A former student at Perryton High School in the great state of Texas is suing the school district over his school’s now-ended Red Ribbon Program. In the program students wearing red ribbons played the role of Jews, while those without ribbons played Nazis. The “Jews” had to take orders from the “Nazis”–including performing difficult and humiliating physical tasks.

How could such a perfectly designed program have gone wrong? Well…

The “Jew” filing suit was forced to carry a “Nazi” who weighed 70 lbs more than he did. As another “Nazi” jumped onto the “Jew’s” back he suffered a partially dislocated hip.

The student is suing the district, not the students, presumably because the students “were just following orders.”

via Lubbock Avalanche-Journal

Hannah Elka Meyers has that classic Eastern-European-turned-NY-Jew look going for her. A pretty face that any Yeshiva dropout would eat bacon for. Her music, however, is a bit confusing. Is it supposed to be a joke? And if so, where are the punchlines?

Take for instance her video “Flatbush is the Best.” She discusses all the positives of Flatbush–plants, diversity, two-story houses–but the video kinda makes it look like a shithole. So much so that I’m going to need better reasons than the ones she gives. Maybe show a flower or a beautiful child. Something. The lyrics are incredibly inoffensive to the point where I feel offended. Maybe it’s just me, but if I loved something enough, I’d be swearing about it with enthusiasm, not singing like I’m some disinterested bystander who got paid in Dunkin’ Donuts coffee to stand outside on a cold winter’s day for a music video. The video reminds me of every NCSY/USY promotional video ever written. But instead of waxing about Judaism, Hannah’s waxing about Flatbush. That being said, she’s not the only Jew who loves Flatbush.

Hannah’s song ‘I Know I Know I Know’ is the funniest song in her repertoire (assuming all her songs are meant to be chuckle-worthy). The premise is that all non-Jews are best taken advantage of as ‘practice dating’. Hannah has to grapple with Judaism’s strict and obsessive laws regarding interfaith marriages. But this doesn’t really make sense, even with all the presumed Jewish guilt. Hannah could marry a shaygetz and still raise Jewish kids. She should probably mention that to her mother. She’s got it a lot easier than Jewish men. At least this song is a bit dirtier, so I am therefore paradoxically less offended.

If you liked what you heard, you can see Hannah perform at her CD release party at Fontana’s this Thursday night, May 24th, from 8-11pm. Cover is only $5. You can find more info on the Facebook event page.

Last Friday, Sacha Baron Cohen gave his first interview as himself since the birth of Admiral General Aladeen, the lead role in the newly released The Dictator. Speaking with the BBC, Baron Cohen took the chance to debut another character: the Jewish comedian who talks about Jews in comedy.

“Jews have a tendency to become comedians,” he kvetched. “There’s ways of coping with persecution and one of them is, you know, humor.”

He also theorized about deeper roots:

“The first joke ever documented, I think, is in the Bible, where Isaac’s real name [in Hebrew] means ‘he laughed.’ So he laughed at the concept that his wife was going to become pregnant. So maybe that’s the origin.”

Baron Cohen also discussed the genesis of the character we now know as Borat Sagdiyev. Originally, this mustachioed pervert went by the name Alexei Krikler, and hailed from Moldova. But apparently something more extreme was needed, which is a fortunate event for the world of comedy, because while Borat Sagdiyev sounds like a guy who might offer you cash to sleep with your sister, Alexei Krikler from Moldova sounds like the whiz kid with a heavy accent competing for the Golden Pencil Award at the National High School Math Championship.

The actor also talked about his new film, The Dictator, which was conceived before the Arab Spring, though the timing was admittedly fortuitous. But truly, is there ever a bad time to make fun of “Leader of the Revolution,” “King of Kings,” “Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council,” sensitive short story writer, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi?

“I had always found Colonel Gaddafi hilarious and I wanted to do a character that was inspired by him… Gaddafi had these thirty virgin guards, you know, he dressed unintentionally like a sixty year old woman, and would often break wind when being interviewed for the BBC.”

Dictators, from Kim Jong Il to Gaddafi to Turkmenbashi, are rich material:

“I think the word is ludicrous. They’re vicious and yet ludicrous. Dictators, because they are all powerful, end up becoming these larger than life absurd characters and obviously, anyone who disagrees with them is executed.”

Larger than life absurd characters? Sounds like the entire comedic repertoire of Sacha Baron Cohen. So go see Admiral General Aladeen get up to tricks in his new movie. It’s what Gaddafi would have wanted.

