There's Nothing New...

(Note: this piece was adapted from a lecture I’ve been prepping for 11 years.)

In the words of Kohelet:

“That which hath been is that which shall be, And that which hath been done is that which shall be done; And there is nothing new under the sun.”

Kohelet, considered a penname for King Shlomo, wrote this early in his scroll, which is read on Sukkot. The verse stands out because it hasn’t aged a day; after all, humans don’t invent, they reinvent. Maimonides, one of Judaism’s great philosophers, allegedly predicted airplanes during Islam’s Golden Age, calling them “iron birds”. If that happened in the 12th Century, it’s safe to say that “nothing new under the sun” is accurate. I’ve yet to see a good counterargument.

This doesn’t have to stop at inventions. It can apply to ideas too, particularly controversies. We’re plugged into the world constantly, and sooner or later its scandals and hot-button issues flock to us. I’ve seen it with geopolitics, but even minor debates have blown up thanks to the fascination people, particularly Jews, have with taboo subjects. This is a good springboard for me using four such examples. They’re weird, perhaps even esoteric, but I’ve wanted to discuss this for over 10 years. Bear with me.

    

The first one extends back to the early months of 2015. We all remember the dress scandal, right? What colour was the dress? Was it blue and black, or white and gold? The debate raged for months! However, it highlighted how something asinine could generate conversation about perception.

I won’t delve into the later scandal surrounding the owner’s relationship with her husband, as that’s not relevant. However, I want state that I never cared about the dress. Like the “Yanny VS Laurel” debate, it was wasted energy. It was a dress! Who cares what colour it was? Will it cure world hunger, or reverse climate change?

However, this debate actually got me started on this drasha, as I think it connects to a similar case about perception: tzara’at. Tzara’at, or “leprosy”, was a Biblical punishment caused by lashon hara, or speaking falsely about others. The disease was highly-contagious and covered the skin, forcing the afflicted to isolate. However, because it was difficult to differentiate from other skin diseases, it was up to the Kohen Gadol, or High Priest, to examine it and determine if it was tzara’at. As Vayikra 13:1-3 states:

“GOD spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying: When a person has on their skin a swelling, a rash, or a discoloration, and it develops into a scaly affection on their skin, it shall be reported to Aaron the priest or to one of his sons, the priests. The priest shall examine the affection on the skin: if hair in the affected patch has turned white and the affection appears to be deeper than the skin, it is a leprous affection; when the priest sees it, he shall pronounce the person impure.”

The implication here is that the Kohen Gadol is announcing “This person is contagious, stay away!” in order to protect everyone else. But why is it the Kohen Gadol’s responsibility? Isn’t it obvious that the person looks afflicted? Perhaps it’s because of perception issues, lest there be debate and everything gets worse. And now we see how this ties into the dress, if loosely.

  

Next, there’s GamerGate and Vivian James. I’ve covered this before, but for those unfamiliar, here’s a rundown:

Back in the Summer of 2014, a rumour circulated around the internet that game designer Zoë Quinn had slept with various video game reviewers to court favour for Depression Quest. Started by her ex-boyfriend, it took root in forums like 4chan and gained the attention of Adam Baldwin, who coined “GamerGate” to suggest a conspiracy ala President Nixon’s Watergate Scandal. Despite the pretense that this was about “ethics in game’s journalism”, a growing list of women, including Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian, became targets of harassment and doxing.

Around this time, a group known as TFYC donated a massive sum to have a character created. Named “Vivian James”, a pun on “vidya games”, she quickly became GamerGate’s mascot. Despite the copious amounts of inappropriate fan art, due to her being a teenager, the question of whether or not a fictional avatar can be a spokesperson for a movement, especially when she had no agency, took centre stage. Was it appropriate to use a fake character as a mouthpiece?

I try not to dwell on GamerGate. I lost a lot of friends over it, some of whom I’d known for many years. However, the part that miffs me to this day is that Vivian James was being exploited by toxic gamers. And she was a teenager, one without any agency. Assuming she was real at all, where was her perspective? Was it fair to misuse her?

Such parallels are found, in my mind, in a section of The Mishneh Torah pertaining to divorce, particularly the Gett:

“When a man whom the law requires to be compelled to divorce his wife does not desire to divorce her, the court should have him beaten until he consents, at which time they should have a get written. The get is acceptable. This applies at all times and in all places. Similarly, if gentiles beat him while telling him: "Do what the Jews are telling you to do," and the Jews have the gentiles apply pressure on him until [he consents] to divorce his wife, the divorce is acceptable. If, however, the gentiles compel him to write [a get] on their own initiative…”

Honestly, the Gett is one the hardest parts of Judaism to swallow. Not because it isn’t necessary, especially since men aren’t trustworthy historically, but because withholding it causes the wife unnecessary pain. It’s boorish, and yet it happens so frequently! Not giving a Gett also creates an agunah, or a chained woman. And if this agunah ends up pregnant from another man, her child is a mamzer, a bastard whose lineage is cursed for 10 generations! That’s not something any sane person wants.

