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
Two deaths in Manchester synagogue attack last year will be probed through public inquiry, Britain says
(JTA) — The deaths of two Jewish men in an attack on a synagogue in Manchester last year will be examined through a public inquiry, the British home secretary announced on Monday, a necessary step to include sensitive information in the investigation.
Melvin Cravitz and Adrian Daulby were killed during the attack on Yom Kippur on Oct. 2, 2025, when Jihad Al-Shamie rammed a car into a group of worshippers outside the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation in Manchester and stabbed two people. Cravitz died from stab wounds and another man, Andrew Franks, was seriously injured but survived. Daulby was shot by police while blocking the synagogue doors to stop Al-Shamie from entering. Two other people were seriously injured.
Al-Shamie, a Syrian-born British citizen, said he was acting for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, before police shot him dead.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced the public inquiry in a statement about national security at the House of Commons, saying that “what happened that day must be fully understood.”
“This will ensure that all evidence can be heard, including any sensitive national security material that could not otherwise be fully heard in the coroner’s court,” said Mahmood.
Judge Alexia Durran, the chief coroner of England and Wales, was overseeing inquests into the deaths of Cravitz and Daulby. Durran last month recommended that Mahmood convert the inquests into a public inquiry, following statements from Home Office lawyers that some information from MI5 would be withheld from open court due to national security concerns. A full investigation that involves hearing sensitive material in private requires a public inquiry.
Earlier this year, Greater Manchester Police’s chief constable Stephen Watson said he was “deeply sorry” for a “missed opportunity” to uncover the plot against the Heaton Park synagogue. Watson made the apology after prosecutors revealed that Al-Shamie had two prior arrests for allegedly breaching a non-molestation order and alleged rape, and his mobile devices were not examined until after the synagogue attack.
Mahmood listed “a series of attacks on our Jewish community” in the year since the synagogue attack, including the stabbing of two Jewish men in the London neighborhood of Golders Green, a spate of arson attacks and a “foiled but potentially lethal plot” against Jews in Manchester on the eve of Yom Kippur last month. In the last case, two Iranian men have been charged with terrorism offenses.
“Faced with the threat posed to our Jewish community, we have increased funding to the police by an additional £250 million to boost police presence in key Jewish areas and to tackle antisemitism on our streets,” said Mahmood.
She added, “I know we cannot simply build higher walls around our Jewish community and expect them to live in fear. So we must root out the evil of antisemitism wherever it lurks in society, and this government is committed to that effort.”
Mahmood’s announcement comes days after the Home Office released data showing that hate crimes against Jewish people in England and Wales rose 10% in the year ending in March.
Mahmood said the United Kingdom was aware that “the Iranian state is targeting our Jewish community,” adding that the threat posed to Jews demonstrated “how the lines are increasingly blurring between extremism and state threats.”
The post Two deaths in Manchester synagogue attack last year will be probed through public inquiry, Britain says appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Checkmate? Netanyahu faces a daunting playing field ahead of Oct. 27
(JTA) —
With just two weeks to go before Israel’s election, the political chessboard is set — and there is little indication that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has found a winning move.
Israel’s prime minister is not elected directly by voters but must assemble a coalition commanding a majority of the Knesset’s 120 seats. That means Benjamin Netanyahu’s chances of retaining power depend in part on how well his smaller political allies perform at the polls.
There are 38 parties running in these elections, although no more than 15 will meet the 3.25% vote threshold – the percentage of the total vote that a party needs to clear to gain any seats in the Knesset. The parties that will be left standing after the Oct. 27 vote will likely include three or four on the right, led by Netanyahu’s Likud list; four or five on the center-left, with polling showing the new Yashar party led by Gadi Eizenkot, a former military chief of staff, leading them; two Haredi Orthodox parties; and two predominantly Arab parties.
Unfortunately for Netanyahu, several right-wing parties didn’t merge as he had hoped. Religious Zionism, the ultra-nationalist party led by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, did not join forces with National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit or Amcha Yisrael, led by retired Brig. Gen. Ofer Winter.
As a result, both Smotrich’s party and Winter’s party remain close to Israel’s electoral threshold, raising the possibility that one or both could fail to win enough votes to enter the Knesset — which means their votes, which could have strengthened Netanyahu’s bloc, will be wasted. With the 3.25% threshold the equivalent of four Knesset seats, the wasted vote could be substantial.
“Netanyahu has been considered Israel’s political magician for many years — the man who managed in 2022 to bring Ben-Gvir and Smotrich together on a joint list,” said Dr. Gayil Talshir, a political scientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Ahead of that election, Netanyahu publicly urged the two parties to merge, warning that the right-wing bloc “can’t take the risk” of either party falling below the electoral threshold. Days later, the two leaders reached a deal following a meeting with Netanyahu, who had pressed for the merger.
“We haven’t seen that happen in this election,” Talshir continued. “Netanyahu is entering this election in the weakest position we have seen him in over the past decade in terms of the parties running.”
