Erotica: Pornography and the Dreadful Few (Part I)


“[O]lder generation of Jewish filmmakers and actors, here [Woody] Allen, [Stanley] Kubrick and [Ron] Jeremy, arguably not only increased the Jewishness of their work, but updated it to match the new post-1990 sensibility by defining it in increasingly sexualized (and pornographic) terms.” Nathan Abrams, Bangor University[1]

…by Jonas E. Alexis

We have repeatedly examined the work of Jewish scholar Nathan Abrams in the past because his article, “Triple Exthnics,” produced a firestorm of controversy when it came out in 2004.

Abrams’ “Triple Exthnics,” however, was certainly not original. Just one year prior to its release, E. Michael Jones published a similar article entitled, “Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos,” in which he meticulously detailed the ideological forces behind pornography.

Citing Luke Ford, Jones wrote that “secular Jews play a disproportionate role throughout the sex industry.”[2] Jones moved on to cite a plethora of Jewish names dominating the porn industry.[3]

Goyim such as Hugh Hefner who promoted sexual decadence and perversion ended up receiving

“the ADL’s freedom award in 1980… On a more commercial level, for example, Jews have been strongly represented in the Playboy enterprises.

“B’nai Brith’s Anti-Defamation League had no problem, for example, when some years back they presented their American Freedom Award at a fashionable black-tie dinner-dance to Hugh Hefner. . . .

“About the honoree, the ADL says, with an apparent straight face, that the empire he founded has had a far-reaching impact, not only on the publishing industry, but on the mores of American society as well.

“In other words, the ADL was rewarding Hefner for the role he played in bringing about widespread moral corruption and the spread of sexual deviance in America. The question remains, why would the Jews at the ADL be interested in rewarding this sort of behavior? ”[4]

Jones, after much analysis, grabbed the essentially Talmudic bull by the horn when he said,

“Pornography is just one weapon in a panoply of cultural warfare which gets waged half in self-defense, half in residual animus against traditional majority Christian cultures, even when, as is the case of the United States, the original prescription no longer fits the actual situation…

“This is the historic modus operandi of the Jews. They are outsiders everywhere except in Israel, and when they first appear in any Gentile society and begin reaching for power they are resisted. The society treats the Jews as outsiders, as aliens, and attempts to keep them from gaining control.

“The Jewish method of countering this opposition is to work quietly to accumulate as much wealth as possible.

“At the same time they work to corrupt the society’s leaders with money and to sow dissension among the masses, to set one social class against another, to break up the society’s solidarity and its cohesiveness, so that there will be less resistance to their penetration of the society.

Nadine Strossen

Nadine Strossen

“During the latter half of the 19th century and the first part of the 20th century fomenting class warfare has been their most successful technique in Europe.

“Jewish involvement in pornography, in other words, goes deeper both commercially and philosophically than Abe Foxman is willing to admit.

“Once the majority of American Jews defined themselves as sexually deviant, pornography, along with homosexual rights, feminism, and New Age goddess worship, would become a natural expression of their worldview, and since they controlled Hollywood, they were in the position to make their worldview normative for the culture at large.

“The traditional animus against majority culture combined with a decline in moral scruple would naturally lead ‘the advocates of Woody Allen’ to become involved in pornography as a form of cultural warfare.”[5]

Nathan Abrams again came out and basically said the same thing. “Jewish involvement in pornography,” he wrote then,

“has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the ‘true blue’ Jews.

“Jewish activity in the porn industry divides into two (sometimes overlapping) groups: pornographers and performers. Though Jews make up only two per cent of the American population, they have been prominent in pornography.”[6]

In “Triple Ethnics,” Abrams simply picked up where Jones left off but both individuals ended up saying the same thing: Jews are in pornography because they wanted to pervert “Christian” cultures. Or, to put it in the words of Jewish pornographer Al Goldstein, Jews are in pornography because they think that “Christ sucks.”

But here is an interesting phenomenon. Jewish scholars like Abrams and even Josh Lambert who indirectly declare that Jewish radicals have been a central force (perhaps the central force) in the pornography and obscenity industry get to publish scholarly books by Rutgers and New York university presses, but Jones gets to be told that he is one of the wicked persons on the face of the earth for saying the same thing that Abrams and Lambert are saying.


In fact, if you go to the ADL website, you will find that Jones “is an anti-Semitic Catholic writer” and that he

“promotes the view that Jews are ded­i­cated to prop­a­gat­ing and per­pe­trat­ing attacks on the Catholic Church and moral stan­dards, social sta­bil­ity, and polit­i­cal order through­out the world.

“[Jones] por­trays the Jew­ish reli­gion as inher­ently treach­er­ous and bel­liger­ent towards Chris­tian­ity.  Jones also blames Jews for Bol­she­vism, Freema­sonry, and an alleged con­tem­po­rary “Jew­ish takeover of Amer­i­can culture.”

