L33tminion ...some people shy away from the word. My best guess is that it's to other reclaimed language, ie, there is not a problem...
@Sorcyress: @L33tminion ...if a Jewish person chooses to self identify as "a Jew" or call themself/another Jewish person "Jew" but because of the...
@Sorcyress: @L33tminion ...history, it can be a little dicey for non-Jewish-identified people to refer to Jewish people a "a jew" or "jews"
@Sorcyress: @L33tminion That being said, IANA Jewish studies major or Jewish. I initially was unsure of whether Jew was a slur. Still am.

At which point I decided a longer post was called for.

Full Disclosure: I was raised Jewish. Many of my family members are Jews. I don't identify myself as "Jewish" / "a Jew", primarily because that implies things about my religious belief and/or practice that are incorrect. (Secondarily, because I put more focus on the religious connotations of the term than ethnic/racial concepts of "the Jewish people".)

Jew as "Reclaimed Language": First off, I take issue with the characterization of the word "Jew" as "reclaimed". Jew is not a word originally applied to practitioners of Judaism by their detractors, but a word with straightforward historical origins that trace back to the biblical story of the origin of the Jews. Wikipedia has an article on the word itself, which contains an excellent summary:

The Jewish ethnonym in Hebrew is יהודים Yehudim (plural of יהודי Yehudi) which is the origin of the English word Jew. The Hebrew name is derived from the region name Judah (Yehudah יהודה). Originally the name referred to the territory allotted to the tribe descended from Judah the fourth son of the patriarch Jacob (Numbers). Judah was one of the twelve sons of Jacob and one of the Twelve tribes of Israel (Genesis). The Genesis 29:35 [1] relates that Judah's mother — the matriarch Leah — named him Yehudah (i.e. "Judah") because she wanted to "praise God" for giving birth to so many sons: "She said, 'This time let me praise (odeh אודה) God (יהוה),' and named the child Judah (Yehudah יהודה)", thus combining "praise" and "God" into one new name. Thereafter Judah vouchsafes the Jewish monarchy, and the Israelite kings David and Solomon derive their lineage from Judah. In Hebrew, the name "Judah" (י ה ו [ד] ה) contains the four letters of the Tetragrammaton — the special, holy, and ineffable name of the Jewish God. The very holiness of the name of Judah attests to its importance as an alternate name for "Israelites" that it ultimately replaces.

[...]

The Middle English word Jew is from the Old French giu, earlier juieu, from the Latin Iudaeus from the Greek Ἰουδαῖος. The Latin simply means Judaean, from the land of Judaea. In the Old English the word is attested as early as 1000 in various forms, such as Iudeas, Gyu, Giu, Iuu, Iuw, Iew. [links omitted]

The first article that @Sorcyress cites, Jonah Goldberg's Proud and True: He's A Jew, claims that "the word 'Jew' is being rehabilitated". The article correctly identifies some problematic uses of the word "Jew". "Jew" as a verb and as an adjective are problematic and that usage both originates from and ties back to an anti-Semetic context. However, the article makes some bizarre statements, for example:

Ironically, the Jew-Jewish distinction was brought to the fore recently by - or to be more fair - because of, another Democrat: Hillary Clinton. The allegation that she called an aide a "f***ing Jew bastard" 30 years ago, fairly or not, reminded some people that "Jew" can be a hurtful word. "F***ing Jewish bastard," oddly enough, would not have been as offensive. [emphasis mine]

Wait, what? I suppose that last statement is technically true. A reduction in the number of syllables conveys emotional intensity (think how many slurs and swears are one syllable), and also has the connotation of force of habit. One would not be unreasonable to conclude that the speaker of the first line is more vehement in their anti-Jewish sentiment and guessing that they more habitually rant about their dislike for "the Jews". But talk about missing the forest for the trees, if the reminder there has to do with the usage of "Jew" versus "Jewish" as opposed to the association of either with "F-ing bastard"!

