Bio
Dana began her Mom Career when her son was born in 2004. When she isn't fulfilling demands for chocolate milk and oreos or watching episodes of Bob t...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Quo Vadis, Israel?

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 139
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

I'm not an expert on matters of the Middle East. I make an effort to read the newspapers and watch the news, but most of the information I discover usually pertains to the war in Iraq and our American troops.

About a month ago, BlogHer's Kim Pearson and I had a brief chat discussion about Middle Eastern history and I was surprised (and somewhat embarrassed) with how little I knew about the territory and it's many crises and religious conflicts.

In my high school history classes my teachers barely skimmed the surface of the complex histories of the geographical regions of Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. We learned of the many controversies between the lands and the numerous failed attempts to make peace among the people. Any discussion of Iraq consisted mostly of anti-Saddam Hussein rhetoric. Looking back on it now, it's a shame that we didn't delve into the details.

I do remember learning about the Holy Land in catechism class, but only as it pertained to the Roman-Catholic faith, the Bible, or Jesus Christ himself.

I once asked a teacher why there were so many conflicts in the Middle East, why people were always fighting with each other, but I never received an answer that made any sense. My questions were often answered with generalizations or personal assumptions.

One teacher avoided my question altogether and instead suggested I pray for these quarreling nations, "so that they may find God's grace". Even now, eleven years out of school, the conflicts of the Middle East overwhelm and confuse me.

Perhaps my desire to find answers to my questions inspired me to read the book Quo Vadis, Israel?, in which author H. Peter Nennhaus examines the conflicts between Israel and the Palestinian people.

"For Jews and non-Jews alike," Nennhaus writes, "the State of Israel has become the source of disappointment and concern. The world has witnessed the never-ending tragedy that has befallen the Holy Land with its wars, bombings and intifadas, and the United States, in spite of its unmatched influence, has been unable to resolve the crisis."

Nennhaus offers a substantive history of Jewish persecution and constant stigmatization, and the many attempts of eastern Europeans to induce social assimilation and christianization among the Jewish people. He talks about the deep-seeded hatred that is projected toward the Jews and gives a basic explanation of how antisemitism has occurred throughout the world, and still exists today.

"They [the Jews] were seen as an unacceptable infestation, an alien people who had to be either subdued or exorcised from the Motherland. They spoke their own tongue, they had persisted to adhere to an unchristian faith, they believed in absurd superstitions, they were a pathetic people provoking derision and contempt, and to top it off, they were now carrying the banner for the subversive movement of Marxism. In many different ways they were given to understand they were an unwanted and outcast race."

The author believes that peace in Israel cannot be achieved if things stay as they are and always have been, and offers that the solution may lie in relocating the State of Israel to a geographic region where there is no hostility.

I wonder how this would work? Would it solve the many conflicts that arise between Israelis and Palestinians? Where would the State of Israel relocate? Should the United States end the war in Iraq and assist the Israelis instead?

Nennhaus' suggestion is "to follow the recipe, which history employed in Israel and Palestine during the past six decades.... It is not unreasonable to fear that this mountain of loathing and abomination will be an irremovable fact dividing the Israelis and Palestinians and that in the unlikely event that some day in the future permanent peace between them becomes reality, it would still not extinguish the flames of mutual aversion."

Quo Vadis, Israel is a fact-based book and at first glance was rather intimidating to me. Perhaps because of my lack of knowledge, it didn't seem plausible to move an entire country. But, after reading the book I acquired a better understanding of the Jewish people and their history, and I can see why Nennhaus believes it may be in Israel's best interest to be transplanted to more suitable land in eastern Europe.

Nennhaus proposes that purchase of the land called the Kaliningrad Oblast from Russia, would encourage Russian immigrants to return to Russia by means of financial enticements, and the transfer of the Israelis

  • 139
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
washwords 5 pts

I was angry too. very angry. see above. But Dana seems very contrite and quite sincere in her desire to learn more. Before we castigate her, let's try to learn and improve. If someone as clearly well-intentioned and intelligent as Dana can be "duped" in this way, how are the many with less education, resources, and fabulous blogger friends, supposed to find their way?

 Dana, your mistake was NOT in reading the book, or any book. When you begin reading more on the history of the Jewish people, and the Holocaust in particular, you'll see that censorship, restricting the freedom of anyone (even/especially the authors of books like these) is no friend to the Jews or any minority group or oppressed group.

 Your "mistake" may only have been in not reading MORE/ asking more/ learning more. I for one give you credit though for not closing comments on this subject and being so responsive to each and every one.

 IMHO, that's how learning and healing really begin. 

washy

http://washwords.wordpress.com

washwords.dc@gmail.com

washwords 5 pts

wow. while dana you seem like an intelligent, intellectually curious (young? I'm guessing) woman and I commend you for that, which is why I'm (and apparently lots of others here) are even more disturbed that you took this as a "fact-based book" that gave you "an understanding of the Jewish people."

 I am quite sincere as a Jewish youngish woman myself that I do appreciate you admitting your ignorance in this area and desire to learn, but you could spend a lifetime on this and still not understand it all, some have!)

 I basically agree completely with everything Nerd's Eye said above and I have a feeling (since you're top viewed post on blogher) you're hearing a lot of critiques and "helpful" suggestions, so I'll keep it brief and simply say, please please please read more from left /right/americans/israelis etc etc. etc.

And do keep asking questions and bringing this up so we can all discuss. I certainly don't claim to be an expert myself. Like you, Im embarrassed at how little I know, really, perhaps doubly so because I AM jewish.

But I do know suggesting we gosh-golly just move somewhere else is hurtful and upsetting, not unlike the feeling i got in the pit of my stomach from some youths from a church group with "sharon=hitler" signs they couldn't possibly have understood.

I also know that the basic question you asked in catechism class is at the root of this all and deserves, but doesn't yet have a better answer. Why do they hate each other? Because. We all have a LOT of studying/writing / learning/listening to do before we can hope to come close to understanding.

thanks for thinking about this and taking the heat I suspect you are! 

washy

http://washwords.wordpress.com

washwords.dc@gmail.com

obvious_child 5 pts

I said correct me if I am wrong. Did you skip past that part?

So correct me!

It was late at night when I saw this post and didn't have time to whip out my bible to be accurate. I knew the three religions came from the same person, I just had the person wrong.

So, there's only ONE thing wrong with my post. The rest is accurate. Thank you for correcting me but -don't say EVERYTHING is inaccurate.

Jesus was a Jew. Christianity took about 30-70 years after Jesus' death to begin to form through the early church (it didn't form over night), Israel IS a land that is of great importance to both groups, there IS no easy resolution to this conflict, and you DO need to look at ALL sources (bible, koran, talmud, Greek writing, ANYTHING to expand your knowledge). Cross-check the dates, the events, and see both sides of the matter.

Is encouraging someone to form their own opinion instead of going to some "self-proclaimed intellectual" wrong?

lilmommythatcould 5 pts

THere are so many things wrong with your post  I do not know where to start- go back to your bible and read the story of Abraham & Sarah.  The Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths are Abrahamic religions.

I have a feeling more people will object to your post- heck I might be wrong but to me it sounds like you are using the Christian bible as a history book of the World instead of a history of a small part of the World.

obvious_child 5 pts

Oh dear.

A large problem of western-centric historical thinking is that people are not taught the histories of other places throughout the world.

History is exactly that... a story. Stories tell the triumphs, the tribulations, the conquors, the upheavals, etc.

So - when North American schools focus on North American histories, you really have no idea that there are events elsewhere in the world that affect how you live your life here.

9/11 is only a smart part of it. It goes much further than that! It's only a fraction of something "over there" that affects "over here".