Ignoring how many modern marriages have civil prenups that automatically enforce Getts, I can’t help feeling for the woman here. After all, she’s being abused! And she’s given little-to-no agency! I also can’t help wondering what’d happen had women had an active role in formulating the Halacha, but it’s too late to fix that. Perhaps that’s why women need to be listened to…

We all remember the riots in Ferguson, Missouri. They weren’t that long ago, and they shed light on systemic abuse from law enforcement. Unfortunately, the situation hasn’t gotten much better. All the riots did was bring attention to how racist police officers can be, as well as how little accountability they have. ACAB, as they say.

Even if you don’t mind cops, the reality is that they’re human beings. And like any humans with authority, they’re flawed. They make mistakes, they screw up, and sometimes their mistakes are deadly. After all, if politicians are recognized as shady, why are police exempt from that? As Alan Moore once wrote, “Who watches The Watchmen?”.

Perhaps the weirdest ripple effect involved a cop who was dismissed for a weird reason. As The Anime Herald wrote on May 14th, 2015:

“Last night, Florida’s WFTV News reported that an officer in the Casselberry Police Department. Police officer Matthew Blunt was suspended for one shift (10 hours) without pay, after sending an off-color text message to his supervisor.”

This is putting it lightly. Blunt, apparently, had been excited about winning the local Powerball lottery, and he wanted some of the money. It wasn’t a lot of money-$32 USD-but even a sushi dinner at a Kosher restaurant is something. However, Blunt using an anime image with a racial epithet was, apparently, going too far, and he was suspended. Interesting.

When Blunt’s story went viral, a debate over whether or not his suspension was justified tagged along. The most-troubling question was “Why this?”. I’m not defending Blunt, he should’ve known better, but between the profiling, beatings and, yes, even shootings police have been guilty of, being suspended over a racist meme is suspect. It begs the question of what police can get away with.

Judaism isn’t a stranger to critiquing authority figures. King David was punished by God for seducing a married woman, having her husband killed and impregnating her. Yet the one passage that sums up this best involves Yoav ben Tsuriah. Yoav was David’s nephew, and he was his highest-ranking general. Nepotism aside, he was a formidable strategist, serving David well. But his hamartia was a bad case of wounded pride. He routinely disobeyed protocol to settle personal scores, including the tragic death of David’s son, Avshalom, after his hair got caught in a thicket. David never forgave him, and it didn’t get any easier once Shlomo took over:

“When the news reached Joab, he fled to the Tent of GOD and grasped the horns of the altar—for Joab had sided with Adonijah, though he had not sided with Absalom.

King Solomon was told that Joab had fled to the Tent of GOD and that he was there by the altar; so Solomon sent Benaiah son of Jehoiada, saying, “Go and strike him down.”

Benaiah went to the Tent of GOD and said to him, “Thus said the king: Come out!” “No!” he replied; “I will die here.” Benaiah reported back to the king that Joab had answered thus and thus, and the king said, “Do just as he said; strike him down and bury him, and remove guilt from me and my father’s house for the blood of the innocent that Joab has shed.

Thus GOD will bring his blood guilt down upon his own head, because, unbeknown to my father, he struck down with the sword two men more righteous and honorable than he—Abner son of Ner, the army commander of Israel, and Amasa son of Jether, the army commander of Judah.

May the guilt for their blood come down upon the head of Joab and his descendants forever, and may good fortune from GOD be granted forever to David and his descendants, his house and his throne.

(Melachim II, 28-33.)

Clearly, Yoav staked his claim with the wrong person, which cost him his life!

The final example I wish to discuss involves Tilly Norwood, whom I’ve also written about. Tilly Norwood is an A.I. actress created by Xicoia, a division of Particle6 Group, in 2025. Her creator, Eline Van Der Velden, desired to experiment with her. Despite never intending for her to replace real actors, Norwood created an uproar in Hollywood and the online world, with people accusing her of talent poaching and performance theft. After all, how can her acting be genuine?

Hollywood has blacklisted Norwood, yet her presence touches on a bigger issue surrounding A.I. It might be a hot commodity nowadays, but is its presence warranted? And is it a tool for change, or merely a fad? There’s plenty that can be said, but I won’t bore you. Instead, I’ll keep my thoughts brief: I’m not a fan. At all. In fact, I try to not rely on it, even at the expense of errors or misinformation. It can’t match up to human ingenuity on a good day.

I had to think hard on what would be a good compliment Tilly Norwood, but I settled on this story about Maimonides:

“There is a beautiful story of a disagreement that Maimonides had with a philosopher. The philosopher claimed that he could change a cat and make him act like a person. Maimonides said this was impossible. They agreed to make a contest. When the day of the contest came, the philosopher brought a cat that he had trained to be a waiter. The cat served an entire meal, and the audience was amazed. Just as they stared and assumed that Maimonides had been proven wrong, Maimonides took out a container from his pocket. He opened it up and a mouse ran by. The cat saw the mouse, dropped the tray of dishes that he was holding, breaking them all, and ran after the mouse. Maimonides was proven right, and everyone agreed that no matter what, a cat is a cat. As much as he may be trained to act in a particular way, he is still inherently a cat and must be treated as such.”