Another paragraph of note from the same article:

[...] Hitler was largely successful in smearing the word "Jew." The word was so beaten up that after the Holocaust most American Jews took to saying, "I'm Jewish," rather than say, "I am a Jew."

Hitler speaking of "Jews" would have been rather uncharacteristically in English, so that leads to some fascinating sociolinguistic questions about the effects of a word with similar derivation in a different language being used as a slur. (I'm being a bit unfair here, I'd guess that the effects of English-speaking anti-Semites had a more significant direct effect on the perception of the word "Jew" in English. A rhetorical reference to Hitler in the context of the recent history of anti-Semitism can surely be forgiven.)

Identity and Labeling: Proponents of political correctness (and yes, I would count myself in that group) often focus on the use of labeling language. See, for example, the discussion of "person-first language". It's true that language can be hurtful because it implies that an attribute is more of a core part of someone's identity than it actually is. Unfortunately, that cuts both ways: Language can be hurtful because it implies that an attribute is less of a core part of someone's identity than it actually is. Especially if that connotes, "I don't want to treat this as a core part of your identity because it's bad." When someone uses "Jewish person" when "Jew" would flow better, I wonder if this is an expression of discomfort with their own negative attitude about Jews, or an excessive focus on speech norms as opposed to the actual effects of speech. To give an exaggerated example, think what it would imply if someone consistently referred to Jews as "people who are members of the Jewish religion" or "people who practice the Jewish faith", especially if they didn't refer to members of other religions in a similar manner. (I considered using "person with Judaism" as my example, but I'm pretty sure that crosses the line from rhetorical exaggeration into satire.)

On Consistency: Speaking of that last, the connotations of "Jewish person" versus "Jew" may also depend on how the speaker refers to (more specifically, how the listener expects the speaker to refer to) members of other religions. "Jew" is the ordinary noun for "a member of the Jewish religion". So if you refer to "Christians", "Muslims", "Buddhists", "Hindus", and "Jewish people", I don't think the connotation with regard to Jews/Judaism is positive. As the Wikipedia article concludes:

[...] when used as a noun, "Jew" is preferred, as other circumlocutions (e.g. "Jewish person") give the impression that the term "Jew" is offensive in all contexts.

Note that the last is not an argument from any authority, simply a long-standing consensus among the article's editors. I'm just quoting that to say "I agree".

"Hug a Jew Day": Of course, none of that addresses the original question of whether or not "Hug a Jew Day" is weird or offensive, except to object to the characterization of "Jew" as "a slur". I can see why "Hug a Jew Day" could be problematic.

However, a bit of searching revealed a more interesting historical context than I'd originally expected. It seems that "hug a Jew day" dates back to 2009. It originated as a Facebook group formed in opposition to Kick a Jew Day, which in turn was inspired by Kick a Ginger Day, which was inspired by an episode of South Park. Hard to say without further information how @Sorcyress's classmates' discussion fits into that context, but there's clearly some substantial stuff to dig into.

Comments

[lbmango.livejournal.com]

Very interesting.

I find the "Fucking Jew Bastard" worse than "Fucking Jewish Bastard" because ... it's grammatically incorrect. Jew is not an adjective. "Fucking Bastard Jew" would be equivalent to "Fucking Jewish Bastard", because "Bastard" can be both a noun and an adjective.

I feel differently on the "Person who practices the Jewish faith", mainly because to me "Jewish" is primarily a cultural thing, and the religion is a closely-related, but different issue, so if you mention the religion explicitly that makes a difference. Whereas you don't need to do the same for other religions, because they are primarily religions and cultures second. Maybe Cree, or some other Native American culture would have a similar flavor.

On "Hug a Jew Day"... I have an issues with that mainly because it implies a problem with being Jewish. "We like you even though your Jewish." umm, thanks?

So, in conclusion, I think that "Jew" is only a slur when used in a context other than as a noun, and so in and of itself it isn't offensive (to me) in "Hug a Jew Day"

I should add that I self identify as a "Militant Agnostic Deist with Jewish Tendencies."

