Photographer Faye Schulman reunites with three Jewish partisans from Warsaw. Schulman and the three men had thought that each other had been killed. Poland, 1943.
Born in 1925 in Lenin, Poland, Schulman grew up in a small town in what is now Belarus. In 1939, Russia and Germany divided Poland, and Lenin fell under Russian jurisdiction.
Schulman’s brother, a photographer, taught her how to take pictures, process negatives and develop prints. She worked as his assistant. She also knew a little about medicine, as her brother-in-law was a doctor.
When the Nazis invaded in 1941, they forced the town’s 1,800 Jews into a ghetto — except for six “useful Jews.” Among them: a tailor, a carpenter and a photographer.
Schulman was recruited to take pictures for the Nazis (her brother had already fled town). She would snap headshots of Nazi officials and portraits of their mistresses.
One day, she developed a photograph that was clearly a mass grave of Jews who had been killed. Peering closely at the print, she recognized her own family. She hid the negative in a box of photo paper to assure it would remain safe and unseen.
She vowed vengeance and sought justice in the forest with a group of Russians — mostly men and overwhelmingly non-Jews — she’d met up with when they raided Lenin for supplies.
She begged them to take her along. They were doubtful of her worth; what good was a woman? But she promised she could serve as a doctor’s assistant, and they accepted her into the group.
She recovered her photography equipment during a subsequent raid on Lenin.
Schulman hid her Jewish identity. During Passover, she ate only potatoes, never explaining why.
She made sure her fellow partisans remained healthy through the harshness of winter, and tended to their periodic battle wounds.
She made her own stop bath and fixer, and buried bottles of the solutions in holes in the ground, retrieving them when needed.
For two years, she lived in the forest and documented life there. She would make “sun prints” by putting the negative next to photographic paper and holding it toward the sun. She’d then give them to fellow resistance fighters.
“They treasured their pictures and respected me for it,” she said.
She married after the war. She and her husband, Morris, could take very little with them to the displaced persons camp in Germany. Though she had very few belongings after two years in the forest, Schulman possessed many, many photos and negatives. She selected only her favorite prints and negatives to take with her to the DP camp, where she spent three years. She brought those with her to Canada.
In the [“Pictures of Resistance: The Photography of Jewish Partisan Faye Schulman”] exhibit, each photo is paired with a lengthy explanation of the image. The text is in Schulman’s own words, recorded during an interview Braff conducted with her in her Toronto home in 2005.
She also wrote a book chronicling her story. “A Partisan’s Memoir: Woman of the Holocaust” was published in 1995.
“I want people to know there was resistance,” Faye said during that interview, the text of which is displayed with the photo exhibit.
“Jewish people didn’t go like sheep to the slaughter … I was a photographer. I have pictures. I have proof.” (via jweekly)
everyone who spent years telling me to ignore harassment from “ironic” neo-nazis online because “they’re just trolls” once they started meeting up in person in larger numbers and terrorizing people with weapons: holy shit, internet trolls have radicalized into actual nazis!!
as long as i’m picking ~mean gatekeeper~ fights, some people are so hostile to the idea of Jewish identity having any definition or boundaries whatsoever that they’ve come full-circle to proto-evangelism. i’ve seen people actually say that it’s bad to tell someone they might need to convert if they want to be Jewish because “there aren’t many of us so we need as many Jews as we can get”
to be clear this isn’t about patrilineal Jews or w/e, it’s about like…..”last month i found out my grandpa was ethnically Jewish and now i’m reblogging memes about ‘goyim’”
(gentiles don’t touch)
I see this happen a lot, especially from gentiles who are from formerly evangelizing religions (not just Evangelical proper, but also certain ex-catholics, other baptist/fundie-escapees, or like, folks who approached atheism with that same evangelical flare).
It’s weird because there’s this…well a somewhat unclear line of enthusiasm and participation that happens, but also so many people go “I’m thinking of converting” and then months later they’ve spoken to nobody, but are now like “Jewish” on their about. or a distant ancestor was, but they’re usually not say, conversos/bnei anusim and even those people often have to go through a lot of effort and work to reconnect/convert/or be “confirmed” into the tribe.
it can feel very “accept the word into your heart”-y with no real engagement/connection outside of maybe reblogging related topics.