Pretty straightforward, right? Maimonides disagrees that animals can transcend their nature, he’s supposedly proven wrong, and then he games the system and ends up being right. The obvious lesson is to not second-guess a rationalist, which Maimonides was, but further research revealed that this might not be his story. Yeah, it’s a midrash, a parable meant to teach a lesson. It’s also a remix of an Aesop’s fable! You ready for this?

“The Cat and Venus

A CAT fell in love with a handsome young man, and entreated Venus to change her into the form of a woman. Venus consented to her request and transformed her into a beautiful damsel, so that the youth saw her and loved her, and took her home as his bride. While the two were reclining in their chamber, Venus wishing to discover if the Cat in her change of shape had also altered her habits of life, let down a mouse in the middle of the room. The Cat, quite forgetting her present condition, started up from the couch and pursued the mouse, wishing to eat it. Venus was much disappointed and again caused her to return to her former shape.

Nature exceeds nurture.”

Big thanks to George Flyer Townsend for translating this. However, that Aesop had covered this prior shows that even Jewish midrashim are responses to previous texts. That’s not necessarily bad. It simply shows that Judaism was self-aware, using prior stories as springboards. You simply can’t deny that.

But this all goes back to that Kohelet verse. Judaism doesn’t exist in a vacuum, as much as we sometimes want it to. Because Jews are a byproduct of the world. This extends to how we perceive and digest media. And if these controversies are indication, the issues present, such as that of perception, aren’t new either. Our sages and texts were grappling with this, and they too were influenced by the world around them. We should definitely remember and appreciate that as we grapple with contemporary issues.

Boys on Trial

I have no interest in watching The Boys. I had no interest in watching it before it finished syndication, either. For one, it was on a streamer I don’t have. And two, its brand of edgy, “aren’t superheroes obnoxious?” humour doesn’t interest me. I don’t say because I like superheroes, although I do, but because tearing down something simply because it’s popular doesn’t feel good. Besides, Alan Moore did it better.

So we’re clear, I’m not putting down anyone who legitimately likes this show. Finale aside, the people involved really did care, and one of the actresses, Erin Moriarty, was fantastic as Hope Shlottman in Season 1 of Jessica Jones. My issue is about its satire. I also think it’s brought out the worst in its fans, such that Moriarty was harassed online a while back. But I digress.

The idea that “popular = bad” is something this show’s thrived on in excess. This is most-exemplified in Homelander, who’s basically Superman/Captain America if he was self-obsessed and annoying. Homelander’s whole deal is that people love him to cult-like degree, even though none of it’s warranted. He revels in the spotlight to avoid accountability for his behaviour, which includes murdering people. I know people revere Superman and Captain America in real life, but not because they’re cynical, self-obsessed man-babies. It’s because they represent the best in humanity, however hard that is.

I’ll use the latest Superman movie to illustrate this. Yes, it has people interrogate him as the genuine article, and he makes occasionally-brash decisions, but Superman only behaves that way because he believes in people. He even tries stopping a genocide, despite doing so aggressively. Superman isn’t about the glory, he’s a boy scout, and Homelander tearing that down is mean-spirited. The same can be said for Captain America, who tries being his nation’s best and doesn’t blindly accept its actions.

Another issue I have with The Boys is its call-outs of superhero culture, specifically The MCU. There’s plenty wrong with The MCU, as there is with Disney. But believing it’s wrong for superheroes to be popular because “superheroes” ignores how even soulless corporations can make good, relevant art. The MCU’s mass-produced media, but it tackles themes like blind patriotism, race relations, familial abuse and the limitations of justice. These are all important in this day and age, however you feel about the movies.

The Boys isn’t content with letting these messages resonate, instead tearing down the movies and shows because it feels they’re tacky or shallow. This is best-exemplified by its scathing parody of “Don’t worry…he’s got help!” in The Avengers: Endgame. It’s silly to have every superheroine in The MCU show up in a single shot to help Spider-Man…but does it matter if it’s pandering to female audience members? The moment is fun, the characters get to shine and it’s genuinely exciting seeing them together. It might be “cynically-driven”, but who cares? The Boys did, with its parallel being included because one of its writers thought it was lame. I genuinely think that’s done real harm in popular culture discourse.

However, that’s this show. Never mind the irony of a superhero series failing to self-interrogate, The Boys is content with coasting on tearing down joy associated with superheroes. I don’t like that. I don’t mind dark and edgy when done well, but a little whimsy and joy goes a long way. The world’s cruel enough without genuine moments of wonder being mocked.

