# He is Jewish / He is a Jew



## samanthalee

I have been told that there's different connotations in "He is a Jew" and "He is Jewish". It was suggested that saying "He is a Jew" is rude or derogatory, and that we should only say "He is Jewish".

Is that true?

By the way, "Jew/Jewish" was randomly picked as an example. You can replace it with British, American, Spanish, Chinese, whatever.


----------



## frenchstudentz

Yes, Jewish means his culture while hes a Jew means that you are insulting the person of his culture.


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

It shocks me profoundly to see it suggested that the statement "he is a Jew" is insulting.

Some people think that it is insulting to call Jews "Jews".  Sometimes they think this because they think there is something "bad" or "wrong" or "inferior" about being a Jew.  This idea, of course, is bigoted rubbish.  Since being a Jew is in no way bad, or wrong, or inferior, it is not insulting to refer to a Jew as such.

I think most Jews would be offended, and indeed disgusted, at the claim that naming them as what they are is an insult.


----------



## samanthalee

frenchstudentz said:


> Yes, Jewish means his culture while hes a Jew means that you are insulting the person of his culture.


Hmm...
So does that mean we can't say "I'm proud to be *an* American"? We can only say "I'm proud to be an American"?


----------



## frenchstudentz

Yes, its just became a habbit now that you don't call people Jews unless you are trying to insult them.


----------



## frenchstudentz

samanthalee said:


> Hmm...
> So does that mean we can't say "I'm proud to be *an* American"? We can only say "I'm proud to be an American"?


 

 No, it does not... Its just that the people makes the language seem harsher sometimes... Jew of course wasn't insulting until people made it seem like it was.


----------



## Dimcl

frenchstudentz said:


> Yes, it*'*s just became a habbit *habit* now that you don't call people Jews unless you are trying to insult them.


 
I'm not sure where you're coming by this information, but many proud Jewish people call themselves "Jews".  And why not?  You might want to do a little research before opining on something like this, frenchstudentz.


----------



## frenchstudentz

From where iam from, Jew is a insulting word, so iam taught that your not suppose to say it because it is impolite.


----------



## Dimcl

frenchstudentz said:


> From *W*here iam *I* am from, *"*Jew*"* is a*n* insulting word, soiam *I am* taught that your *you're* not suppose*d* to say it because it is impolite.


 
I'm not sure where you're from, but in my humble opinion, you're being taught incorrectly.


----------



## snorklebum

> hes a Jew means that you are insulting the person of his culture.



This is NOT true.  Ignore it.    Ask any Jew and see what they say.    

Jew is a noun.   Jewish is an adjective.   So Jewish can be used for a lot more things, including inanimate things:  Jewish food, Jewish accent,  Jewish tradition.

But Jew or Jews is a toally proper term.  Like I say, don't take our word for it.  Ask.  Or look at some Jewish websites.


----------



## Blootix

I agree with Dimcl and snorklebum that neither sentence necessarily carries any negative connotation.


----------



## MagdaDH

_*He is a Jew *_is equivalent to _*He is Jewish*_.

I can't imagine any Jew considering this an insult. I know several who refer to themselves exactly like that _*I am a Jew*_.

I am a Pole = I am Polish.
He is a Scot = He is Scottish.
We are all Danes = We are Danish.


----------



## nzfauna

Likewise.  I see no difference.


----------



## casebook

When I was a boy, and that is a long time ago now, the word Jew was used offensively to mean a usurer or miser.  This was probably influence by Fagin in Oliver Twist.  I suppose that some people may still have this meaning in mind but it should have died out long ago.


----------



## MagdaDH

The word "Jew" could have similar meaning in Polish, though I think it's now obsolete. And even with such a meaning in Polish it didn't mean Jewish people stopped calling themselves Jews. 

However, I am unaware of such a regular, consistent meaning in English and this is what the question was about.


----------



## panjandrum

The words "He is a Jew," have two distinct meanings in many cultures.
We may choose to pretend this is not true, but why?
At face value, OED definition (1), it is a simple statement about his religious beliefs - a person of Hebrew descent; one whose religion is Judaism; an Israelite. 

Alternatively, OED definition (2), it is based on prejudice and caricature _- offensive:_ as a name of opprobrium: _spec._ applied to a grasping or extortionate person (whether Jewish or not) who drives hard bargains. 