Ahhh I’ve seen folks like that – who use a distant relative – then use it to speak over me (about antisemitism … hmmm) because I converted and they didn’t
And it’s funny how the “Jewish ancestry” always comes up to deflect accusations of anti-semitism when it otherwise doesn’t interact with their identity/experiences at all except for a rhetorical “gotcha” – when really it’s a lot closer to white people who claim their “great grandmother was a Cherokee princess”
Yeah especially when it’s someone like Milo Yabbadabbadopolis who clearly uses it as a cover for Nazi accusations.
Reblog and have a Happy Hitler Is Dead but My Queer Jewish Mixed Race Ass Is Alive Day
For the people who don’t speak German: lord-kitschener said “Die angry then”
queer jewish people, Judaism does not believe in jesus therefore the religion would not allow the ‘abomination’ of being homosexual because it is in their long list of many things one is not allowed to do.
Note that the bible also lists eating unclean beasts as an abomination as well.
Please explain more about this “bible,” the “abominations” we are not allowed to do, and what believing or not believing in Jesus has to do with ANYTHING.
Jewish people do not believe in christ, they must in turn follow rules which god has set in order to get into heaven because they cannot receive salvation in Jesus christ, i understand, Judaism and being Jewish are two different things. And, im trying to be friendly here, i understand, but i’m not christian nor am i apart of judaism, but i study these religions out of respect to those who’s lives are poured into them.
Look im not in the mood to get in a heated angry argument because as i’ve said im attempting to be civil and kind and enjoy life. Im just saying it’s a contradiction to say Queer Jew because Judaism litteraly has a rule against anything other than Heterosexuality.
There is, in no way hostility here, just a calm and placid statement of facts i’ve learn, if i have misinformation, please just tell me, don’t be a hostile, sarcastic jerk about it just because you came into my post expecting me to be ignorant and unwilling to learn because that right there is stereotyping and its wrong. You need to be civil, if you respond to THIS with hostility, i will ignore you, and i will not care if you go to your followers and try to make me look like a dumb shit because i don’t care about some random strangers rudeness.
I will try not to respond with any hostility, but I want you to realize that you were the who claimed that our religion and way of life is fundamentally incompatible with being LGBTQ. And then you explained Judaism incorrectly and with false authority, later described as a “claim and placid statement of facts.” How is that being respectful, as you claim to be, to “those who’s [sic] lives are poured into them”? If you think you are being civil and not rude as you have ordered me to be, I’m not sure what to tell you.
Here you go:
There is no one way to practice Judaism. We are a diasporic people who have had to adapt to different cultures and societies for at least 2000 years. Saying that Judaism has an absolute and self-contained rule or mitzvot against or for anything shows one is coming at it from a narrow and uneducated view (this goes for anyone Jewish or gentile).
You’re explaining what Judaism is by the rules and theology of a different religion, namely Christianity. What does believing whether Jesus was or was not the messiah have to do with Judaism? Judaism doesn’t have a concept of salvation, because we don’t believe in original sin. Original sin is a Christian belief, not a religious belief. We don’t need to be saved, either by Jesus or by following our rules.
In Judaism, there’s no inherent evil or eternal damnation. We all have yetzer hara and yetzer hatov; an evil inclination and a good inclination. Both are necessary and natural. Because we have free will, we freely choose between both of them. Nothing compels or tempts us to make a choice, we choose freely. You may not be a Christian, but you’re looking at Judaism through a Christian normative lens. That is displaying ignorance about Judaism.
By the “rules which god has set to get into heaven” do you mean Halacha? Because that’s not what Halacha is. Judaism doesn’t have a set concept of heaven. Halacha, similar to sharia in Islam, is the religious law of how a Jewish person is supposed to behave throughout life. It’s made up of mitzvot or commandments, which we are obligated to follow. Different movements and different communities have different interpretations of Halacha, along with different minhagim or community customs. Even within different movements and communities, there is a diversity of interpretations. We are expected to wrestle and argue about it; we are B’nei Yisrael, or the children of Israel where “Israel” is one who struggles with G-D.
Not obeying a commandment does not mean you are damned to hell or have “sinned.” As I said above, Judaism doesn’t have a concept of eternal damnation. It’s expected that people will make mistakes or errors because no one is perfect. Being imperfect is the natural state of humanity. In Hebrew, the word for an unintentional sin is cheit meaning to miss the mark or stumble (off the path of Halacha). Everyone can do teshuvah by making amends, learning from your actions, and returning to the path of fulfilling our obligations and following Halacha. It involves, amonst other things, correcting the mistake to the best of your ability and to learn from the mistake.
“Abomination” is a bad translation of the Hebrew word toevah.
