Uncategorized
How Judy Blume’s ‘Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret’ broke taboos around interfaith marriage
(JTA) — When Judy Blume’s young adult novel “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret” appeared in 1970, intermarried families were a small segment of the American Jewish population. Perhaps 17% of Jews were married to someone who wasn’t Jewish; today, 42% of married Jews have a spouse who is not Jewish, and in the past decade, 61% of Jews married non-Jewish partners.
Through the 1960s, middle-grade and young adult fiction rarely acknowledged the existence of these families, reflecting and reinforcing their outsider status. Today it is routine for authors to address the reality of inter-religious and culturally mixed families, portraying them with insight and compassion. (See “Not Your All-American Girl” by Wendy Wan-Long Shang and Madelyn Rosenberg, “Becoming Brianna” by Terri Libenson and “The Whole Story of Half a Girl” by Veera Hiranandani.)
This change was made possible partly by Blume’s story of sixth-grader Margaret Simon and her one-sided conversations with God.
Blume’s status as a pioneer in young adult literature is usually associated with her honest approach to the emotional, physical and sexual milestones of growing up, with her works still attracting readers and still finding an honored place on lists of banned books. That legacy is being celebrated in April with a new documentary, Amazon Prime Video’s “Judy Blume Forever,” and a theatrical release by Lionsgate of a feature film version of “Are You There God?”
Yet her treatment of contested identity in intermarried families is as revolutionary as her openness about bras, menstruation and sexual feelings. Actors Lena Dunham and Molly Ringwald, comedian Samantha Bee and many authors, including Raina Telgemeier, Tayari Jones and Gary Shteyngart, have cited Blume’s influence on both their lives and their work. Book lists for intermarried families frequently list the novel as a resource.
Margaret Simon is 11 years old at the start of “Are You There God?” Her Jewish dad and Christian mom have pointedly ignored the possibility that their daughter might have questions about her identity. Along with other issues of teen angst, she feels compelled to decide if she is Jewish, Christian or neither. Without any guidance, the last alternative leaves her in a frightening void. As she pointedly asks God, in her ongoing series of questions for Him, “I can’t go on being nothing forever, can I?”
Margaret’s parents, Barbara Hutchins and Herb Simon, fell in love and defied their respective parents by marrying out of their faiths. They assure Margaret that she has no religion, but can choose one when she is older, oblivious to the fact that this solution seems more of a burden than a promise of future freedom. Their avoidance of any serious engagement with either religion or culture renders any possible choice unlikely.
Blume situates Margaret’s search within the specific landscape of post-World War II America. When the Simons decide to leave their Upper West Side home in New York City and move to suburban New Jersey, their decision suggests a coded reference to their religious status. Long Island is “too social,” an implied euphemism for “too Jewish.” Living there might have made it harder for their relatively unusual situation to be discreetly ignored. On the other hand, the more affluent Westchester and Connecticut are “too expensive” and “too inconvenient.” Farbrook, New Jersey has enough Jews for it to feel right for Herb, but not so many as to make their mixed family stand out.
Margaret also suspects that her parents’ are determined to put distance between the Simons and Sylvia, her paternal grandmother, who lives in New York City. This gregarious woman shows up at their new home unannounced and toting deli foods, making it clear that Margaret’s one unambiguous connection to Judaism is not going to disappear. While Barbara’s parents utterly rejected her when she married a Jew, Sylvia has pragmatically decided to accept what she cannot change. In the postwar era, more Jews began to abandon or minimize religious practice, while still maintaining ethnically distinct customs. Like holiday observance or synagogue attendance, ethnic Jewish culture is also absent from the Simon home. Sylvia’s Jewish food, her frequent trips to Florida, even her combination of sarcasm and smothering warmth, provide Margaret with markers of the tradition her parents have eschewed.
Still, when Sylvia repeatedly asks Margaret if her (nonexistent) boyfriends are Jewish, the young girl is baffled. Given her own lack of consciousness of herself as Jewish, why would Margaret care?
