Some years ago, I was a corporate language trainer - the particular shape of the job was that I went into companies and trained their foreign workers on the English needed to function in the US and in their jobs with English-speaking counterparts. These were normally middle-management or higher people, typically either leadership or technical workers like programmers or engineers. But we also did these services for their families at home, which generally meant the wife that was dragged along because her husband's new position took them from (for example) Tokyo to NY, and the kids that had to adapt to being in a US school.
I was working with an Israeli company where I was teaching the wife of an executive. She was (as I recall) quite smart, but did not love language study in general and struggled incredibly with English; you'd be surprised how emotional language learning can be when you're doing it out of necessity and not doing it as well as you'd like- I've had lots of people cry or scream. My husband frequently remarked that my students were exceptionally lucky I was a psychotherapist when I wasn't teaching English.
Anyway, in one particular lesson I was teaching this woman the meaning of words commonly found on government documentation like ID and forms- "nationality," "ethnicity," "race," "citizenship," "religion," etc. "Racially," this woman was absolutely Ashkenazi if not simply Caucasian- long blonde hair, blue eyes, pale skin (and, as it happened, drop-dead gorgeous and used to getting her own way). I knew from previous interactions that her family had immigrated to Israel shortly after WW2.
In trying to explain the distinction between "nationality" and "race," she became INCREDIBLY angry when I suggested- in all innocence and having no idea what I was stepping into- that "Jewish" was not, in the world of American English bureaucracy, not in itself a nationality- she was "Israeli" by nationality and citizenship and, arguably, "Jewish" by race. I tried to explain, look, I'm for example, "American," but for "race" I'd say "white" on the form, and for "ethnicity" I'd probably say "northern European" or "Irish and Danish," and "religion," well, let's not get into that. They have different meanings. But not for her.
It was an eye-opening experience at that time and reminded me that for much of the world, the ethno-state is the starting point of identity, and that has been so for quite some time.
Well said Rhyd. It's a minefield of claims, accusations and labels out there, made so much worse by the internet and social media. I think this piece sheds some much needed light on such divisive constructs; constructs which can be so easily manipulated and marketized by those with an agenda or power or both. Distracting us from our commonality where any hope for a peaceful coexistence surely resides.
I’ve been feeling like the Left’s bizarrely varied reactions to this conflict are somehow exposing its total loss of direction. I’ve been stunned at how vehement many friends seem to be about their position for or against Israel. Why is it not possible to see that this horror is rooted in deep historical trauma on both sides? Why do we insist on taking a side? Why the fear of complexity and nuance? You just explained it all. Thank you.
Humans have always defined themselves against others. In the 1930s, Gregory Bateson an anthropologist, coined the term schismogenesis, creation of differences. The Orthodox Jews defined themselves as Jews by how they were different from the non-Jews. But it's also true at an individual level, like watching people argue positions they don't necessarily agree with just because it's the opposite of what someone else said (the whole rationale behind "owning the libs")
Which brings us to, I think, the core problem of identity politics which comes down to ownership of identity. The people who can stake claims of ownership on an identity are the ones who get to define it, and that's when it's reduced to Carl Schmitt's friend-enemy distinction for anyone that doesn't fit that identity. And I think modern culture, particularly internet culture allows people to stake claims and make definitions quicker than ever before without any of the mitigating factors of face-to-face interaction.
What does your identity cost you? If it can make no demands on you, then what real worth does it have? Can you have an identity without demands, commitment, or sacrifice? All the benefits and none of the grief or the work?
Personally I see my being bi/queer as relatively incidental to my solidarity with Palestine. I don't have any illusions that Palestine is some kind of gay haven, and as you point out Israel's claims to this are also somewhat exaggerated- especially outside of Tel Aviv in particular. From my understanding the association of being LGBTQ & pro-Palestine is more indirect, I believe it is comparatively recent, particularly due to the alliance between Black Lives Matter, the Women's March, anti-war movement and pro-Palestine activists, as well as anti-Zionist Jewish activists being involved in LGBTQ movements. But there's also people on the pro-Israel side in all of these movements/communities as well. Certainly having a position on it as a queer group wasn't seen as important or necessary when I was in college in the 2000s. Our attempts to be intersectional back then would seem quite inadequate to the eyes of many contemporary activists!
