Connect with us
The Residences advertisement

Features

Where are the Feminists Decrying the Hamas Assaults on Israeli Women?

tweet by University of California Professor Jemma Decristo

By HENRY SREBRNIK (posted Nov. 21) Jewish women are outraged that so many feminists, many of them prominent academics they have always known and liked, don’t seem to mind or may even condone the rapes and brutality visited on Israeli women Oct. 7.
But how many gender studies departments at universities have spoken out? On the contrary, Syracuse University’s Women’s and Gender Studies Department, for example, explicitly linked a pro-Palestinian position to its academic mission.
A few days after the massacre, Professor Jemma Decristo, a University of California, Davis, specialist in “the interplay between sound, race, gender, and embodiment,” tweeted a message to “zionist journalists” in the United States: “They can fear their bosses, but they should fear us more.” She punctuated her tweet with a knife, a machete, and three drops of blood.
Yale University professor Zareena Grewal, whose research focuses on race, gender, religion, and nationalism among American Muslims, asserted that “Israel is a murderous, genocidal settler state and Palestinians have every right to resist through armed struggle.” When a journalist pointed out that she was talking about the deaths of innocent civilians, Grewal was dismissive: “Settlers are not civilians. This is not hard.”
George Washington University professor Lara Sheehi, whose scholarship focuses on “decolonial and anti-oppressive approaches to psychoanalysis,” deemed the massacre a justified response to “Israel’s genocidal intent.”
According to a statement by 122 Columbia University professors, 37 of whom hold endowed chairs at the institution, one could regard the events of October 7th “as an occupied people exercising a right to resist violent and illegal occupation.” The signatories included gender and sexuality scholar Katherine Franke.
In an interview with the news organization Truthout Oct. 31, the prominent philosopher Judith Butler, distinguished professor in the Graduate School of the University of California, Berkeley, maintained that “a genocide is surely taking place” in Gaza. “Zionism has from the start engaged in a racist project,” she added. “What that meant was that the Palestinians there were not regarded as people — they literally could not be seen as human forms.”
Also at the end of October, nearly 150 American scholars in feminist, queer and trans studies released an open letter demanding an end to “Israel’s genocide and occupation in Gaza.” Calling Israel’s “cynical employment of feminist language to cover up or justify its military atrocities,” they added that “We will not be silent when the bells of genocide ring. Silence is complicity.”
To stand in solidarity with Israeli women, they asserted, is to give in to “colonial feminism.” There was no concern for the abducted Israelis that Hamas dragged off to Gaza, roughly 100 of whom are believed to be women, or the sexual assaults that took place on October 7.
The left-wing anti-war organization CODE PINK: Women for Peace had no problem supporting Hamas’ massacre: “The U.S.-backed Israeli apartheid regime inflicts daily settler violence and terror on Palestinians. Israel is an occupying force. Palestinians have every right to resist it,” they informed us.
UN Women, the organization “dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women,” condemned “the attacks on civilians in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories” but its statement didn’t mention Hamas at all.
One academic went further. Laura Mullen, the Kenan Chair of the Humanities in the English and Creative Writing Department at Wake Forest University, sparked outrage with a social media post just days after Hamas’ surprise attack, tweeting that “if you turn me out of my house plow my olive grove and confine what’s left of my family to the small impoverished state you run as an open air prison I could be tempted to shoot up your dance party yeah even knowing you will scorch the earth.” She then announced she felt like a victim because the school refused to stand by her.
Some feminists are even questioning the gruesome stories because they don’t want to shake their blind support for the Palestinian cause. In such a climate, perhaps it’s no wonder that Samantha Pearson, the woman running the University of Alberta’s Sexual Assault Centre, no less, was fired Nov. 18 after she signed an open letter calling reports of sexual violence during Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack on Israel an “unverified accusation.”
Phyllis Chesler, an Emerita Professor of Psychology at City University of New York, has lectured and organized political, legal, religious, and human rights campaigns in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, Central Asia, and the Far East.
“Sadly, I must conclude that what was once a diverse and independent-minded movement has become hijacked by a ‘woke’ death cult,” and “has lost its moral compass,” she wrote Oct. 19 in an article for the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy. “I note a terrible silence, a moral failure, among those women, including women activists, who live in freedom in America.
“The failure to even grapple with this subject speaks volumes,” she said. The few who spoke out were defriended, bullied and excoriated; one was called a “Zionist” – the worst word that came to mind.
Now that we have seen feminists effectively supporting Hamas and virtually apologizing for them in their raping of Jewish women, these academics are little different from those who were members of women’s groups in Nazi Germany, which — obviously — didn’t include Jews.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Every Rick Owens Sneaker You Should Know: A Complete Ranking

I’ve spent an embarrassing amount of time thinking about Rick Owens sneakers. Comparing soles in browser tabs at 2 AM, reading forum debates about leather quality across seasons. But it’s turned me into the person friends text when they want to know which pair to buy first — so at least it’s a useful obsession.