First of all, Jones is not an anti-Semite. In fact, as a serious Catholic intellectual, he rejects the biological ideology and the morally and intellectually repugnant view that Jewish behavior is genetic. After clarifying that issue, Jones declares,

“No Christian can in good conscience be an anti-Semite, but every Christian, insofar as he is a Christian, must be anti-Jewish. In contemporary parlance the two terms are practically synonymous but their meanings are very different, and the distinction is deliberately obscured for political purposes.”[7]

In other words, there is no doubt that the Dreadful Few have been waging a frontal war on the moral and political order. This perennial war got its start at the foot of the cross and has jumped from one century to the next, with different ideological spins but with the same metaphysical substratum.

Furthermore, the breadth and depth of this war has been metaphysically and ideologically fleshed out in a theological text, the Talmud, which has some blasphemous and disgusting things to say about Christ and his followers.[8] As we shall see in the next article, many Jews in the Middle Ages followed that ideological patterns and pronounced blatant maledictions on Christendom and much of the West.

This Talmudic text has also been the well from which nearly all major significant political upheavals have sprung. Benjamin Disraeli indirectly admitted this in his novel. He said,“You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate.”

Disraeli even moved on to say that

“that mighty revolution which is at this moment preparing in Germany, and which will be, in fact, a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolise the professorial chairs of Germany.”[9]

Josh Lambert

Josh Lambert

If the ADL does not like the analysis presented above, the organization only needs to look in the mirror a little closer and examine the invasions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and more recently Syria.[10]

Second, the fact that the ADL has given Hefner a noble prize for producing perversion is a testimony against them. As a corollary, the organization never produced an article against Abrams and never even remotely suggested that he was an anti-Semite for saying that Jews are in pornography because they want to destroy “Christian” cultures.

This again reveals their obvious prejudice. And this tactic has been going on since the Dreadful Few has imposed a draconian speech code on the goyim.

Again, remember Jewish film historian Neal Gabler, who wrote the influential book An Empire of their Own: How Jews Invented Hollywood in 1988.  Six years later, in 1994, British journalist William Cash adopted Gabler’s premise, arguing that Jews largely invented Hollywood in an article for the highly-read British journalSpectator.

Gabler, seemingly oblivious to the fact that Cash was simply reiterating the sentiments of An Empire of their Own, called Cash’s article “an anti-Semitic bleat from a reactionary crackpot.” E. Michael Jones concluded, “Gabler attacked Cash for saying what Gabler had said in his own book!”[11]

This attitude is appalling, but unfortunately it is becoming the rule rather than the exception.

Third, the ADL could never bring itself to explain what Goldstein meant by saying that “Christ sucks” and that “Catholicism sucks.”[12] The organization could never tell us what kind of sexual acts Sarah Silverman is suggesting on stage:

How about mocking the crucifixion on an Israeli TV on Easter?

And how about Larry David trivializing the Israel/Palestine conflict and then using Middle East women as sluts and whores?

Finally, the ADL needs to explain what Jewish scholar Josh Lambert means when he said in his recent book that

“many defendants in crucial, precedent-setting Supreme Court obscenity cases were Jewish men, specially in Burstyn vs. Wilson (1952), Roth v. United States (1957), Freedman v. Maryland (1965), Mishkin v. New York (1966), Ginzburg v. United States (1966), Ginsberg v. New York (1968), Cohen v. California (1971), and Miller v. California (1973).

“As conventional and mail-order publishers, editors, film distributors, newsdealers, and social protester, the men named in these cases tested the limits of the American law of obscenity and of the First Amendment….

“American Jews played crucial roles in obscenity controversies not just as defendants but also as lawyers, judges, and witnesses. Jewish lawyers were often willing to defend people accused of obscenity even when their liberal non-Jewish colleagues were not…


“In the postwar decades, many of the most influential lawyers who took on obscenity cases were also Jewish: Charles Rembar advised his cousin Norman Mailer to bowdlerize ‘fuck’ to ‘fug’ in The Naked and the Dead (1948) and served as lead counsel for Rosset’s Grove Press…

“Stanley Fleishman was the most prominent First Amendment lawyer in Los Angeles for several decades; and Ephraim London argued key film-censorship cases in front of the Supreme Court.

“In addition to their legal work, these lawyers also wrote or edited books and essays for popular audiences in which they agitated against the suppression of litertature and art, presenting relevant arguments to authors, publishers, and general audiences who were unlikely to consult articles in legal journals.

“Some Jewish judges also exerted substantial influence on the development of the law of obscenity.”[13]

These are known facts, and the ADL cannot just wiggle out of them so easy.