We (as a people) have forgot that we ALL derive from the stories of the bible, regardless of our "current" religion. It began with Adam and Eve, Cain, Abel and Seth. I may be incorrect (someone please correct me if I am wrong) but - Adam, Eve, Abel and Seth began the lineage of the Jewish people. Those descendants from Cain began the lineage of the Muslim people. And from the Jewish lineage at least three distinct groups formed: the Jews, the "Christians" and the Messianic Jews.

The Jews from what I understand follow parts of the old testament. At the time of Jesus and His disciples, He was a Jew. The term "Christianity" only became popular afterwards as a way to differentiate as the early church formed. And the Messianic Jews? They are Christian Jews who believe in the the laws of the Jews and that Jesus was the Messiah they were awaiting!

I may very well be wrong - please no one flame me, but - as I started this post with Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit -- I come forward with some knowledge and a desire to know more.... meek with understanding, a desire to inherit knowledge.

Dana - I believe in the end, this is really what you were writing about. Showing your meekness with a desire to inherit knowledge.

The best way to figure out things is to educate yourself in the religions. It's been years since I did this properly and I will definitely in the near future read up more. The Bible, the Torah and the Koran are good places to start. From there, you can begin to see where the conflicts begin and then search upon those conflicts. You'll quickly see how such a small area of land is such a hotbed of fighting and controversy.

There's no easy resolution for the conflict. Everyone has their own idea of how it could be "solved".... but essentially it boils down to a few things. "How can you have an estimated ten million people of two major religions share land that is important to both of them?"

If you figure it out, let me know :)

I'm thinking it has to do with compassion, understanding, tolerance, respect and.... forgiveness.

I wish you the best and don't let this eat at you. Instead, let it inspire you to learn more about a part of the world few understand.

A word to the wise? Avoid mainstream journalism and go straight to the source -- it can be biased and that's not what you need when you're looking for "the truth".

Obvious child
(From Canada, not Jewish or Catholic nor Muslim... just Christian with an appreciation for all cultures because I believe in the end, we're all really worshipping the same higher power)

Trixamina 5 pts

and you don't know me. I am not a popular or noteworthy blogger. I've been at this for a little over a year...I am but a lowly mother, hanging out in the blogosphere

I've read almost to the end of the comments and can take it no more.

I'd like to send out a compliment for sticking with this and coming back time and time again. I am sure you cringe at the thought of visiting this post or writing others. I absolutely feel for you.

The lack of compassion for you, is appalling to me.

I came here from Mocha's post and am glad I came.

I walk in the world as a white girl, raised straight, lesbian for the last 20 some odd years. Raised in a working lower/middle class, mostly white, recovering Catholic...Of these things, I feel fairly safe to talk.

Other things, I have to ask questions, observe, read, learn. I make the assumption that everybody else is in the same boat- Unless we walk in the shoes of others how else are we to learn???

Kudos to you for going out on a limb and continuing to try and balance.

Now I'm going back over to Mocha's to ask her a possibly racist question - because that's how I learn.

Much respect,

Tricia

truthinadvertising 5 pts

Dana wrote an idiotic, ignorant, offensive piece, which she obviously slapped together in 10 minutes. Stating she had no knowledge on the subject, which seemed to be her way of "un-claiming" the info, does not make her lack of effort alright. She was lazy and ill-informed, and yet hit 'publish' anyway. I guess my question is: "Why is Dana Tuszke a paid BlogHer CE?" I've read many of her posts, and rather than forming her own opinions and ideas, she regurgitates the words of others who've said it much better than she ever could. I realize the hallmark of a good writer/analyst is to read as much info on the subject, digest the information, form a coherent opinion based on all the facts, and present a new, improved viewpoint. Has Dana ever actually done that? She seems to think resaerching a topic means grabbing snippets from everyone else's head/blogs/newspaper clippings and arranging them into a semi-logical order. That's not journalism - that's simply playing journalist dress-up.

 Just because Dana backpedaled and handed out prolific apologies for her truly offensive post does not mean she should be forgiven or her incompetence overlooked. She offended a HUGE group of BlogHer readers...not just those of Jewish descent, but those of us who appreciate a well-researched piece, those of us who know what racism looks like, and those of us with a social conscience. Dana is out of her league. Look at her previous posts; if you find actual research and a coherent opinion that doesn't restate all her thumbtacked snippets, I'd be surprised.

Dear BlogHer, please show Dana Tuszke and her apologies, blatant ignorance, and regurgitated pieces the door. There are plenty of other writers who would be willing to do the work/research it takes to be a succesful CE who would GLADLY take her place.

DanaFiles 5 pts

Jane, I understand where you are coming from. I have taken responsibility for my actions. No one is excusing me from my mistake. I appreciate the support that many have given me, but in no way does that exempt me from owning up to what I've done.

I understand where Neil is coming from as well, but I don't believe that he should suggest that I "don't have the stomach" for politics, simply because I was honest and shared my fears. It's natural to feel this way after a grave mistake such as mine. And I think it's very important that I address and conquer that fear.

(Also, I want to say that while I was woefully ignorant of matters of Israel, I do have knowledge in other areas of politics and news.)

ByJane 5 pts

 and uncalled for.  You are lecturing someone who has taken the time to write a thoughtful and considered response to Dana.  What he is saying to her is, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And if you want to stay in the kitchen, get airconditioning.  What he is saying to you and others who rushed to Dana's defense, excusing the whole thing, is take responsibility.  If you want your site/organization to be considered a major player (like, you want the presidential candidates to take you seriously), you must take yourself seriously.  Putting a writer in the position of Contributing Editor of Politics and News who is so woefully ignorant about politics and news is not taking yourself seriously.  It's playing at the game and whining when you're caught out.

Neil is in no way reducing your support for Dana to something trivial.  He is pointing out, and rightly so, that her post has damaged BlogHer's credibility.  I wonder if you would have been so quick to throw the political is personal line at him if he had been a she.  It seems to me that you are excessively circling the wagons.

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com 

DanaFiles 5 pts

Rita, I agree.  It will take volumes of research (thanks to Jill and Lara for the links and book recommendations) so I hope to go at this again in the future.  And I promise to let others view it before I post (and include tons of links and references!)...

Rita Arens 7 pts

I should've proofread my comment. Check out all those typos!

I personally think the best thing you could do at this point is to take all that great background info you've been given on Israel and

write

the

post

again.

Surrender, Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com )- When I was your age, we just let them ride in the back window.

lilmommythatcould 5 pts

Dana Best wishes on getting back on the horse. 

  Kicking a person while their down keeps them from growing. 

DanaFiles 5 pts

Rita, thank you for that excellent advice.  I'm using it.  I'm building up the confidence to keep working at this.  I realize it's a natural reaction to run for cover when stones are thrown, but I do agree that I must jump back on the horse.

DanaFiles 5 pts

Hi Neil.  I did happen to read your blog about my error in judgment.  You are absolutely entitled to your opinion.  You have every right to be angry and to make your own judgments about me.  I'm not going to argue with you.  I've paid for my mistake.  I've made the best of a painful situation and walked away a better person, and a better writer because of it.  That is the most valuable lesson I could ever learn.

And while I appreciate your advice and respect your opinion, I do not appreciate the lecture "tone".  I realize what I've done.  And I believe I have every right to be afraid.  But being afraid does not define me.  Overcoming that fear and using it to throttle myself into the next level of political writing -- that's worth more than a king's gold.

I'm not proud that it took a mistake such as this to learn this hard lesson, but I'm not going to ignore it.  It's important to learn from this and to mature and grow as a writer.  I think what has happened will allow me to become fearless, eventually, while still being cautious and aware of others' feelings.

