+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Jewish anti-miscegenation groups distribute racist, sexist flyers

I have recently reported on a few instances in which two Jewish anti-miscegenation groups  – Lehava and Yad L’Achim – have been actively operating to thwart contact between Jews and Arabs. Lehava, which runs a hotline encouraging callers to inform on Jewish-Arab couples, was reportedly behind a campaign to pressure Israel’s National Service Administration to stop allowing Israeli Jewish females to work night shifts in hospitals – presumably to make it more difficult for them to socialize with the Palestinian citizens of Israel with whom they work.

Yad L’Achim – whose mission is to fight “assimilation” (read: miscegenation) and whose slogan is, “We don’t give up on a single Jew” – claims to collect the identification cards of Jewish women seen socializing with Palestinians.

Both these organizations have posters circulating on the streets and in social media that are racist, sexist and offensive. Here is a flyer by Lehava spotted in Jerusalem that says in Hebrew and Arabic: “Don’t even dare to think about a Jewish woman!”

‘Don’t even dare to think about a Jewish woman!’ -Lehava poster in Jerusalem (Courtesy, T.F.)

Yad L’Achim has a poster going around social media that reads: “In a relationship with citizen belonging to an ethnic minority?” And below that: “You know it’s not it, but having fun in the meantime? Don’t waste your time! You are wasting the most beautiful years. Your life is not a game! Turn to Yad L’Achim’s 24-hour hotline now.”

Yad L’Achim poster: ‘In a relationship with citizen belonging to an ethnic minority?’

The barcode in this flyer takes you to a video produced by Yad L’Achim which shows a Jewish Israeli woman telling other women about the dangers of dating an “Arab” – how they are obsessive, and take over your life, and she implies that all Arab men abuse Jewish women verbally and physically. The last message of the video is: “You deserve one of us.”

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. CigarButNoNice

      Tevyeh the Milkman was a “racist” according to your standards. Indeed, in the bizarro world of Leftist cosmopolitan thinking, most of the 6 million harbored beliefs no different than their murderers’.

      With your forays into lambasting the long-held Jewish law against marrying non-Jews (a matter of _religion_, not genetics, for you race-obsessed so-called anti-racists), you remove the cover of anti-Zionism showing the underlying Jew-hatred for all to see. With or without Zionism, marrying exclusively within the Jewish nation (as defined by Jewish Law) has been the rule for Jews for thousands of years.

      Filing this together with Stormondofront’s anti-circumcision tirades.

      Reply to Comment
      • If you don’t want to marry a non-Jew, that’s your prerogative. It’s perfectly understandable and natural to want a partner who shares your most important ideas and values, which for many people include religious beliefs and cultural heritage.

        You don’t have the right to impose your ideas about life on other people, and still less do you have the right to threaten them if they don’t conform to those ideas. Lehava set up a hotline to encourage people to spy on ‘mixed’ couples, and what’s more, they’ve thrown a threat of violence in there – they offer to provide details of men in ‘mixed’ relationships to callers living in the same area, ‘so that each person can explain in his own way to the Arab man that he is better off dating Fatima from the village than Yael or Einat’. The Lehava chairman said that. What is the difference between him and anti-miscegenation activists in other countries and contexts? Same invasion of other people’s personal lives, same threat of vigilantism. No one is forcing you to be with a non-Jew. Just don’t try to harass other Jews who make different choices or, worse yet, support organisations that threaten their partners with harm.

        Reply to Comment
        • CigarButNoNice


          The Torah says the Jewish nation is a single body where the ailment of one part impacts all the rest. There is no more an option to let Jews get lost to intermarriage than there is to sit idly by while seeing Jewish blood spilled. Your “live and let live” stance applies in Judaism only to relationships between the Jews and the other nation, not to inter-Jewish issues. The seduction of Jewish girls by Arab predators is every Jews’ business and duty to prevent.

