France's Jews Flee As Rioters Burn Shops To Chants Of 'Gas The Jews'

gendest:

littlegoythings:

Manuel Valls, France’s primeministersaid: “What happened in Sarcelles is intolerable. An attack on a synagogue and on a kosher shop is simply anti-Semitism. Nothing in France can justify this violence.”

Also from the article —

The government had banned a demonstration planned in Paris for Saturday, but posters were seen around the area which said “Come equipped with hammers, fire extinguishers and batons” and promised a “raid on the Jewish district”.

France has around half a million Jews, the biggest population in Europe, and around five million Muslims.

The Society for the Protection of the Jewish Community’s figures suggest that anti-Jewish violence is seven times higher than in the 1990s, and 40% of racist violence is against Jews, despite them making up just 1% of the population.

In March 2012, a shooting spree by Mohammed Merah in the south of France left three French soldiers, three Jewish schoolchildren and a rabbi dead. The gunman claimed a connection to al Qaeda.

More than a thousand Jews have made aliyah (the term used when Jews immigrate to Israel) in the past 10 days, according to the Israeli government.

"I came because of anti-Semitism,” said teary-eyed Veronique Rivka Buzaglo, one of 430 immigrants who arrived from France the day before.

this happened 2 months ago and i had no idea until today. please reblog this, its so important that people talk about antisemitism and dont just sweep it under the rug

(via montoyas)

2,417 notes

micdotcom:

For many Muslim Americans, 9/11 was a double punch of tragedy and bigotry

The actions of 19 Islamic extremists on 9/11 left an indelible mark on America. Today, millions pause to commemorate the attacks’ 13th anniversary, to honor the victims and to remember that all life is special and sacred. But there’s an untold story amid the many speeches and moments of silence — one filled with a different kind of pain, grief and strong sense of loss. 

Those stories are now being told on social media

(via sarah531)

122,554 notes

kosherqueer:

60% of what is referred to as “anti-religious” hate crimes in the US target jews specifically, but like, “anti-religious” is an inaccurate label for something that applies to jews as an ethnic and cultural group as well as a religious community. islamophobia and antisemitism are not attacks on ideology, they are strains of racism and they are motivated by racism.

Snapshot: Hate Crime in the US, by the Numbers, an NBC News breakdown of the FBI’s 2012 hate crime statistics report. Part of a series of articles on the Kansas Jewish Center shootings earlier this year, so content warning on that in particular along with the general subject matter.

(via catrectangle)

1,778 notes

Someone said “Are you really so stupid to think that Africa has the same technological advances as us? If they did they would probably have clean water and not live in houses made of sticks and mud. Get over yourself and stop being so ignorant.”….. Below is a tiny collection of images of the Africa they refuse to show you..

tzikeh:

shez-a-b0mbshell:

kushandwizdom:

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

image

I’m sorry you’ve been made to believe that the whole of Africa is poor, I really am..

Reblogging for those of you who think Africa is only what the media and movies portrays it to be

YEAH IF ONLY AFRICA HAD SUPER-ADVANCED AMERICA’S INFRASTRUCTURE! HERE ARE SOME PICS OF HOW PEOPLE IN THE 21ST-CENTURY USA LIVE—SEE WHAT YOU’RE MISSING, AFRICA?

image

image

image

image

image

image

104,073 notes

How NOT to use the term POC (2 Step Guide)

owning-my-truth:

The term “POC” (people/person of color) is thrown around loose and fast on Tumblr, and many times quite inappropriately as well. This can lead to the erasure of lived experiences, neo-imperialistic projections onto non-Western contexts and ultimately can reinforce white supremacy in turn. I find the rampant abuse of this term on and off of Tumblr (but especially on this platform) to be exasperating to say the least. It’s one of many reasons that I’ve grown increasingly tired of even engaging with conversations on here, but a recent conversation I had with another friend, who has already left tumblr, prompted me to write this short list for one of my Tumblr major pet-peeves. 

So with that let us begin, HOW NOT TO USE THE TERM POC (in 2 steps):

1. Non-Western Contexts

As a Nigerian I find this to be especially irritating. I have seen people throw race into the #BringBackOurGirls conversation, even as Nigeria is a more than 99% “black” country where we do not even consciously identify as black ourselves because (ding ding) basically EVERYONE is black! We do not see ourselves as black in the context of Nigeria, but now we are suddenly “persons of color”? I can hear my Nigerian aunties hissing at the thought even as I write this.