He is Jewish carries only the first definition.


----------



## Packard

I frequently hear people say, "This Jewish person..." in place of "Jew". It has always sounded odd to me.

We call Catholics, "Catholics" and not "Catholic people".

We call Muslims, "Muslims" and not "Muslim people".

But more often than not you hear someone saying "The Jewish people..."

There is the use of "jew" that is offensive (to me) and as a verb is used to mean to haggle over a price. "He jewed me down from $900.00 to $750.00."

I would say, "He is a Jew from Israel" and not "He is a Jewish person from Israel".


----------



## Wobby

I think the thing is, is that "Jew" is slightly different, in that occasionally it has been used in a pejorative manner. Possibly "Jew" was used in this way more so than others because it was a shorter word with the hard 'J' sound - and perhaps this is why the slightly softer 'Jewish' was never used in this context, and never had the same sort of connotation.

It seems to me similar to the use of 'Paki'  and 'Pakistani', with the first form being pejorative, and the second form not. The only difference would be that "Pakistani" is used twice to be the adjective as well as the noun.

It is perhaps another word that has a formal official meaning, that over time has developed a second pejorative use - kind of like the word 'gay'. I think you should be perfectly able to say "He is a Jew" without sounding offensive, and the person that told you was probably erring on the side of caution - it is after all the tone of the voice and the context which is important. That said, you will never get in trouble for saying "He is Jewish".


----------



## Josh_

panjandrum said:


> The words "He is a Jew," have two distinct meanings in many cultures.
> We may choose to pretend this is not true, but why?
> At face value, OED definition (1), it is a simple statement about his religious beliefs - a person of Hebrew descent; one whose religion is Judaism; an Israelite.
> 
> Alternatively, OED definition (2), it is based on prejudice and caricature _- offensive:_ as a name of opprobrium: _spec._ applied to a grasping or extortionate person (whether Jewish or not) who drives hard bargains.
> 
> He is Jewish carries only the first definition.


Yes, when you call someone a Jew because he is a miser, or for whatever reason other than his heritage, that is quite opprobrious, but I do not think that is what is meant by this discussion.  I think the thread starter was referring to calling someone "a Jew," who is in fact a Jew by heritage and/or religion, as being insulting.  I have also heard the idea that saying "he is a Jew" rather than "he is Jewish" is more abrupt, but like the majority of responses here have related, I don't see why.  A lot may depend on the tone of voice as well.


----------



## shivasprogeny

The Jews I have spoken to do not mind being called "a Jew" as long as it is not said in a rude way.

I think this came about since the noun and adjective are different for the Jewish religion whereas Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. are all both parts of speech.

I don't think anyone would consider "He is an American" rude unless the speaker specifically sounds derogatory.


----------



## אדם

Depends on how it's said. It's usually not offensive, but I'd rather someone say that I am Jewish, than I am a Jew.


----------



## Tidel

samanthalee said:


> I have been told that there's different connotations in "He is a Jew" and "He is Jewish". It was suggested that saying "He is a Jew" is rude or derogatory, and that we should only say "He is Jewish"
> 
> Is that true?
> 
> By the way, "Jew/Jewish" was randomly picked as an example. You can replace it with British, American, Spanish, Chinese, whatever.



Hi,
Actually, I have heard "he is a Jew" used in the sense that the person is trying to get the lowest price... or jewing the price down... when a person is bargaining, (maybe aggressively).  It can be very offensive if it is used in this way.

In the same way, depending on the context, pointing out someone's nationality could be offensive... but it depends on the context.
Tidel


----------



## אדם

If someone said, "Who's the Jew?" I would personally find that very offensive, just as an example.


----------



## Packard

Hauser said:


> If someone said, "Who's the Jew?" I would personally find that very offensive, just as an example.


 

It is offensive in its context only.

It is like saying, "Who's the thief"?  It is accusatory, as if being a Jew is some sort of crime.


----------



## אדם

Exactlly. However, I do think that when your talking about someone it's must more polite to use Jewish rather than Jew.


----------



## snorklebum

So would it be offensive to say, "Who's the buddhist?"    Or "who's the Canadian?"

Of course not.  "Jew" is not an offensive term.  Get over it.   

It's only as offensive as adding OFFENSIVE elements to the sentence would make it.  This is a non-issue.   One is not more polite than the other, or more offensive than the other.