          Reply to Comment
          • How is it you describe Arab men as ‘predators’ when you must know how such inflammatory language was used to vilify Jewish men in relationships with non-Jewish women not so long ago? No doubt people believed it about Jews as sincerely as you seem to believe it about Arabs. Violence is almost inevitable when people start thinking like that.

            As a non-Jewish woman in a relationship with a Jewish man, I’m an ailment and an affliction in the eyes of people who think like you, so my opinion on this probably isn’t going to count for much. All I can say is that a culture of bullying and intimidation and violence can be a pretty nasty community ailment in its own right, so you might want to think twice before backing groups that support it – for your own sake if not for the sake of guys like the one who nearly got killed in Zion Square all because a mob decided he was ‘looking at’ Jewish girls.

            Reply to Comment
          • CigarButNoNice

            “How do you describe Arab men as…”

            I tend to walk in my own shoes, not the other side’s. So do you 972Mag lefty posters and staff, when you excuse Arab atrocities, only you aren’t honest (or maybe even self-aware) about it.

            “Violence is almost inevitable when people start thinking like that.”

            I’m not impressed with calls for calm from the same people who inflame this conflict by painting Israel and Zionism as a colonial enterprise.

            Reply to Comment
          • “The Torah says the Jewish nation is a single body where the ailment of one part impacts all the rest. There is no more an option to let Jews get lost to intermarriage than there is to sit idly by while seeing Jewish blood spilled. Your “live and let live” stance applies in Judaism only to relationships between the Jews and the other nation, not to inter-Jewish issues.” : This logic makes “relationships between the Jews and the other nation” all a form of “intra-Jewish issues.” The single body of Torah defines what the individual cell must do. There is then only one Judaism and one way to think and speak, both within a community of belief and when bridging communities, for bridging affects those within the community. While religious groups may do this in law, the State may not aid them to this end, as in the two other cases Zonszein posted recently. The stand you have taken assumes no divisions within Judaism, and attempts to isolate dissenters from social support outside your definition of Judaism. For a Jewish women might align herself intellectually with ideas foreign to your thought, even though she marries a Jew. Her children might then grow up outside of faith, so lost as well. She should therefore be monitored against marrying said deviating Jew. She has autonomy only if she does what you demand. Conversely, she might marry a non-Jew, her children nonetheless coming to faith as you define it. This is not about preservation of the Jewish People, but preservation of what you think these should be.

            Reply to Comment
          • CigarButNoNice

            “…preservation of what you think these should be.”

            You make it sound like it’s my invention. In truth this is Jewish tradition as it has been for about three milennia, and only recently (beginning in Enlightenment Germany) has this definition come under formal attack. Did I mention Tevyeh the Milkman? That has always been The Jewish View.

            Reply to Comment
          • Cigar, Darwin, in the Origin of Species, though inheritance was by blending. So if Dad is 4 feet and Mom 12 feet tall, kids should be around 8 feet. He had no idea of genetic particulate inheritance, and was indeed quite worried about males and females, for there is no in between, you are on or the other; it didn’t fit blending. No one takes him seriously on that anymore. Maybe it is time to take much older documents with the same kind of critical attitude. Sometimes, tradition is wrong.

            Reply to Comment
          • Walt Morris

            Let it go. Just because your religion is 5000+ years old doesn’t mean it has to be propagated for eternity. The age of religion is over, finally. Christians, muslims and jews have done more to spew hate and perpetuate violence than any other peoples on this planet. Time to move on to a science-based world and not one centered on fantasy gods in the sky.

            Reply to Comment
          • Average American

            The Torah has some nice little gems in it about how Jews are taught to treat Goys. Not like they treat fellow Jews. It’s duplicitous.

            For example, Sanhedrin 57a says a Jew is supposed to pay a worker his wages promptly. Great. Aren’t those Jews upstanding people.