Mark Zuckerberg’s Big Week: $19 Billion And A Wedding (MTV)

Vice Meets: Brett Ratner (Vice)

British actor John Cleese to appear in Israeli heist comedy (Haaretz)

The show ‘Girls’ isn’t racist; you are (Hipster Jew)

When I See a Boy Wearing a Kippah at a Bar (When On The Upper West Side)

Credit Where Credit Is Due (Failed Messiah) (NY Times)

Family of slain Hamas figure seeks to block Israel movie (The Daily Star)

Saudi Arabia bans English language and Western calendar (RT)

The trailer for The Possession has three of those basic ingredients, except the demonic possessor in this movie is a dybbuk, so we’ll be getting Jewish mumbo-jumbo between creepy kid moments instead! Here’s the synopsis:

Clyde and Stephanie Brenek see little cause for alarm when their youngest daughter Em becomes oddly obsessed with an antique wooden box she purchased at a yard sale. But as Em’s behavior becomes increasingly erratic, the couple fears the presence of a malevolent force in their midst, only to discover that the box was built to contain a dibbuk [sic], a dislocated spirit that inhabits and ultimately devours its human host.

The trailer looks pretty awesome and is packed with some truly creepy moments. Watch below:

(via io9.)

"Papercut Masochist" from DARK CORNERS OF A LIGHT SOUL

Your show is called Dark Corners of a Light Soul. Where’d that name came from? You got a light soul with dark corners?

I definitely have a light soul but this collection brought me into darker areas of my life. I allowed myself to delve into dark, frustrating and neurotic places, the ones you never really want to get into. In a way the show is a de-peacocking; we keep a smiley face on for the world, wearing flashy bright color clothing to get attention, then arrive home, let our guard down, feel everything and the colors fade.

So this show is  darker than previous shows…

My work usually has a lot of lightness and colors that pop. This collection has taken on darker hues but I never loose sight of color even if it’s a simple drip or dusting.

"Self-inflicted Beauty" from Dark Corners of a Light Soul

Your work is “mixed-media,” A mix of what?

My process is all about layering and mark-making.  When I use different mediums the process becomes endless. I love to use acrylics, spray paints, glitter, gold leaf, construction materials, magazine clippings and in my latest works, silhouettes from target ranges.

"Power Struggle" from Dark Corners of a Light Soul

What’s the significance of the shooting-range target?

The significance of the silhouettes is representations of how each individual becomes a target. Whether it is through our own self-torment or how others treat us.  I wanted to bring awareness to people in order to show how the layers can be stripped away so our true selves can live.

"A Lifetime of Unspoken I Love You's" from Dark Corners of a Light Soul

Your work is “street-art influenced,” how so? Any specific artists?

I wouldn’t say there is one specific artist who has inspired me recently but a collective. Since I live in the meatpacking district I am surrounded by street art, advertisements, and poetry that run along the buildings. All the pieces add up to a story conveyed that is universal and diverse. That is what inspires me to create a specific mark use of color to add another layer.

There’s a spiritual vibe to your work, is that the case? Do your Jewish roots play into your art at all?

I am spiritual. To me it is the energy that surrounds us everyday. The inspirations of the people and environment. I have a strong tie to my roots and traditions and Judaism always come through my work in some way, though what that way is, is tough to say.

If money were no object, what art would you own in your home?

Anything by Yves Klein, Jose Parla or Basquiat.

DARK CORNERS OF A LIGHT SOUL opens with a public reception Thursday May 17 (7–10p) and runs May 17–23 402 West 13th St. http://lindseywilner.com

It’s been a busy month in gay news: Obama and Biden support marriage equality, John Travolta supports happy endings, Bravo’s Andy Cohen is finally looking for a boyfriend, and now (sit down girls), Y-Love, the only African-American hasidic Jewish hip hop artist comes out as gay.

In an Out.com exclusive interview, Y-Love, nee Yitz Jordan, tells the gay magazine he “wanted to tell the world that he’s [been] gay for some time, but he was concerned that his ‘public reputation’ would be tarnished and the music career he has fought so hard to carve out in a seemingly intolerant community would be ruined.”

Jordan converted to Hasidic Judaism in 2000, attended Jerusalem’s fundamentalist Ohr Somayach Yeshiva, married a woman for a brief time and lived an ultra-orthodox lifestyle while becoming a rising star in the hip hop community, even winning an award for Best Hop Hop artist at Heeb’s 2006 Jewish Music Awards.

