Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:47, 31 August 2017

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the American Jews article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Judaism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Ethnic groups High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on American Jews. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C788721%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mla.org/census_data_results%26state_id%3D36%26place_id%3D39853
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.oecd.org/document/51/0%2C3343%2Cen_2825_494553_34063091_1_1_1_1%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071220000000/http://www.hillel.org/about/news/2006/feb/20060216_top.htm to http://www.hillel.org/about/news/2006/feb/20060216_top.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050203175928/http://jbuff.com/c021501.htm to http://www.jbuff.com/c021501.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:42, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Jews and whiteness

The subsection "American Jews and race" is quite one-sided.

First, it offers only one point of view, namely that Jews are not "white". However, there are criticisms of this, from reliable sources. See, for example, this Washington Post article. This is a controversial topic, since the notion of "race" itself is questionable. Indeed, an ethnically European individual can convert to Judaism and become a member of the Jewish people: does he cease being white after conversion? There needs to be a more wholistic discussion. In addition, most censuses in the United States, both currently and historically, have identified Jews as white, and I would wager that a significant portion, if not a clear majority, of Jews self-identify as white. Jews are also phenotypically white in the sense that differentiating between Jews and ethnic Europeans visually is, in practice, impossible.

Secondly, the discussion of Jews' Middle Eastern lineage is a bit of a red herring. It's not of any significance that a portion of many Jews' lineage can be partially traced to the Middle East, which is what the cited study suggests. This notion that race is a biological construct and that the only "white" people are those that possess exclusively European ancestry is not, to my knowledge, an opinion expressed in the scholarly literature. Moreover, the "genetic research" cited is also rather lopsided. Although it is true that Jews likely have origins in the Middle East, there has been substantial genetic admixture between ethnic Europeans and Ashkenazi Jews.

Thirdly, it's unclear to me why nearly half of that section is devoted to the opinion of Cornel West, a non-Jewish individual without any credentials in genetics or anthropology.

I would encourage my fellow Misplaced Pages users to improve this section, or give me permission to do so. In my opinion, the section comes off as a screed from either a white supremacist, or a Jewish nationalist. CompactSpacez (talk) 03:44, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I examined all of the history citations. only Michael Lerner uses white in a racial sense--he does not say that ANY American Jews are ambivalent about being of the white race. the others never use race in a racial or ethnic sense (they talk of "a black and white argument" "White House"). CompactSpacez has dealt with the false use of genetics. So it's an unsupported section & I erased it. Rjensen (talk) 05:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

User:CompactSpacez 1. The Census identifies Middle Easterners as white, and that is why Jews were moved to that category (they were previously considered 'Asiatic').

2. "and I would wager that a significant portion, if not a clear majority, of Jews self-identify as white. Jews are also phenotypically white in the sense that differentiating between Jews and ethnic Europeans visually is, in practice, impossible. " Both of these claims are conjecture/guesswork, not provable facts. The second statement in particular is pretty ignorant.

3. European admixture is irrelevant. Many non-European peoples have European admixture, not just Jews.2601:84:4502:61EA:456F:E528:DD7:CF11

4. To my knowledge, opinion pieces at WashingtonPost do not fall under WP:RS.(talk) 00:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

User:2601:84:4502:61EA:456F:E528:DD7:CF11

1. They are still identified as white, which is what matters.

2. Here is a source for that claim. Only 19% of Jewish millenials self-identify as other than white. The numbers are lower for older Jews. This flies in the face of the claims made in that section. The second statement is effectively common sense. There's no conceivable way one would be able to tell that Sarah Silverman or Bill Maher have Jewish ancestry, for example, simply by looking at them. Conversely, one can immediately deduce visually that someone like Al Sharpton is African-American. That said, I agree with you that common sense is not a reliable source, at least according to Misplaced Pages. However, the sources that were cited in that section were not particularly reliable either.

3. What is a "people"? Does a "people" constitute a "race"? Is being "white" equivalent to simply being a member of a European "people" in a strictly cultural context? Or does it involve having European ancestry? These are certainly debatable and complex topics. If they are to be explored in this article, they need to be explored in a more objective manner. One should keep in mind that a "race" isn't usually considered something one can convert to, whereas one can become a member of the Jewish people by simply converting. In any case, if genetics and ancestry are even tangentially relevant to what constitutes a "people", then the European admixture is relevant. If genetics are not relevant at all, then we shouldn't discuss Jewish genes whatsoever.