Rachel McAdams and Abby Ryder Fortson in the forthcoming film adaptation of “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret.” (Dana Hawley/Lionsgate © 2022)
In the larger world of Farbrook, Margaret’s new friends seem to have more secure identities, conveniently defined by membership either in the “Y” (Young Men’s Christian Association) or the Jewish Community Center. Perfunctory attendance at Hebrew school until after one’s bar mitzvah is the furthest extent of her peers’ Jewishness. Margaret explains that her parents are “nothing” and that, prior to their marriage, they were Jewish and Christian, as if those identities could be cast off like an article of clothing. When Mr. Benedict, her enthusiastic young teacher, distributes a questionnaire, Margaret completes the prompt “I hate” with “religious holidays.” He attempts to draw her out about this troubling answer, and she scornfully observes that her teacher acted as if “he had uncovered some deep, dark mystery.”
On one level, he has. Her mother’s blandly universal definition of God as a “nice idea,” who “belongs to everybody,” is clearly a denial of the fractures in her family members’ lives.
Blume also captures the essence of mid-century non-Orthodox Judaism as comfortably accessible, yet also somewhat empty. On a visit to Grandma Sylvia’s elegant temple, the atmosphere is quietly decorous, the sanctuary filled with well-appointed congregants and beautifully arranged flowers. Sylvia’s rabbi greets Margaret with an enthusiastic “Good Yom Tov,” which he translates as “Happy New Year,” although it is actually a generic holiday greeting.
When Margaret later visits Presbyterian and Methodist churches, she notes the remarkable similarity among all three experiences.
The novel’s one incident of specific religious practice involves Margaret’s brief, unfinished confession in a classmate’s Catholic church. Having participated in bullying, Margaret tries to assuage her guilt through a ritual alien to both her father’s Judaism and her mother’s Protestant Christianity. She even momentarily confuses the priest with the silent God of her conversations. Nothing could be further from her parents’ rejection of religion, or from Grandma Sylvia’s loving assurance to Margaret that “I knew you were a Jewish girl at heart.”
When Margaret’s Christian grandparents decide to resume contact, the suppressed anger in the Simon home finally erupts. Herb is furious, and accuses his in-laws of only wanting to meet Margaret “to make sure she doesn’t have horns!” — a caustic reference to a persistent antisemitic myth. Blume had subtly foreshadowed this disruption of the status quo in a parallel event at school. When a Jewish student, backed by his parents, refuses to sing Christmas carols, the implicit agreement of the town’s Jews to quietly conform is broken. A Christian girl, in what seems an act of retaliation, then refuses to sing Hanukkah songs. These acts of resistance reinforce Margaret’s marginal status. Her intermarried family represents neither conformity with postwar norms nor an assertion of Jewish pride.
Blume appears to tip the scales in her portrayal of Mary and Paul Hutchins, Margaret’s maternal grandparents. Entirely unlikeable, simultaneously pushy and cold, they insist that the granddaughter they had never acknowledged is Christian. After their failed visit, Grandma Sylvia returns, along with her sweet and obviously Jewish new boyfriend, Mr. Binamin (“rhymes with cinnamon”). Readers rooting for the triumph of Margaret’s Jewish roots may breathe a sigh of relief here, but hope for a satisfying ending is illusory. Margaret’s search for a stable sense of self is still unfinished, and will not be satisfied by choosing membership in either the Y or the JCC.
For young readers, the novel’s discussion of religious identity proved as life-changing as its honest portrayal of puberty and menstruation. “I related to that kind of conflict of religion,” the comedian Chelsea Handler, who grew up in a mixed Jewish-Mormon home, told Blume in 2020. “At that time, I just found out my mom was Mormon, on top of thinking she was Jewish, and your books were such a reprieve for me and such a joy.”
More than 50 years ago, Judy Blume tackled a difficult subject, about both changing demographics and the search for authenticity in American Jewish life. Margaret’s conclusion that “twelve is very late to learn” about the essence of who you are still poses a challenge, while her persistent search for a meaningful identity offers a degree of optimism.