Rita Arens 7 pts

Unfortunately, no writer gets smart without a few painful mistakes.  A writing professor mine once told me I had no right to pick up a pencil until I knew what my interviewee or main character would eat for breakfast if he or she was out of milk.  While there's no always time in the blogging world to go to that level of detail, it's a good measuring stick, I think.

I know as a CE I often run into time constraints.  Writing a BlogHer post usually takes me a few hours, because it takes a lot of time to find relevant women bloggers writing on the topic I choose each week.  I've had to abandon posts before because I couldn't find the back-up blogs.  The other problem is trying to find new female voices when you're in a time crunch. It's deifnitely not the easiest thing to be a BlogHer CE.  Some BlogHer CEs post twice a week, and I don't know how they do it. 

I learned in graduate school the hard way by having my writing posted on a blackboard while my professor pointed out every little thing that was wrong or unprofessional about it.  My writing is still not perfect.  Every week I put up something mildly controversial (like this week), I hold my breath a little before I hit Submit.  However, as BlogHer CEs, I think we have a responsibility to put relevant, timely and thought-provoking issues out there.  As someone privy to the CE backchannel, I'll say I don't think anyone takes that responsibility lightly.

Lisa is right. Dana didn't include other points of view. If she had linked to other female bloggers, she probably would've received some of the education she got in the comments before she wrote the post, and I'll bet it would've been a more balanced post.  She made a mistake, and the mistake was not seeing what other people were saying before writing her own post.

That said, she's been educated.  Attacking her is not going to erase that post, or erase her thought process.

Dana -- you have two choices.  You can hide or you can come back with your next post better, stronger and more polished for the experience you've had.  Trust me, I went home from my classes in graduate school every week and cried because I was so mortified about my writing.  Writers put themselves out there, and it's dangerous.  But just learn from it -- don't stop. 

Surrender, Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com )- When I was your age, we just let them ride in the back window.

Grace Davis 5 pts

 And others should stop babying you.

Come on, Neil. With that remark you reduced our support for Dana into something trivial. You're also treading in waters where the political can be utterly personal - like abortion -  and these intersections have been extensively explored both online and at the BlogHer conferences. Finally, Contributing Editors can delve into what you called "the personal realm". I will refer to BlogHer founder Lisa Stone's comment above which includes the official BlogHer editorial guidelines. 

I say all of that in the spirit of the BlogHer organization, in how we welcome your input and will consider it respectfully.  And in that respectful spirit, I think you're patronizing Dana and many of us here. Please don't.

Best regards, 

Grace Davis

State of Grace ( http://gracedavis.typepad.com )

Neil 5 pts

I was also very upset at your article when I first read it. I even wrote a post ( http://www.citizenofthemonth.com/2008/04/25/back-t... )on my own personal blog criticizing the content of what you wrote. By now, I'm sure you figured out how far from the mainstream this crazy Peter Nennhausis, not only to Jews, but to most intelligent people. I've read your comments and it is clear that you are a compassionate and caring person who really meant no harm. I know you were only raising questions, but in politics -- the questions that are raised are as political as the answers to the questions. I can raise the question, "Would it be better if women just moved back into the bedroom and kitchen where they belong?" -- but we both realize that the question itself is filled with some unsavory content, just by me asking the question. I can always hem and haw and say that I never actually said that women should go back to the bedroom and kitchen, but the box is already open when I bring it up.  Of course, I know that this is never really going to happen in the real world, so the statement just sits there, festering, like an insult against the modern advances of women.   Likewise, asking the question, "Wouldn't it be better for everyone if Israelis were just moved back to some remote part of Russia away from the nice beaches of Tel Aviv?" is just as loaded. People weren't angry at you because you raised a question, but because you raised a question that is itself an insult.

There are a lot of BlogHer members out there supporting you, but I'd like to take a different view. What happened here is the best thing that could happen to you, as an amateur political writer. You now see what occurs when you write something controversial, especially when it pertains to a group that is not your own. Get used to it. That is the life of a political writer. Whenever I write something controversial on my on blog, I ready myself for battle. If you really believe what you say here:

I'm scared to death to write politics again. I'm scared to death to even dare to discuss controversial topics.

-- then don't write political columns. You don't have the stomach for it. Write about other stuff. You're not writing for your high school newspaper here. You are writing on the BlogHer blog, which a lot of people read. BlogHer wants to be respected in the community.  They want to show that women can be as powerful and accepted in the blogosphere as men.  You can't write political columns and then say, "well, I really don't know anything about the topic." BlogHer is supporting you because you are an amateur. The New York Times would have fired you for spinning your wheels.

I'm all for people expressing themselves, but if you want to move out of the personal realm and raise political questions, especially ones you don't know about, from sources you haven't really analyzed, expect people to breathe down your neck. And others should stop babying you.

I don't think you should shy away from controversy. I say go for it! Look how many comments you got from all this. People love contoversy, There are many famous people in the media who became famous by being controversial. You just have to have the stomach to take the chances.

Since you clearly don't know much about the Middle East, it was probably a poor choice of subject matter to write about. It's a losing proposition when you have readers who know more about the subject than you, ready to pounce. People hate seeing those who know less than they do talking about a subject. You can't just read one book and then just spit out the info.  You need to do some serious research and read many books before you attempt to talk about a subject. You should have read this crazy book, and then another book that opposes this author, so you could have been better informed. Ask others for suggestions. Don't just depend on one source. That person may be biased.

Since you come from a religious background, I bet you could write a couple of excellent pieces concerning your own religion, or write about the hot topics of abortion or gay rights. Those are controversial also, and you will feel the heat, but at least you have a personal view on those subjects, and your pastor might help you better explain the religious reasons for your stances.

If you are really interested in the Middle East, try to learn more about the conflict between Israel and the Arab world. The Palestinians live under a lot of hardships. You can write about them. Again, what you say might be controversial, but hopefully, this time, you will have done some reading up on the subject. There are many intelligent arguments coming from both sides, and also much propoganda that you have to be wary about. The book you reviewed is from a crackpot who isn't very respected by anyone.  Presenting his views as legitimate ideas is like living your day based on the astrology in the local newspaper.

Take this as a learning lesson. BlogHer is giving you a great opportunity to learn your craft. Just remember -- this is not your own personal blog. A lot of people read what you write, both men and women. You want to make sure you know at least a little something about the subject before you write about it.

The best of luck to you!  I'm sure by next week, everyone will have forgotten this and you'll be loved again!  Don't take it too personally.

poppy 5 pts

Lisa, thanks for posting that. I'm glad to see what the BlogHer guidelines are.

They appear to provide a nice balance of oversight and freedom, and I think that if followed, they'd add a great deal of additional depth and breadth to people's posts. In fact, they'd almost guarantee it.

Poppy

The Opiate of the Masses ( http://www.poppisima.blogspot.com )

DanaFiles 5 pts

The same person who referred me to "The New Feminized Majority" ( http://www.blogher.com/rise-new-feminized-majority ) of which I wrote about here at BlogHer asked me if I had heard of Peter Nennhaus' book.  She mentioned it was about the conflicts of Israel and I was thinking how coincidental it was, as I had just told another BlogHer I wanted to learn more about the Middle East.  I did not plan to write about Quo Vadis, Israel? here at BlogHer but after I read it, the subject matter struck me and I thought others would be curious as to what was being presented.  I did a blog search for other bloggers who may have read it and found interviews with the author, and a lot of praise for his work on this book.  I thought it would be good to address the suggestion because no one else had.  But I went about it the wrong way.  I realize that. 