4. You are allowed to use opinion pieces from reputable sources so long as the views are attributed to the author rather than presented as statements of fact. See WP:NEWSORG. CompactSpacez (talk) 13:31, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Jews considered "Asiatic" that was never true of official US government / census policy. Rjensen (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

When the only options on the census for race are white and black, or white, black, and Asian, most Jews will pick white as the least misleading of two or three choices, none of which fits correctly. Similarly, when the ethnicity section allows only the choices of Hispanic or non-Hispanic, most Jews in the US do not identify as Hispanic. That does not mean that Jews think of themselves as truly part of the white, non-Hispanic majority; it means that the census, and similar information forms elsewhere, do not contain an appropriate category, and so Jews check off the one they find least inappropriate. PA Math Prof (talk) 01:13, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

The US Census doesn't ask about religion, so there's no way to know how American Jews describe their race in the census. In the Pew survey cited in the article, participants were asked "Which of the following describes your race? You may select as many as apply. White, Black or African American, Asian or Asian American or some other race." If the response was "mixed" or "biracial", the participant was asked a follow-up question: "What race or races is that?"

If, as many on the fringe insist, most white-skinned Jews consider themselves Semitic/Asiatic and not white, why did they volunteer that they were white instead of Asian or "some other race"? (Hint: Because they know that they're white.) — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 01:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Please note that the deleted section that I restored does not suggest in any way that "most white-skinned Jews consider themselves Semitic/Asiatic and not white" - it states that "many American Jews retain an ambivalence about whiteness". The relevance of the latter statement should be painfully obvious, and many, many other sources exist to document it. Whether or not this ambivalence represents a majority of American Jews (which the section does not claim), it is absurd to regard this observation as "fringe". Newimpartial (talk) 01:55, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I would not use the term "fringe". Under discussion here is the difference between "figurative" and "literal". Jews (aside from those that are not white) are literally white. But figuratively-speaking they may not be white. When it comes right down to it, 90% of Jews are white. How might we know this? Good examples abound. Consider as an example a police lineup. If suspects matching a description were lined up, would white Jews be included or excluded depending on whether they are white or not? Of course not. A white Jewish person is largely indistinguishable from a white non-Jewish person. If we are using the language literally, we call 90% of Jews white. But figuratively-speaking, a white Jew can be considered non-white. Bus stop (talk) 02:15, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

This "literal" versus "figurative" notion is absurdly reductionist. To give an example that is not about Judaism, between 1909 and 2014, people of Middle Eastern and Arab origin in the United States have been defined as "white" legally and for census purposes . Meanwhile, in Canada, people of the same origin - the same people - are defined as a visible minority group of Arab or West Asian origin, and have been since at least 1961 . Does that mean that a person of Arab ancestry who crossed the Canada-U.S. border before 2014 changed from being "literally" non-white to being "figuratively" non-white upon crossing the border? They were "literally white" in the U.S. but only "figuratively white" in Canada? Or "literally non-white" in Canada and "figuratively non-white" in the U.S.? Surely "literal whiteness" and "figurative whiteness" do not fully capture the reality of the situation on either side of the border. Newimpartial (talk) 02:30, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Newimpartial—"white" is meaningless except under meaningful circumstances. A police lineup is a meaningful circumstance. If you don't like the "literal" versus "figurative" method of explanation, that is fine. But you must bear in mind that there is no definition of whiteness that applies in all frames of reference. Bus stop (talk) 02:38, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the concept "white" is of course purely contextual. And I wouldn't support any inclusion in the present article claiming that the 95% of American Jews under discussion "are not white". But the subjective ambivalence about whiteness felt by many American Jews is well-documented, has a real historical basis, and is by no means a "fringe" observation. Newimpartial (talk) 02:43, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

PA Math Prof says "...it means that the census, and similar information forms elsewhere, do not contain an appropriate category, and so Jews check off the one they find least inappropriate." What would be an appropriate category? What category is missing from the form? Bus stop (talk) 02:29, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Many people find the racial categorization on the Census inappropriate in general. Witness the meandering definitions surrounding "hispanic origin". Newimpartial (talk) 02:34, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