I also think the energy this show gives off encapsulates what’s wrong with the internet. You know that stereotype of the internet being loud, whiny and needlessly angry? That’s the vibe here. I see enough terminally-online nonsense on social media without a superhero show adding to that. I’d tell this series to go outside and touch grass, but I doubt it’d help. And that’s unfortunate.

Look, my time is precious. I can only stomach so much negativity before it starts weighing me down. It’s why I Unfollowed a popular anime reviewer on Twitter years ago, as, among other problems, he didn’t know how to not be condescending about popular entertainment. I don’t need that, so I cut my losses. I don’t regret it, either.

This series feels like that, but on a grander level. And yes, there are ways to criticize superhero entertainment. But it requires self-introspection, which I don’t think The Boys does. Or if it does, it’s minimal and ineffective. Basically, it needs to try harder.

And as for the internet’s adoration in general? Far be it for me to piss on your fun, but I think the unpleasant and snarky behaviour surrounding this series isn’t helpful. The world is a mess right now, and people need outlets for harmless escapism. Superheroes, whether you like them or not, are one such outlet, as they shine a mirror on societal woes and eradicate them with kindness and decency. If that bothers you, then I guess you’re part of the problem. I’m not sorry in the slightest for calling that out.

Donkey Kong Woes

I’m going to be upfront: I’m hesitant to play Donkey Kong 64 on NSO.

It’s not because the port has problems. Or because it’s “bad”. Or because I think it “sucks”. No, it’s none of that. Rather, I have mixed feelings about the game stemming back to childhood, and I’m afraid that’ll cloud my enjoyment.

I’m not great at video games. Period. I’ve written extensively about that before, so I won’t rehash why. But that struggle is especially true with older games, as they artificially ramped up their difficulty to extend their run-times and work within technical limitations. Rare was notorious for their games being particularly brutal, such that I’ve only beaten Donkey Kong Country and GoldenEye 007. Rare liked giving players a run for their money, and Donkey Kong 64 was no exception.

But whatever, “Rare makes hard games” isn’t a revelation. Nor is it an automatic red flag. I’ve played many hard games, and I’ve even beaten some. I’ve also played several of Rare’s classic titles, even if I haven’t beaten them. Donkey Kong 64 being difficult isn’t necessarily a deal-breaker.

The game’s tedium, however, is. For one, it’s notorious for being an obnoxious collect-a-thon. Many platformers prioritize collecting items, but this specific one does so mercilessly. Specifically, it requires you to switch to a specific Kong, open a new area with collectibles, backtrack and switch to another Kong, collect those collectibles, then backtrack again and switch to the first Kong. So many of the challenges and collectibles, most of which are required, can’t be collected without specific Kongs in specific locations, which adds to the frustration. I understand Rare wanted to get proper mileage out of each Kong, but was this the way to do it?

If that’s not bad enough, some of the challenges are poorly-designed. I don’t have to tell you about “Beaver Bother”, and how I’m positive the developers didn’t properly beta test it, but it goes further than that. There are sections, particularly later on, where it gets dark and you can’t see anything. I know people complain about modern lighting being too dark, but this game released in 1999. It’s not like this is a new experience.

True, you can say this was to hide design limitations, especially with something so ambitious. I don’t buy that considering Super Mario 64 managed without being too dimly lit. (Granted, it had other limitations.) This may have been massive for 1999, especially on a Nintendo 64 cartridge that required an expansion pack, but that doesn’t excuse being unable to finish an objective because you can’t see. I don’t have the patience for that, especially nowadays!

It’s a problem because this makes the experience less enjoyable. It’s already a difficult game without the lighting issues, and it doesn’t stop there! Between that, the tedious backtracking and the design limitations, it feels like Donkey Kong 64 might’ve been too ambitious. Either that, or it needed more time in development. I know Rare had a deadline to meet, but couldn’t they have asked for more time? Rushing it out isn’t the answer.

I’m annoyed because I remember enjoying this game’s multiplayer mode, which was the main game meets the multiplayer from GoldenEye 007. Unfortunately, you need to go through the main game to access it, which is hampered by what I’ve mentioned above. Not being able to play multiplayer right away is a missed opportunity, one that could’ve demonstrated, yet again, that no one did multiplayer in the 90s like Rare. But it’s too late to fix that, right? Moving on.

Perhaps the biggest issue, and one I remember well, is that several challenges are time-based. To be fair, you can go back and retry them if you fail, sometimes without penalty. But these time limits frequently feel too short or cheap, and the game’s tendency to repeat challenges beat-for-beat makes them a nightmare. (Did Angry Aztec need a doomsday clock for 5 Golden Bananas, one where the objective is to avoid being shot? Seriously?!)

I could go on about this game’s flaws. I could mention the limited use of DK’s animal buddies. Or how the arcade games, both of which you have to complete, are relentlessly difficult. Or how Hideout Helm, the final level, is a race against a timer that can only be extended by taking blueprints to Snidely. Or even how the game’s sexual and bodily humour has aged terribly. However, all of this would make me feel guilty discussing if weren’t for one problem:

Donkey Kong Bananza released last year.