            Oh wait, if it’s a heathen (anyone who isn’t a Jew is obviously a heathen, right?), who doesn’t actually ask for his wages, or who is so foolish as to not have arranged a payment schedule ahead of time, then the Jew doesn’t have to go the extra mile and pay promptly, the Jew can pay at his convenience, permissibly never.

            Or if a Jew hires a heathen on behalf of another Jew, and the first Jew clearly says it will be the second Jew who pays him, and the heathen never meets the second Jew, then neither of those Jews is held to pay. Poor heathen, he just isn’t a very good businessman.

            Then a footnote says this only borders on robbery, for actual robbery is taking something the heathen already had.

            Reply to Comment
          • Vadim

            1. Please provide sources. As you probably know the Talmud is built upon discussions and I wonder where it appears.
            2. Torah and the Talmud are two different things. We try to hide it from the American public, but it’s true.
            3. Making conclusions about Israel or Jews in general based on the Talmud is like generalizing on a single pedophile priest or a verse in the Koran.

            Reply to Comment
      • Notme

        Ahh… so they’re all inbred. Starting to make more sense now.

        Reply to Comment
    2. Tuviah was a private person. Further, he did not live in a sovereign state. You can not run a sovereign state the way you run a shtetl. And yes, Tuvia was somewhat racist. He was written when it was more acceptable. And finally – yes, traditional Judaism is indeed infused with much of the essentialist disdain for others that characterizes nazism. The two salient differences:
      1) Judaism also has humanist and universalist components to somewhat balance these shortcomings
      2) Jews had centuries of practice in repressing and sublimating these tendencies.

      Reply to Comment
      • CigarButNoNice

        “And yes, Tuvia was somewhat racist.”

        Nope, just nationalist. Race has nothing to do with it. See XYZ’s fine comment for a spot-on rebuttal. You Leftists’ obsession with race and skin color and genetics is only paralleled on the swamps of the Far Right.

        “He was written when it was more acceptable”

        The values and precepts of the Torah are for all time. Yes, even the politically incorrect ones. The Torah isn’t judged by the times, but the times by the Torah.

        Reply to Comment
      • Marcos

        Mr. Berman is depicting raw, sickening anti-semitism.

        Reply to Comment
    3. XYZ

      Once again we hear the “miscegenation” myth being propagated here by another “prgressive”.
      To set the record straight: ANYONE CAN CONVERT TO JUDAISM. People of all races are represented among the Jewish people. Yes, Judaism opposes intermarriage, any religion has the right to ensure its propagation to the next generation. Islam also opposes intermarriage of Muslim women with non-Muslim men. Many Christian groups oppose intermarriage also.
      There is nothing wrong with this and Berman’s typically “progressive” libel that Judaism is supposedly like Nazism simply shows up once againg the essential intolerance of so many “progressives”.

      Reply to Comment
      • There is a strong and obvious racial and sexist component to groups like Lehava. They aren’t so interested in policing what Jewish men get up to. They are preoccupied with Jewish women. Nor are they handing out their warning fliers to all the foreign Christian men near St Andrew’s Church in Jerusalem. They’re preoccupied with Arabs.

        The interesting thing here is that Jewish women in relationships with non-Jewish men are unlikely to be leading a traditional Jewish life anyway. They might practise their faith, yes, but not in any way that would pass muster with the orthodox rabbinate. Yet of all the many things about traditional Judaism that they don’t observe, these groups zoom in on their relationships. Such groups don’t go handing out prayer books like certain chasidic groups do or inviting secular men to pray with tefillin. They’re staffed by aggressively nationalistic men who care about one thing: the fact that somewhere a Jewish woman might be sleeping with an Arab guy. It really is that crude. And you want such people appointing themselves as Judaism’s vigilantes?

