On December 17th I posted an article here at America's Living Room taking a semi-serious pot-shot at Pajama Boy of Obamacare fame. In as much as I did disparage this "man-child" and the image he portrayed as basically a microcosm of the emasculation of the American male over the past few decades. In addition, I admit that my visceral reaction initially was also along the lines of the atypical youth camping out in their parents basement (aka living at home, still). It goes hand-in-hand with the left wing belief of "taking no responsibility for oneself" being behaviorally or professionally. That said, I came across an article this morning written by Jay Michaelson at "Forward.com" titled Obamacare "pajama boy" controversy wrapped in anti-Semitism.
We are to give credibility to this yahoo because his website is actually called "The Jewish Daily Forward". If you actually look closely at the original ad, there is absolutely no reference or credence to indicate the effeminate pajama boy as Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Kwanzic or any other religion what so ever. Yet, Mr. Michaelson wants us to connect the thought police dots that he is spewing.
He advocates the following -- "The Right went apoplectic, calling Pajama Boy “a metrosexual in a plaid onesie,” “an insufferable man-child,” and various other vaguely sexist and homophobic epithets. Apparently, real men don’t wear pajamas.
Or glasses. What’s interesting about the Right’s freakout about men who don’t measure up to the standards of the 1950s is how Pajama Boy’s obvious Jewishness has been subsumed by these other characteristics.
Yes, Virginia, Pajama Boy is a member of the tribe. Look at him. Pale Ashkenazic skin, Jew-fro’d black curls, Woody Allen specs. Even the smart-ass expression on his face screams of the Wise Son from the Passover Seder.
Parenthetically, the model himself is one Ethan Krupp, an Organizing for America staffer who is, in fact, Jewish. But whether Krupp himself is circumcised or not, Pajama Boy is semiotically Jewish, even stereotypically so."
First, let me address the last sentence -- Ewwwww.... I did not need that visual on top of the stereotypical one I already had (which I wrote about).
According to this author we were to draw the Jewish conclusion because of "Pale Ashkenazic skin, Jew-fro’d black curls, Woody Allen specs. Even the smart-ass expression on his face screams of the Wise Son from the Passover Seder."
Yeah, that is exactly what I thought when I saw that photo. He caught me, red handed (oops -- another racist term). I believe the Yiddish term for idiot liar is schakren putz.
He ends his screed by saying we (those who berated this man child) as facists. His exact words were --
"Whether or not the Pajama-Boy bashers are unconsciously anti-Semitic or not, I don’t know. Consciously, they are against everything “Judaism” stands for, at least as construed by its enemies: outsiderness, cosmopolitanism, liberalism, a progressive rather than nativist agenda, an opposition to the notion that there is one kind of “normal” person, a sympathy for the underdog and the immigrant as opposed to the successful and the privileged, and, yes, a rejection of a certain gendered, masculinist understanding of justice wherein the strong survive and the weak are trampled underfoot like the untermenschen they are.
That fascistic outlook has long been a part of far-right conservatism – whether in revisionist Zionism, contemporary French/Hungarian/Greek nationalism, American Republicanism, or German fascism. Real men are strong, and the weak don’t deserve our pity. Let them get sick for lack of healthcare; they probably deserve it. And as for women, and the parasitic “Jewish” men who resemble them? They are to be suppressed and domesticated, not empowered. Patriarchy is good. Sexism is natural. Get out of your onesies, America. And put on your jackboots.
Schakren putz indeed!
I came across this article just now, This is what I am talking about!!!!