While Y-Love has now gone down the path of Matisyahu and identifies as ex-Hasidic, it’s fascinating that Jordan lived a Hasidic lifestyle, even marrying a woman – all by choice, knowing he was gay. I can forgive marrying a woman, but chareidi-misery by choice? That’s unforgivable.

With Y-Love now focusing on finding his man-basherte, and the release of his new single “Focus on the Flair” where he can be seen in drag and vogueing, we’re curious to see how his religious Jewish audience will respond to his coming out. Time will tell, in the meanwhile, we offer Y-Love much mazel in this new journey and remember there are resources out there on teaching ex-Orthos how to date in New York!

Toward the end of last week, the New York Times published an expose on the Ultra-Orthodox community for ignoring a child molestation problem and for, in some instances, actually shunning and ostracizing the victims instead of seeking justice for them. How is this happening? Well, the Hasidic community reasons that by delivering the suspected pedophile over to the police for investigation, you are therefore transgressing Jewish law as a moser, or an informer. A moser cannot turn his fellow Jew in to a secular non-Jewish authority as derived by Maimonides’ extrapolation of ha’poresh mi’darchei tzibbur, or one who actively separates himself from the rest of the community. While I doubt that our great sage Rambam meant to protect the the lowest of the low, some Hasidic communities are nevertheless manipulating the learnings of our elders and in turn, sheltering these deviant monsters.

While I’m not entirely surprised that this sickening predatory activity is plaguing some shtetls (after all, there was even a Law & Order episode about it), I am saddened and shocked by the various reactions.  And I don’t mean the delusional justifications and rationalizations of the Hasidic community leaders–I mean, the Jews living outside of the Williamsburgs and the Borough Parks. Based on the conversations I have had over the weekend since these necessary articles appeared, I would like to suggest some potential responses to our collective propensity to sweep shamefulness under the rug.

1. “The New York Times likes to pick on the Jews.”

This is a complaint I hear whenever the Times covers Israel, Jews, Israeli Jews, the banks, and/or brisket. And in truth, it may have some validity to it. The New York Times known for its liberal slant can oft portray Israel as oppressor, even when it’s not warranted. But that’s neither here nor there, and it’s also something you and I can never prove. Yet when I discussed the two aforementioned articles on the Hasidic community written by Ray Rivera and Sharon Otterman with someone I knew well, he said something along the lines of, “Well, of course, when it comes to the Jews it’s a big story. But what about the Church? Why don’t they talk about abuse in the Church?”

If you do a search for the words “abuse” and “church” on the nytimes.com, you will find 431,000 results. If you were to however limit it down from the last 150 years to the last seven days, you will still get 19 results. Deflecting the attention from ourselves to another fundamentally flawed and troubled religious system will by no means make our problems go away. Child abuse is a problem regardless of the house of worship, and kudos to the New York Times for bringing this to light even if, according to many, the daily paper still may hate Israel.

2. “It’s not worth ruining someone’s reputation especially if the accusations aren’t true.”

First and foremost, shame on Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zwiebel, the executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America, for having a response similar to this. And this is coming from a media outlet that once photographed Roseanne dressed as Hitler. Zwiebel, along with his extremely influential and powerful Orthodox organization, determined last year that Orthodox Jews should not report allegations to the police unless a Rabbi has given permission to do so. He also said that “you can destroy a person’s life with a false report.” Incidentally, you can also destroy a person’s life by putting your hand down his pants without permission. Zwiebel also added that “you speak it over with a rabbi before coming to any definitive conclusion in your own mind,” which implies that after an incident, it is important that you first consult with a rabbi so he may convince you that it was not molesting, but just tickling.

3. “I understand the secrecy. After all, if could ruin the  shidduch (impending marriage proposals).” 

It’s hard to believe but this was actually said to me, but it was. And it wasn’t said in an effort to implicitly justify the cover-up attempts–the person who had this reaction was simply channeling the Hasidic community’s emphasis on yichus, or legacy. If, hypothetically, someone’s brother or sister had been accused of being a child molester, this would affect the siblings’ chances of getting married. It’s sadly accurate in a community that weighs worthiness on, for example, what kind of China they set the Shabbos table with.

I think in an ideal world everyone would agree that one should not be held responsible for his or her family member’s actions. However, that is very much the case in the Ultra-Orthodox world. Families have and always will go to extreme measures in maintaining an uncontaminated facade like hiding their televisions in cabinets, keeping diseases or sicknesses obsessively secret, and in some cases, even protecting the identity of a pedophile. Maybe, though, once it would be known that someone’s brother was forcibly abusing children and as a result, his sister went years without a suitor, the community would only then react with less tolerance.