One more time:  if you're in doubt ask some Jews or take a look on websites devoted to Jewish organizations and culture.


----------



## Flaminius

According to the usage note of Jew in AHDE, which does not seem to be happy at all with the findings, Jew as a noun could be held objectionable for some.


> It is widely recognized that the attributive use of the noun _Jew,_ in phrases such as  _Jew lawyer_  or  _Jew ethics,_  is both vulgar and highly offensive. In such contexts _Jewish_ is the only acceptable possibility. Some people, however, have become so wary of this construction that they have extended the stigma to any use of _Jew_ as a noun, a practice that carries risks of its own. In a sentence such as  _There are now several Jews on the council,_  which is unobjectionable, the substitution of a circumlocution like  _Jewish people_  or  _persons of Jewish background_  may in itself cause offense for seeming to imply that _Jew_ has a negative connotation when used as a noun.


Other nouns can have pejorative connotations if used attributively.  For instance, Spaniard lawyer or Dane ethics sounds outright derogatory.


----------



## Lolamartinez100

frenchstudentz said:


> Yes, its just became a habbit now that you don't call people Jews unless you are trying to insult them.


 
I can not believe that you would say that calling someone a Jew is an insult.  When are you living, the late 1800s?! 
I am a jew, and I know many other jews.  Not one of them would be insulted if you called them a Jew.  To me, saying he is a Jew, and he is Jewish are the same thing.  I find it extremely insulting that you think calling someone a Jew is an insult.  I am a Jew, and I am proud to be a Jew.  Have you even met any Jews before?!



אדם said:


> If someone said, "Who's the Jew?" I would personally find that very offensive, just as an example.


 
I understand why you would find it offensive, but I think it would be just as offensive to say "whos the american?"


----------



## natkretep

Lolamartinez100 said:


> I understand why you would find it offensive, but I think it would be just as offensive to say "whos the american?"



Agreed. The problem is the association or the stereotype, rather than the word. You could say, 'Who's the Scot?' to mean 'Who's the skinflint?' or 'Who's the American?' to mean 'Who's the loudmouth?' and so on. Do we respond to the associations by avoiding the noun forms?

PS: Welcome to the Forum, Lola.


----------



## mplsray

snorklebum said:


> So would it be offensive to say, "Who's the buddhist?"    Or "who's the Canadian?"
> 
> Of course not.  "Jew" is not an offensive term.  Get over it.
> 
> It's only as offensive as adding OFFENSIVE elements to the sentence would make it.  This is a non-issue.   One is not more polite than the other, or more offensive than the other.
> 
> One more time:  if you're in doubt ask some Jews or take a look on websites devoted to Jewish organizations and culture.



Well, here's one source. The following is from _Dictionary of Jewish Usage: a Guide to the Use of Jewish Terms_ by Sol Steinmetz. After discussing how the word _Jew_ and its cognates in other languages "have been used pejoratively through much of history," he writes:



> After the Holocaust, the word _Jew_ and its cognates began to lose some of their pejorative connotations, but only superficially. In English, for example, many non-Jews are still uncomfortable using the word and prefer to say "He's Jewish" rather than "He's a Jew." Even some Jews are inclined to say "We're Jewish" instead of "We're Jews" in social situations.



I don't think this is solely a question of the word _Jew_, however. In a social situation, other terms of ethnicity or religion pose some problems. I think it would be quite odd to say of someone, in a casual conversation, "He's a black" or "He's a white" rather than "He's black" and "He's white." (I'm presuming that the mention of the ethnicity is recognized by the listeners as relevant to the discussion at hand.)

"He's a Catholic" is not offensive in isolation. However, consider that in the film The Blues Brothers an American Nazi, speaking of one of the brothers, says:



> His name is Elwood Blues. He's got a record a mile long. And, he's a Catholic.



The screenwriters had a choice between "And, he's Catholic" and "And, he's a Catholic." I contend that the choice of wording made the Nazi character sound more sinister, based simply on the inclusion of the article.


----------



## a little edgy

> In English, for example, many non-Jews are still uncomfortable using the  word and prefer to say "He's Jewish" rather than "He's a Jew." Even  some Jews are inclined to say "We're Jewish" instead of "We're Jews" in  social situations.


