svetlana-del-rey:

holzmantweed:

I am no fan of Mr. Schwyzer, and have never paid enough attention to him to know the history of his Jewishness, but I doubt he appropriatively had a brit for his son.

Either way, the anti-Semitism he’s getting in response to his announcement that he had a britfor his son is real enough, so I’m gonna call that out and view askance anyone who looked at that article, thought his implied Jewishness was worth calling out but not the responses.

Can you elaborate? Because I want to know why you doubt he appropriated Jewish customs (he did), or why the anti-Semitism he may be getting as backlash effects him as a goy instead of the rest of us actual Jews.

To have this discussion, we must first establish whether Mr. Schwyzer is a Jew by ethnicity and by religion.  In both cases, I rely on his own words, if someone has a better resource, I need to see the math.  Regarding his ethnicity, he writes My father is ethnically Jewish.   Therefore he is ethnically a Jew, period, paragraph, end of discussion.  I will entertain no halachic argument to the contrary, the reality is that white goyim established long ago that there is a sort of “one drop rule” about whom they regard as a Jew and subject to anti-Semitism that does not care about halachic quibblings over whether that drop comes through the mother or the father.

Religiously, he is not a Jew, writing “Our neighbors are all Jewish; we’re the only goyim on the block.”

As an ethnic Jew who chose apostacy and embraced another religious path, I assert that Jewish tradition belongs to the ethnicity,and  not only that portion of the ethnicity that practices the religion.  Thus it is impossible for Mr. Schwyzer to appropriate the culture of his father’s ancestors.

The assertion that anti-Semitism does not affect him as a goy similarly holds no water: I experience anti-Semitism even though I no longer practice Judaism. However, even if he was a goy, anti-Semitism directed at him would affect him as well asaffecting Jews because that’s what “directed at him” means. I don’t see how it would have to be constructed as an either-or.