I also once saw someone on tumblr call Ghana a “majority POC” nation and I was absolutely floored. In yet another country where people don’t even identify as black, suddenly they are now “POC” as well? This is Western centrism and cavalier neo-imperialistic projections of Western racial politics onto the wider world in action. Race is a social construct which varies tremendously from place to place, and taking a flat view of race on a global scale is myopic to say the least. Calling Nigeria and Ghana nations of “POC” is not only flat out wrong, but it is an erasure that reinforces Western hegemony in turn. We want nothing to do with your word “POC” in our countries, as it has no meaning in the context of our lives there.

At this point it’s important to remember that the term “POC” is a Western political term for organizing in Western contexts against white supremacy. Again, it has no use in a country like Nigeria or Ghana where basically everyone is “black” (by our definition, even though, again we must note that people from these countries don’t even consciously identify with a racial marker like “black” until coming to the West). It also has no use in other “majority POC” nations. For example, how useful is a term like “POC” in a country like Saudi Arabia, where there is brutal, local Arab supremacy rooted in a largely independent history as well? How useful is it in any east Asian country where not even “Asian solidarity” exists given the history and tremendous animus between various peoples in the region? The answer is short- it doesn’t apply. Context is critical. Please stop abusing the term “POC” in non-Western contexts. When you do so, you’re talking over people from these countries, being Western-centric and erasing their lived experiences in turn. Stop.

2. When antiblackness and other specific forms of racialized oppression occur

As a community, many of us black people are still mourning the loss of our murdered son, Trayvon Martin, killed by antiblackness and failed by a virulently white supremacist and antiblack justice system. Yes, other POC are victims of racial violence and hate crimes all of the time, but this specific tragedy was a black tragedy. Trayvon Martin was killed in that neighborhood because he was a black boy whose black body was immediately interpreted by George Zimmerman as a security threat that needed to be tracked, followed, and ultimately extinguished and destroyed. Again this is antiblackness in action.

But to my great surprise, in the midst of our grief, we find other POC waxing long about this being a “POC tragedy.” No, it’s not a POC tragedy, it’s a black tragedy as he was killed for being black. Stating blandly that this is just about some general struggle that all “POC” go through is a form of violence against black people and an erasure of the particularities of our struggle as well. People love to do this with black tragedies in particular, piggy-backing on our pain, but similarly, if someone told me that the murder of Vincent Chin, who was killed for being east Asian-American, was a “POC tragedy” I would also be horrified and disgusted.

In short, stop it. SPECIFY the form of oppression at play, because without doing so you are simply erasing lived experiences and perpetuating white supremacy and the violence against the community in question. Stop it.

——

And there you have it. It sounds simple doesn’t it? Don’t apply the term “POC” to non-Western contexts and specify forms of oppression when you can in Western contexts. But people regularly fail to do these two simple things- perpetuating violence, white supremacy and Western dominance against marginalized communities across the globe. Please do use the term “POC” as a political organizing tool in the West— I understand its use and importance there and do use it myself in specific ways to encourage solidarity. But I simply have no time for any of the above and hope that one day the abuse of this ostensibly useful term will finally stop. 

9,274 notes

Anonymous said: can you explain the difference between fetishizing asians and preferring asian facial features (finding them ideal, the best looking)?

gayperson:

please show me an example of universal “asian” facial features.

you like small eyes? some asians got big eyes. some white ppl got small eyes. you like high cheekbones? do people of other races not have high cheekbones? are there not asians without high cheekbones? just what do you mean when you talk about “asian facial features”???

when you say “asians” do you mean central asia and south asia too? are you talking india? kyrgyzstan? uzbekistan? sri lanka? pakistan? or just east asia? just china and korea and japan? think about it for a sec.

White Womanhood, Racism, Ageism, and the Cult of Rose Tyler

nerdyhbic:

As a fan of Doctor Who for many years, and as someone who’s aware of how white privilege and racism function both in the media and in fandom, it is not surprising to me to find that there’s a lot of overlap between the implicit message that RTD era Doctor Who has which promotes white privilege, especially in the form of Rose Tyler’s brand of young white womanhood, and how this translates to that character being utilized by many within the fandom as a tool to justify and defend their problematic reasons behind their ardent dislike of Martha Jones or even ageist reasons why they dislike Donna Noble.

Read More

Beautifully on point.