The thing about Rick Owens eu clothing is that sneakers are secretly the gateway. People see the draped jackets on the runway and assume that’s where Rick starts. For most of us, it starts with a pair of shoes that looked unlike anything else on the shelf. Here’s my ranking of every major silhouette.

Ramones: The Gateway That Started It All

If Rick Owens sneakers have a mascot, it’s the Ramones. Named after the punk band — these are Rick’s take on the classic high-top. Chunky rubber sole, waxed cotton laces, a toe cap that sits more forward than a typical Converse shape. The most recognizable silhouette in the entire lineup.

I recommend these as a first purchase to everyone. Easiest to style, most forgiving in proportion, and they age beautifully. Mainline leather runs $700–900. DRKSHDW canvas sits closer to $400–500 and works just as well daily.

Geobaskets: The Statement Maker

Take the Ramones, crank the volume up, and you get Geobaskets. Higher shaft, thicker sole, more visual weight. The proportions are deliberately aggressive — they look like they belong in a sci-fi film, and that’s the point.

Geobaskets are not a beginner shoe. The shaft height changes how your pants sit. They demand confidence. But if you’ve already got a couple of pieces from the Rick Owens collection and want to commit harder — this is the move. Leather pairs run $1,000+ and they’re worth it to the right person.

Abstract: The Low-Top That Actually Works

Rick’s low-top game was uneven until the Abstracts landed. These take the Ramones DNA — the sole shape, the toe box — and drop it to ankle height. Clean, sharp, unexpectedly versatile. I wear mine with cropped trousers in summer and they look as intentional as any designer shoe I own.

The Abstract solved a real problem: what do you wear when it’s too hot for Geobaskets but you still want that Rick silhouette? This. Browse the EU store during warmer months and you’ll see these sell fast.

Megalaced Runner: Where Rick Meets Athletic

When Rick started putting out runner-style sneakers, purists lost their minds. But the Megalaced Runner works because it doesn’t pretend to be a performance shoe. It takes the runner shape and twists it — exaggerated sole, dramatic lacing, materials that belong on a runway, not a track. The pick for someone who lives in sneakers but wants to graduate beyond Nike into something with more design weight.

Fogachine: The Platform Statement

The Fogachine is for people who’ve seen every other Rick sneaker and thought — “not enough.” The stacked platform sole is massive, borderline architectural. Closer to wearable sculpture than traditional footwear. I’ve tried them on and they’re surprisingly comfortable, but they require a very specific wardrobe commitment. If your closet is already deep into Rick Owens, they’re a natural endpoint.

Sizing and Mainline vs DRKSHDW

Rick Owens sneakers run about a full size large. A US 10 in Nike translates to roughly a 43 in Rick, maybe 42 depending on the model. Ramones and Geobaskets are the most generous. If you’re ordering from the official Rick Owens EU site, their size charts are reliable.

Every model comes in two tiers. Mainline is premium leather, made in Italy. DRKSHDW is the diffusion line — canvas, waxed cotton, denim — same silhouette, roughly half the cost. What nobody tells beginners: DRKSHDW is not a downgrade. Canvas Ramones develop a worn-in character that leather doesn’t replicate. If you shop Rick Owens online and see DRKSHDW — you’re not settling, you’re choosing.

Which One Should You Buy First?

Ramones. Always Ramones. DRKSHDW to start smart, mainline leather to start with a grail. Every other model builds on what the Ramones established. Once you own a pair, everything else in the Rick Owens EU clothing catalog makes more sense.

After that, the path is personal. Geobaskets for drama. Abstracts for warm weather. Megalaced Runners if you live in sneakers. Fogachines if you want to tower. Once you put on your first pair, regular sneakers start looking flat — that’s what twenty years of perfecting a sole shape does.