“The remaining philological problem is the word toevah, usually
translated as “abomination.” The word in the Hebrew Bible is used
in different contexts to mean different things. It appears first in
Genesis when Joseph invites his brothers to dine with him, and we
are told that the Egyptians do not eat with Hebrews because doing
so is hateful (toevah) to them. It is clear from this context that the
idea of toevah is not unique to Hebrews. Every people has its own list
of things that it finds contaminating or distasteful.”
– Wrestling With God and Men: Homosexuality in the Jewish Tradition, Rabbi Steven Greenberg (Rabbi Steven Greenberg is a gay Jewish Modern Orthodox Rabbi.)
And distasteful and contaminating don’t have negative meaning in this explanation. It’s more of a “we do things this way and they do things that way” without putting a value judgment upon it.
The fact that treyf food (non-kosher) is also referred to as toevah points to the word meaning different things in different contexts.
Specifically, the mitzvah you’re referring to prohibits the action of a cis man sexually penetrating another cis man anally. It’s not a prohibition against “anything other than Heterosexuality.” Neither any other sexual act is specifically prohibited nor any sexual act between two (cis) women. One of Rabbi Greenberg’s theories, stemming from the fact that only this specific sexual act is prohibited, is that the reason it was made into an explicit prohibition was because it was avodah zara or pagan idolatrous ritual. The theory is that the intent was to prevent Jews from “copying the gentiles” because that way led to idolatry and therefore unethical behavior. (Idolatory and unethical behavior are linked in Judaism.) Another theory Rabbi Greenberg expounds upon is that the prohibition is specifically against penetrating a (cis) man to humiliate him because that (the humiliation) is abhorrent. Here toevah is translated to abhorrent. It’s a prohibition against rape.
You don’t have to be Jewish, but don’t tell people who are what their religion and culture does not say about their validity and basic dignity. You’re asking me to be respectful, you should reciprocate. Especially when you’re explaining their religion and the basic precepts thereof completely incorrectly.
If you have any other questions about Judaism, I’ll be happy to try to answer. After a long day, full of trying to remember to follow the mitzvot of saying the brachot (blessings) over my food and not being able to eat a piece of chocolate after my chicken dinner because I observe kashrut and don’t mix dairy and meat, I’m going to sleep.
@jewish-privilege If I understand you correctly, the Jews do not believe in God, in the laws of God (Decalogue), in the Hereafter and in the Justice of God in the Hereafter? Is it correct ? If so, what do they believe?
To be completely honest, and perhaps a little curt, maybe go to Wikipedia or jewfaq.org. You’re asking for information that is readily available and easily found.
Judaism has our G-d (though we also have a long tradition of atheism/agnosticism)
Judaism has 613 mitzvot, as jewish-privilege said. The Ten Commandments (which would really be better translated as the ten sayings, the ten declarations or even the ten things) are not mitzvot in and of themselves, but are generally considered to be categories of mitzvot.
Judaism doesn’t give a fuck about “the Hereafter”. Or at least, nowhere near the scale of fuck that Christianity gives. Who cares what happens after you die? What matters isn’t the hereafter, it’s the here, now. This world is the important one.
Is there Justice of G-d in the Hereafter? Yeah, probably. Is it important or relevant to actual Jewish life? Not particularly.
@purronronner I do not understand what you mean? There would be a God for the Jews and another God (or no God) for the non-Jews? Yet there is only one Universe and therefore one God. And since justice does not exist here below, it must exist in the hereafter. If not, what would the word “justice” mean?
G-d is our god. Whatever you think about other religions, whether other people have other gods or whether G-d is the only god who exists – G-d made a covenant with the Jewish people specifically. We have a deeper relationship with G-d, which comes with about 606 more rules than non-Jews are expected to follow. (Basically, we’re the designated drivers.)
I never said justice doesn’t exist in the hereafter, I said the hereafter isn’t important. Justice is an ideal, one we strive to fulfill in this world. If there isn’t justice here? The answer isn’t to go “oh well, there’ll be justice once you die”. The answer is to make justice here. Tikkun olam – fixing the world – is one of the most important things in Judaism. You have to make the world better, or what’s even the point?
@purronronner When you say that “G-d” is your god, do you mean that “G-d” belongs to the Jews? Does this imply that “G-d” does your will, or that you do the will of “G-d”? If it’s the will of “G-d”, how do you know that will? Do you believe that “G-d” created the Universe and all it contains?