I went through the notes and noticed a couple of people pointing out that Rose herself faces a lot of classist bashing. This is true, and worth discussing either in its own right or as part of a wider intersectional conversation, if done with care and awareness that invoking classism is a concern-trolling tactic frequently used to redirect conversation away from racism, especially anti-black racism. But invoking class-bashing as a defense of Rose Tyler (who is a fictional character not being attacked here; the critique is of RTD’s narrative and the way large swathes of fandom interpret it) against charges of racism and ageism is textbook derailing.

(Source: valentina-slaynetta)

seidrs:

raptorific:

Seriously, it surprises me that people still don’t get that “whitewashing” doesn’t just mean “taking a character of color and turning them white,” but also applies to “focusing disproportionately on the stories of white people,” “glossing over or altering parts of a story to make it more palatable or make white people look better,” and “treating ‘white’ as the default race”

The fact that Disney churns out film after film after film after film about white people with a maximum of one film per ethnicity that showcases a group other than white people is whitewashing.

The fact that the story of “Pocahontas” (not her real name) has been substantially altered so that some of the white people in that story don’t look like such villains, with John Smith younger and Pocahontas significantly older, as well as recounting a popular myth of her saving John Smith from near-execution (a story John Smith made up to make himself look brave, the real Pocahontas told him to stop telling and hated him for using her to make himself look good, and he started to spread like wildfire after she died because she could no longer object) is whitewashing.

The fact that the characters on “How I Met Your Mother” are all white, and they supposedly live in New York City, but apparently associate exclusively with other white people (with the exception of Wayne Brady, who occasionally visits from out of town, and a recurring taxi driver) is whitewashing.

The fact that the Doctor has now been a white man a full twelve times in a row is whitewashing even though the character’s always been white, because the idea that there’s a character whose entire appearance can change in a matter of seconds, yet ends up white twelve times in a row by pure random chance, implies that white is a neutral default and other races are a deviation from that norm. 

Read More

Nailed it.

(via summonbolt)

30,355 notes

Orson Scott Card’s long history of homophobia

ronchronchronch:

kleenexwoman:

thisisaslongas:

animate-mush:

Ender’s Game is an amazing book.

For those who are concerned about it, it is worth noting that Orson Scott Card sold the rights in totality. He has already gotten all the money he will from this project - he will not be getting any royalties from the movie. Your choice to go see it or not will not influence his earnings one way or the other. It will only affect whether you see the movie.

From the trailer, it looks like either people are going to be really really surprised about what the story’s actually about, or they entirely missed the point. It’s a little mystifying. It could be awesome. Or it could be, well, really NOT Ender’s Game. We’ll see.

Well that’s useful to know, thanks!

Excellent.

The problem with the “don’t protest the Ender’s Game movie, OSC already got paid!” argument is that if the movie does well, he’ll see an increase in book sales/royalties, and it’s very possible that other studios will buy the rights to his books to make them into films. (Plus, the Ender’s Game sequels.)

So yes, your choice to see Ender’s Game can and will affect how much money goes into the pocket of a homophobic, racist bigot.

Yeah, this is nice to know if you saw Ender’s Game before finding out that OSC is a bigot who funds bigoted organizations (as happened to the daughter of a friend of mine), but it’s not a great justification to go see the film knowing in advance.

(Source: bookgeekconfessions)

TEDDY BOYS AND GIRLS WERE WHITE SUPREMACISTS

treelet:

And because I feel like the previous post doesn’t say it loud enough.

TW: Racist violence.

"From the early 1950s, young White working-class ‘Teddy Boys’ began to turn hostile towards the growing numbers of Black families in the area. Right-wing groups exploited the situation. Fascist groups such as the Union for British Freedom set up branches in the district. Sir Oswald Mosely, founder of the pre-war British Union of Fascists, held street-corner meetings in west London and further afield. Leaflets and wall slogans urged ‘Keep Britain White’.

During the summer of 1958, gangs of Teddy Boys became increasingly open about their aggressive intentions toward anyone who was Black. Youths smashed Caribbean cafs. Individuals were harassed. On the morning of 24 August, nine White youths assaulted five Black men in separate incidents in Shepherd’s Bush and Notting Hill, seriously injuring three of them.

http://www.20thcenturylondon.org.uk/notting-hill-riots-1958

More about the 1958 riots (tw for racism, racist violence, and racial slurs): http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/panther/ch4.html

You can even find people on Stormfront talking about them being one of the first anti-Black youth cults.

This is why those “girl gang” posts predominantly highlighted and praised by white women make me uncomfortable as shit.  White counter-culture/alt culture youth groups have a long history of committing hate crimes.

You can dig the fashion, but let’s not pretend these were awesome people from an awesome time being awesome.

(via summonbolt)