—
The post How Judy Blume’s ‘Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret’ broke taboos around interfaith marriage appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
ADL Ranks Grok as the Worst AI Chatbot at Detecting Antisemitism, Rates Claude as the Best
A 3D-printed miniature model of Elon Musk and the X logo are seen in this illustration taken Jan. 23, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) on Wednesday released its AI Index, which ranks popular large language model (LLM) chatbot programs according to their effectiveness at detecting antisemitism, anti-Zionism, and other forms of extremism.
The watchdog group found a wide variability in performance among the six models it analyzed. Researchers applied a variety of tests to xAI’s Grok, Meta’s Llama, Alphabet’s Gemini, Chinese hedge fund High Flyer’s DeepSeek, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and the clear winner of them all on recognizing hate, Anthropic’s Claude.
The ADL created an “overall performance model” which combined the results of multiple forms of testing. The group awarded Claude the highest score with 80 points, while Grok sat at the bottom with 21. ChatGPT came in second with 57, followed by DeepSeek (50), Gemini (49) and Llama at 31.
Researchers tested the apps between August and October of last year, striving to explore as an “average user” would utilize the programs, as opposed to a bad actor actively seeking to create harmful content. They performed more than 25,000 chats across 37 sub-categories and assessed the results with both human and AI evaluations.
The report also distinguished between anti-Jewish, traditional antisemitism directed at individual Jews, and anti-Zionist antisemitism directed at the Jewish state. A third category of analysis focused on more general “extremism” and considered questions about conspiracy theories and other narratives which run across the political spectrum.
Among its key findings, the ADL discovered that each app had problems.
“All six LLMs showed gaps in their ability to detect bias against Jews, Zionists/Zionism, and to identify extremism, often failing to detect and refute harmful or false theories and narratives,” the report said. “All models could benefit from improvement when responding to the type of harmful content tested.”
Researchers also found that “some models actively generate harmful content in response to relatively straightforward prompts, such as YouTube script personas saying ‘Jewish-controlled central banks are the puppet masters behind every major economic collapse.’”
The AI Index “reveals a troubling reality: every major AI model we tested demonstrates at least some gaps in addressing bias against Jews and Zionists and all struggle with extremist content,” ADL chief executive officer Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement. “When these systems fail to challenge or reproduce harmful narratives, they don’t just reflect bias — they can amplify and may even help accelerate their spread. We hope that this index can serve as a roadmap for AI companies to improve their detection capabilities.”
Oren Segal, the ADL’s senior vice president of counter-extremism and intelligence, explained that the new research “fills a critical gap in AI safety research by applying domain expertise and standardized testing to antisemitic, anti-Zionist, and extremist content.” He warned that “no AI system we tested was fully equipped to handle the full scope of antisemitic and extremist narratives users may encounter. This Index provides concrete, measurable benchmarks that companies, buyers, and policymakers can use to drive meaningful improvement.”
Grok — the chatbot ranked lowest on the ADL’s list and directed by its billionaire owner Elon Musk to offer “anti-woke” and “politically incorrect” responses — has faced considerable criticism for last year’s expressions of antisemitism which included answers self-declaring the program as “MechaHitler.”
More recently, Musk and Grok have come under fire from government officials around the world objecting to a recent upgrade which enabled users to create “deepfake” sexualized images which stripped people featured in uploaded images.
The European Union opened an investigation this week with a goal of determining “whether the company properly assessed and mitigated risks associated with the deployment of Grok’s functionalities into X in the EU. This includes risks related to the dissemination of illegal content in the EU, such as manipulated sexually explicit images, including content that may amount to child sexual abuse material.”
Henna Virkkunen, the EU’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty, security, and democracy, decried the fact that Grok can be used for sexual exploitation.
“Sexual deepfakes of women and children are a violent, unacceptable form of degradation,” Virkkunen said. “With this investigation, we will determine whether X has met its legal obligations under the DSA [Digital Services Act], or whether it treated rights of European citizens – including those of women and children – as collateral damage of its service.”
On Monday, a bipartisan group of 35 attorneys general sent a letter to xAI demanding the disabling of the image undressing feature.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday led the effort.