        Reply to Comment
      • The question is not conversion but exiting the place of one’s birth. One may convert to Judaism (although the bar can be quite high), but in birth to a Jewish woman one is predefined in faith–whether or not one wants to live by that definition. This happens in other religions as well. Deviation is reported, although mostly in a direct social network way rather than anonymous phone line, with admonition from (somehow) a representative of God intervening unto the deviant. At some point such behavior in law can become harassment. In the US, one can be placed under court order to desist if, say, following someone continuously, making presence known, until conformity is achieved. If your faith is true, there is no need to force it on another solely because of birth location (born of a predefined Jewish mother); have the courage to let your true belief be seen and understood by the hapless deviant. She doesn’t need to be spied upon, and certainly the State should not be an accessory to (one) community of faith building and policing.

        By the way, the two admonitions presented in this post are quite different. The poster focuses on the Jewish woman, urging her repentance. The flyer, however, says “Don’t even dare thinking about a Jewish woman!” which is a threat. Loving admonition becomes threat to outsiders. Even so, I do not think the flyer may be legally prevented; it is part of free speech.

        Reply to Comment
      • andrew r

        “To set the record straight: ANYONE CAN CONVERT TO JUDAISM.”

        However, not everyone who converts will be eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return. Racism is not only an exclusionary process; it also involves creating the adversarial categories. If many Palestinian refugees converted to Orthodox Judaism, Israel would almost certainly invoke the relevant clause in the “Law of Return” to ensure they can’t make aliyah. There’s a difference between a Jewish community enforcing tradition among themselves and making it state policy (Or in this case, the state tacitly approving unofficial activism).

        Reply to Comment
        • The Trespasser

          >However, not everyone who converts will be eligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return.

          Nonsense. Just nonsense.

          >If many Palestinian refugees converted to Orthodox Judaism, Israel would almost certainly invoke the relevant clause in the “Law of Return” to ensure they can’t make aliyah.

          Nonsense as well. On many levels. Should Palestinians en-masse convert to Judaism, it would only make other Jews happy.

          Reply to Comment
      • Rob Marinet

        The very same Jews in the US who run the ADL would scream “White Supremacy! if any White in the US dared to push this. Are we to believe Abe Foxman doesn’t know about this stuff? Jews push miscegenation on Europe & the US while trying to preserve their own race. And THAT is why Jews are and always have been hated. That’s why they’ve been run out of 109 countries. Why don’t you all return to Israel? The outright hypocrisy is breathtaking.

        Reply to Comment
    4. Dave Boxthorn

      If they are ‘racist’ why don’t they advise White Jewish women not to marry Ethiopians/Yemenis/non-White converts?

      Do you know what the word ‘race’ in ‘racist’ even means?

      Reply to Comment
      • Racism is generally selective, based on perceived greatest danger. Racism also decays. There was a time in the US where many thought associating let alone marrying an Irish of relatively recent immigration (maybe only two generations removed or less)was intolerable. That decayed; similar feelings about blacks of long lineage in the US lasted much longer.

        Reply to Comment
        • CigarButNoNice

          The only thing selective is the Left’s choice of the meaning of the smear-word “Racist” to refer to exactly that particular group they want to delegitimize at the given moment. So an Algerian who wanted French colonists out of Algeria wasn’t racist, but a French who wants Algerian colonists out of France is, according to the pro-Islam, anti-West Left.

          And don’t get me started about how the Leftist narrative has framed a conflict between two ethnicities that aren’t defined by race (both Jews and Arabs sport a wide range of skin, hair and eye colors) as a saga of “indigenous brown resistance to white colonialism.” The Left’s cries of “Racism!” are nothing but projection.

          Reply to Comment
          • Alina

            it’s obviously racism because they are discouraging jewish women to date Palestinians. it’s not some left wing conspiracy guys it’s obviously racism. to argue that because the ad doesnt discriminate against all different kinds of races makes it not racist is illogical. if you think that’s ok then you’re racist too. if they were discouraging white christian women in america not to date jewish men.. would you argue that isn’t racist? and let’s not get technical on the term no matter what word you use it’s bullshit and it’s wrong.

            Reply to Comment
          • Average American

            I think women have a more instinctively accurate read on this particular issue than men.