Jill Miller Zimon 5 pts

How did you learn about the book you write about in the original post?  I'm a little surprised I've never heard of it but maybe it's pretty obscure, which makes me curious to know - who suggested it to you - or where did you find the citation? I'd like to know more about whomever or whatever group is promoting this kind of thing - mostly so I can be hip to it should I ever hear about it or see it again! :)

Thank you. (Maybe that could be or would have been a link you'd add to the original post for it to be more in line with CE guidelines??)

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

voiceofreason36 5 pts

To see the amount of hatred and vitriol directed at Dana. Cannot things be questioned without having to backstep and have people have intense hostile reactions? *shesh*

Did you know that Abraham's chosen in the Koran was Ishmael and not Isaac. But in the Torah, it's Isaac. Yep, god told him to take Ishmael up the mountain in the Koran and kill him. And nobody even called CPS. They can't both be chosen by god. But it's funny how each religion makes "chosen" the guy who's their direct ancestor (claimed). That should make you suspicious.

All of this nonsense could be ended and eliminated if people could come to the realization, that there is no god. No christian god, no Jewish god, no Palestinian god, no Arab god. Allah, Jehovah and Jesus are just figments of imagnination, invented to help us deal with our own mortality.

And then, guess what. We'd have to realize that these people who we're fighting with are actual humans and not devils or monsters or them in a never ending fight of "Us vs. Them". Who knows? Maybe they'd start treating each other like long lost cousins or something.

Meanwhile, I think I'm going to make a religion that lets me inherit Florida! Somewhere nice and sunny with great beaches!

voiceofreason36 5 pts

And generations of Palestinians "have been born and died on the soil there. Generations have built homes, fallen in love, had babies, seen the world" before Churchill saw this as a solution as to where to put the disenfranchised Jews after WWII. Why could not the Jews then have been granted a homeland in a sparsely populated area in Africa, where conflict would have been less likely to happen?

I haven't read Nennhaus, nor claim to disagree or agree with his ideas. I, however, do not think our treatment of the conflict is sane (or has ever been).

voiceofreason36 5 pts

In fact, this is how the nation of Liberia was formed. This was a considered by some a solution to the problem of slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Colonization... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberia#Settlers_from...

Catherine Morgan 5 pts

Hi Lisa. Thanks for taking the time to post this comment and explain the mission of this site and the contributing editors.

As a CE that sometimes crosses over into controversial territory, I can say that clicking that publish button can be very intimidating. I think we all feel the responsibility that comes with posting to the front page of BlogHer.

But, I also think that the controversial posts are the ones that most demonstrate the greatness of this community (and its members). You could not have this conversation on any other site on the entire WWW (or anywhere else for that matter), without it turning into an unreadable hate-fest.

Hate and fear could have easily stopped this conversation, and would have anywhere else. Think about that for a minute...This post has become a unique opportunity to discuss the raw feelings that surround this issue, as well as facilitate a greater understanding of the subject for people who may have not even thought about it until now. In the end, that is a good thing...and I am proud to be a part of this great community of women.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan also at The Political Voices of Women ( http://politicsanew.com/ ) and Care2 Election Blog ( http://www.care2.com/politics/features/ )

alyssaroyse 5 pts

Strong, simple, generous statement of belief in what you do and the value we all bring when we open minds and share. Well done - from start to finish. Let the conversations continue!  Thanks. 

___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE: ( http://www.justcauseit.com ) A Web Site To Save The World

Start Her Up ( http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/startherup/ ): A blog for Women Entrepreneurs

Lisa Stone 6 pts

Hi everyone,

I'm happy to share our guidelines and goals for BlogHer's contributing editors, as well as BlogHer's policies about editorial oversight. I can also put Dana's post in the context of these guidelines and policies... and how the guidelines were and were not followed.

Our mission for our contributing editors is to provide an ongoing guide to the best blogging by women on a given topic, with the goal of delivering the Internet's definitive guide to women who blog -- and, where appropriate, men too. We are extremely proud of our contributing editors, many of whom initially volunteered to share their expertise and leadership in the subjects they cover here; still others were later recruited. We do not require a specific credential to cover a broad topic area; rather we require a proven record of success in doing so, a strong sense of professionalism in personal conduct, writing and research technique, and, of course, a passion for the topic and for delivering the best blogging has to offer. Which to Elisa, Jory and myself means a true, user-generated, self-correcting, and ideally self-healing, community. More on that below. First, definitions...

A contributing editor's contribution can take two forms: Blogging or "surfing" guides and personal commentary.

Blogging guides, as described in our author agreement with contributing editors, should be focused on the best blogging commentary our editors can find by women who blog, as well as other news and information resources available online. The guides may encompass breaking news, analysis, commentary, information and insider buzz by people blogging in all mediums (text, photo, audio, video and mobile) about this topic. Finally, the editors agree to link to at least three women who blog. Example: Hispanic Women Voters Seek Experience and Leadership When Evaluating Candidates ( http://www.blogher.com/hispanic-women-voters-seek-... )

Prose, or essay-style commentary, is the second form that contributing editor writing may take. These pieces are designed to provide editors with a forum for flexing their individual interest and/or expertise in given topics in addition to writing blogging or "surfing" guides as described above. Each personal essay or commentary piece should be followed by related links to women who have blogged about this topic or a closely related topic. If blogs by women are not available on this topic, then related links to men or other Internet sources are acceptable. Example: Hillary Clinton - What Makes a Candidate 'Electable' ( http://www.blogher.com/hillary-clinton-what-makes-... )?

In either case, an editor is also expected to adhere to the same community guidelines ( http://www.blogher.com/what-are-your-community-gui... ) as everyone else here, to provide proper attribution and links for excerpts, photos or other content, and to regularly participate with, respond to and monitor comments on her posts.

As to Poppy's question ( http://www.blogher.com/quo-vadis-israel#comment-42... ), "Who shall edit the editors themselves," and Gena's comment ( http://www.blogher.com/quo-vadis-israel#comment-42... ) that there is no "sheriff", I should add the following: While there is no requirement that either Community Manager Denise Tanton or I read every post before it goes live, we do read every contributing editor post published, maintain a detailed futures calendar and regularly act as sounding boards, copyeditors, headlines re-writers and the partners in writing that Pam ( http://www.blogher.com/quo-vadis-israel#comment-42... ) invokes. It's my belief that the combination of (1) strong community guidelines, (2) strong editorial guidelines for contributing editors and (3) behind the scenes collaboration with editorial leaders and other contributing editor colleagues provides the standard and safety net for an editor to be successful in addressing any topic with this community. This system also saves the writing on BlogHer from being pasteurized and/or dumbed-down by a single editor in chief and her life experience, and creating the same closed loop of coverage and commentary that so many women on our site complain about where mainstream media is concerned. To quote my partner Elisa, "this is the network the community built." To quote Jory, our goal is a "true, user-generated, self-correcting, and ideally self-healing community."

Unfortunately, in this case, Dana did not follow the editorial guidelines for prose or essay-style commentary by providing related links to women who have blogged about this topic or a closely related topic, nor did she reach out to me, Denise, her contributing editor colleagues or this community for support and assistance in framing the question. Her question, however, is not one I would have discouraged her from asking. And I should note that she has executed her responsibilities for monitoring and responding to comments admirably. Let the record show that she has apologized to the community. We are reviewing this post with Dana this week, just as we have and would with any editor who posts without providing related links and context for the conversation.