Sure, it might not be fair to compare the games. Especially since they were made with different hardware limitations. But I can’t help it! There are many aspects of Donkey Kong Bananza I love, and one I don’t, but chief among them is the game’s collectibles being so streamlined that they aren’t even necessary. You don’t have to collect all of the game’s Banandium Gems. I don’t think you need to collect them at all, they’re simply a fun bonus! But that they’re largely secondary to the main objective means that the pressure to collect them is almost non-existent. I can’t say that about Donkey Kong 64, where most of its collectibles, the Golden Bananas specifically, are required.

That’s my biggest frustration, and it still haunts me 27 years later. And look, I know Rare makes their games like this on purpose. All of their N64 titles, even Diddy Kong Racing, are designed to be challenging, and this is no different. But hindsight’s 20/20, and a free-roaming platformer like this deserved better. Perhaps an in-game difficulty tier would’ve worked, one where the easiest setting fixed my design gripes and the hardest didn’t? If Donkey Kong Country 3 could get away with difficulty settings, why couldn’t Donkey Kong 64?

I know I’m crying over spoiled milk, as the game’s been around for almost 3 decades. It’s also not even like there aren’t aspects of the game that aren’t fun, as there are. I especially like “The DK Rap”, as it introduces this game’s setting and characters in a fun way. But the parts that terrify me outweigh the enjoyment I remember having. And since I don’t have infinite time or patience for video games, that doesn’t scream confidence.

Maybe I’m being too harsh, letting my biases cloud my judgement. I don’t know. It’s also possible that I might prove my concerns wrong when I gather the courage to sit down and play the game again. However, for now I remain cautious of Donkey Kong 64 on NSO. You can call that cowardice, but I don’t care. My time, and my energy, is too precious to not be guarded. If that’s cowardly, then so be it!

Whining About Pavi

The trailer for Avatar: Seven Havens is online, and it looks good! Granted, trailers aren’t the be-all-end-all, and they can be misleading, but I’m definitely intrigued. I especially like the angle of this new show, with the new Avatar being feared thanks to the mistakes of Korra. It’s a refreshing take on the “this world’s engulfed in chaos” premise the original series did, and it looks amazing visually. If the show plays its cards right, we could have another winner. And it makes me upset that I don’t have access to Paramount+.

Despite showing promise, this trailer has also seen plenty of backlash. In particular, terminally-online individuals have called it “woke, DEI trash”, implying that it’ll fail. Funny, since the franchise was always “woke, DEI trash”, with the characters being based on Southeast Asian and Inuit cultures. Also, the series has had several disabled characters, including Toph. But I guess that’s too on-the-nose…

While it’s easy to write this off, it’s worth noting that there’s always spillover. Geopolitics aside, shows and movies have been cancelled and shelved based on audience feedback. It happened with The Acolyte, and it’s possible, knowing who’s running Paramount, it could happen here too. That’s disheartening. It’s especially disheartening because it puts undue pressure on these high-concept stories to wow everyone immediately, which isn’t always feasible.

Even within this franchise it’s unfeasible. I love Avatar: The Last Airbender, but its first season took about 13 episodes to find its groove. I happened to like it before that, even though it had one of the most-divisive episodes of television ever, but taking over 4 hours to become something special is something that’d never be allowed now. I’m even convinced the show would’ve remained unfinished had it premiered in 2026. That’s how much everything’s changed in the TV landscape.

Something that’s cause for alarm is people complaining about Pavi’s peg leg. To that, I return to the original show with Toph. Introduced in the second season, she was a blind girl who was spunky and fierce. She also invented Metalbending, which came in handy later on. That said, despite Toph being one of the most popular characters these days, I’m positive she’d be criticized for similar reasons as Pavi if she’d debuted now. Think about it.

Of course, there’s the complaint about Pavi and her friends being minorities, to which I ask if people have been living under a rock. This franchise never had white people in it! And no one had an issue with that before now! Even Avatar: The Legend of Korra, which was a modernized follow-up series dealing with contemporary politics, paralleled real world advancements while keeping true to that. And its titular heroine was bisexual, to boot.

Like The Odyssey, people are being racist and ableist about nothing. Unlike The Odyssey, people are being selective with their memory of this franchise. Because it was always “woke, DEI trash”. That that’s even a complaint is ludicrous. You can argue contrary all you want, but it’s true.

Having this be about racism and ableism is missing how pathetic that is. DEI isn’t offensive, contrary to what racists claim. Like CRT, it’s about giving minorities opportunities white, able-bodied individuals have. It’s not an attack on your capabilities, as much as you might claim that, and if you think it is then I doubt you understand it. Then again, the people throwing around “DEI” like a slur are probably mad they can’t use racist language anymore. Prove me wrong.