            Reply to Comment
          • I see. Ethnic discrimination is ok because it is not racism. Then let us proceed.

            Reply to Comment
          • XYZ

            You are correct. Our “progressive” friends here use the word “racist” like the old-time Communists used to throw the word “fascist” at their opponents in order to silence them and to intimidate them by shutting down all discussion.

            Reply to Comment
          • XYZ, this discussion thread is about an organisation that has just been distributing threatening ‘Don’t you dare…’ posters in Palestinian neighbourhoods and that is known to collect the addresses of ‘mixed’ couples via a special phoneline for distribution to any thug who asks. This is the same organisation that responded to the Jerusalem lynch by handing out posters warning Arab men ‘not to get hurt’ the way the victim had got hurt. There wasn’t even one shred of proof that the poor guy in question had so much as looked at a Jewish girl – that was the justification that the mob who attacked him tried to give, on the flimsy grounds that he couldn’t have had any other reason for being in Zion Square. They used that excuse because they knew it would guarantee them immediate support from groups like Lehava. From people like you. You wrote on this site that you saw ‘nothing wrong’ with those posters. You typed that even though the critical condition of the victim had been widely reported. Yet when people call such vigilantism racist, you see it as a way to ‘silence and intimidate’ people who disagree? Use of the word ‘racist’ is the intimidating thing in this scenario for you? Astonishing priorities you’ve got there.

            Reply to Comment
    5. blood libeling doesnt qualify as activism

      Is it fair to say that a proffesional Palywood magazine such as +972 ,that writes solely in English and therefore dont bother addressing the Israeli public opinion one bit, has no real interest in ending the conflict in the mid-east (if they were aiming for that they’d try to convince the Israelis or Palis- and write in Hebrew or Arabic) but only an interest in bashing the Jews and Zionism for petrolioum money and other “good will donations”?
      your “reporter” Yosi gurviz , for exmaple – appears in that David Duke (KKK holocaust denier) video:
      תצנזרו אותי כמה שאתם רוצים. אתם עוזרים רק לאנטישמיות בעולם, ולא לשלום.
      צנזור נעים:)

      Reply to Comment
      • andrew r




        Holy cow, English has a loan word from Hebrew.

        Reply to Comment
    6. Mikesailor

      This is really comical: Jews claiming something isn’t racism while freely confessing their religious bigotry which, if they were on the receiving end, they would be the first and loudest to cry that hoary old canard: “antisemitism”. I have asked many on these pages before whether the Jews themselves were and are responsible in some part for the perceived dislike of Jews by some in the gentile community. Such questions are loudly decried themselves as “antisemitic” or ignored. Apparently self-reflection is not a Jewish strong-point. Yet, when you strip away the “religious camouflage” and selective reliance upon passages in “holy books” or “tradition” used as an excuse for the discrimination and hatred espoused by those like Cigar Butt, you find basic old garden-variety racism. And, why wouldn’t the ‘outsiders’ respond in kind to those beliefs?

      Reply to Comment
      • “Apparently self-reflection is not a Jewish strong-point.”

        How many people have commented on this discussion thread, either to support Lehava or to deflect attention from it? Four or five. And how many Jews are there in the world? Most of them won’t even have heard of Lehava or Yad L’Achim, let alone be supporting these organisations’ spying and violent outlook. The idea that they need to ‘reflect’ on their supposed shared responsibility for the attitudes on display here and the impact that such attitudes might have on non-Jews is hateful in its own right. It is hypocritical for someone to draw a moral equivalency between pointing out the colonial concepts in Herzl’s writings and supporting a mob who nearly beat young man to death in a busy public square, but you can’t ask millions of people to shoulder responsibility for that – especially as there’s nothing unique or distinctively Jewish about it. You can find the exact same attitudes being spewed in gutter brawls after a Rangers/Celtic football match. Much as aggressive nationalists might want to believe that they’re fighting some grand sweeping battle for the honour of the volk and love of the vaderland and purity of the faith – so unique, so special – there’s nothing special about any of it. Same crude misogyny. Same selfishness. It shows up in far too many context for the ethnicity and religion of the perpetrators to be much more than a side-note.