And so, yes, Poppy ( http://www.blogher.com/quo-vadis-israel#comment-42... ) is right, some of the pain in this thread could have been avoided if BlogHer's guidelines had been followed or Denise and I had been asked for feedback on the topic. That said, as I posted Friday, this is how a strong community heals and strengthens itself ( http://www.blogher.com/quo-vadis-israel#comment-41... ). I'll repeat myself here: A strong community like ours heals itself in exactly the process I see happening in these comments. Dana posted self-described "naive" questions about a book that many of us find outrageous and offensive. Rather than suffer the pain in silence, we are now in the process of correcting what we find wrong with the situation.

Lastly, I'll add that Elisa, Jory and I are proud of the civil debates that BlogHer has hosted regarding the most sensitive issues our society faces -- abortion, gay marriage, race, stem-cell research, war in Iraq and more. While additional context, citation of opposing viewpoints and a more well-though-out framing for this question might have saved many of us from the pain of the initial post, the ensuing discussion and debate has been amongst the most educational and enlightening we think we've ever hosted on BlogHer...and surely represents a tremendous learning opportunity for us, for all our contributing editors and many BlogHer members who have remained silent but surely have soaked all of this in.

We are extremely proud of this community, of this discussion and are utterly committed to continuing conversations on BlogHer that demonstrate the terrific diversity of opinion and experience among and between women who use social media to get their word out.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://blogher.org/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

annie_one 5 pts

Dana-

What crunchy carpets said about "sometimes the best places to find answers to religious questions is not religious sources."

I agree 100%. being raised Catholic myself, I often got wishy-washy answers and it was feared that I would be "led astray".

I found one of the best ways to get a general idea of many basic religions without being exposed to a particular bias, was to take a "World Religions" class in college.

Also, you could just pick up the college text to the class or find a similar text at a bookstore.

Elana Centor 5 pts

Was on a business trip and missed this discussion as it was unfolding. BlogHer is the perfect place to have asked this question. While some of the responses were mean-spirited and vitriolic, there was a great deal of wonderful information shared in this space.

People need to apologize to Dana -- she didn't do anything wrong. BlogHer didn't do anything wrong. She asked a question and people didn't like the question. Okay... and where's the problem?

As American bloggers we can speak our mind. If we think a question is off base we can say why and we can share our opinions.  That is a precious gift that should be celebrated and rewarded.  Dana didn't know she would have to be brave when she asked a question she wanted an answer to. 

I don't like lots of questions. I don't like lots of answers. 

What I don't get is as soon as Dana understood that even the question touched a nerve, she  shared how horrified she was that she had done something in innocence that hurt people and created a violent reaction

But many  people wouldn't accept her heart-felt apology.

How many mea culpa's would be enough? Isn't it great that Dana asked and got answers that will now broaden her ( and many other's world view?

Hasn't asking the question raised an issue that many of us know is always bubbling under the surface but politically correct folks don't talk about?

I wish some of the offensive comments would not have been directed at Dana but at the concept. Dana just raised the question that an author is peddling. 

I hope Dana continues political blogging and asking questions. 

 Seveal months agoI offered up my guest room to any blogHer who wanted to cover the GOP convention in MPLS and Dana asked me to hold it for her...I hope you are still planning to come.

Oh, yeah, I am a blogger who happens to be Jewish. My mother was born in Israel.

As my father always said, there are no dumb questions, just dumb answers.

elana
Blogher Contributing Editor,Business&CareersFunnyBusiness ( http://funnybusiness.typepad.com/funnybusiness )

Grace Davis 5 pts

...but your purpose was to beat and punish her, as you tried to do with me and others in your commentary on Rita Arens' Surrender Dorothy ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com/surrender_doro... ).

You can say what you want and I know BlogHer will publish it, but your accusation of BlogHer as anti-Semitic (per the post on your blog that I refuse to link here) is unequivocally wrong and transparently vicious. Because of such cruel intent, I know from many others that any time they see your name on a comment, you are readily dismissed and ignored. I would dismiss you as well but you called me a "pimp" and a writer of "dreck" in your comment at Rita's blog and I'm not going to take that crap.

Back off, Margalit.

Grace Davis

State of Grace ( http://gracedavis.typepad.com )

zchamu 5 pts

Every day here on BlogHer we have people posting about things they may know very little about, but about which they want to learn more. Very frequently we have people discuss things such as books they've read and ideas within those books, and start the thread to purposefully begin the discussion and to learn more. And in those threads, very frequently, the original author of the post is found to say "I hadn't thought of that" or "I didn't know that".  it happens every day. You shouldn't have to have specific qualifications in the subject matter to ask a question. In my mind, that would stifle discussion rather than encourage it.  

Visit my blogs at ThreeSeven ( http://www.threeseven.ca ) (all that's irrelevant and amusing) and
ecochick ( http://www.ecochick.ca ) (all that's green, cool and Canadian).

Grace Davis 5 pts

...so please forgive me in repeating myself, but I want to make my viewpoint known here on BlogHer.

You ended your comment in saying:

But if we are going to take the stage and lead those discussions, we had better be damn sure we know what we are talking about.

The stage in question is BlogHer, where it is and always will be safe to pose any question or discussion we wish to explore. Though the one who presents the question may be confronted with vigorous, opposing response, the BlogHer community should defend her right to pose the inquiry and not punish her for doing so.

Further to BlogHer as a stage, we combine many functions, as a media outlet, in hosting annual conferences, and offering an ongoing forum. I understand our stage/community as one that extends to each of us, whether editor, commenter, or conference attendee, the benefit of the doubt, that the BlogHer member meant well when she poses a question and offers her perspective. It is in this spirit that I accept the content and context of Dana's post.

You also wrote:

The discussion needs to come from an authoritative moderated educated voice, not some random person wondering "What's up with that?"

I was not that "authoritative moderated educated voice" when BlogHer offered multiple opportunities for me to serve the organization. I was really a "random person" when I was assigned to be the Contributing Editor of elder issues, even though I was a mere 52 years old (which is "middle aged" I suppose, or youth, if we're to believe that 50 is the new 30). Most dramatically, I was put front and center on the podium with nationally recognized media celebrities during the closing keynote at the 2006 BlogHer conference. My creds were woefully modest, all I did was what you and I did together - working our mighty little Hurricane Katrina blog. Though I was a total doofus on stage by calling out Arianna Huffington on not being a lifelong Democrat, I was still there because BlogHer believes in mixing it up, in hearing as many voices as possible and in having faith in that radical act.

Dana, an enthusiastic member of the BlogHer community, is one of those many voices and I rest my faith in her intentions fully and completely. I may disagree just as fully and completely, but I will defend her right to present her viewpoint and for BlogHer's decision to provide the bandwidth for her to do that. It would be in the spirit of BlogHer's grand experiment of hearing all voices that all of us try to do the same.

Best regards to you, Pam, and to everyone,

Grace Davis

Blogger, State of Grace ( http://gracedavis.typepad.com )

Crunchy Carpets 5 pts

sometimes the best places to find answers to religious questions is no religious sources....

History books usually help as do political texts....

you need to search outside the bubble...this post has been your experience in that..and sadly not a good one...but you did learn right?

Hugs to you.... 

Look for me at http://crunchycarpets.com or check out the ladies at www.wetcoastwomen.com ( http://www.wetcoastwomen.com )

DanaFiles 5 pts

Thank you, for saying what I was just about to say.

I honestly did not know that I shouldn't have asked the question in the way that I did.

As for my biblical "training", I mentioned right away that what I studied in the bible comes from a Roman Catholic upbringing.

I cannot tell you how many times I've asked priests and catechists about Judaism only to be redirected to the "Catholic version".  Is that how I should go about learning about this subject?  From a Catholic standpoint?  Because that seems kind of strange. And biased.