I think this sums up the situation perfectly. In my neck of the woods, where there are many Jewish people (note my usage!), non-Jews are hesitant about saying "Jew" except in certain specific circumstances. There is, of course, nothing inherently offensive in the word, but association with historical anti-Semitism has made us sensitive to its use. It does not come naturally to most Americans to say, for example, "there are many Jews in New York," whereas we would not hesitate to say "there are many Catholics in New York." Instead, the inclination would be to say either "there are many Jewish people in New York" or "New York has a large Jewish population." Such circumlocutions are neither carefully thought out nor awkward on the tongue but rather come naturally because it is the most common way of speaking. 

It is my observation that, in referring to a specific person, almost no non-Jews would say "he's a Jew"; and, if they did, it would sound at best awkward and at worst raise suspicions of anti-Semitism. This seems illogical until one considers the historical perspective.


----------



## panjandrum

shivasprogeny said:


> The Jews I have spoken to do not mind being called "a Jew" as long as it is not said in a rude way.
> ...





snorklebum said:


> ...
> Of course not.  "Jew" is not an offensive term.  Get over it.
> ...





Lolamartinez100 said:


> I can not believe that you would say that calling someone a Jew is an insult.  When are you living, the late 1800s?!
> ...


Saying it isn't so will not make it go away.  The evidence above makes it very clear that the term may be used in an offensive manner.  There is nothing to suggest that is is always offensive.

_shivasprogeny_ has raised an important point, however.  Perhaps the term is less likely to be used offensively with reference to a Jew.  In other words, to refer to a Jew as a Jew is a simple statement of fact, invoking definition (1) in my earlier post to make _a simple statement about his religious beliefs_; to refer to a non-Jew as a Jew is quite different, invoking definition (2) _as a name of  opprobrium, based on prejudice and caricature_.


----------



## Nunty

Oh dear. I think I agree with everyone.

As a Jew, I find it offensive when a non-Jew is talkiing to me and avoids saying "Jews" or "a Jew", saying instead "Jewish people" or "a Jewish person" (or even more laborious circumlocutions). I find it offensive because they are clearly avoiding using a word _they feel_ is offensive.

I completely agree with Panjandrum's statement:





> In other words, to refer to a Jew as a Jew is a simple statement of fact, invoking definition (1) in my earlier post to make _a simple statement about his religious beliefs_; to refer to a non-Jew as a Jew is quite different, invoking definition (2) _as a name of  opprobrium, based on prejudice and caricature_.



Except that I would qualify it as "a simple statement about his religious beliefs _or his ethnicity/heritage_".


----------



## Lolamartinez100

natkretep said:


> Agreed. The problem is the association or the stereotype, rather than the word. You could say, 'Who's the Scot?' to mean 'Who's the skinflint?' or 'Who's the American?' to mean 'Who's the loudmouth?' and so on. Do we respond to the associations by avoiding the noun forms?
> 
> PS: Welcome to the Forum, Lola.


 

i see what you mean, i just think that in this day and age, it is sad that there are associations with certain noun forms.  i know many jews, and where we live, there is no association with the noun Jew and bad things and such.  i dont think that we should avoid the noun forms unless it is clearly being used in a negative and deragatory way.

ps: thank you!!


----------



## abenr

frenchstudentz said:


> Yes, its just became a habbit now that you don't call people Jews unless you are trying to insult them.



Perhaps this is true in Canada, but in the U.S., it's utter nonsense.  There is no insult felt in being called a Jew.


----------



## abenr

snorklebum said:


> This is NOT true.  Ignore it.    Ask any Jew and see what they say.
> 
> Jew is a noun.   Jewish is an adjective.   So Jewish can be used for a lot more things, including inanimate things:  Jewish food, Jewish accent,  Jewish tradition.
> 
> But Jew or Jews is a toally proper term.  Like I say, don't take our word for it.  Ask.  Or look at some Jewish websites.



I hadn't thought of it earlier, but reading this I realize that Jew used as an adjective may indeed be insulting.  I don't at all like the sound of Jew food or Jew tradition.


----------



## goldencypress

frenchstudentz said:


> Yes, Jewish means his culture while hes a Jew means that you are insulting the person of his culture.


He is a Muslim, He is a Christian. Why not "He is a Jew?"


