Letter to the Editor

One of my favorite political commentators is Yoel Marcus of the left-wing Israeli news­paper Ha’aretz. He used to publish columns called “Comments on the Situation.” This is my version.

  1. Is it possible to talk about what happens outside of the West without talking about the West? We’re myopically obsessed with our­selves, and Joshua Schreier is the most near­sighted among us. Gay people are jailed in 21st century Egypt, stoned in 21st century Iran, and deported from 21st century Bahrain, but Josh wants to talk about 19th century French homophobia. Sorry, Middle East LGBTQ com­munity. The academy has sacrificed you on the altar of post-colonial political correctness. Rainbows require sunshine, and Joshua Sch­reier has focused all of his on Israel.
  2. As long as we’re talking about color, Black Lives Matter. As my people say, Bimher­ah V’yameinu, may justice come speedily and in our time. But what did Schreier mean when he compared American racial justice cam­paign to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Is the United States the subject of an intensive inter­national campaign to demonize its people and effect its dissolution? Israel is. Is the United States the subject of structural discrimination at the UN, where states with human rights re­cords inferior to its own line up to condemn it? Iran condemns Israel as it stones gays to death. China condemns Israel as it occupies Tibet. Russia condemns Israel as it persecutes Muslim Chechens. Israel faces far more op­probrium than any of these countries. Tell me, Vassar students. Why is that? (Hint: It’s not just about the occupation.)
  3. By the way, does Vassar have any actual students? None of them were quoted in the Misc’s coverage of Bret Stephens. Instead, we got a long quote from some mensch who gave a beautiful Talmudic dissertation about respecting one another’s strongly-held views and an even longer quote from some other guy who called Stephens a racist, misquoted him, repeated discredited BDS talking points, and suggested that people who support dia­logue and a two-state solution weren’t making a positive contribution. The professor is the Talmud guy, right? If not, he should be.
  4. Speaking of mensches, Bret Stephens seems super-nice. Without raising his voice once, Bret called on people to respect each other’s viewpoints, and even apologized for expressing concern about being disrupted. His concern was legitimate. SJP, with Josh Schrei­er’s support, had chosen to preemptively slan­der him as a racist and had encouraged their members to attend his event. They even pre-planned a post-Stephens whine fest to com­plain about the invasion of Vassar’s commune by a non-lefty Pulitzer Prize winner. And it’s not like SJP chapters across the country ar­en’t known for shouting down speakers and storming stages, when they aren’t forcing dis­invitations or scaring speakers away, as they did at Brown, where SJP forced Janet Mock, an African-American trans speaker, to withdraw because her appearance was co-sponsored by Hillel, the Jewish students organization.
  5. Of course, I josh, and my terrible puns are always intended. The real Bret Stephens was terrible, horrible, even. Stephens said that the two-state solution was the best moral out­come in a conflict where both peoples have strong political and ethnic identities. Terrible. He encouraged grassroots, rather than top-down, activism. Horrible. He even encour­aged people to take small gestures to help build trust between Israelis and Palestinians, and he asked us to recognize the humanity on both sides. Despicable. He also encouraged students to think critically and to reject those calling for Israel’s dissolution, something vir­tually every major BDS activist supports, or, in the case of Vassar’s SJP, regards as a desirable outcome. Stephens also took lots of questions. Curiously, none came from Josh Schreier. He waited until he was among other BDSers to speak.
  6. Speaking of BDS scholars-cum-shills, can gay Palestinians in Israel be openly gay? Of course they can; sexual orientation freedom is covered by Israel’s Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty and by Israel Supreme Court prec­edent, and it’s been that way for more than 50 years. The Israeli health system covers sexual reassignment surgery. Do gay Palestinians liv­ing in the West Bank or Gaza have these rights? No, because their civil rights are determined by Article 9, Section II, of Palestine’s Basic Law, which, like similar legislation throughout the Middle East, does not cover sexual orien­tation, and it’s not because they forgot to put it in. It’s just not safe to be gay and out in Pal­estine. That’s why gay Palestinians take refuge in Israel, and no, it’s not because the Mossad signs all of them up as collaborators. It’s be­cause they want to survive.
  7. Speaking of gay people in the Middle East, Schreier seems to be under the impres­sion that criticizing the lack of LGBTQ rights in the Middle East is the same as assuming that their cultures have always been this way and always will be. Stephens didn’t say this, and neither do I. Unfortunately, change moves in more than one direction at a given time, and the same-sex relationships that may have been tacitly accepted in the Middle East two centuries ago have given way to a culture of fear and repression today. Again, Bimherah V’Yameinu, it should change speedily in our time. But it sounds like we have a long way to go. This year, the Grand Imam at Al-Ahzar University, generally considered Sunni Is­lam’s most prestigious educational institution, called homosexuality a “moral disease” that undermines the innate quality of humanity. (The Jakarta Post, “Discourse: Homosexuali­ty not human right but moral disease: Grand Imam,” 02.25.2016). But who cares about that guy? No one takes him seriously, right? Josh Schreier doesn’t seem to. How could he? The venerated clergyman did not even mention 19th-century France.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Miscellany News reserves the right to publish or not publish any comment submitted for approval on our website. Factors that could cause a comment to be rejected include, but are not limited to, personal attacks, inappropriate language, statements or points unrelated to the article, and unfounded or baseless claims. Additionally, The Misc reserves the right to reject any comment that exceeds 250 words in length. There is no guarantee that a comment will be published, and one week after the article’s release, it is less likely that your comment will be accepted. Any questions or concerns regarding our comments section can be directed to Misc@vassar.edu.