I'm a practicing Catholic but I completely respect the religions of others.  I understand that my religion can be flawed, so I've always tried to learn more about all faiths. 

When I was in high school I did a "church tour".  I attended mass at a Baptist church, Methodist church, Lutheran church, Evangelical church, Apostolic church and even a non-denominational church.  I wanted to know the differences.  I couldn't go to a synogogue because the one in our town is no longer operating (it's a Jewish/Polish history museum now). 

My grandmother was shocked.  She feared I was going to convert to another religion.  She feared I was going to be "tainted" into believing in something else.  And when I asked why she was upset, I was told that I "don't need to know about other religions because Catholicism is the universal religion" and that if I "continued to question my faith I would be led down a dangerous path." 

A dangerous path to where?  Hell?  I hated the use of fear.  I felt like I was being forced to shut up and live in a a Catholic bubble.  I don't want to live in fear.  After the mistake I made, I'm more afraid now than I ever was before.   But I am determined to overcome that.  I have to be.  I don't want my children to be brought up like the same way, afraid to ask and learn.

zchamu 5 pts

In fact, more than legitimate: probably necessary. 

Visit my blogs at ThreeSeven ( http://www.threeseven.ca ) (all that's irrelevant and amusing) and
ecochick ( http://www.ecochick.ca ) (all that's green, cool and Canadian).

Crunchy Carpets 5 pts

what sort of vacuum the American people are living in to not have the barest bones education in WHY it is called the Holy Land?  And the conflicts and politics that have been part of that area..geopolitics, etc. 

I mean...I have an ENGLISH major.

I don't read masses of non fic...but I have a rudementary understanding of religion, history and politics to understand that this would be a hot topic.

Anyway...enough you are right..i don't want to pick on her anymore....but am just boggled. 

Look for me at http://crunchycarpets.com or check out the ladies at www.wetcoastwomen.com ( http://www.wetcoastwomen.com )

zchamu 5 pts

You asked a question, and it created a sh*t storm - and a lot of people learned things. That's never bad. You've faced it with dignity. My respect for you and your quest for learning and knowledge has only been increased through this whole thread.

Keep asking.

Visit my blogs at ThreeSeven ( http://www.threeseven.ca ) (all that's irrelevant and amusing) and
ecochick ( http://www.ecochick.ca ) (all that's green, cool and Canadian).

zchamu 5 pts

If you know the question is offensive, you know not to ask it. She did not realize the extent to which this would be an issue. She's apologized. I fail to see the point of continuing to ask "why" she didn't know.  

Visit my blogs at ThreeSeven ( http://www.threeseven.ca ) (all that's irrelevant and amusing) and
ecochick ( http://www.ecochick.ca ) (all that's green, cool and Canadian).

Crunchy Carpets 5 pts

said..this guy must be a nut job.....or posed the questions about the book about anti semitism or WHY the author would think relocation would be a good idea...

because really in reading it...I kept thinking....does she KNOW why the Jewish people want to live there? Does she know why the muslim people want to live there?

You sounded like you knew nothing of religion and history..and I assume you have a biblical background?

I think the key question about Israel is why CAN't TWO religions live together as ONE people...why does religion have to be used as a tool for hatred and bigotry and racism that has plagued the middle east for a millenia and only got worse with the onset of colonialism and imperialism and meddling from the west.

Phew...

it is fine to question.  It is fine to ask about things you do not know...but  I think people are just boggled that you COULD NOT KNOW that this would offend?

I am not jewish, not christian, not muslim....no bias....but I too just wondered what your reasoning was behind the post.....

you have apologized and that is fine...people should let it go now and you should perhaps rethink the ways to 'start a dialogue' 

Look for me at http://crunchycarpets.com or check out the ladies at www.wetcoastwomen.com ( http://www.wetcoastwomen.com )

alyssaroyse 5 pts

The acquisition of knowledge begins with acknowledging that we don't have it, and do need it.

For some reason, you post reminded me of the process - utterly unrelated to this - of fundraising for a company. I am - along with mos of my friends these days - in the process of raising capital for my company. As such, I spend a lot of time talking to people who have the money, and tell them why I need the money. I've had better luck than most, but still, general wisdom among entrepreneurs looking for money is that no one gives it to you unless you don't need it. "that's a great idea, makes total sense, you are brilliant, call me when you succeed and i'll give you money then."

something in your post reminded me of that. "it's great that you are seeking knowledge, once you get it figured out, give me a call and then i'll share mine with you." that just isn't workable.

if it is too hard / scary / dangerous to admit that we don't know anything, then we'll never admit it. never ask for it. if it is too hard / scary / dangerous to come together and talk about issues that matter, then we won't do it.

and nothing will ever change.

any of us could, at any time, choose to assume positive intent in queries like dana's, however misguided they are. the number of people who made personal attacks against her not only did a disservice to her personally, but to the open nature of a forum in which world-changing dialog can and should take place.

dana's most recent post made me cry. to hear that someone so well0intentioned would contemplate never opening her mouth again just makes my breath away. what have we accomplished then?

sometimes the best way to lead discussions is to ask hard questions and allow a safe environment in which IDEAS can be discussed and dissected without dissecting the individuals asking them.

there is not a single one of us who always knows what we're talking about in any universal way. there is no universal truth. two people can look at exactly the same situation and draw widely varied conclusions and as such present widely varied arguments - even widely varied descriptions of "fact."

if the bar to start a dialog is pre-existing knowledge and knowing for sure that we know what we're talking about, then we may as well all shut up now.

if the bar to start a dialog is the agreement that we will assume positive intent, listen, learn, expand, share, offer additional viewpoints, etc....  well then we can come together and have the kind of conversations that just may save the world.  if not in our lifetime, maybe our children's, or grandchildren's, until the legacy we live behind is one of engagement rather than enraged combat.  verbal, virtual or physical.  

___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE: ( http://www.justcauseit.com ) A Web Site To Save The World

Start Her Up ( http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/startherup/ ): A blog for Women Entrepreneu

DanaFiles 5 pts

Please don't blame BlogHer for my error.  This is my mistake.

DanaFiles 5 pts

I tried to promise myself I wouldn't respond anymore, because I didn't know how much more I could take -- but I'm absorbing every comment, every word, and doing my best to store it in my hat for future writing.  

However, I'm scared to death to write politics again.  I'm scared to death to even dare to discuss controversial topics.  I'm terrified to even respond to some of the comments because now I'm afraid of what my fingers will type.  I'm second-guessing every thing I say and think and write.  I don't know if this is good or bad or instinct but it frightens me.  

It frightens me because I feel as though this experience has triggered me to put that wall back up.  The amateur political blogger wall, with a sign that says "Don't say that or write that because you are going to offend someone."  

The first post I wrote here was about embryonic stem cell research and if you knew how much I had to talk myself into writing about it you would tell me I was being silly.  I've always been guarded with my writing.  I've always been guarded with conversation. 

In fact, some people who know me think I'm strangely quiet, as though I have nothing to contribute to a convesation -- but really, I'm absorbing everything trying to be overly careful with how I respond.  

That isn't to say that I've blogged on emotion, because I have.  Many times.  I've learned some valuable lessons from emotional blogging, which caused me to be non-emotional and unbiased and objective -- in this case here, I should have injected my opinion and disagreement. 

I'm not a writer with years of experience or years of education.  I admit that right off the bat.  But does that make me any less intelligent than anyone else?  Does that make me exempt from making mistakes?  Absolutely not.

When Kelly speaks of "safe" places to ask these questions, I understand what she's saying.  Perhaps I should have chosen a safer circle to ask a naive question.