What is a "Census"? A Census has purposes. Our purpose is not the same purpose as a US Census. We are talking about frames of reference. This is not complicated. 90% of Jews are white. Do they identify with White Anglo-Saxon Protestants? Probably not. Bus stop (talk) 02:43, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Bus stop, I do not understand how you can recognize that frames of reference exist, and then insist that there is only one frame of reference that applies to American Jews and whiteness in this wikipedia article. It is, for example, as though the whole of world history before 1947 were irrelevant to questions of "American Jews and whiteness" even though, per reliable sources, many American Jews feel an ambivalence about whiteness which is rooted in their own (historical and cultural) frames of reference. Newimpartial (talk) 02:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Congress says Jews are Asians in 1910? Not.

We have one anonymous editor who claims Congress in 1910 said all Jews are Asiatics: In 1910, Congress approved a bill that classified Armenians, Assyrians, and Jews as Asiatics No history book listed in our bibliography makes mention of any such dramatic ruling. That's because it is a misreading of a primary source and has no support whatever from any reliable secondary source. Lots of Jews in 1910 lived in the Middle East and Congress said they were NOT to be treated like Asiatics. Likewise Armenians. Rjensen (talk) 08:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

"And Mongolians, Malays, and other Asiatics, except Armenians, Assyrians, and Jews, shall not be naturalized in the United States." ( Now-deleted source, p.321 of the scan.) Jews cannot be listed as exceptions from "other Asiatics" in this manner without being considered Asiatic by the document; that is a simple truism of the English language. It is factually correct to say that the document from Congress in 1910 considers them to be Asiatic or words to that effect; whether Congress's view is true or not (Edit for clarification: or for that matter, which organisation's Congress this was), or to the liking of the mentioned groups or not, doesn't change the fact that the document states it. Certainly, if you have as you say reliable secondary sources to suggest that Jews and Armenians contested being identified as Asiatic at the time (and I can imagine that occurring), do add it - presenting nuances based on conflicting sources pertaining to the same event is ideal - but it's best practice not to delete relevant, cited information, especially based on framing assumptions that have no such sources cited, primary or secondary. Benjitheijneb (talk) 00:54, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

the source = anonymous newsletter of the Asiatic Exclusion League 1910 is a white supremacy hate group that in 1910 worked to exclude all Chinese, Japanese, Koreans etc. Trusting it for laws of Congress does not meet Wiki's reliable sources criteria. No reliable secondary sources supports its strange claims. Rjensen (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

see WP:RS Wiki only uses RELIABLE sources. Wiki rule WP:QUESTIONABLE states: Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited. an anonymous newsletter from a white supremacy hate group hits all the warning signs when dealing with Jews (= "third party" in the wiki rule) Rjensen (talk) 02:28, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

I added some more sources and revised the text, per the above request. If there is a problem with the existing version, please add more sources or revise the text. Don't just wipe the entire thing clean, because that makes it impossible for anyone interested in this topic to find anything.2601:84:4502:61EA:456F:E528:DD7:CF11 (talk) 02:22, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

For more than 50 years, the United States does not identify its citizens by race by law; they self-identify. As my recent addition shows, the overwhelming majority of American Jews identify themselves as white. A century ago, when "mongoloid" and "negroid" were considered terms of science, it was a different story. But today, when American Jews can identify themselves however they'd like, they choose (for obvious reasons) to identify with the ruling caste. That's the end of the story. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 04:05, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Not that I don't agree with your point, but I think ,"That's the end of the story" is a pretty dicy claim since any one in the world can keep the story going. In any case I have added the phrase to my list of phrase that mean "in my opinion." Carptrash (talk) 04:10, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Malik Shabazz is quite right. 2601 gets it all wrong -- he falsely states "in 1907, the United States Immigration Commission fought to implement immigration quotas on Jews" No one says that because it's not true. Furthermore 2601 mistakenly thinks there was a law passed by Congress that defines Jews as "Asiatics"--that's the kind of howler one commits when one relies on an anonymous 1910 newsletter from a white nationalist hate group for information. 2601 has been looking but has failed to find a single reliable secondary source that supports his position. His new "sources" say the opposite--the Silver book says Jewish leaders in early 20c strongly believed that Jews were white. That's because he started out with bad information from an unreliable source in the first place. Rjensen (talk) 04:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