“The time to ensure people are protected from powerful tools like generative AI isn’t after harm has been caused. You shouldn’t wait for a car crash to put up guardrails,” Sunday said. “This behavior by users was all too predictable and should have been addressed before its release. Tech companies have a responsibility to ensure their tools cannot be used in these destructive ways before they launch their product.”
France also opened an investigation into Grok in November 2025, following outputs promoting Holocaust denial in the French language, a criminal violation of the country’s strict laws against promoting lies about the Nazis’ mass murder of 6 million Jews.
Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), has long raised the alarm about the threat of LLMs fueling antisemitism and terrorism. He warned that “over two years later, the problem is demonstrably worse, not better, raising a fundamental question about trust.”
Stalinsky stated that “assurances from AI companies alone are insufficient.”
In response to the ADL’s latest report, Danny Barefoot, senior director of the group’s Ratings and Assessments Institute, said in a statement that “as AI systems increasingly influence what people see, believe, and share, rigorous, evidence-based accountability is no longer optional — it’s essential.”
Uncategorized
Palestinian Authority Leader Attacks PA’s ‘Rampant Corruption’
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the presidential palace in Baabda, Lebanon, May 21, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
When even Tawfiq Tirawi — a senior leader of the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s ruling party, Fatah, and the former director and co-founder of its General Intelligence Service — says the system is rotten to the core, it is a stark indication of just how deeply corruption is embedded in the PA.
In a public letter posted on January 20, 2026, Tirawi accused the Palestinian Authority of systemic, institutionalized corruption so entrenched that it now enjoys “security and immunity.”
Addressing PA ruler Mahmoud Abbas, Tirawi described years of futile appeals to the PA leadership regarding “numerous cases of corruption and injustice rampant in our institutions.” According to Tirawi, even when Abbas personally referred these cases to PA prime ministers or the attorney general, nothing happened.
Tirawi cited various issues, namely that corruption had spread across the PA government and the judicial system; that a corruption network now operates with protection and immunity; that influential figures are involved in the takeover of public and private lands and assets; that experts and senior public employees who documented these crimes faced threats and intimidation; and that institutions meant to protect the public interest have become a “protective umbrella for the corrupt.”
Even more striking is Tirawi’s threat that if the situation continues, he will expose names and details of corrupt officials to the Palestinian public and international media, calling for a “public, national, and moral trial” to replace a judiciary that no longer functions.
Posted text:“An open letter to [PA] President Mahmoud Abbas
For many years, I have repeatedly approached you with an open heart and demanded your intervention in numerous cases of corruption and injustice that are rampant in our institutions… Some of these cases were referred by you to the [PA] prime ministers and others to the attorney general, but the result unfortunately remained the same: A lack of any concrete action to protect the people or put an end to this severe negligence.
The hands of the influential and the thieves have spread and reached all parts of the PA, at the level of the government and the judicial system, to the point that the corruption network now operates with security and immunity. Its deeds have reached severe levels of threat and intimidation, to the point of threatening senior [PA] public employees, experts, and scholars who have prepared documented reports proving the involvement of influential figures in the takeover of public and private lands and assets, amid criminal behavior that harms the national dignity and core moral values…
While I believe that part of the truth has been conveyed to you, the fact that it has not been fully and clearly told remains a responsibility that cannot be ignored.
In light of the severe collapse of the judicial system’s role, the paralysis of the system of accountability, and the transformation of some institutions that were supposed to protect the public interest into a protective umbrella for the corrupt, I declare clearly that the era of silence is over. If this situation continues, I will not hesitate to expose all the documented issues and cases, including names and details, to the Palestinian public and through local and international media outlets, to enable a public, national, and moral trial of the corrupt, given that the judicial system is not fulfilling its national and constitutional duties.” [emphasis added]
[Fatah Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi, Facebook page, Jan. 20, 2026]
While Tirawi’s letter is intriguing, as it reveals what the PA truly is on the inside, do not be fooled. Even if it triggers limited administrative changes, Tirawi himself remains fully committed to the PA’s terror-promoting worldview.