What I’m suggesting here is that if there had an old maid problem in Williamsburg, the rabbis would then maybe speak out against child molesting.

4. “We should be able to handle this within our own community. No need to get the police involved.”

In March, the Times notes, Satmar Hasidic authorities in Williamsburg posted a Yiddish posters in synagogues warning adults and children to stay away from a community member who they said was molesting boys. But the sign didn’t recommend calling the police: “With great pain we must, according to the request of the brilliant rabbis (may they live long and good lives), inform you that the young man,” who was named, “is, unfortunately, an injurious person and he is a great danger to our community.” This is a step in the right direction, but sadly, it is not very effective.

I know of one definitive example in which a serial child molester–I’m speaking of at least two-dozen individual accusations–left the country, rebuilt his life in Israel, and currently works with children. You would think for this not to be the case, considering the small Jewish geography we occupy, but it’s incredibly easy for a violator to re-root his life in another Jewish community and pick up exactly where they left off with a trail of unvindicated victims in his wake.

5. “It’s not as bad as “they” make it out to be.”

When it comes to harming young children, there should be a zero tolerance policy. I don’t care if it only happened once or twice. However, according to journalists Sharon Otterman and Ray Riveria “in recent months, a new program called Kol Tzedek, the Voice of Justice, has contributed to an effective crackdown on child sexual abuse among ultra-Orthodox Jews, saying it had led to 95 arrests involving more than 120 victims.” 95 arrests. 120 victims. Williamsburg, we have a problem.

6. “The rabbis understand things we cannot so we must accept it.”

The overwhelming response to the reposting of the Times articles on the comprehensive Orthodox Jewish blog Vo Is Neius is that the notion of moser should never apply in regards to abuse especially when considering “dina d’malchusoh dina,” that we are obligated to follow the laws of the land we occupy. These commenters and readers are for the most part observent G-d fearing people, yet allowing the police to intervene seems obvious to them. This shouldn’t be seen as a contradiction.

If, in eventuality, the rabbis’ devotees, the frequent shul goers, and the check-writing participants speak out and demand a zero tolerance policy, maybe the molesting business wouldn’t be so good. But by the communal passivity, rabbis remaining silent, and the continued blind eye, they are ostensibly supporting the continuation of it. And it may come to a point when the crying of our children gets too difficult to ignore even as the words of some rabbis try to drown them out.

Though he can’t recall the name of Israel’s Prime Minister or Secretary of Defense, Peter Berg offers some scathing critiques of their policies on Iran (“Israelis will die…”) in an interview that was apparently supposed to be about his new film Battleship. And who would know more about the tough decisions over waging war in the Middle East than a man who just directed a film based on a board game?

A board game…about war.

It’s hard to say what the best part of this clip is. When Berg pivots momentarily back to talking about Rihanna? When he talks about the subsequent deaths of Israelis after any Iran strike, and it looks like interviewer Jason Holt is going to punch him in the face? When he calls Holt a motherfucker and accuses him of dodging the draft? (Yes, probably the last of these.) And keep in mind that the whole interview is only one minute and thirty-four seconds long.

Note to Israeli media personalities: when you sit down with anyone to talk about anything, get ready for a lecture about Israeli foreign policy. Watch the whole thing below.

Heeb wishes a hearty mazel tov to cartoonist Eli Valley and welcomes him to our little family of Jewish satirists who have been condemned by the Anti-Defamation League for being brutally and graphically frank about subjects which the organization’s national director Abraham Foxman selectively deems beyond the pale.

In an interview with the Algemeiner, Foxman, who once said, “I think what Eli Belly [sic] does is fine,” now says that his latest comic is “offensive and obnoxious and crosses the line.”

The cartoon, “The Hater in the Sky,” published by the progressive Israeli magazine +972, depicts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu goading President Barack Obama into sacrificing life, limb and dignity for the state of Israel. Despite the President making even the gravest of sacrifices – going so far as to allow his limbless torso to be sodomized by Netanyahu – the Prime Minister and pro-Israel hawks continue to doubt the authenticity of the President’s commitment to Israel.

“Cartoonists usually have much greater leeway of criticism because they are cartoonists, but even within that framework it crosses the line,” Foxman said.

When asked his feelings about Foxman’s remarks, Valley told Heeb, “I went over it in Photoshop this weekend because the lettering wasn’t entirely legible when reduced. I’m glad he liked the final version.”