----------



## dojibear

I grew up in a town where Jews were not a small minority. About 1/3 of my fellow students were Jewish. My best friends were Jewish. I can confirm that "Jew" and "Jewish person" are often interchangeable, when used by Jews and by most other people.

But in this thread, everyone seems to be ignoring a major aspect of Judaism, saying it is just a religion. That is incorrect. It is both a religion and an ethnicity (a race). People can (and do) convert to Judaism to marry someone Jewish. They can change their religion, but they can't change their ethnicity/race. 

For hundreds of years, there was a large amount of anti-Jew discrimination in Europe. I think that was primarily about race, not religion. I also think some peope use "Jew" about the race and "Jewish" about the religion.

Of course, I might be wrong.


----------



## kentix

abenr said:


> There is no insult felt in being called a Jew.


That is not the association being made by people who don't use it that way, in my opinion and experience. The many people without much personal exposure to Jewish people (they are historically only around 3% of the U.S. population and far from evenly distributed across the country) don't have the experience of hearing it used that way. They don't hear Jews talking with each other about topics like that.

What they have heard through historical sources, movies and documentaries, is Nazi ideologues using it that way. That's the association they are avoiding. It's not about Jews, it's about Nazis. People don't like the feeling they are speaking in the manner of Nazis. It makes them feel icky so they don't do it.

This is from a recent news story.

At another point a Nazi yells, “He’s a Jew, look at him! Guess where you’re going back to?”​
That's the association. And that's what's being avoided. It might seem crazy to some but it's real. Many people just aren't going to say that. So _it is_ special compared to Christian or Muslim or American for historical reasons.


----------



## Byblos.sull.lago

Well, this is fascinating. Here's my (non Jewish) perspective, coming from my linguistic conditioning in a few languages and cultural contexts. I grew up in the rural southern USA, not a <Jewish person> in sight, but known through media.

- The Jewish people - which includes religion and cultural community and background - have had a long and difficult history. The mid-20th century in Europe and Palestine is particularly present in my mind.

- The noun "Jew" has been used as an oppressive term in some or much of this difficult history. Thus, to some people (myself included), the adjective phrase "Jewish person / people / community" is preferred; it doesn't include any perceived atmosphere of oppression.

- There is a parallel with other terms: the nouns black and gay have been used to oppress, and that usage has an "aura" of racism and homophobia. "The gays have their agenda," "a black was looking in my house." The adjective phrases "gay / black person" could of course be used in the same oppressive, pejorative way, but IMO that would be intended to deflect suspicion of bias.

The Steinmetz _Dictionary _reference above reflects my conditioning pretty accurately.


----------



## SniperMaské

dojibear said:


> But in this thread, everyone seems to be ignoring a major aspect of Judaism, saying it is just a religion. That is incorrect. It is both a religion and an ethnicity (a race).



Thank you for stating this; reading the thread, I was baffled to notice that only Nunty clarified it:


> Except that I would qualify it as "a simple statement about his religious beliefs _or his ethnicity/heritage_".



I also noticed mplsray alluded to it, but did not clarify out of presuming wrongly about most people’s knowledge!


> (I'm presuming that the mention of the ethnicity is recognized by the listeners as relevant to the discussion at hand.)



Many Gentiles are unaware of this aspect (in my view, this is because they just get their information from mass media sources instead of researching things by themselves).



dojibear said:


> For hundreds of years, there was a large amount of anti-Jew discrimination in Europe. I think that was primarily about race, not religion.


The history of Gentiles-Jews conflict is an intricate one, with various causes linked to how both groups interacted: religion (the mission of the Inquisition was to discover falsely converted Jews (Marranos), not to go after self-avowed Jews), economy (for example, one could think of usury in the Middle Ages, but the Jewish collectors were appointed by Gentile lords, so, the reality is complex; by the way, the roundel / yellow star was actually used by them as a way to _protect_ their special collectors!), ideology (support for communism went strong in Jewish communities in the 19th and 20th centuries)…
I clearly remember reading that on the contrary, race-based concerns were a way later thing. There was a lot of information in the article, which was chronological, but I cannot get my hands back on it!

As an aside, in French, the question does not arise (ie name and adjective are used interchangeably), but there are the two nominal forms _juif_ and _Juif_ to distinguish between ‘a Jew by religion’ and ‘a Jew by race’. Although I suspect the general public is little informed about this too; most people just do not have a clue. 😆


----------