[l33tminion]

I feel differently on the "Person who practices the Jewish faith", mainly because to me "Jewish" is primarily a cultural thing, and the religion is a closely-related, but different issue, so if you mention the religion explicitly that makes a difference.

That's relevant in some contexts, but tangential to the point I was making above.

Whereas you don't need to do the same for other religions, because they are primarily religions and cultures second.

Seems like you're jumping to conclusions here. All religions are cultural, and it's not so easy to pick the two apart. There are a lot of contradictions in the phrase "I'm just culturally Jewish" (or any other religious designator).

[lbmango.livejournal.com]

I don't see a huge contradiction with "culturally Jewish"... and I guess that's the point I was trying to make. There are a lot of parts of "being Jewish" that have nothing to do with whether or not you believe in a deity, or what kind. My point is that in most religions, the part of the culture that is intwined with the religion is 1) minor and 2) hard to pick apart. In Judaism, it's much easier.

You don't find a whole lot of "agnostic Catholics". They call themselves "recovering Catholics" usually. Judaism is qualitatively different.

The only way that this is relevant is that to me "X is Jewish" is a different statement than "X practices the Jewish faith" (or "X practices Judaism") "X is a Jew" is the former, not the latter.

[l33tminion]

There are a lot of parts of "being Jewish" that have nothing to do with whether or not you believe in a deity, or what kind.

Sure, but a lot of those examples are pretty strange once you remove them from the historical context of Jewish religion.

My point is that in most religions, the part of the culture that is intwined with the religion is 1) minor and 2) hard to pick apart. In Judaism, it's much easier.

Care to support that statement?

You don't find a whole lot of "agnostic Catholics". They call themselves "recovering Catholics" usually.

Oh, you know a lot about the prevalence of agnosticism among Catholics? I wouldn't expect that to be an easy thing to determine.

[lbmango.livejournal.com]

The simple support of my statement is that you hear all the time about people who consider themselves "secular Jews" but you never hear about "Secular catholics" or "Secular Buddhists"

or at least *I* never hear about these.

and yeah, I know a lot about "agnostic catholics" Because once you're agnostic, you're no longer a Catholic. It's like saying atheist Presbyterian. Once you're an atheist, you're no longer a Christian. However, I know many Atheist Jews, who consider themselves exactly that.

Perhaps agnostic isn't as good an example as atheist. There are many atheist Jews. There are no atheist Christians.

Being Jewish is more like being Greek. Sure, you're brought up Greek Orthodox, and everyone pretty much assumes you're greek orthodox, but if you are an atheist, or agnostic, you are still Greek.


The one difference is that once you join another organized religion, you are no longer Jewish. You can be a Greek who converted to Catholicism, and still be Greek. You can't remain Jewish. (Jews for Jesus aren't) but that's really the only way that they differ as far as I can see.

[l33tminion]

The simple support of my statement is that you hear all the time about people who consider themselves "secular Jews" but you never hear about "Secular catholics" or "Secular Buddhists" or at least *I* never hear about these.

I know secular Buddhists. I don't know if any of my Catholic acquaintances are agnostics, but I've read accounts written by individuals who claim to be agnostic Catholics, and I have no reason to doubt their self-identification.

(We are talking about self-identification, right? Because even the Reform Jewish movement lists in its central tenets, "Belief in God as defined in the Shema"; agnosticism doesn't exactly qualify.)

Because once you're agnostic, you're no longer a Catholic.

That's incorrect. If you're talking about self-identification, there are certainly agnostics who identify as Catholic, even if they don't feel they are "practicing the Catholic faith". In fact, the Catholic Church makes that very distinction! Once you're baptized as a Catholic, you are "a Catholic" for life.

There are no atheist Christians.

Also incorrect.

The one difference is that once you join another organized religion, you are no longer Jewish.