When I said that G-d is our god, I mean what I said already – G-d made a covenant with the Jews, and only with the Jews. We do the will of G-d. We know the will of G-d because it’s written down in the Torah. There’s a story about this:
G-d went to all the peoples of the world and asked each if they would like to make a covenant with G-d. Each people asked: what would we have to do? G-d replied: you would have to follow these 613 rules, where you currently only have to follow 7. Each people asked: and what would we get out of it? G-d replied: …not much, to be honest, you’d just be making your life harder. Most peoples decided: no thanks, not interested. The Jews decided: challenge accepted, let’s do this thing.
(And then, a few hours after they got the rules, they said: hey G-d, do you take constructive criticism?)
Finally – well, I personally am an atheist, so I don’t think G-d (or any god) even exists. But yes, standard Jewish theology is that G-d created the universe.
@purronronner It’s pretty funny. You tell everything about what God has done. And finally you say that God does not exist? And so the world is uncreated? In any case, thank you for your time and your explanations.
Up until that question, you were asking about Jewish theology, not about what *I* believe. Our conversation has been about Jewish theology. The fact that I’m an atheist isn’t relevant to the conversation, except that you asked me what I believed so I gave an honest answer.
“And so the world is uncreated” – obviously not. But I’m not going to get into that, because that wasn’t what we were talking about.
I don’t think it’s worth it to talk to them. They reblog from white supremacists and memes about “Cultural Marxism,” which is a euphemism for Jewish control and usurpation of white culture, amongst other lovely content.
And this is a PRIME example of how approaching Judaism and Jewish law from any viewpoint other than a Jewish one leads fucking nowhere. If you are looking at Jewish teachings, culture, and religion through the lens of Christianity (as this person very clearly is), then nothing will make sense. because Judaism is NOTHING like Christianity. Not in out texts, not in how we interpret our texts, not in how we lead our lives.
Amazing how many websites that refuse to block Nazi content (whether because of muh freeze peach or because it’s supposedly not manageable) find it easy and breezy as fuck to censor LGBT content/put it behind a “sensitive to the innocent children” wall
Nazis aren’t marching while they’re at work. Most jobs and employers have policies preventing political expression at work. The NFL is a business. Players are employees.
If that were true, then the national anthem would not be sung at all. The national anthem is a political expression. A popular political expression is still a political expression.
You want political expression to be allowed, but only if it’s the politics you agree with.
You don’t shout back because you think you’ll change the oppressors’ mind.
You shout back for those who can’t.
Theres an anarchist group at my old university that has been relentless in protesting/shaming nazis and other bigots at the school as well as the school for not doing anything about their behavior. Toward the end of the year some professors told them that they were able to pressure the administration to hire a full-time diversity officer instead of the inexperienced part time diversity officer they currently have as a result of the protests. Shaming tactics help more institutional types by demonstrating that there is a need to be fulfilled and shifting the Overton window in that direction.
A condor has struck up an unusual friendship with a man who saved the huge creature’s life.
The man nursed the condor back to health after it reportedly fell from a nest as a baby.
And the condor clearly didn’t forget his rescuer, as video footage shows the pair greeting each other with hugs and one big warm embrace, after the condor returned.
After being rescued, the condor – the largest bird in North America – was then able to learn how to fly and return to normal life.
Since there is a royal wedding coming up, you’re probably going to see takes like this a lot, as people who’s self image demands that they appear to have put some intelligent thought into their political beliefs try to justify getting all excited about it.
So, whenever you see this historically illiterate ‘constitutional monarchy is a fail-safe mechanism against authoritarianism/fascism’ take, remember two things.
1. Original fascist Benito Mussolini co-existed with King Victor Emmanuel III of Italy just fine.
2. Hitler’s choice for head of a conquered British state was his good mate Edward VIII.
These days, the function of monarchy is to lend legitimacy to whatever political system is dominant at the time, and whenever that dominance shifts, for example from liberal democracy to fascist state, the function of the monarchy is to smooth that transition by providing continuity and conferring legitimacy. Given that the monarch has the power to dissolve parliament and is commander in chief of the British armed forces, the existence of the British monarchy is the one route by which a fascist takeover could be 100% legal and constitutional.
Also worth remembering that the current heir to the British throne, Prince Charles, is a capital T traditionalist, a follower of Rene Guenon who thinks that we’re living at the end of a historical cycle and should be preparing for the next one, where we can transcend the “chronic imbalance and disharmony” of modernity.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/GettyImages-510445488-581a1e433df78cc2e8092af4.jpg)
Rush's tumblr archive 