Lena Dunham received plenty of criticism for her insufferable New Yorker piece titled "." In it, the creator of Girls weighs the pros and cons of getting a pet or keeping her Jewish boyfriend: "He doesn't tip," and "he never brings his wallet anywhere," and so on. The jokes may tell us something about her comedic abilities, her audience, and The New Yorker, but despite much hand-wringing, it tells us nothing about anti-Semitism.
MORE ARTICLES BY
4.24.15 12:05 am
3.27.15 12:00 am
3.20.15 12:00 am
The Anti-Defamation League's national director, Abraham Foxman—the unelected voice of American Jewish conscience—argued, "The piece is particularly troubling because it evokes memories of the 'No Jews or Dogs Allowed' signs from our own early history in this country, and also because, in a much more sinister way, many in the Muslim world today hatefully refer to Jews as 'dogs.'"
"Anti-Semitism" is rooting for Hamas. Making fun of your nebbish boyfriend is lame, but it should not make any rational person think of Iran's supreme leader. I've heard plenty of malicious and offensive anti-Semitic jokes in my life, but it would be tough to conjure up the indignation to believe that Dunham was flirting with anything resembling bigotry. Making fun of innocuous stereotypes—and Dunham is part Jewish and lives in a world teeming with Jews—in the pages of a friendly publication evokes memories of subpar Catskill comedians, not long-dead nativists.
In fact, why should Dunham—or anyone else—have to worry about inadvertently evoking memories of ancient wrongdoings that disturb the sensibilities of the professionally aggrieved? She's a 28-year-old actress. Not every ethnic, religious, regional, and racial idiosyncrasy has to be off-limits. If both sides are going to prosecute entertainers for thought crimes and failed jokes, our culture is going to become even more tedious.
Take Trevor Noah, the South African comedian picked to replace Jon Stewart as host of The Daily Show. He seems to have a habit of making wincingly bad jokes about Jews, women, fat people, Asians, and many others on social media. Salon predicted a wave of "right-wing rage" after his announcement. But as is often the case these days, it was the left that turned on him. And the right.
A sample of his Jewish jokes:
"Behind every successful Rap Billionaire is a double as rich Jewish man. #BeatsByDreidel."
Is that really anti-Jewish?
"Almost bumped a Jewish kid crossing the road. He didn't look b4 crossing but I still would hav felt so bad in my german car!"
You get the picture. At worst, those tweets reflect the work of an untalented comedian. At best, they are a trivial sample of what is an otherwise impressive comedic mind. I imagine the market will decide soon enough. Mostly, though, it's worth remembering that Noah is a TV comic, not a nominee for the Supreme Court.
If I treated The Daily Show as a serious news program, I'd probably note the irony of Noah's replacing a didactic scold whose entire shtick is predicated on making fun of people whose statements he has taken out of context. And though Noah asks for understanding, it's unlikely he will be extending the same to conservatives. But just as no one is coercing liberals to listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck (although the left has campaigned to banish both from the airwaves), it's easy to ignore The Daily Show. I do it almost every day.
The problem with this kind of prefabricated reaction is not that it emboldens haters but that it crowds out legitimate grievances. Everything begins to stink of politics, and we start sounding like a bunch of humorless protesters. There is nothing wrong with calling out people for the things they say, but there is something fundamentally illiberal about a mob's hounding people for every stupid tweet or making snap judgments about entire careers based on a few comments. Most often, the purpose is to chill speech. At some point, Americans decided they were going to be offended by everything. And, I guess, that's what really offends me most.
MORE ARTICLES BY
4.24.15 12:05 am
3.27.15 12:00 am
3.20.15 12:00 am
David Harsanyi is senior editor of &and the author of .
Follow David Harsanyi on
Reason In Your Inbox!
GET REASON MAGAZINE
Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online
Reason’s Open Issue
Matt Welch:
There is nothing ‘open-minded’ about using government to punish disfavored views.
When Open Government Slams Shut: Failed transparency, from Hillary Clinton’s emails to hidden campaign contributions.
Ronald Bailey: New research demonstrates the amazing power of open markets and open borders.
Veronique de Rugy: How bureaucrats are keeping people in the dark about the Export-Import Bank.
Camille Paglia talks about feminism, rape, academia, and Hillary Clinton.