Continue Reading

Features

Big Numbers, Small Print: Why Simpler Promotions Often Deliver More

Few things catch the eye more than a giant red sign advertising a 50% discount on a popular product. Just seeing it makes shoppers feel they’ve struck gold. However, experienced shoppers aren’t easily convinced, having seen many impressive offers shrink to next to nothing by the time they reach the checkout. The headline-grabbing number is rarely the full story.

Most of the gap between the advertised saving and the one found at the till comes down to the small print. Conditions, thresholds and expiry dates can all chip away at the discount. That’s why a modest promotion can sometimes offer better value for money, even if it doesn’t look as appealing on the poster.

Why Bigger Doesn’t Always Mean Better

Large discounts, cashback promises and bonus rewards are expressly designed to stand out. They are bright, bold and hard to ignore. Still, the advertised value doesn’t always translate into the same real-world benefit. A promotion is only worth what the customer can use, and the conditions behind it, not the headline figure, determine that.

Imagine two clothing stores on the same floor of a mall. One is offering a 30% discount on purchases over $200. The other offers 10% off everything with no underlying conditions. A shopper looking for a $60 pair of jeans will get a guaranteed $6 off at the second store, and nothing at the first. In this case, the smaller offer gives the customer greater value.

This doesn’t mean a smaller promotion is always best. A person spending $300 in a shop will get the better savings at the first store. When studying competing offers, the real question is which deal best fits the customer’s spending intent in that moment.

The Fine Print Behind Everyday Offers

Conditions are a part of modern-day promotions. Common conditions include minimum spending levels, limits on qualifying products and specific redemption windows. Others tie rewards to loyalty program membership or require extra steps before the reward unlocks.

Reward schemes are a clear example. A coffee chain might award loyalty points for every order, which customers can redeem for a free coffee on a future visit. A grocery store might add store credit onto a shopper’s loyalty card but tie it to a 30-day validity period. Both offers hold genuine value, but only if customers return.

Neither offer is unreasonable, as businesses need to manage costs while encouraging customers to return. But sometimes, having the extra condition makes customers pause and question what an offer is really worth.

Where Simpler Rewards Pull Ahead

When a promotion has few conditions, it holds an advantage over others because it is easy to understand. A straightforward discount or a free item with no extra steps before redemption leaves little room for confusion. Shoppers know what they are getting, and the reward’s value is clear.

This differs from an offer that requires shoppers to make two separate purchases, complete a mail-in form and then wait six weeks for a rebate cheque. The rebate reward might be bigger, but many people never get far enough to claim it because the steps are too confusing or too long-winded. When the offer isn’t claimed, the advertised value means nothing.

The same distinction is visible across digital entertainment. An online casino offering free spins, for example, often includes clauses such as wagering requirements. This means that any winnings that come from these free spins can only be withdrawn once their total value has been bet through a set number of times. Yet some casinos understand that an offer with no wagering requirements is a good promotion that carries real weight among players.

Even so, these promotions are often not free of all conditions. Many casino offers are restricted by caps on winnings, short validity periods and a limit on which games can be played.

Same Principle, Different Industries

Travel companies also follow a similar promotional pattern. A cheap city break in Vancouver or a discounted cottage stay may appear only on certain dates or may include a non-refundable clause. Blackout periods are also common, meaning the discount can’t be used during busy times.

Subscription services often go down a slightly different route, with a low introductory price that increases after a few months. Many tie the reduced price to contract length, meaning a longer contract comes with a lower introductory price. Bundling services is another way to reduce prices. However, the value only exists when the customer actually uses all of the services they buy.

Video games work similarly, with in-game currency and other bonuses available to players in exchange for a set number of daily logins or for completing certain challenges within the game. While the industries vary, the underlying concept remains consistent. Rewards are available, but the value depends on what the customer needs to do to get them.

Why Businesses Build Complicated Offers

Consumers often blame companies and come to the belief that promotions are designed to trip shoppers up. However, the truth is more practical.

Promotions also need to benefit the business. Minimum spend thresholds and loyalty point accrual encourage customers to fill their baskets before checkout or give them a reason to return. Similarly, limited-time offers prompt immediate action by creating a sense of urgency. These are normal marketing tactics, and when implemented correctly, they deliver real benefits to both parties.

When a program is well designed, customers can earn consistent rewards over time rather than relying on a large upfront discount. If the business can balance its offers with clear explanations of the conditions behind them, customers are far less likely to be caught out.