        Reply to Comment
    7. Mikesailor

      Come on Vicky. The argument you present is akin to arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Look at the tribal racism and sexism engendered within many of the posts. Then ask youself how endemic this behavior is within many adherents of Judaism. Do these attitudes toward the ‘other’ cause, in any way, the backlash commonly referred to as ‘antisemitism’. Or does the hatred to be condemned only flow one way: when Jews hate others it is all right while if others hate Jews it is to be condemned. Note that I am not condemning all Jews as your post implies. There are many not infected with this curse, those who condemn the King’s Torah, etc. Yet there is a strain within Judaism silently accepted within the tribe as a whole, that presupposes that Gentiles, or the world as a whole, hate Jews because they are Jews rather than dislike many Jews for what they do. If you would like a treat, watch the Youtube video of ‘Defamation’ and ask yourelf whether the brainwashing of Israeli youth in particular is moral or correct.

      Reply to Comment
      • Mike, you made a blanket statement about Jews as a whole – “Self-reflection obviously isn’t a Jewish strong point” – and then suggested that Jews (again, as a whole, including every Jew) should think about whether they might be responsible for other people’s ‘perceived dislike’. (I noted your use of the word ‘perceived’ – are you simultaneously trying to claim that anti-Jewish feeling isn’t real, while at the same time suggesting that its objects assume some responsibility for this not-real thing?) Once you’ve done that, you can’t really back out with, “Of course not all Jews…” People seem to think that by attaching a ‘not all…’ caveat to their prejudice in the manner of a false moustache they can say whatever they like.

        Refusing to take the 972 comments section as representative of the Jewish community as a whole is hardly akin to making some abstruse philosophical argument. It’s simple logic. You are making exactly the same arguments that some people make about Muslims – oh, they’re not doing enough to condemn terrorism to satisfy me, therefore their support for it must be widespread. The King’s Torah was written by two settler rabbis who aren’t even prominent in the rabbinical world; it’s hardly some important religious text being read in yeshivot across the world. I am not going to expect every Jew I meet to explicitly disavow it, as though they are somehow obliged by an accident of birth to take personal responsibility for racist rantings that the vast majority have never read and never would read, any more than I expect Muslims to go about wearing sandwich-boards disavowing al-Qaeda. You are trying to heap on collective guilt. As for ‘strains within Judaism’ (I would leave off the disease imagery if I were you), I hold an advanced degree in Jewish Studies that at least gave me some grounding on major contemporary trends in religious and philosophical thought. Belief in violent bullying isn’t one of them.

        “Or does the hatred to be condemned only flow one way: when Jews hate others it is all right while if others hate Jews it is to be condemned.”

        I’ve written extensive criticism of Lehava on this article and elsewhere, but I did that because Lehava’s outlook is hateful and vicious and increasingly dangerous, not because its founders happen to be Jewish. That’s a distinction that some commenters here seem unable to appreciate.

        Reply to Comment
        • Shmuel


          Kol Hakavod. I agree with everything you say about both Lehava and to Mikesailor.

          Maybe I misjudged you. If I did, then I apologise to you.

          Reply to Comment
          • Thank you, Shmuel. I appreciate that.

            Reply to Comment
          • Shmuel

            You are welcome 🙂

            And I appreciated what you said to Mikesailor too.

            And again, I am not in favor of what Lehava and similar organisations do. Just as much as I disagree with racist acts perpetrated by Palestinians against Jews or anyone else for that matter. And yes, I know that not all Palestinians are guilty of it just as much as not all Israelis are racists. Some are on both sides. In fact too many. Because even one is too many.

            Reply to Comment
    8. Click here to load previous comments