OKAY WTAF

[cimorene]

Today, I was once again reduced to wordless rage!

SOME KID: But why was Jesus crucified?
TEACHER: Well, that was because, you see, the Jews didn't really like the way that Jesus said he was the son of God. The Jews were waiting for the Messiah who would save them and they didn't think the Messiah would be that kind of person, like an ordinary human being like Jesus.

ÖALSKDJJJJJ BBQ

This is the same one who jumped in to answer the clueless one who wanted to know what Jews think about "our" Jesus (mostly correctly but without any special knowledge of the respect he's sometimes been held in since his death) - so volubly that I wasn't able to get a word in in order to come out as a Jew.

Now, it's not that I couldn't rebut this. It's more that I barely know where to start, let alone how it's hard to formulate Swedish when overcome with rage. Also any comeback would have to be both brief, and simple enough to not seem weird in the second-grade context, if you see what I mean. What SHOULD I have said, calmly and in brief, to correct this misrepresentation for a second-grade audience?

Comments

[laughingrat]

I'm just...ugh. And somehow I picture her, when confronted, saying, "Well these are just my OPINIONS! Free speech, yo!" or some variant, you know, whatever's the usual BS excuse there. As if actual historical fact is just a matter of opinion, or totally dissing an entire ethnic group is just, like, something you do if you're into it, not a big deal or something.

[cimorene]

For some reason I picture her as less willing to admit the possibility of being wrong than that. No, it's probably because of the way she jumped in and loudly whitesplained for the clueless teacher about Jews and their shocking belief that Jesus is neither a deity nor, according to her, a prophet. And her immediate readiness to answer questions as an authority on Judaism that is so ready I couldn't actually get a word out before she started. Or during. Anyway, I have a nightmare vision of her just denying if, for example, I pointed out that the Romans were responsible for the crucifixion ("But the Jews were responsible", "But it says they were in X," "But it totally DOES say that", "Well, it doesn't matter that crucifixion was for political crimes, it just WAS because some Jews asked"). I feel this is a Finnish response to contradiction but I might just be projecting from negative experiences with my mother-in-law.