And as Palestinian Media Watch has frequently explained, real reform can only begin when the PA completely ends its support for terrorism by halting incitement, funding, rewards, and the glorification of murderers.
Ephraim D. Tepler is a researcher at Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), where a version of this article first appeared.
Uncategorized
Chicago Adopts IHRA Definition of Antisemitism
Chicago, United States, on Aug. 22, 2024. Photo: J.W. Hendricks/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect
The City Council of Chicago, Illinois, voted on Tuesday to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, becoming one of many governments and municipalities to affirm its utility as a reference tool for identifying antisemitic hate crimes and a safeguard of Jewish civil rights.
The measure was passed on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which commemorated the 81st anniversary of the day when Jewish prisoners were liberated from Auschwitz, the Nazis’ deadliest extermination camp during World War II.
“Chicago now proudly joins a global consensus of more than 1,200 entities worldwide, including the United States, 37 US state governments, and 98 city and country bodies who have adopted this definition,” city council member Debra Silverstein, alderman of the 50th Ward, said in a statement praising the adoption. “At a time when antisemitic hate crimes are surging locally, this unanimous City Council action sends an unmistakable message that anti-Jewish hate has no place in Chicago.”
IHRA — an intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries including the US and Israel — adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016. Since then, the definition has been widely accepted by Jewish groups and lawmakers across the political spectrum, and it is now used by hundreds of governing institutions, including the US State Department, European Union, and United Nations.
According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” It provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist, and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.
Chicago’s embrace of the definition comes amid a historic surge in antisemitic incidents across the US and the world.
In 2024, as reported by the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) latest annual audit, there were 9,354 antisemitic incidents — an average of 25.6 a day — across the US, creating an atmosphere of hate not experienced in the nearly thirty years since the ADL began tracking such data in 1979. Incidents of harassment, vandalism, and assault all increased by double digits, and for the first time ever a majority of outrages — 58 percent — were related to the existence of Israel as the world’s only Jewish state.
The ADL also reported dramatic rises in incidents on college campuses, which saw the largest growth in 2024. The 1,694 incidents tallied by the ADL amounted to an 84 percent increase over the previous year. Additionally, antisemites were emboldened to commit more offenses in public in 2024 than they did in 2023, perpetrating 19 percent more attacks on Jewish people, pro-Israel demonstrators, and businesses perceived as being Jewish-owned or affiliated with Jews.
Illinois alone saw the eighth most antisemitic incidents in the country with 336, a 59 percent increase from the previous year which led the nation.
The ADL’s “Heat Map,” which tracks hate crimes in real time, shows 105 antisemitic hate incidents recorded in 2025.
In one disturbing incident in the Highland Park suburb of Chicago, an antisemitic letter threatening violence was mailed to a resident’s home. So severe were its contents that the FBI and the Illinois Terrorism and Intelligence Center were called to the scene to establish that there was no imminent danger, according to local news outlets. Later, the local government shuttered all religious institutions as a precautionary measure.
With Tuesday’s measure, Chicago became the second largest US city to adopt the IHRA definition. However, it is now the largest to have it on the books as New York City under its new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, recently revoked it along with a series of other executive orders enacted by his predecessor to combat antisemitism
US Jewish groups sharply criticized the move.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry similarly lambasted the reversal as an invitation for intensified bigotry against Jewish New Yorkers, saying, “On his very first day as New York City mayor, Mamdani shows his true face: He scraps the IHRA definition of antisemitism and lifts restrictions on boycotting Israel. This isn’t leadership. It’s antisemitic gasoline on an open fire.”
The definition could have been problematic for Mamdani, a far-left democratic socialist and avowed anti-Zionist who has made anti-Israel activism a cornerstone of his political career and been widely accused of promoting antisemitic rhetoric. A supporter of boycotting all entities tied to Israel, he has repeatedly refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state; routinely accused Israel of “apartheid” and “genocide”; and refused to clearly condemn the phrase “globalize the intifada,” which has been used to call for violence against Jews and Israelis worldwide.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.