Skip to main content


99% of the time "Judeo-Christian" is antisemitic. And yes, I will absolutely elaborate on this if asked.

Credit: @Rabbit Cohen

Edit because this blew up far more than I expected and multiple people have asked for me to elaborate, here's a copy of my elaboration with follow up questions encouraged:

It's a messy topic and it's late here (I'm a bit sleepy), so feel free to ask follow up questions.

The short version of it is that Judeo-Christian is almost always used in one of two harmful ways:

1) To try and give more credibility and weight to something that is purely Christian by claiming that it's part of Judaism as well when it's not (like the above example, because Judaism explicitly permits abortions)
2) To try and talk about broader groupings of related faiths while ignoring the many other Abrahamic faiths (the proper term, though that one more often hurts the lesser known groups, don't use it unless you also know it applies to groups like the Baháʼí, which I'll admit even I know next to nothing about, but it's valid here because all I'm doing is naming their religious family)

Because many (cough most cough) teach a bastardized form of Judaism through the lens of Christianity, and because that's the only exposure many get to our faith... they get skewed harmful and hurtful ideas about us.

Some highlight examples:
* We don't have an established afterlife (we don't say there isn't one, we just have zero information on it if there is)
* We don't seek "eternal reward", the reward for our faith is being a better person than we were the day before
* We have forgiveness baked into our faith, and no it doesn't require animal sacrifice (it requires you to actually ask the person you wronged...)
* We thoroughly encourage arguing any topic with anyone (right time and place of course), and that includes picking a fight with God if you think they're wrong about something (you have a 99.9% chance of being wrong... but we commend the effort and every once in a while someone wins the argument)
* We have a rule, Pikuach Nefesh, roughly meaning that life is the highest commandment. Your well being takes precedence over your faith, if it would hurt you or others to be observant than you are exempt from that requirement. It's unacceptable to hurt others for your faith, and for yourself it's frowned upon
* We actively discourage conversion, it's allowed but it's not a trivial process. We don't want people to become Jews, we just want people to be better.

This entry was edited (1 year ago)
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Shannon (she/her) @Pedestriansfirst I suppose you're technically correct, I guess I usually never think about it because there's always more apt descriptions (ie. Nazis are often Zionists because "Blood And Soil").

And yes on the antisemitism of it, I just chose not to say anything about that in favor of a chance at education. (Also a love for getting into arguments with aggressive militant atheists because it's so fun to see their talking points shatter and the confusion that comes from it)

And I didn't bring it up later because I felt from the conversation that it wasn't going to be a problem again from them because they learned some things about Judaism, Jewish Culture, and that religions people can in fact own and acknowledge bad behaviors in their own communities.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@Shannon (she/her) I don't think believing all zionists are jews isn't that messy of a idea because it impacts so little, especially since the zionist behavior of non-jews is already easily discernible on it's own as awful anyways.

And keep in mind that the comparison is that this started from assuming that all Jews condoned the atrocities committed by the Israeli government and has walked away knowing that it's not uniform.



This is a long article, but the theory hits *hard* with me and connects really well.

The basic gist is that autistics almost always define our identities by what we do and our personal traits, while non-autistics almost always define their identities by their relationships (in particular to social groups)

If you don't have it in you to read all of it, definitely read the section: "How does having an experientially-constructed identity impact relationships?".

neuroclastic.com/the-identity-…

Mandi reshared this.

Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem

@bike I suspect it isn't that much different. Collectivist societies can be awful in their own ways.

They're still better imo, but they have a tendency to focus too hard on traditions and conformity on top of the ideals of communal responsibility.

But in all cases it's a mesh of peer pressure and group identity vs our value identity.

@bike
Unknown parent

Shiri Bailem
@bike I get that, I mostly mention that so I don't come across as bashing collectivist societies incidentally. My point was more that I doubt there's that much difference for us, just swap out one set of rules that don't make sense for another set that don't make sense for a different reason.
@bike


Why You Must Keep The Monsters Human


*(Reposting because my node crashed and lost all my posts and I want to keep this one pinned)*

I've been mulling over making this post for a little bit, but I think it's really **really** important.

It's critically important that you remember and acknowledge the humanity of monsters. Not for their benefit, but for *everyone else's* benefit.

When someone commits a monstrous act or shares a monstrous belief, we want to think of them as an inherently vile and non-human thing.

But doing so shields and protects other monsters.

When you make a Nazi, or any kind of abuser, into a one-dimensional monster. When you make their whole existence *center* on this monstrous act or belief... you make it hard to see their humanity. And that's the point, you don't *want* to see their humanity.

*** You Don't Want To Believe That Someone You Know And Trust (Maybe Even Love) Is Capable Of Such Atrocity. ***

And that's the problem. Because when you reject their humanity, that humanity becomes their shield. Your friend Bob can't possibly be a Nazi or a child-abuser, he's such a loving father and he helped you move!

Because you see their humanity, you can't possibly imagine them as monsters because the monsters have no humanity in your eyes.

There's a reason that when serial killers get caught their neighbors say they couldn't imagine them doing such things.

So don't ignore their humanity, keep it in your mind... so the next one can't use it as a shield.



Copying myself because I'm irritated yet again by people with their head up their ass assuming that their tiny view of the fediverse represents the whole and it's history...

This was set off by another person, yet again, complaining about bridgy-fed and thinking Snarfed is some untrustworthy asshole because he was following the actual norms and standards of the fediverse because the Twitter expats thought Mastodon was some bastion of personal control and ownership....

For context, opt-out (via just blocking the bridge) has been the norm since pretty much the beginning of federation... which the people complaining about the nature of the bridge don't realize how old federation and the community is.

For context (of the ones I'm aware of):
* The first federated protocol was introduced in 1980
* The first federated chat protocol was introduced in 1999
* The first federated social networking platforms that I know of started coming out about 2010. The platform I'm on (Friendica) came out that year.
* the second major federated chat protocol was introduced in 2014 and quickly bridges were built between it and the first (all only opt-out via blocking)
* Mastodon wasn't released until 2016, originally on the ostatus network (Friendica supported and still supports ostatus)
* Snarfed starts working on bridgy-fed around 2018
* Activitypub came out in 2018, mastodon and friendica both transitioned to Activitypub as their central protocol with Mastodon eventually dropping ostatus.
* Bridges were established between Activitypub and previous social networks, all opt-out bridges (and again via blocking)
* 2022 Elon Musk buys Twitter and do to good PR Mastodon becomes the instance platform of choice for most of them to the point that most of them think Mastodon is the network
* 2023, Snarfed has been writing bridgy fed for 7 years now, about as long as the activitypub network has existed, long predating Bluesky (because that's not the only bridge in the project), and all of a sudden people specifically overwhelmingly on Mastodon or younger projects think it's a deep offense to build something under the same social standards that have been the norm for decades. Even then long before the bluesky portion of the bridge was fully functional they relented and switched to an approach that drastically hampered has caused countless bugs and technical difficulties just because a minority of people decided to dogpile him... and of course he's judged because other people essentially crashed a party he'd been at peacefully for years and decided to scream that he was being inappropriate when everyone who was hear already supported it...

#bridges #bridgy #FediMeta #Fediverse #Bluesky

in reply to Shiri Bailem

And I really can't wait until Mastodon's roll out of quote posts hits and they start freaking out like it's a whole new and despicable thing... I'm gonna break out the popcorn for that because I can't imagine them convincing the whole fediverse to just tear out a feature that's been there for ages because they thought Mastodon made the rules lol