Some years ago, I was a corporate language trainer - the particular shape of the job was that I went into companies and trained their foreign workers on the English needed to function in the US and in their jobs with English-speaking counterparts. These were normally middle-management or higher people, typically either leadership or technical workers like programmers or engineers. But we also did these services for their families at home, which generally meant the wife that was dragged along because her husband's new position took them from (for example) Tokyo to NY, and the kids that had to adapt to being in a US school.
I was working with an Israeli company where I was teaching the wife of an executive. She was (as I recall) quite smart, but did not love language study in general and struggled incredibly with English; you'd be surprised how emotional language learning can be when you're doing it out of necessity and not doing it as well as you'd like- I've had lots of people cry or scream. My husband frequently remarked that my students were exceptionally lucky I was a psychotherapist when I wasn't teaching English.
Anyway, in one particular lesson I was teaching this woman the meaning of words commonly found on government documentation like ID and forms- "nationality," "ethnicity," "race," "citizenship," "religion," etc. "Racially," this woman was absolutely Ashkenazi if not simply Caucasian- long blonde hair, blue eyes, pale skin (and, as it happened, drop-dead gorgeous and used to getting her own way). I knew from previous interactions that her family had immigrated to Israel shortly after WW2.
In trying to explain the distinction between "nationality" and "race," she became INCREDIBLY angry when I suggested- in all innocence and having no idea what I was stepping into- that "Jewish" was not, in the world of American English bureaucracy, not in itself a nationality- she was "Israeli" by nationality and citizenship and, arguably, "Jewish" by race. I tried to explain, look, I'm for example, "American," but for "race" I'd say "white" on the form, and for "ethnicity" I'd probably say "northern European" or "Irish and Danish," and "religion," well, let's not get into that. They have different meanings. But not for her.
It was an eye-opening experience at that time and reminded me that for much of the world, the ethno-state is the starting point of identity, and that has been so for quite some time.
Well said Rhyd. It's a minefield of claims, accusations and labels out there, made so much worse by the internet and social media. I think this piece sheds some much needed light on such divisive constructs; constructs which can be so easily manipulated and marketized by those with an agenda or power or both. Distracting us from our commonality where any hope for a peaceful coexistence surely resides.
I’ve been feeling like the Left’s bizarrely varied reactions to this conflict are somehow exposing its total loss of direction. I’ve been stunned at how vehement many friends seem to be about their position for or against Israel. Why is it not possible to see that this horror is rooted in deep historical trauma on both sides? Why do we insist on taking a side? Why the fear of complexity and nuance? You just explained it all. Thank you.
Humans have always defined themselves against others. In the 1930s, Gregory Bateson an anthropologist, coined the term schismogenesis, creation of differences. The Orthodox Jews defined themselves as Jews by how they were different from the non-Jews. But it's also true at an individual level, like watching people argue positions they don't necessarily agree with just because it's the opposite of what someone else said (the whole rationale behind "owning the libs")
Which brings us to, I think, the core problem of identity politics which comes down to ownership of identity. The people who can stake claims of ownership on an identity are the ones who get to define it, and that's when it's reduced to Carl Schmitt's friend-enemy distinction for anyone that doesn't fit that identity. And I think modern culture, particularly internet culture allows people to stake claims and make definitions quicker than ever before without any of the mitigating factors of face-to-face interaction.
Good point. I was beginning to think I was the only person who thought this way? Good read.
What does your identity cost you? If it can make no demands on you, then what real worth does it have? Can you have an identity without demands, commitment, or sacrifice? All the benefits and none of the grief or the work?
Very well said! Thank you for your obvious deep-dive research and bringing it to us.
Personally I see my being bi/queer as relatively incidental to my solidarity with Palestine. I don't have any illusions that Palestine is some kind of gay haven, and as you point out Israel's claims to this are also somewhat exaggerated- especially outside of Tel Aviv in particular. From my understanding the association of being LGBTQ & pro-Palestine is more indirect, I believe it is comparatively recent, particularly due to the alliance between Black Lives Matter, the Women's March, anti-war movement and pro-Palestine activists, as well as anti-Zionist Jewish activists being involved in LGBTQ movements. But there's also people on the pro-Israel side in all of these movements/communities as well. Certainly having a position on it as a queer group wasn't seen as important or necessary when I was in college in the 2000s. Our attempts to be intersectional back then would seem quite inadequate to the eyes of many contemporary activists!