I'd quibble with you over that one, there are people who identify as Buddhist Jews or Jewish Unitarian Universalists, I have a friend who identifies as Jewish and Quaker. (As far as Jews for Jesus, they're not even making an argument that the Jewish and Christian religions are compatible, they define "Jewish" in terms of ethnicity or birthright. You clearly reject that definition (no amount of religious conversion will change one's ethnicity or parentage), and so do I.)

[archangelwells.livejournal.com]

Jumping into this thread oddly: Hi! I'm Jewish. I'm also a Jew. The two words are *grammatically* different, but their *meanings* are identical. They both mean that one identifies with the culture/religion/political/whatever the who thing that descended from the Israelites of biblical times. Hence Hillary's grammatically incorrect usage of Jew grates on me, in a way using Jewish there wouldn't, but either way, she was insulting the person and throwing the reference to his/her religion/culture in there was out of line (IMNSHO). Also, *BOTH* have been used negatively throughout history. But is that any surprise to anyone?

Also, a Muslim who does not believe in the religion? Is usually called "an Arab", not a Muslim. There aren't all that many practices that Muslims have that people who don't believe in the religion have. It's possible Halal is to that like Kosher is, and I only have limited experience otherwise, but I don't think non-believing Muslims cling to Islam the way non-believing Jews cling to Judaism. I've heard it discussed more places than just here, by people supposedly experts, that this is a phenomenon that is rather unique to Jews, as opposed to being common with the other religions.

Although, lbmango, it is the case that once born Jewish or converted to Judaism, one is always a Jew, even if one converts to another religion. Or so say the Orthodox, at any rate. However, similarly, if you have a French Catholic who converts to Islam, they're still French, but no longer a Catholic. ~shrugs~ I never really understood the being a cultural Jew thing, so I'm not sure how much help I am, but this is what I know/have learned.

[l33tminion]

Also, a Muslim who does not believe in the religion? Is usually called "an Arab", not a Muslim.

That is the sort of statement non-Arab Muslims and non-Muslim Arabs are likely to find very offensive. It's not even correct as a generalization. There are about 1.5 billion adherents of Islam in the world, and only about 280 million Arab Muslims (about 300 million Arabs, about 93% of those are Muslims). Most Muslims are not Arabs.

There aren't all that many practices that Muslims have that people who don't believe in the religion have... I don't think non-believing Muslims cling to Islam the way non-believing Jews cling to Judaism.

Muslims have holidays, traditional food, art, songs, religiously inspired literature and so on, the sort of cultural elements that "cultural Jews" claim can be separate from religion.

How can I express why that line of argument bothers me so much? Imagine someone saying this: "Man, I'm so glad I'm an atheist Jew. If I'd been raised in some other religion and later became an atheist / agnostic, I'd have to abandon the whole religious/cultural edifice. It's great the Judaism has the sort of cultural depth to it that other religions don't! Also, isn't it amazing that secular Jews are loyal to Judaism? It's as if members of other religions are merely bound to their religious culture by the lashes of dogma and doctrine."

I would argue that lbmango's statement "in most [other] religions, the part of the culture that is intwined [sic] with the religion is... minor" and your statement "non-believing Jews cling to Judaism [in a way that is distinct from non-believing members of other religions]" implicitly make the claims above.

[archangelwells.livejournal.com]

~shrugs~ I"m not saying this is a good thing, about Judaism. But it *is* something that people far more knowledgeable and who have actually studied the way this plays out in other religions say is unique to Judaism.

I'd like to note that you said *ADHERENTS* of Islam. Not *people who identify as Muslim but don't believe in the religious aspects*. Perhaps it is my ignorance of where the culture spread out to, but the only group that I know of that is *culturally* Muslim as opposed to necessarily *religiously* Muslim are the Arabs. And I'm well aware that there are Arabs who are not Muslim. I'd still say Islam has influenced their culture in a way that is not dissimilar from "cultural" Judaism, at least from what I know of the ones whom I've met. Although the ones I've met were Christian Arabs, and so were not non-believing Muslims.