The right-wing parties’ decisions to run separately reflected a combination of personal animosity and ideological differences. Winter emphasized the need to bring new faces into politics, arguing that those tainted by the failures behind Hamas’ invasion of southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, should make way for new leadership. Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, meanwhile, remained divided by personal tensions and the belief that each appeals to a somewhat different segment of Israel’s ultranationalist right.
Veteran pollster Shmuel Rosner believes Winter’s new party risks falling below the threshold. It is currently polling at around four to five seats, but support for new parties has traditionally declined as the initial excitement surrounding their launch fades. Smotrich’s Religious Zionism, which is polling at roughly five to six seats, is also vulnerable. The party has spent a significant amount of time below the threshold in polling in recent months.
“The party lineup is more challenging for Netanyahu than for his opponents,” Rosner said. “In the anti-Netanyahu camp, there is currently no party that is at risk of falling below the electoral threshold, while in the bloc that leans toward Netanyahu, there is at least one — and potentially another — party in that position.”Even if both parties clear the threshold, however, current polling suggests that Netanyahu remains well short of the 61 seats needed to form a governing coalition. Most polls put his bloc at around 52 to 53 seats.
But the picture is not entirely bleak for Netanyahu. The opposition-aligned bloc, currently led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, is also not projected to reach 61 seats. In recent weeks, its numbers have fallen sharply, from roughly 58-59 seats to around 52-53. The balance of the seats go to Arab-led parties.
Yashar party chairman Gadi Eisenkot speaks during the “Game-Changing Generation” National Youth Conference at the International Convention Center in Jerusalem, October 11, 2026. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)
Talshir attributes that decline not necessarily to a loss of support for the bloc itself, but to changes elsewhere in the electoral map. Three Arab parties have joined forces to make up a unified Joint List party, strengthening the Arab political bloc and helping one of the parties avoid falling below the electoral threshold. The merger could also increase turnout among Arab voters.
Both major political camps have pledged not to include the Arab parties in a governing coalition. However, here too, the anti-Netanyahu bloc is in a better position.
Joint List and Ra’am are projected to win roughly 14 seats. And the leader of Balad, one of the parties making up the Joint List, withdrew from the race late last month after the Supreme Court signaled that his candidacy would be disqualified. The impact of his forced withdrawal remains unclear, but some analysts suggest it could further boost turnout among Arab voters, who may cast protest votes against those who prevented him from running.
Netanyahu’s potential coalition members are adamantly opposed to including any Arab parties in their coalition, and have made the possibility of a coalition that includes an Arab party a line of attack against the opposition bloc. The previous government, formed by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid in 2021, brought Ra’am into its coalition to secure a parliamentary majority – a history-making first.
But key figures in the current opposition camp have pledged not to repeat that arrangement this time, saying that emotions remain too raw in the Jewish public three years after the Oct. 7, 2023 deadly Hamas raids inside Israel. Those ruling out another partnership with Arab parties include Gadi Eisenkot, the current leader of the opposition camp in the polls; Lapid, who helped engineer the previous coalition; and Avigdor Lieberman, the hawkish former finance minister.
Talshir nevertheless believes that those commitments could ultimately be tested if the election produces another deadlock. She points to a possible scenario in which Eisenkot and Ra’am could cooperate to establish a minority government, with Ra’am voting to install an Eisenkot-led list while remaining outside the coalition in order to prevent Netanyahu from remaining prime minister.
Abbas told Channel 12 in an interview in August that his top priority was replacing Netanyahu’s current government. And on Saturday, Joint List chairman Youssef Jabareen said his party would be willing to support any government that ends Netanyahu’s rule, subject to conditions he did not specify.
Leader of the Arab Israeli party Ra’am (United Arab List), Mansour Abbas speaks during an election campaign event, ahead of Israel’s legislative elections, in the Arab town of Ka’abiyye-Tabbash-Hajajre in Israel’s Northern District on September 26, 2026. I(Jalaa MAREY / AFP via Getty Images)
If neither bloc can assemble a coalition, Israel could once again find itself heading toward another election — as happened during the two-year political crisis that began in 2019 and led to five subsequent elections — while Netanyahu would remain in office as caretaker prime minister.
“Looking at the scenarios and the polls we are seeing right now, we see a very small chance that either bloc will be able to reach 61 seats,” Rosner said.
One of the biggest wild cards is the handful of parties currently polling below the electoral threshold that have nevertheless decided to remain in the race.Rosner points to three notable parties in that position: The Reservists-Economic Party led by Yoaz Hendel and Yaron Zelekha; the Haredi-oriented party led by Moti Leitner; and Benny Gantz’s Blue and White.
The most significant of the three, Rosner said, is the Hendel-Zelekha party, which is hovering around the electoral threshold and could either cross it or fall short. “It is on the edge of the threshold,” Rosner said. “It could pass or fall with four seats.”
