Thank you, my friend, for the gentle call-out on privilege in this exchange.
As I wrote below in response to someone else, I reacted to this story without analysing it. I knew there was something very wrong about it. It made me angry, whereas many other examples of idiotic thinking just make me either sad or amused. I just didn't think very hard about why.
What I didn't see immediately was just how many different levels of anti-semitism there were in the article, starting with the reasons behind the refusal by the hospital in the first place and going on to the construction of the story - the inclusion of the information about the Holocaust symposium, I have realised, is there to deliberately defuse any idea that the reactions to the paintings might be based inanti-semitism: "how can not wanting to show these paintings be anti-semetic when Jews don't want to show them either." It's a deliberate diversion, and I walked right into it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2006-09-07 10:45 pm (UTC)As I wrote below in response to someone else, I reacted to this story without analysing it. I knew there was something very wrong about it. It made me angry, whereas many other examples of idiotic thinking just make me either sad or amused. I just didn't think very hard about why.
What I didn't see immediately was just how many different levels of anti-semitism there were in the article, starting with the reasons behind the refusal by the hospital in the first place and going on to the construction of the story - the inclusion of the information about the Holocaust symposium, I have realised, is there to deliberately defuse any idea that the reactions to the paintings might be based inanti-semitism: "how can not wanting to show these paintings be anti-semetic when Jews don't want to show them either." It's a deliberate diversion, and I walked right into it.