"No one says that because it's not true." The source I provided, which came directly from the group that tried to implement this policy, says otherwise. I'll deal with the rest later.2601:84:4502:61EA:456F:E528:DD7:CF11 (talk) 07:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

The cite quotes a proposed law that did not pass. It's not found in any law book. The US Supreme Court in 1923 said that section 2169 of the Revised Statutes had not been changed since 1875. U.S. v. BHAGAT SINGH THIND, (1923) http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/261/204.html the 1875 law "Section 2169, Revised Statutes (Comp. St. 4358), provides that the provisions of the Naturalization Act 'shall apply to aliens being free white persons and to aliens of af African nativity and to persons of African descent.'" "The succeeding years brought immigrants from Eastern, Southern and Middle Europe, among them the Slavs and the dark-eyed, swarthy people of Alpine and Mediterranean stock, and these were received as unquestionably akin to those already here and readily amalgamated with them. It was the descendants of these, and other immigrants of like origin, who constituted the white population of the country when section 2169, re-enacting the naturalization test of 1790, was adopted, and, there is no reason to doubt, with like intent and meaning." and " When this act was under consideration by Congress efforts were made to strike out the words quoted , and it was insisted upon the one hand and conceded upon the other, that the effect of their retention was to exclude Asiatics generally from citizenship.' Rjensen (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

I re-added one of the deleted RS and put in an expansion template.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 23:00, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:NPOV concerns under American Jews and race section

User:Malik Shabazz is insistent on including the following line: "The overwhelming majority of American Jews view themselves as white."

I don't believe this line is necessary, given that the following one (and the source itself) both say the same thing. In addition, the above quoted line treads very close to violating WP:NPOV, and comes off as an attempt to make a "point" about Jews. The aggressive tone in Malik's reverts are also of concern.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 02:54, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Which part of NPOV does it allegedly violate? And what is your concern about my tone? That I won't put up with your outrageous abuses of the editing process and lying about sources? — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 04:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Which sources did I lie about, and where did I "outrageously" abuse the editing process? Show me, please.

As to your second question, perhaps it's just me but your reverts were quite hostile and accusatory. Especially the last one, which left me with the impression that you are, in fact, trying to make a point by including that line. And that is a problem because, as you yourself said to another editor, Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox.

I answered the first question in my original post.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 04:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Malik Shabazz's last revert included this message: "since you and your friend are still peddling the "Jews aren't white" line, it's very necessary"

In other words, he feels the line is necessary not because it improves the article (it doesn't), but because I mentioned in passing, on another talk page, that I do not personally identify as white.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 05:13, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

I would like my original, cited phrasing/statement restored to the edit I made today. Jeffgr9 (talk) 05:42, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

The Human Trumpet Solo—no one is interested in how you "personally identify". If you are an editor we do not care that you "do not personally identify as white." Bus stop (talk) 12:35, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

It was an off-hand comment. The only reason I even brought it up here is because it is the chief motivating factor behind Malik's constant reverts, by his own admission.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 13:03, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

This entire paragraph should be subsumed into the paragraph that presently follows it. Bus stop (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Then bring it up in another section and stop derailing this one.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 13:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

There is no sense in rearranging the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic. Some Jews are black. Some Jews are white. That some white Jews have said that they are not white does not provide us with justification (in the American Jews article) for writing a paragraph about those white Jews who say that they are not white and then following that paragraph with a paragraph about those Jews who actually are black. The logical placement for any material pertaining to white Jews who say that they are not white is at the end of the paragraph on that minority of Jews who are black—not in a freestanding paragraph—and not in a paragraph that precedes the paragraph on Jews who actually are black. Bus stop (talk) 13:50, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

That belongs in a new section. Please stop derailing this one. Moreover, no one is interested in your opinion on whether or not Jews are white.The Human Trumpet Solo (talk) 14:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Jews are a Semitic Tribe, and Jews may indeed be a mix of Black and Jewish, and in fact, Jews, including Asheknazim, have a significant amount of African ancestry from Early Migrations. So, the connection does not only intersect when self-identified (or otherwise) Jews and self-identified (or otherwise) Black people mix in modern times (or notably with Beta Israel or the Lemba, but is also inherently intertwined.