The party, he added, is difficult to place politically. “It doesn’t really say what it will do, and it is made up of people who have different interests and different desires,” Rosner said. Still, he estimates that it would be easier for the party to join the opposition-aligned bloc than Netanyahu’s coalition, in part because of the coalition’s partnership with the Haredi parties. Military reservists deeply resent Haredi men who avoid serving in the military and want the next government to end the practice.
Gantz’s Blue and White, which once led the opposition camp but lost much of its popularity after Gantz joined Netanyahu’s government, is still running despite remaining well below the threshold. It is currently polling at around 1%.Gantz has made clear that if his party clears the electoral threshold, he would seek to form a unity government that includes both Netanyahu and parties from the opposition’s change bloc.
The new Haredi party, HaTzibbur HaHaredi, is polling at a similar level. It could draw one or two seats away from the established ultra-Orthodox parties, potentially weakening Netanyahu’s bloc. The party has said it would support a “broad national government,” without specifying which political camp it would join.For now, the key question is not so much whether voters will switch sides, but whether each bloc can mobilize its existing supporters to turn out on election day.
“The struggle right now is much less about moving voters from one side to the other and much more about making sure voters leave their homes and vote,” Rosner said. “And I estimate that the more difficult test will be for the right-wing bloc.”
The post Checkmate? Netanyahu faces a daunting playing field ahead of Oct. 27 appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Poll: Most New York City Jewish voters say criticism of Israel is often a cover for antisemitism
A majority of Jewish voters in New York City believe criticism of the Israeli government is often used as a cover for antisemitism, and more are concerned about antisemitic speech and attitudes than physical hate crimes, according to a new poll examining Jewish views on rising antisemitism and the city’s political climate. The survey also found that Jewish voters were more likely to blame the political left than the right for scapegoating Jews.
The Honan Strategy Group survey of 503 Jewish voters across the five boroughs, shared exclusively with the Forward, was conducted Oct. 2 through Oct. 6 via text-to-web before Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s controversial Oct. 7 statement and before his supporters turned on him during a peace vigil last Wednesday.
The survey found that while 85% do not consider criticism of the Israeli government or its leaders inherently antisemitic, 56% believe such criticism is often used as a cover for antisemitism. Meanwhile, seven in 10 Jewish voters believe they are being blamed for society’s problems, and more hold the political left responsible than the right.
The poll has a reported margin of error of plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.
The findings highlight the ongoing tensions between Mamdani and parts of the Jewish community over his harsh criticism of Israel, his defense of pro-Palestinian protesters’ rights and his ties to the Democratic Socialists of America and other left-wing groups.
Throughout his mayoral campaign and since taking office, Mamdani has sought to draw a line between his opposition to Israel and Zionism and his commitment to protecting Jewish New Yorkers. Last month, he rolled out a new municipal strategy to combat antisemitism, but the plan did not adopt a definition of the term.
Last Wednesday, on the third anniversary of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, Mamdani issued a statement condemning Israel’s war in Gaza as a “genocide” and accusing the U.S. government of complicity in Israeli war crimes, irking Jewish leaders, including some allies.
The poll also found Jewish voters divided over whether some positions Mamdani has taken toward Israel are antisemitic. By 48% to 42%, respondents said describing Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide is not antisemitic. Similarly, 49% said boycotting Israeli products and companies is not antisemitic, compared with 43% who said it is. But a majority — 52% — said denying Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state is antisemitic. Almost two-thirds consider protesting outside synagogues an act of antisemitism.
Mamdani, who rose to power aligned with pro-Palestinian activism and is the city’s first Muslim mayor, has repeatedly accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza, has refused to recognize Israel specifically as a Jewish state and has called for a permanent end to city investments in Israel Bonds.
Mamdani has also defended the rights of anti-Israel protesters, including outside synagogues hosting events promoting real estate in Israel and the West Bank. Some demonstrations have included chants calling for an “intifada” and other rhetoric Jewish leaders described as antisemitic and intimidating, slogans Mamdani has either condemned or encouraged people not to use.
“The data shows broad consensus that criticism of Israel’s government is not antisemitic on its own,” pollster Bradley Honan told the Forward. “But it also shows that most Jewish voters have watched that criticism turn into something more troubling, and they want that line taken seriously.”
Earlier this year, the city’s top Jewish officials urged Mamdani to recognize Israel’s centrality to Jewish identity, and a group of liberal rabbis who met with the mayor warned Mamdani that his rhetoric on Israel is “causing harm.”
The same survey found widespread disapproval among Jewish voters of Mamdani’s handling of antisemitism.
Respondents also appeared to disagree with Mamdani’s approach to combating antisemitism. His plan includes millions of dollars for security, hate-crime prevention and Jewish education. It does not adopt a formal definition of antisemitism and offers little clarity on how the administration views anti-Zionism.
In the poll, 34% said antisemitic speech and attitudes were a bigger problem than physical hate crimes, such as assaults and vandalism. Just 8% said hate crimes were the bigger concern, while 46% considered both equally serious.
The post Poll: Most New York City Jewish voters say criticism of Israel is often a cover for antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.