Truthfully, this whole backlash is ridiculous. So what if Pavi has a peg leg and isn’t white? Is that really a problem? Is that going to impact your life negatively? Are you that attached to a show meant for children that you want to ruin the experience? Because if that’s the case, then you need to reevaluate your priorities.

I’m not saying this show will be amazing. The franchise hasn’t had an amazing entry since its inception. Even Avatar: The Legend of Korra, which I enjoyed, was clunky and inconsistently-written, with a final pairing that annoyed me enough to write a rant that remains my most read and commented piece here. Yet that has nothing to do with its characters being SEA-coded, or its protagonist being queer. If anything, those are ancillary to the show’s problems.

I’m unsure what else to say. Yes, Avatar: Seven Havens could end up being bad. That’s always a possibility. And if it ends up being bad, then I’ll reevaluate it then. But for now, I’d like to keep an open mind. Because it looks interesting, and that’s more than enough to persuade me.

Finally, I must ask that the detractors let up. I know it feels scary to not have the world revolve around white people, but this is a kid’s show. It isn’t worth getting that upset over it, and doing so is pathetic and childish. If that isn’t enough to persuade you, then I suggest, as usual, going outside. Also, get professional help. I promise you’ll feel so much better.

Haus of Chaos

It’s fortuitous I’m writing this on Tisha B’Av. On one hand, it’s a day of reflection and mourning. On the other hand, it’s relevant to the day as a whole. So let’s discuss the Haus of Decline VS Will Stancil controversy. I hope God forgives me…

I haven’t been on Twitter in years. I wrote a whole piece on why, but every now and then its drama catches up to me. Such is the case with something Stancil shared on Bluesky recently. I know Stancil’s reputation is shady, but his remarks on a Haus Tweet from earlier this year shed light on the hypocrisy of Bluesky’s user-base and the frustration of the Israel-Gaza war. Because both are exhausting without this. But I digress.

The Tweet in question had Haus of Decline compare Israeli children to Watto from the Star Wars Prequels. Haus also used her Jewishness in a direct follow-up to shield from any criticism she might’ve received. It didn’t work, as Stancil called her out and shed light on how shady the “joke” was. It also started a squabble between Jewish and non-Jewish Bluesky users over it, with Jewish users criticizing her and non-Jewish ones defending her. So where do I stand?

Simple: I think Haus’s Tweet was in really poor taste.

I know some of you might jump on me for saying that, but I don’t care. Comparing Israelis to a representation of several Mediterranean/Middle Eastern stereotypes, one of which includes Jews, is offensive. The greedy slave trader with an enlarged nose who smells bad, speaks with a heavy accent and has flies surrounding him evokes bigoted imagery, and that’s before the scene in the second Prequel where he wears a coat and top hat. It might be too late to fix it, as he debuted in 1999, but let’s be grateful his species, The Toydarians, was made more dignified in Star Wars: The Clone Wars.

Outside of that, comparing Israelis to him is insulting. Israelis, most of whom are Jews, aren’t monolithic. And they for sure don’t dress dirty. Even the subset Haus referred to, Charedim, don’t watch movies anyway, so the comparison falls flat. It’s bad all around.

I know some people defended Haus by pointing out she’s Jewish. I’m Jewish too, so it’s irrelevant. Others defended her by pointing out she’s trans, hence Stancil was transphobic. Ignoring Stancil’s politics, that’s a red herring. It doesn’t matter that she’s trans. Stancil didn’t even misgender Haus, so I’m not sure what that accomplishes.

It’s also speaks to a bigger problem in progressive circles: it’s okay to make bigoted statements if the target’s Jewish. I’ve seen it with Stephen Miller and Benjamin Netanyahu, as both have Antisemitism lobbed at them from critics. It shouldn’t be necessary to do that, as they have valid issues with their behaviour without adding bigotry. The same goes with Israelis, most of whom, again, are Jewish.

Another red herring defence involved comparing Haus to Mel Brooks. Firstly, Brooks is 100 years old. Secondly, he has bigger issues to worry about. And thirdly, comparing her to Brooks misreads Brooks as a comedian. I’ve seen Blazing Saddles, and I assure you he’d be on top of Haus with his trademark humour if he cared to take a side. Those who think otherwise are missing the point.

I also think attacking Stancil and calling him transphobic over this is ridiculous. Yes, I’m sure Stancil has his own skeletons. But no, pointing that out here isn’t helpful. Because Stancil was right to call out Haus. I may not have used his language, but still.

On a bigger level, this is an example of baseless hatred, or Sinat Chinam. And during Tisha B’Av, which commemorates the correlation between that and the current exile of Jews, it’s especially tasteless. We have enough to deal with without one of our own adding to it. Haus’s Tweet was tone-deaf, and she’s yet to apologize. It doesn’t help that this, supposedly, isn’t one of her worst Tweets, which makes me dread uncovering anything else she’s said.