Furthermore, because Jews are a Tribe, an Ethnoreligious group, a Jewish "atheist" is different from a "non-Jewish atheist" through both ethnicity and Tribal designation. Jews remain ethnic Jews even if they may choose to leave the Tribe like conversos and crypto-Jews, and "Jews by Choice" do in fact add an ethnic identity to themselves in name, language, cuisine, philosophy, culture, etc. when they join the Tribe (convert). Jeffgr9 (talk) 15:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Based on the almost immutable factors of facial features, skin tone, hair type, etc., this American Jew is black and this American Jew is white. Bus stop (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

False; Paul Simon's nose, lip, eye, and eyebrow shapes/sizes say otherwise. Paul Simon may not be (predominantly, outside of possible Early Migration ancestry, as discussed in the article I included above) Black, but he is not "white." Jeffgr9 (talk) 22:15, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Jeffgr9—can you please name for me a Jew who is white? I only mentioned Paul Simon as an example. Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Again, because B'Nei Y'Israel are a Tribe, there are no "white" Jews, only "white-passing" Jews and Jews who intersect European and Semitic heritage--whether through genetic admixture or new Tribal designation (as discussed in the Jews by Choice article I included above). Whereas ethnic Jews can predominantly trace their lineage back to Semites who first settled the Levant (and/or to Jews by Choice who joined the Tribe), Jews by Choice add Semitic ethnic heritage to their identity in addition to whatever previous ethnic heritage they had. Therefore, Jews by Choice may no longer just identify as European, Ugandan, Japanese, etc., they must incorporate their new Semitic ethnic heritage into their identity. That is how race in relation to Tribes like B'Nei Y'Israel works.

Also, as an aside, the term "white Jew" was used by Nazis to describe non-Jewish European scientists who adopted Jewish scientists' principles. Point being, the term "white Jew" carries no significant relevance to ethnic Jews or Jews by Choice and should not be used when describing any Jew. Jeffgr9 (talk) 23:19, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

So, if a Jewish person has straight blond hair, blue eyes, and pale skin, they are only "passing" as white? Bus stop (talk) 23:48, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Exactly. That is the definition of "white-passing." Jeffgr9 (talk) 23:53, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Well, then what sort of a person with straight blond hair, light skin, and blue eyes is not white-passing? If we don't designate them as Jews, what do we designate them as? Bus stop (talk) 00:05, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

We disignate people by whatever ethnocultural/Tribal identity with which they belong. Walter F. White, one of the Presidents of the NAACP, was a blond-haired, blue-eyed, light-skinned Black man. There are many similar cases within other/intersecting ethnic groups, from Queen Noor of Jordan, to Chloe Bennett, to Cherokee Nation's Principal Chief John Baker, to Pawnee Nation's Andrew Knife Chief, and more. The term "white" in it of itself is not even descriptive enough for the ethnic and/or sociopolitical differences between Europeans, but that is for a different discussion. Jeffgr9 (talk) 00:41, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

It is original research to assert that white Jews are only "passing" as white. Most of them say they are white and most other people regard them as white, as long as they contain the "hallmarks" of "whiteness" which are commonly seen in skin color, often seen in hair color and hair type, and sometimes seen in eye color. Bus stop (talk) 00:33, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Please read my response above. Jeffgr9 (talk) 00:41, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

We abide by the findings of sources. We avoid original research. No source says that no Jew is white. You are making that assertion without the support that we require in sources. This edit is improper. You are asserting that white Jews are "passing" as white. This is possible, but not in all instances. The reality is that it probably is the case in very few instances. Bus stop (talk) 00:56, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I did not assert my fact-based opinion while making my edits. I asserted that American Jews are often given no other options to identify on censuses and other related surveys, and many Jews feel that "European" or "white" identifiers are not appropriate in relation to breaking down Jewish ethnic heritage, both of which are sourced and true. Moreover, there are sources that prove my these assertions contained in articles such as . And no, it is not a "few instances." Have you seen ? The majority do not appear "white" at all. Jeffgr9 (talk) 01:21, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

You don't get to decide who is actually white and who is passing as white. You are saying that Jews are passing as white. Without support in sources this is original research. Bus stop (talk) 02:02, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

