Trump’s Bloody Nose: Men and Assorted -struations.

What Trump Sees? (Source: Pinterest, Aela Gholizadeh)

Portrait photograph of Megyn Kelly

What we see.

I think it was Bubba Jefferson, Thomas’ lesser-known brother, who said that the tree of GOP primaries has to be watered with the tears shed for a candidate who drops out because of what he says about blood and women. And that is still true today.

Kidding aside, Trump’s blood comment should give us pause. In case you are lucky and still avoid the void of avoidable news, you may not have heard that GOP Presidential hopeful and front-runner Donald Trump received some pointed questions about his past comments about women (all disparaging, many shaming their bodies, some directly suggesting that submitting to sexual intercourse with Trump would be a good idea). FOX News anchor Megyn Kelly read some of his comments back to Trump, asking if he considers this in conflict with his electability for the office of the Presidency. And from there it went from bad to worse…

 

Continue reading

Advertisements

And Their Children’s Children: Sippenhaft, Blood Feuds, and other Political Incentives

The seemingly never-ending confrontation between the U.S. and Iran appears to bring out some of the most unpredictable and hostile behavior and some of the most painful grand-standing by pundits and politicians alike.

An Euler diagram illustrating the association fallacy. Although A is within B and is also within C, not all of B is within C.

Association Fallacy Diagram. (Source: commons.wikimedia.org)

The letter sent by 47 U.S. Senators dismissing political negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program has led some to brand the authors as traitors, others to hail them as patriots. Freshman Senator Tom Cotton (R) of Arkansas seems to have a leading role in drafting the letter. Of course this piece is not about Senator Cotton, but about the fraught political nature of blood and blood metaphors. I want to use this opportunity and consider a theme that squats underneath another text Senator Cotton drafted about Iran. This ugly and ancient political idea illustrates the strangeness of political conceptions regarding Iran.

Senator Cotton’s 2013 withdrawn amendment gives me an excuse to revisit one of the most painful political uses of blood: Sippenhaft, or kin liability.

Continue reading

Blood Majority? Transfusion, Language, and the Law in the Age of Hobby Lobby

01953189-1379-497c-8316-a643a188118b.jpeg

Both the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby Opinion and Dissent point a warning finger at Jehovah’s Witnesses’ stance on blood transfusion. But what do we mean when we talk about religious objections to blood transfusion like those of the Jehovah’s Witnesses? What does this specific objection regarding blood show us about how we might want to think about the intersection of law and bodies?

You should read my whole piece on Jehovah’s Witnesses and blood transfusions below, but…

Continue reading

First Glance: Blood : A Critique of Christianity by Gil Anidjar

Image

Blood: A Critique of Christianity

by Gil Anidja.

Columbia University Press, 2014.

ISBN: 9780231167208 0231167202
OCLC Number: 863199863
Description: xvii, 441 pages; 24 cm.

Table of Contents:

Preface: Why I Am Such a Good Christian
Acknowledgments
Introduction: Red Mythology
Part One. The Vampire State
1. Nation (Jesus’ Kin)
2. State (The Vampire State)
3. Capital (Christians and Money)
Part Two. Hematologies
4. Odysseus’ Blood
5. Bleeding and Melancholia
6. Leviathan and the Blood Pump
Conclusion: On the Christian Question (Jesus and Monotheism )
Notes
Index

The third part of Dr. Gil Anidjar‘s quasi-trilogy on the sweeping and radical changes in the theology, politics, and history of Abrahamic religious monotheism that began with The Jew, the Arab: A History of the Enemy (2003) and continued with Semites: Race, Religion, Literature (2008) has arrived with Blood: A Critique of Christianity.

So this is a blood studies review. Which is to say that I greet this valuable contribution to the study of blood first and foremost because of its translation and not because of its contribution to religious studies, though that may be an important one. No, I also do not mean translation in the sense of Anidjar’s wonderful Derrida translations. Rather, Anidjar’s particular contribution lies in the translation that is so often necessary to make true inter- or transdisciplinary work possible. In Blood: A Critique of Christianity, Anidjar discusses and brings together inquiries that run parallel, beckoning other scholars to work on the intersections.

What’s inside?

Continue reading