She is known as “The Gray Lady” – the national newspaper of record – supposedly representing the highest ideals of journalism, objectivity, non-partisanship, and fairness.
And yet when the New York Times editors deal with Orthodox Jews – they are anything but.
It is interesting to note that the Gray Lady’s latest offense against Orthodox Jews was first noted by Ira Stoll, formerly of the Forward, and now of the Algemeiner Journal.
The offending terminology? “Dorky Yeshiva boys.”
In a discussion of a movie concerning two former Hebrew school students with Jewish names, the New York Times cites the producer’s blatant bias and thus reflected their own as well: Mr. Chin said. “They were dorky yeshiva boys, but they dreamed of being players.”
Here it is in a fuller context:
For “War Dogs,” Mr. Chin made research trips to Miami to hang out with David P., one of the arms dealers portrayed in the movie (the other, Efraim D., was awaiting sentencing on a conspiracy conviction related to arms dealing), and to see their old stamping grounds. Once he talked to Mr. P, he began to understand what drove them both to ditch their staid lives to sell weapons to the United States military. “They could see the huge mansions of the drug lords..,” Mr. Chin said. “They were dorky yeshiva boys, but they dreamed of being players.”
Let’s try the smell test. Pick an ethnicity, any ethnicity (Blacks, Puerto Ricans, Asians, Chinese), and fill in the blank below.
Dorky _______.
Hmm.. Biased? Not politically correct? Of course it’s not.
Because it is wrong and racist – projecting negative stereotypes all over. Indeed, the offense is rank – it smells to heaven. And yet, for some reason, open season on the Orthodox is always okay. The “dorky orthodox” can and should be relegated to a lower rung of the social ladder. We can say whatever we want about them.
It is not an isolated incident.
Here is a second and recent offense: This past June, the New York Times ran a piece entitled, “Everybody into the Pool” where it denounced women only swim hours for the Orthodox. And yet not once in the piece, as Tablet Magazine has pointed out, was there any mention of the fact that Muslim women have been receiving such accommodations for years – throughout the country. It is only when Orthodox Jews, taxpayers as well, request an accommodation, for a mere hour or two a week, does the full brunt of the moral indignation of the New York Times come down.
But what is most offensive, a third and most vile example of its anti-Semitism, is the subtle olfactory imagery employed by the New York Times editorial board: Aha – there it is:
“The women’s swim time,” writes the New York Times editorial board, evinced a “strong odor of religious intrusion into a secular space.”
Yes that odor thing. The terminology harkens back to a different time – a different place. It brings us back to the foetor judaicus, that false medieval idea that a foul smell emits from observant Jews. “A thousand baths,” the anti-Semites of yore would say, “cannot eliminate the stench.”
This is the New York Times, the master wordsmiths, at work.
And now the fourth example. Let us also not forget the incessant identification of the religion of perpetrators of crimes. It is ever-present – always right there within the first three paragraphs. Never mind that there are others charged, whose religions are never identified.
It has become the raison d’etre of the New York Times to identify the religion of perpetrators of crimes when and only when they are Orthodox Jews.
By countenancing and printing such drivel, the New York Times is thus promoting a distorted xenophobic image of the Orthodox projected by the anti-religious elements of our culture. Of all institutions, the New York Times should know that words matter. There is a pattern of behavior here, and they should be called out on it once and for all. The gray lady should issue an apology – directly and forthwith.
Comments may be sent to: [email protected]
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
11 Responses
Oh come on!
From dictionary.com
Slang. a silly, out-of-touch person who tends to look odd or behave ridiculously around others; a social misfit:
In other words a nerd! I would call someone that LEARNS ALL DAY a nerd
Additionally,
We are a light to the nations and it seems incongruous for religious Jews to be drug lords (vs other religions)
The New York Times anti-Semitic? Since most writers, including the editor are liberal self-hating Jews, more likely these terminologies are coming from self-hating bitter Jews who hate Jews more than Arab terrorists.