User:Bus stop I forgot you ignored sources I have provided to you in the past, now I realize you are doing it again. Why do you do that? In our previous conversations and this one, you often violate Misplaced Pages:Civility by ignoring my sources/points. Very disturbing. In any case, I made the change to which you just referred based on not only our conversation here, but sources that I provided in the article. You have not proven Jews to be "white," so excluding sources that explain these phenomena from a fact-based perpective is against Misplaced Pages policy. Jeffgr9 (talk) 02:45, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

What makes you think that you can decide that Jewish people are not white? If the person thinks they are white, and others think they are white, then that leaves you as the sole authority deciding that they are not white, but merely "passing" as white. You made this edit and I partially reverted it, as seen here. Not only is it not supported by a source, but the second half of the sentence is a non sequitur from the first half. That is because there is no connection between "passing" as white and being an atheist. If you had a source (for the passing as white implication) you would probably still want to split that into two sentences. Bus stop (talk) 03:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

You say that I have not "proven Jews to be white". That is correct. And I am not trying to prove that Jews are white. You are using article space to assert that Jews are not white. I consider that claim farfetched and I'm asking you to provide a source. Bus stop (talk) 03:33, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I have not decided any such notion of Jewish identity alone. In fact, in 1987, the Supreme Court ruled that Jews were "racially distinct" from "white" people. You can read further instances in this cited article and in this cited article that I included above.

This sentiment regarding Jews is not new, nor "farfetched," and I find it personally offensive and that you seem to want to conflate or support conflating Jews with those who have repeatedly rejected, pogromed, and genocided them (i.e. the Holocaust in which Jews were racially persecuted for being non-"white," the Spanish Inquisition with "limpieza de sangre," with the most recent alt-right protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which "white" Supremacists called for Jews' destruction because Jews are not "white"). In any case, the various opnions of how Jews view themselves deserve to be included, but most especially in the context of the fact-based reality: Jews may only be "white-passing" and/or "mixed-with-white," neither of which are "white," and a Jews' "white-passing" status is only conditional until a Jewish individual and/or community have to face Antisemitism, a form of racism directed against Jews. I suggest you ask David Duke, Richard Spencer, or other "white Supremacists" regarding how they view Jews, because at the end of the day, these extremists represent the subconscious/underlying racism that still exists against Jews by many actual "white people" today.

Some last notes, so you agree that those non-Jewish people of color whom I listed are in fact "white-passing," yes? And you agree that the Jews in the Ashkenazim gallery do not fit conventional "white" phenotypes, yes? And finally, you agree that Jews are a Tribe (as per the Jews by Choice article) with tribal rules that include those regarding ethnicity that dictate that Jews are a People in it of themselves, yes? תודה. (Thank you.) Jeffgr9 (talk) 06:23, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

You really need to read more carefully. The Supreme Court did not "rule that Jews were 'racially distinct' from 'white' people". The decision says:

the question before us is not whether Jews are considered to be a separate race by today's standards, but whether, at the time § 1982 was adopted, Jews constituted a group of people that Congress intended to protect. It is evident from the legislative history of the section reviewed in Saint Francis College, a review that we need not repeat here, that Jews and Arabs were among the peoples then considered to be distinct races

When was section 1982 enacted? 1866. In other words, the Supreme Court said that more than 100 years ago, when Congress wrote the law in question, it considered Jews to be racially distinct and therefore intended for them to be covered by the statute. — MShabazz /_Stalk 11:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

The fact there has been constant and documented questioning (both within and outside the Jewish community) of the racial categorization of Jews shows there is racially more to Jews than is described by the term "white." How many "white" groups have this same intensive degree of scrutiny or identity ambiguity when discussing race?

The Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb case above merely states Jews can claim racial disrcrimination from "whtie" groups; its primary purpose is not to promote the concept of considering Jews "white," and invokes previous decisions to show that Jews indeed have a claim of racial discrimination even if society were to consider them "white" during any time period. Meaning, the court ruled to protect Jews no matter what they are considered, but most especially because Jews have been considered "racially distinct."