You know what the awful part is? Haus wrote this in 2026. I know some people still use Twitter for global activism, but it’s not worth staying there anymore. The site’s reputation has tanked since Elon Musk’s purchase, as he’s allowed hatred to flourish there under the guise of “comedy”. Haus might not be a right-wing reactionary, but her joke about Watto and Jews feels right at home there. In other words, she should be ashamed.

And for those defending her? Please stop. Haus screwed up, and no amount of bending over backwards will remedy that. That so many Jews on Bluesky are being mocked over criticizing her, even ones with progressive politics, is more indicative of progressive gentiles’ priorities. Because Bluesky’s user-base claims to have standards. This isn’t that.

I’ll end with something a fellow Jew on Bluesky pointed out: you know how people chastise the goblins in the Harry Potter series for being Antisemitic? What if Haus had substituted Watto for them? Would people have turned on her, or done mental gymnastics to justify this? And what would that say about their double standards? Think it over.

May we Jews love one another unconditionally, enough to end of our exile. And may it happen soon.

Anime Matsuri's Shame

Many years ago, I wrote a piece defending Vic Mignogna. Despite not deleting it, as I believe in learning from my mistakes, I feel I was too lenient on the man. I especially feel that in light of what’s transpired since, such that it feels incredibly tasteless. Because he’s a creep, and more people should appreciate that. Unfortunately, some organizations haven’t gotten the memo.

Recently, Anime Matsuri took flak over inviting Mignogna to an FMA reunion panel. This announcement was made without consulting fellow franchise alum Maxey Whitehead, who voiced Alphonse alongside Mignogna’s Edward. When it came to her attention, she posted a statement on Facebook and cancelled her appearance. It’s unfortunate, but understandable given Mignogna’s predatory allegations. I’d have cancelled too in her position.

What makes this doubly-upsetting is that Mignogna’s behaviour isn’t secret. He lost a defamation case in Texas over it, one that became famous. It’s weird that he was allowed to go as long as he did without repercussions, but many powerful figures did what he did too. Either way, Mignogna’s been bad news for years. And he hasn’t been helping his reputation, either.

Anime Matsuri should’ve known better, as they violated a contract agreement. Whitehead was entitled to not be in the same room as Mignogna, and Anime Matsuri not respecting her wishes is on them. Then again, Anime Matsuri has a history of shady behaviour. Ergo, this isn’t surprising.

That the convention was willing to go through with this is an indictment on how society treats predators relative to victims. Mignogna isn’t the only example in the anime community of a predator. He’s not the only example of a predator, period! And there are individuals who’ve committed more heinous acts than him! But it doesn’t matter. His behaviour isn’t unknown, and he shouldn’t be rewarded because of his influence.

This isn’t to downplay his talents. I liked him as Edward Elric. I liked him as Tamaki Suoh too. He also has an excellent singing voice, as evidenced by him rerecording various English covers of anime intros. But talented people can be awful too. The world’s messy like that.

Regardless, it’s on Anime Matsuri to fix this mess. Unfortunately, they haven’t exactly been doing a good job, even locking their official Facebook Post. They also put out a half-baked response to Whitehead that warrants reading. Seriously, check it out. It’s embarrassing.

What also doesn’t help is that many of the comments are spiteful toward Whitehead, accusing her of being petty. Which begs the question: what kind of message is being sent when a convention shames a VA for feeling uncomfortable? It’s not like Whitehead needs the spotlight, especially when she gets booked at other conventions, but she requested that she not be with Mignogna. If Anime Matsuri can’t respect her wishes, to the point of shaming her publicly…

I know this is the internet, and it’s easy for nonsense to spread before the truth catches up. I also know that posts online never truly disappear, no matter how hard you try scrubbing them. And I understand that social media encourages bad behaviour, much at the expense of civility and nuance. You don’t need me telling any of you that. I’m not innocent myself, especially with some of my early writing! However, I try learning from my mistakes, and I attempt to not repeat them. I’m not always successful, but the effort’s made.

Anime Matsuri isn’t doing that. You can argue that Whitehead backing out last-minute was shocking, no doubts there. But like I said, Mignogna’s behaviour has been known for years. Ignoring his defamation suit, plenty of VAs and convention attendees have called attention to his behaviour, with some even going public. Anime Matsuri, therefore, made a deliberate choice, and now they’re refusing to hold themselves accountable. It’s disgusting.

Ideally, the convention would shut down for the year. They made a huge debacle, showing how ugly they truly are. But we don’t live in an ideal situation. Like with any public figure embroiled in a scandal, there will always be people who stand by them out of spite, or out of sheer ignorance. The latter might not even be malicious! But it’ll happen with Mignogna, as it usually does.

That said, I can express my displeasure anyway. And look, I don’t like trashing celebrities, as much as it seems otherwise. I especially don’t like trashing them justifiably, as much as it may also seem otherwise. But sometimes staying quiet is more harmful. In the case of Vic Mignogna, I feel an obligation to share my disdain. Because if my words bring justice to one of his victims, or help ward off future ones, then I’ve done my job. It’s the least I can do.