And much more
4.24.15 4:45 pm
4.24.15 4:35 pm
4.24.15 4:30 pm
advertisement
Peter Suderman
Peter Suderman
Nick Gillespie & Alex Manning
Scott Shackford
Matt Welch
Jesse Walker
Nick Gillespie
Geoffrey A. Manne & R. Ben Sperry
Matt Welch
Sheldon Richman
Steve Chapman
Sheldon Richman
Brian Doherty
Scott Shackford
Ed Krayewski
Emily Ekins
Emily Ekins
Emily Ekins
Peter Suderman
John McClaughry
Jesse Walker
&2015 Reason Foundation.|Disboard pretending to use up obvious vicissitudes of life 是什么意思？？
Disboard pretending to use up obvious vicissitudes of life 是什么意思？？
假装的Disboard用尽生活明显的变迁
相关知识等待您来回答
外语领域专家She's in Finland now, getting her Ph.D. at the University of Jyvaskyla,
but before that, when she was in Adelaide, Australia, she studied
elevator behavior.
hung around two tall office towers in town, riding
elevators up and
down day after day, looking for patterns. When a bunch
of people get
into an elevator, she wondered, do they segregate in any
predictable
way? Do tall ones stand in the back? Do men stand in
different places
than women? Who looks where? She says she wasn't
expecting or even
predicting a particular configuration, but she found
Over and over, she noticed that older "more senior men in particular
seem to direct themselves towards the back of the elevator cabins."
Younger men took up the middle ground.
And in the front, facing the doors, backs to the guys, stood "women of all ages."
not sure why. It wasn't segregation by height. It wasn't age, since
older and younger women co-mingled. Clearly, the people in the back had
the advantage of seeing everybody in the cabin, while people in the
front had no idea who was behind them. Could there be a curiosity
difference? A predatory difference?
There was a second pattern,
one that broke along gender lines. "Men," she wrote, "looked in the
side mirrors and the door mirrors" to openly check out the other
passengers, and/or themselves.
Women didn't do that. "Women would watch the monitors and avoid eye
contact with other users (unless in conversation)." They would only look
at the mirrors (where they could check out the other passengers) when
they were with other women. Eye-wise, the guys were roving, the ladies
"That's where I started thinking of power," Rebekah wrote me. The men
who flocked to the back, who had a better view of their fellow
passengers, were consistently older, more "senior" (I'm not sure how she
knew that, but it's in her ) and many of them "weren't concerned with
'getting caught' looking in the mirror." They gazed freely, suggesting a
sense of privilege. Younger, less powerful men seemed to avoid that
space, choosing a middle ground. The back of the box, (unlike the back
of the bus in Alabama civil rights days) she decided, might be the
elevator power zone.
Perhaps a gender analysis
is too easy. Power hierarchies in elevators, she wrote, "almost seemed
too cliché." This could be about shyness. Bold pe
shy people the front. Does that mean she thinks Australian women are
more self-conscious than Australian men? She wouldn't go there, except
to say, "I don't really want people to know how vain I am, so looking in
the mirror (as a woman or not) when others are in the lift ... is
highly avoided." By this analysis, the back of the elevator is the
Vanity-Unleashed zone.
Basically, she's still puzzled. A
pattern shows up. But the explanation, she said, slipping into academic
shyness, "awaits further analysis." Then she added, "I'd be really
interested to hear what your listeners (she means you, you reading this)
have to say about the issue."
Host, Radiolab
Robert Krulwich is co-host of Radiolab, WNYC's Peabody Award-winning program that examines big questions in science, philosophy and the human experience through compelling storytelling.
Today, Radiolab is one of public radio's most popular shows.
Its podcasts are downloaded over 4 million times each month and the program is carried on 437 stations across the nation. In addition to Radiolab, Krulwich reports for National Public Radio. “Krulwich Wonders” is his NPR blog featuring drawings, cartoons and videos that illustrate hard-to-see concepts in science.
Comments [45]H.I.M的《Pretending》 歌词_百度知道
H.I.M的《Pretending》 歌词
提问者采纳
baidu://music歌曲名:Greatest HitsEnding我趴在琴上　晕了手弹到最後心也累了无力　拥有你忘掉你比较容易活因寒冷而抱紧热恋中难以变清醒雾轻盈罩住了我的灰眼睛黑键白键　如此靠近分不清音阶迷离我弹到尾奏　再也忍不住痛你我都熬不到最後琴键冰冻穿透指尖为夜晚而疯狂反覆弹著致命的旋律愚蠢　就是我我必须要说　做梦救不了我黑键白键　如此靠近分不清音阶迷离我弹到尾奏　再也忍不住痛你我都熬不到最後琴键冰冻穿透指尖Ending让我哭它结束的如此仓促留下一阵盲目　糊涂Ending让我哭它结束的如此突兀只有自己找退路爱是谜样的节奏开始洒脱结束伤透扔掉钢琴是否感觉好过我对自己说http.M专辑.I:H
其他类似问题
歌词的相关知识
等待您来回答
下载知道APP
随时随地咨询
出门在外也不愁