But I thought BlogHer was a safe place to ask questions, to learn, to navigate through things I don't understand.  I love this community with all my heart.  I've witnessed amazing dialog at BlogHer and I trusted that it was safe to ask a question and talk about a subject I openly admitted I knew little about.

Then the uproar ensues. I wasn't surprised with the opposition of the author's suggestion or my question -- I was surprised at the outrage projected toward me personally.  It made me feel like I should never, ever ask a question like this again.  It made me feel as though I had committed an unforgiveable sin.  (I truly, naively thought I was asking and innocent, honest question.  But my own lack of experience prevented me from asking it properly.)

And then I wondered, "How do I overcome this?  How do I erase the mistake?"

The next thought that crossed my mind was "Are there other BlogHers/readers/bloggers who feel they can't ask a question or join a discussion?  Are they going to see the mistake I made and the outrage and be afraid to try?"

And then I watched as a blogger blamed BlogHer org for my mistake and I felt sick.  BlogHer has done nothing but support women like me.  I feel as though I've let BlogHer's co-founder's down, that I've let the readers down.  And I'm terribly sorry for this.  I want so badly to erase this, but I can't.  I can only learn from my mistake and move forward.

Jill Miller Zimon 5 pts

Bring on that meal Kelly! Should be one of the required meals at BlogHer.

Thanks. Really well-made point. 

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Pam 5 pts

I'm all for the hard questions, but a gut check is in
order before randomly exploding with our "What's up with that?"
questions all over the place. We can all ask, "Hey, what's up with
black people?!" but wouldn't it be more useful to start with a specific
question, or better yet, some guided tour of the relevant issues? When
we ask our questions, who, specifically, are we asking about? The
devastated African American families of the 9th ward? Attendees at
Reverend Wright's church? That coffee farmer we met on Kona? Once we've
defined that, we could find someone who's part of the group and ask
them before proceeding. Hurling questions about race (or religion or
politics) into the void without exploring the backstory in any way just
creates angry, alienated readers (yes, that's me). The discussion needs
to come from an authoritative moderated educated voice, not some random
person wondering "What's up with that?"

I'll say again that I genuinely believe Dana had no intent to offend
anyone with her post. But I remain angry that BlogHer - which I feel is
supposed to represent the best in quality blogging - was used as a
forum for presenting as credible of a deeply offensive idea. A lot of
people have mentioned what a great learning opportunity this has been,
but I can't help but think that with a minimum of inquiry, it could
have been a learning opportunity without pissing a bunch of people off. I am absolutely for the discussion of
delicate and difficult issues. But if we are going to take the stage
and lead those discussions, we had better be damn sure we know what we
are talking about.

Nerd's Eye View ( http://www.nerdseyeview.com )

Kelly Wickham 5 pts

I think it's kind of like when we ask questions in smaller circles and get taught (or "schooled" as I like to say) enough so that we don't have to ask them again because VIOLA! we have the answer.

My mom tells the story about when kids in school starting giving the "middle finger" and she pretended like she knew what it meant and she used it and someone said (about her): "Uh oh. Don't mess with her. SHE knows what THIS means." and she didn't know. It took other conversations with her sisters and brothers to figure it out. But she knew it was B-A-D.

The point is that there are "safe" places to ask questions where we don't get hung out to dry. I'm certain if Dana mentioned this to a group of friends someone in the bunch would set her straight and she could have saved herself a lot of grief. But she didn't. She asked it in a public forum as a BlogHer rep (CE) and got nailed.

It's not that I always want to sit down with the peace pipe and have happy-happy conversations because the greatest learning happens when we experience things. I'm betting that most people wouldn't feel the need to ask these "insulting" questions (and yes, Jill, I read that post about Obama yesterday when you linked it, so I know where you're coming from on that point) if they had more EXPERIENCE.

I always want to yell at people, "GO GET SOME BLACK FRIENDS IF YOU HAVE ALL THESE QUESTIONS. DAMN." but I don't. If they didn't surround themselves in their hygenic-hermetically sealed bubbles and hope that everyone else can please explain themselves. I try to educate instead and sometimes, yes, I do so with a lot of sighing and a mild amount of disgust, but I know they really do want to learn. As you well know, sometimes the response you give back to people just won't be enough.

Ironically, Blacks were given the same option the author suggests for Jews and uhh...look how well that turned out. Americo-Liberians, anyone?

Because I adore the movie, Bedazzled ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0230030/ ), I have to quote it here as invitation:

"You know, rather than get confrontational why don't we all sit down, have some salad with dolphin-safe tuna and see if we can't start a dialogue?"

Except I'm bringing fried chicken, latkes, and margarita bars. Because I kick ass at making them. (And I couldn't resist poking fun at myself, heritage and experience included)

Link Text ( http://www.mochamomma.com )

Jill Miller Zimon 5 pts

I'm sure there are others and these aren't all based in the Middle East or anything:

The Interfaith Ailiance ( http://www.interfaithalliance.org/ ) - I find this group to provide really good materials.  A lot of what they care about has to do with respect for religion in the US but I just think it's a very temperate group that should be supported.

Isaac and Ishmael: ( http://ishmaelandisaac.org/ ) here's an article ( http://www.wcpn.org/news/2006/10-12/1012ishmaelisa... ) about it

Combatants for Peace ( http://www.combatantsforpeace.org/ ) - this is one that I think Kim Pearson linked to in another thread - I didn't know about it ( http://www.ffipp.org/ffipp_usa )

Faculty for Israeli-Palestinian Peace ( http://www.ffipp.org/ffipp_usa ) again - don't know anything about this one but it looks very very promising; here's a very nice resource lis ( http://www.ffipp.org/resources )t though from looking at it, I'm going to guess - but it's just a guess - that it's a bit more to the left of me (I'm kind of center on this in general - depends on what's going on over there at any time!) - that list has movies, news outlets - all kinds of good stuff

Here's an article ( http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070701/2826...,_Israel_Churches_Seek_Boost_in_Faith-Based_Peace_Efforts.htm ) on something called The Palestine Israel Ecumenical Forum but I don't know anything about it - it doesn't look like it's quite as even-handed as some others, but I could definitely be wrong about that. Sometimes, as a Jew, I get wary of some efforts that to me seem to overemphasize the suffering of one side over anothers - but again, I'm not so objective! I know that.

Write On For Israel ( http://www.writeonforisrael.org/ ) - I was recruited to lead this program in Cleveland but the fit was not good for a number of reasons.  However, after I looked into the project, I can say that I do believe that they truly want to engage in productive conversations, not to say we are right, you are wrong. Frankly, I'd love to see this expanded or copied so that it could be used bilaterally or multilaterally for the entire Middle East.

Here's a nice resource page ( http://www.writeonforisrael.org/linksRev.html ) from that site re: the history of the area etc. 

We really need a non-Jewish BlogHer who might be familiar with even more from other vantage points.  

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

alyssaroyse 5 pts

hadn't meant to flog, but maybe i am. good catch.  but not in a specific sense no....  just aimlessly flailing the flogger around in town square wondering where on earth to start.

ya know. maybe if we fix this one piece, or maybe this one, or that one, or get that person to take a step to the left, no, right.... damn. continue aimlessly flailing the flogger.

do you have any links to any of those groups? i will GLADLY hire a feature writer to write a story about it. for sure!

didn't mean to flog anyone, but if there was a little sting of recognition felt, maybe that's okay.  we're all guilty of reacting to things and not thinking about how or what we should do with our reactions, (yes, even me.) so maybe it's good for all of us to step back and figure out what's happening inside ourselves at that root level that causes these flare ups.....  and take it from there. reconstruction (yes, know it's a loaded word) begins at the core.