Further, you did not address any of the rest of the articles or points I have made, so you agree with them? Jeffgr9 (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

This whole discussion is ludicrous. Arabs and originally middle Eastern Jews are scientifically considered Caucasian (Semitic). Many Ashkenazim have significant European genes in them too, often due to rape, as well as intermarriage. While many Jews historically in places like Poland, did not consider themselves Polish, for example, they identified that time as a religion. It is modern academia that has painted an ethnic and/or racial component. And most people arguing about this either are trying to prove that Jews are not White for racist reasons (I know the difference between race and ethnicity, but they are often conflated, even if that is not correct), or not originally from the Middle East for political reasons. That the vast majority of Jews, genetically, according to modern definitions, are Caucasian is unassailable. Even the Brandeis study mentioned earlier is mis-quoted. 89% identify as White and another 6% as Hispanic. In all likely, these are Spanish (Sephardic) Jews and are thus also White. So, 95% of Jews identify as White. There are definitely Black and other non-White Jews, whether by choice, intermarriage, or the early diaspora. In the end, there is nothing wrong with saying Jews are overwhelmingly White, because that is a 100% unassailable scientific fact. Sposer (talk) 12:26, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Sposer, again, labeling Jews "white" is literally racist, as in Anti-Semitic, as in denying the Ethnocultural/Tribal origins of Jews as a Semitic People who originated in the Levant. As many sources, like the George Shishim case, already provided in the article state, only a conditional inclusion of Semites into "Caucasian" may exist to assert a connect between the figure Jesus and European peoples. Such a "white" status has been revoked over and over again in various European pogroms, genocides, exiles, and other persecutions (even by European Americans) against Jews. Please address the sources and arguments above before trying to derail the conversation. Your claims have already been addressed above. And you present and interpret flawed/incomplete evidence. Jeffgr9 (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Actually I would say the exact opposite. Calling Jews a race is racist. Jews, and I am one, are mostly Caucasian, period, as long as Semite is Caucasian. Using the more classically defined races: Caucasian, Negro and Asian, there is no other race that Jews largely would fall under. Those that have labeled Jews as non-white did so specifically to persecute them (Nazis). Pogroms also are racist as these European pogroms and genocides lie and say that Jews are different, which they are not. The Supreme Court Case says the opposite of what you wrote. It says that Jews are White, but if racists are treating them otherwise, they can still sue, since they are being incorrectly targeted. The Brandeis survery says 95% of Jews are White, assuming that most of the Hispanic self-identified Jews are non-Negro (Caucasian) Hispanic. And since Ashkenazim, Sephardim and Mizrahim all are scientifically similar and are at least partially Semitic (with Ashkenazim often partly European) and therefore White. Sposer (talk) 17:42, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Again, all of your points have been previously addressed with cited material. Please refer to all arguments/sources cited above. However, even then, the tridivisional/quadri-divisional definition of race by Blumenbach/others was mislabeling and created with racist intentions. And the Brandeis survey does not call Jews "white," it says, given the limited racial choices and information provided, many of those selected Jews self-identified as racially "white." That does not definitively prove their self-identification of "white," and does not exclude other perspectives on the matter. Jeffgr9 (talk) 18:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Jeff, you are mistaken about so many things. You are engaging in impermissible original research. And you still don't know how to spell the name of the author of the journal article you're misrepresenting.

When they are asked their race, more than 90% of American Jews say they're white. Rosenwaike's article says the percentage was 97% among Jewish New Yorkers. On Misplaced Pages, we don't make up stories to rationalize why the overwhelming majority of our co-religionists disagree with us. We report what reliable sources say, and we give appropriate emphasis to mainstream views and fringe views. — MShabazz /_Stalk 20:01, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

David Biale; Michael Galchinsky; Susannah Heschel (1998). Insider/Outsider: American Jews and Multiculturalism. University of California Press. p. 60. ISBN 978-0-520-21122-3.

Kenneth L. Marcus (2015). The Definition of Anti-Semitism. Oxford University Press. p. 77. ISBN 978-0-19-937564-6.

Those are both interesting references, Moxy (and I own a copy of the book edited by Biale, Galchinsky, and Heschel), but would you care to elaborate on your point a little? — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 00:56, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Judaism articles
• Mid-importance Judaism articles
• B-Class United States articles
• High-importance United States articles
• B-Class United States articles of High-importance
• WikiProject United States articles
• B-Class Ethnic groups articles
• High-importance Ethnic groups articles
• WikiProject Ethnic groups articles