And Anime Matsuri? If you’re reading this, my message is simple: shame on you. Shame on you for booking this man, shame on you for not being upfront with Maxey Whitehead, and shame on you for not admitting fault. But most importantly, shame on you for letting the toxic fans have the last word. People see that, and we take note. If that doesn’t deter you, then perhaps you should do some soul searching. I doubt you will, though.

It's Not Real!

The internet’s biggest weakness is The Dunning-Kruger Effect. Not only are people an expert in areas they don’t understand, they’re proud of that. They also make that everyone else’s problem, which is bad when having a thoughtful, nuanced conversation. This is especially true with representation in fictional media. Because it feels like media literacy is wanting, and that’s bad.

Take The Odyssey. The latest from Christopher Nolan’s filmography, it’s been getting plenty of positive buzz because of its execution. It’s also been receiving unwarranted criticism online for its casting, particularly Lupita Nyong’o. Despite being talented, even having an Oscar, she’s been attacked for “blackwashing” a Greek story. Elon Musk has even complained for months on social media. While this’d normally be easy to ignore, Musk has incredible political and financial influence.

But also, this isn’t a real story. The Odyssey’s a work of fiction about Mount Olympus, sirens, cyclopes and the gods and goddesses of Greek mythology. Essentially, race-swapping a character isn’t a big deal. Especially since black people lived in Ancient Greece, contrary to popular opinion. Europe was never an ethnic monolith.

That I have to say that is embarrassing. It should be common knowledge to anyone with any kind of sense. Unfortunately, not everyone’s gotten the memo, instead couching their bigoted ideologies and rhetoric. It’s why “incel” is upsetting to incels, or why “TERF” upsets TERFs. And like with Musk, this has spillover.

I’d end here, but it doesn’t stop at The Odyssey. Media literacy for any ancient text is insulting. Even Scripture gets misappropriated to cause real damage. We see it with textual literalists, who use it to justify forcing their beliefs on others, and textual rejectionists, who use it to justify being jerks about God and spirituality. All the while, Maimonides rolls in his grave.

Scripture isn’t a history book. It has history in it, and some of its characters were real, but it doesn’t line up 100% with actual events. The text even makes that clear, as there are Mandela Effects that occur through osmosis: the forbidden fruit wasn’t an apple. The Hebrews didn’t build the pyramids, but rather storage cities. Jonah wasn’t devoured by a whale, but a massive fish. None of the text is accidental, it’s meant to teach us something, but understanding that requires being well-versed.

Going back to The Odyssey, the text doesn’t focus on modern descriptions. That’s not important to its themes and messaging. Having a black woman in it, therefore, shouldn’t matter. But even if the text did describe modernized features, she’s not real. She isn’t Harriet Tubman. Her race is irrelevant! If that bothers you, then it says more about you.

I can hear the counter-argument about robbing a white actress of a role. White people don’t have to worry about equity. There are plenty of roles available for them, the doors will never be shut for them. Minorities don’t have that luxury. Ignoring how they’ve had roles stolen by white people before, there aren’t as many opportunities because Hollywood’s cowardly. In some cases, they’ve had to fight for roles. In others, they’ve relied on the generosity of casting directors.

Giving opportunities to minorities has helped raise the self-esteems of minority consumers. And yes, this hasn’t always been successful, as sometimes minority roles are tiered. I know Jews are frequently shut out of representation on the big and small screens, causing debates about whether or not they’re “actually a minority group”. But that there are opportunities at all shows how far Hollywood’s come, and how much further it has to go. That’s more important than complaining about authenticity.

I also don’t think this is a big deal compared to other problems. Take Tom Holland and Anne Hathaway. They’re cast as son and mother, even though Hathaway’s approximately a decade older than Holland. Considering Matt Damon plays Hathaway’s husband, isn’t that creepy? It might be “accurate” to the times, especially since marriages started over family bonds, but this is Hollywood in the 21st Century. Bending reality for modern sensibilities would do wonders here, especially since the movie’s working in minority casting.

Little details like that feel more pressing, despite them being minor. Complaining about Nyong’o’s casting, however, is reaching for sour grapes. It’s also racist and overlooks what she can bring to the role. Remember, she’s an Oscar winner. And she won that Oscar for a tough role in an even tougher movie. I know that Oscar winners can also turn in bad performances with the wrong direction, but she deserves a chance, no? I’d say so!

Above all else, this is all petty and childish complaining. I get Nolan not being your jam. I love a lot of the man’s work, but I acknowledge he sometimes doesn’t click. I don’t get, however, making this into an issue of racial purity. Because I assure you the “white race” will be fine, like it always is. If that’s not reassuring, then I suggest getting outside and touching grass. I promise you’ll feel so much better after doing that.

Now, if you’ll excuse me…