;) 

___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE: ( http://www.justcauseit.com ) A Web Site To Save The World

Start Her Up ( http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/startherup/ ): A blog for Women Entrepreneu

Jill Miller Zimon 5 pts

Kim Pearson, and I think Maria Niles and maybe a couple of other BlogHers know this, but I actually was that person who like Dana NEEDEd the compassion and didn't feel it at all when I was JUST starting to dip into the WOC blogs (I didn't even know what WOC stood for - I had to google it  - just four weeks ago!).

I asked a few questions at a couple of WOC blogs, got slapped around for asking, didn't get why that was, read and read and read, and then, in a completely unrelated discussion, got exhausted of being asked over and over by a segment of male bloggers as to why a particularly mag cover was misogynistic (they still don't get it).

THAT's when the light bulb went on about why (at least in part) the WOC didn't like me asking questions: it's exhausting and I should have done some learning on my own.

There's more to it than that - but you know, sometimes it really does take going through something to make you see it when it's happening to someone else - in this case, Dana. I TOTALLY empathize with her.

But I LOVE questions - I don't know how else we learn. And I believe that we can only teach ourselves so much and then we MUST interact to go beyond that.

But I'm still figuring all this out and I have my own beef about being intimidated out of asking questions - that's not okay. There needs to be a way to manage re-directing people so they don't feel shutdown or unwilling to ever ask again. That's not acceptable to me.

So bring it on re: the black community or any topic, really :) I'm ready, said the class privileged white feminist who is about to be made a token at the race and gender session at BlogHer! :)

(joke joke joke - that very last part)

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Jill Miller Zimon 5 pts

History isn't an excuse - shouldn't be used an excuse - not to resolve problems. I agree with you Alyssa. That's what I read in what you wrote.

Based on my experience of learning about and living amidst the Middle East problems, as a Jew, and American and a person who lived there at age 22 for 11 months, let me explain how I see it:

There are groups that live in those regions who make absolutely NO secret of their desires, beliefs and convictions that aim to annhilate the Jews. There's just no other way of saying it. They say it themselves. If you want to get into a point me to where they've said it thing, fine. But I think it's well-established how Hamas in particular feels. Traditional and citizen journalism is replete with examples that support Hamas's desires to this end.

I believe that they are not able to be convinced otherwise because they tie their desires 1) to their religion and 2) to history.

Parties cannot move forward if they don't even agree on what their core interest is. And as regards Israel and the occupied territories, at least one group has a core interest in having the land to themselves. At least one other group has an interest in splitting the land.

These are not compatible interests.

From the work I've done, the training I've had in alternate dispute resolution and mediation, if the parties cannot even identify a common interest, the hope for resolution is quite gloomy - unless someone changes their mind.

Who do you think should be convinced? That's not a trick question but only intended to prod the realization that the situation is in fact pretty intractable. At least, as things stand right now. In my opinion.

So while I agree with you about never using history as an excuse for current or future behavior, to couch the intractible nature of the situation as being because people sit by and watch the atrocities is not, IMO, accurate. There are, currently, no accceptable options to the parties involved that the parties involved will accept. So it becomes a matter of people having to change their minds - the people in those parties, there, in the Middle East.

And, there are many, many ongoing efforts to engage people from both sides, from all the generations, abroad and here in the US so that we CAN budge out of this current state of being. I didn't take the job, but there is a program that's been around a few years now sponsored by one family foundation that works to teach Jews how to engage productively in written and oral communications with Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims on college campuses. There are the Isaac and Ishmael programs, and others - large and small - that engage anyone who is seeking to be engaged to help change minds.

I cannot encourage people strongly enough to find these groups and get involved - or at a minimum, write about these groups. There ARE many inhabitants of the Middle East who want to live in Peace, together. But they aren't necessarily the ones who have power or control.

To the extent that we can help them gain that, we should try. There are ways to do - find them, use them.

But re-reading your comment, Alyssa (I'm saying this with a total smile of irony on my face), don't you think that last graph sounds a little bit like you are flogging...some of us? :)

Thanks.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Kelly Wickham 5 pts

What is ultimately fascinating about this is that there's a phenomenal amount of humility on the part of Dana. It's never comfortable to be a part of everyone's learning (and by that I mean that I believe this post should not be pulled because of the amount of learning it's allowing for many people, not just Dana) but really, the vilification should stop.

Most interesting, then, is that one of the people helping to promote the condemnation of the author has the tagline: "What was I THINKING?"

That was my thought when I first read this piece: What is she THINKING? Dana can't be serious! I think it was quickly founded by most readers that this was written out of ignorance and a lack of exposure to diversity, especially those of the Jewish faith and race (there's a distinction in my own experience where some friends identify with the race only, some with the religious aspect only, and some with BOTH).

With that said, I am a little jealous. Jealous that there is such learning and compassion happening in this thread and that eyes are being opened to a largely neglected portion of this world that has endured more suffering than I am capable of repeating in this comment.

It is the kind of learning and understanding I am always hopeful for when it comes to matters of race in the community of Blacks. Oh, how I wish someone would ask an ignorant question, get a great deal of learning out of the answer (or multiple answers in this case) and then leave a wiser person. Look to all the resources and literature that's been offered. Anyone else taking notes besides me? My library list just got longer!

Taking the wisdom and moving forward out of the darkness of unfamiliarity to a place of compassion is the best we can manage.

Link Text ( http://www.mochamomma.com )

alyssaroyse 5 pts

Here's the thing with statements like, "there is just so much history in that part of the world."

There is that much history everywhere. There or no people and no regions that are without history. Voluntarily repeating it doesn't make it go away. At what point - as humans in relationships, as societies, as individuals - do we finally say, "I want a different future?"

I am IN NO WAY in favor of relocating anyone, just to be clear. I am in favor of people figuring out how to peacefully coexist in the present and in the future. "arab and jew." "black and white." "men and women." "tibetan and chinese."  there's a lot of history in all of those relationships, and at some point, a critical mass has to stand up and say, "yeah, we have a lot of history, but we also have a lot of future. where do you want to live? past or future?"

but, when we raise our hands up and say, "oh, there's so much history," we are, in effect, walking away from the possibility and responsibility to be part of the solution, to even acknowledge that a solution is possible in the face of all that history. 

there are moments when i feel hopeful, but when a well-intentioned woman asks a question that COULD start a dialog about the future, and she is instead greeted with the digital equivalent of a flogging in town square, it's easy to see the intractable hopelessness of people who feel more entitled to anger than to being part of a peaceful future. you can see how no one ever speaks up in places where this conversation is had and results in war - of the non-digital kind.

and the world is full of those people. they are the people who fight for their convictions MORE than for peace and understanding and promise. they are the people who's convictions sentence us to a life sentence of intractable past.

there is a lot of history every where. we should be able to learn from it and say, "no more."

no more fighting, i am capable of more, and so are you. no more war, our lives are worth more than the unsettled debt of generations who's eyes we never looked in and who's children were lost so that mine could be born. no more choosing my convictions over the collective peace possible - a peace in which even i can grow and explore.

no more history. no more excuses.

in my mind, i'm sorry to say, the people who sit by and watch atrocities,  justify them with religion or politics or history, are as big a problem as the monsters we demonize to relinquish ourselves of the responsibility to change something.  

so, now i'm ready for my public flogging.  i know that i am hopelessly naive. but if people fought for the future even half as hard as they fight for the past, we'd be in much better shape.

___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE: ( http://www.justcauseit.com ) A Web Site To Save The World

Start Her Up ( http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/startherup/ ): A blog for Women Entrepreneu