How to Weigh Up an Offer Beyond the Headline

A simple way to judge a promotion’s value is to ask a few basic questions. What is the advertised saving or reward? Does it have any additional spending requirements to unlock? Are there any time limits for claiming the reward? And does the shopper meet the eligibility requirements in the first place?

Then it’s important to look at what the offer actually is and whether it is something that will be used. An offer that pushes a customer to buy something they never normally buy doesn’t really represent a saving.

An offer on a music streaming service is only useful for someone who listens to music. For someone who doesn’t even listen to music, the deal has no value, even at a reduced cost.

Reading Past the Headline

Big discounts and rewards can be highly beneficial, but only when customers understand the difference between the advertised value and what they’ll actually receive. A 30% discount that goes unused is worth nothing, while a 10% discount that applies to every purchase can offer real savings.

Although simple promotions tend to offer greater clarity surrounding conditions, more complex promotions can still be beneficial, provided they align with the customer’s existing plans or spending habits. However good the offer may seem, it is essential to weigh the value against the cost of obtaining it.

Continue Reading

Features

Arabs in the coalition – yes or no?

Paul Newman as Ari Ben Canaan and Jon Derek as Taha in a scene from "Exodus"

By MARTY GREEN The Jewish People are facing a moment of decision today which will define who we are for generations to come. Should we, or should we not, form a coalition government with the Arab parties?

There was a moment in our recent history where we faced a parallel question…or, if not in our actual history, at least in the historical narrative which defines us. I am talking about Leon Uris’s masterwork, “Exodus”. I read it as a teenager, and I can’t imagine that there are many Jews my age whose worldview was not fundamentally influenced by that story.

Our protagonist, Ari Ben Canaan, grew up close to the Arab village of Abu Yesha, where he became close friends with the mukhtar‘s son, Taha. Now, twenty years later, on the eve of the War of Independence, Taha’s father is gone and the young man is now the village leader. Arab irregulars have made themselves at home in the village, and are preparing there for the coming assault on Gan Dafna. Ari goes to see his old friend to ask for cooperation. (I am paraphrasing here:)

“You said we would always be friends.”|

“Times have changed. I am an Arab.”

“You are first of all a human being.”

“What do you expect me to do?”

“If you don’t rein in the irregulars we will have to attack Abu Yesha.”

“Is that what you want to do?”

“What do you expect me to do?”

The two are at an impasse. Then Taha speaks: “You said we were brothers, didn’t you? Well, if that is true, if you really meant it, then give me Jordana. Yes, give me your sister to be my wife; to bear my children…”

Ari’s fist shot out, sending Taha sprawling to a corner. He leaps up and instinctively grabs his knife and raises it towards Ari…

Now, let us pause in the telling, because I remember how I felt when I read this as a teenager. And I feel very differently when I read it today. Who was in the wrong? Was Taha in the wrong for demanding Jordana as a sign of brotherhood? Or was Ari wrong for responding with outrage?

I am all but certain that the answer to those questions is glaringly obvious to everyone who is reading here. And I am further all but certain that half of you choose Answer A and half of you choose Answer B.

Because that is exactly how the Jewish People appear to be divided on the question of whether or not to form a coaltion with the Arab parties who hold the balance of power. And the decision we make will have consequences just as far-reaching as the (fictional) decision made in the spur of the moment 80 years ago in the village of Abu Yesha.

Ari stood there dumbfounded by what he had done, unable to find the words to explain. But Taha understood perfectly well.

“Never mind”, he spoke. “You’ve told me everything I need to know. Now get out of my house, zhid!”

(It happens that the only copy of Exodus in my possession is an old samizdat version from the Soviet Union, kindly given to me many years ago by an elderly Russian immigrant. I couldn’t resist the chance to offer Taha’s final words using that particularly expressive insult from the Russian original. It also explains why my quoted passages are inexact, having passed from English to Russian and back again.)

And what is my point with all of this? It is the question of whether we should offer the Arab parties a place in the coalition government. From reading the online discussions, it is quite clear to me that we are just as divided on this question as we are on the Exodus question…should we or shouldn’t we. And each opposing side is equally vehement in the certainty that they are right.

What I can tell you for sure, is that if we make the choice which I fear, it will be just as it was between Ari and Taha. |If we manage to cobble together a coalition of parties that have nothing in common except a determination to keep 20% of our population out of the seats of power, we will have told the Arabs everything they need to know. I can only hope against hope that Eisenkot has the courage to do the right thing.

Ed. note: If you don’t remember this scene from the movie, that’s because it was only in the book.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News