Yes, Islam has all the elements that cultural Jews claim as separate. I don't know of people who follow those, without also believing in (at the very least) Allah.


Also, I think your assessment of my statement is incorrect. From my understanding (which, granted, limited, and since I can't name any of the experts I remember listening to (and they might have been mostly Jewish, so there's probably a skew there)), most people who give up their religion which is tied to their culture ALSO fight against their culture. Honestly? I hope I'm wrong. Because that's a huge loss. (Although I find celebrating religious holidays when you don't believe in it to be rather silly.)

I guess the closest thing I can think of to not giving up the culture when you give up the religion is all those atheists and agnostics who celebrate Christmas and New Year's and Easter. You really don't find them celebrating Palm Sunday or participating in Ash Wednesday, though. You *do* find cultural Jews participating in our small holidays.


At this point, it's all "these are things I remember experts saying, but I can't remember who they are", so I'm bowing out of replying after this. If you'd like to come back with sources that show this is not unique to Judaism, I'd love to be convinced otherwise. But my education and my experiences say otherwise.

[l33tminion]

I'd like to note that you said *ADHERENTS* of Islam.

I wish there was more precise language for this. I mean people who are nominally Muslim (who show up as Muslim on demographic surveys or other first-glance measures).

Perhaps it is my ignorance of where the culture spread out to

Yeah, that.

Although I find celebrating religious holidays when you don't believe in it to be rather silly.

I agree, but I can think of some reasons to do it anyways. Personally, I enjoy spending time with extended family, and I can appreciate the aesthetic and historical value of rituals that don't (in my view) really make metaphysical sense.

You really don't find them celebrating Palm Sunday or participating in Ash Wednesday, though.

Are you using circular logic here? When you see someone participating in one of those holidays, do you assume they're a gnostic theist with no further evidence?

At this point, it's all "these are things I remember experts saying, but I can't remember who they are"

Yeah, I'm glad you understand that's not really persuasive.

If we're going with guesswork, let me front a few hypotheses:

(Note that much of this is comparing Judaism with Christianity, my experience with other religions is more limited.)

1. Muslim and Christian doctrine holds that non-believers go to hell (I'm generalizing, I know some Christian sects disagree with that, and expect some Muslim sects do as well (e.g. the Sufi)). Jewish doctrine doesn't hold that. That probably decreases the pressure on non-secular Jews to bring more secular Jews back into the fold. The fact that Jews don't proselytize in general probably feeds into that.

2. Related to the above: If you believe non-believers will meet a terrible fate, you're more likely to think they're bad people (avoids cognitive dissonance). At least, my impression is that anti-atheist sentiment is stronger among Christians than Jews (though there are a variety of reasons why my perception could be skewed).

3. Jews are a global minority (about 14 million Jews compared to 1.5 billion Muslims and 2.2 billion Christians). That means a stronger desire to keep more people in the group, relative to the desire to enforce religious norms.

4. Zionism probably has a related effect. Whether Jews identify as Jews probably has far more impact on the sustainability of a Jewish state than whether those Jews believe in God or not.

5. Judaism puts a great deal of focus on scholarship. Which in countries like the United States means theres a lot of interaction between Jews and politically-liberal academic institutions.

[tenshikurai9.livejournal.com]

I guess the closest thing I can think of to not giving up the culture when you give up the religion is all those atheists and agnostics who celebrate Christmas and New Year's and Easter.

I've never thought of New Year's as a religious holiday. Even if you don't believe in anything, the calendar still turns.

[rafaela.livejournal.com]

I've always, very vocally I might add, identified myself as a Jew. This refers not only to my ethnicity (well, half my ethnicity - my father was a convert), but to my religious practice and belief. I see no problem with the word. There's no shame in it. I don't see it as a reclaimed word. I never saw it as an insult in the first place.