Coffee addict:
Your pseudonym says it all. Only one who learns Torah is truly free – not a slave, an addict, to anything.
May I suggest that you acquaint yourself with those who learn Torah fulltime, who joyfully wage the milchemta shel Torah, and you’ll discover that they are the utter opposite of nerds.
There are dozens of examples of the NY Times’ less than favorable view of Orthodox Jews (and Israel, of course). However, the author of this article really missed the ball with his/her example. The word “dorky” usually is a synonym for “nerdy”. Not exactly a complimentary term, but not racist.
The New York Times is owned by the Sulzberger family, former Jews who converted to Episcopalian.
The NY Times is at least anti-Orthodox, which I don’t think too many people are surprised. This wouldn’t be the first anti-frum slur that appeared in their paper. So, while it’s good to protest what was published, we all know that it’s practically business as usual for the Times.
I have, however, a different take on this matter. You realize, of course, that the Times editors could defend themselves by pointing out how most of the Israeli media disses Judaism and frum Jews on an ongoing basis. And has been doing so for decades, since before the State even appeared on the horizon. The ‘maskilim’ in Europe were doing it already 175 years ago. For that matter, the tone of some articles on YWN sometimes disparages frum Jews for whatever real or imaginary ‘infraction’ some bored kids might or might not have committed. And the comments /talkbacks that sometimes appear in response to some news items? Hashem yerachem!! On occasion, readers remarks evince undisguised contempt for rabbonim, roshei yeshiva, and even towards the gedolei hador.
So, it’s hard to complain against the NY Times or any other non-Jewish media for mocking Jews and/or Judaism as long as we Jews are doing it to ourselves. It’s a two-way street.
“I will bless them that bless you and I will curse them that curse you.”
The “ultra-orthodox” Jews (NYT term–constantly in the NYT) are the hope of mankind. Morals are the basis of humanity. Without morals, we become savages !! Abortion for economic & social reasons have slaughter over 50 million souls in this country alone. The Nazis were credited with less than 50 million deaths. I never met a man or woman who thought abortion was such a blessing that they wished they were aborted !!
If those who advocate/sustain “gay” marriages, and if these same advocates’ parents were truly “gay”, they would not BE !!
This country and its people are sinking rapidly into a moral chaos that can only lead to cannibalism and savagery. The only hope for the world are the Islands of Torah (Yeshivas and their rabbis and students–bocherim).
May I suggest to the orthodox Jews several things and as a despicable goy I’m told by a great Rabbi (he’s orthodox–sorry NYT), three things:
1) Whatever Talmud Torah you do, b’vah’cha’chah, do a little more.
2) whatever davvening you do, b’vah’chah’shah, do a little more.
3)Whatever chessed (deeds of kindness),b’vah’cha’shah do a little more.
The world needs these three things and more !!
Toddah rabbah, a goy, Gerry Mullen
PS: Slicha, I hope, Rabbi (no-name), I did right by publishing these words–hopefully with your blessing !!!
Voseppes,
Thank you for the slight, I really appreciate it right after Tisha bav
Is someone who doesn’t learn Torah all day an automatic anti Semite?
I’m explaining why a not frum or not Jewish person might call Yeshiva bachur a dork without it being anti frum
But thank you again
#7, 1000 points! Right on!
The New York times is anti religion all religion.. With one caveat the religion must be real with a real g-d. All the people of the world know deep down that there is one and only one g-d the g-d of the chosen people israel. So they don’t get up in arms when accommodations are made for religious Muslim women because all other religions are all bluff, and have no g-d..there is only one g-d and he is the g-d of Israel so Jews who are real representers of religion, of g-d, that is who anti-religious people get upset about. Because anti religion is really anti g-d there is only one G-d and one people who represent his ways in this world. This is the answer to the stirah you posed about the times’ coverage