Lambert continues to tell us that “Cultural and legal historians and literary scholars who have studied literary obscenity in the United States and England have tended to avoid the question of the relationship of Jewishness to their subject” because they do not

“want to reproduce the nativist anti-Semitism of Comstock and other antivice crusaders or to provide support for the racist claims about Jewish sexuality trumpeted by avowed anti-Semites…”[14]

Hugh Hefner

Hugh Hefner

If “Christ sucks,” then anything that would denigrate the moral order will get the support of the Dreadful Few.

Jewish legal scholar and former president of the ACLU (from 1991-2008) Nadine Strossen made it clear that pornography should be viewed as art.

In the introduction of her own book, Strossen declares that the ACLU, a Jewish fifth column, always supports pornography as a form of free expression. Strossen admits that

“Since I wrote the book in 1994, we have continued to fight these very same battles, in the very same arenas, including schools and public libraries, college and university courses and conferences, and art exhibits museums.”[15]

But Strossen is far from alone. Pornography, according to Jewish thought police Alan Dershowitz, is not harmful.[16]

When the pornographic movie Deep Throat came out in 1972, Dershowitz was on the front lines in defending Jewish actor Harry Reems for his role in the movie.

From 1977 to 1988, Dershowitz was a staunch defender of pornography, titling one of his essays “Justice: Connecting Pornography with Violence is Junk Science, Which Doesn’t Belong in Courts.”[17]

This particular essay was published by Penthouse, a pornographic magazine, for which Dershowitz wrote about seventy-five articles, the majority of which were published during the latter half of the 1980s.

Reuben Sturman

Reuben Sturman

Was Dershowitz defending pornography because he wanted to collect a huge chunk of money or was he literally defending perversion? Well, it seems to be both. And here he was not alone.

Time magazine estimated that Reuben Sturman made $300 million per year in selling pornography before dying in prison in 1997.

Sturman’s Jewish contemporary, Steven Hirsch, founded Vivid Entertainment Group, which has been named the Microsoft of pornography.

Michael Lucas, Jewish pornography actor and director, founded Lucas Entertainment, the largest gay adult film company in New York. Lucas declared

“Porn is show business. You’re in a show business whether you are an actor or an anchor doing news or fucking.”[18]

 One can say that many Jews are in pornography because it brings big business. Every three seconds, at least $3 thousand are spent on pornography. South Korea, following in the footsteps of the United States, is not that far behind in the sex industry.[19]

Paul Fishbein

Paul Fishbein

Amy Tang, “an Immigration and Customs Enforcement attached with the US Department of Homeland Security in South Korea,” noted that “There’s a highly organized logical network between Korea and the United States with recruiters, brokers, intermediaries, taxi drivers, and madams.”[20]

If the sex industry shots its business down overnight, the revenue would be enough to feed at least 62% of the world’s hungry for an entire year!” It also must be kept in mind that “U.S. porn revenue exceeds the combined revenues of ABC, CBS and NBC.”

There is more. Frank Rich of the New York Times acknowledged back in 2001 that

“The $4 billion that Americans spend on video pornography is larger than the annual revenue accrued by either the N.F.L., the N.B.A. or Major League Baseball.

“But that’s literally not the half of it: the porn business is estimated to total between $10 billion and $14 billion annually in the United States when you toss in porn networks and pay-per-view movies on cable and satellite, Internet Web sites, in-room hotel movies, phone sex, sex toys and that archaic medium of my own occasionally misspent youth, magazines.

“Take even the low-end $10 billion estimate (from a 1998 study by Forrester Research in Cambridge, Mass.), and pornography is a bigger business than professional football, basketball and baseball put together.

“People pay more money for pornography in America in a year than they do on movie tickets, more than they do on all the performing arts combined.

“As one of the porn people I met in the industry’s epicenter, the San Fernando Valley, put it, ‘We realized that when there are 700 million porn rentals a year, it can’t just be a million perverts renting 700 videos each.’”[21]

Paul Fishbein, who founded Adult Video News, declared,

“There are so many outlets that even if you spend just $15,000 and two days — and put in some plot and good-looking people and decent sex — you can get satellite and cable sales. There are so many companies, and they rarely go out of business.”[22]

Rich continued to say that Hollywood, which we all know is a Jewish town,[23] plays a central role in producing pornography in the culture. Rich indirectly connects the dots when he declared that sexual politics is essential in understanding the key issues. Without naming names, he wrote,

“Among other things, I learned that the adult industry is in many ways a mirror image of Hollywood. Porn movies come not only in all sexual flavors but also in all genres, from period costume dramas to sci-fi to comedy.

“(One series is modeled on the old Hope-Crosby ‘Road’ pictures.) Adult has a fabled frontier past about which its veterans wax sentimental — the ‘Boogie Nights’ 70′s, when porn was still shot only on film and seen in adult movie theaters.

“(The arrival of home video revolutionized porn much as sound did Hollywood.) Adult also has its own Variety (Adult Video News), its own star-making machinery (the “girls” at Vivid and Wicked are promoted like bygone MGM contract players), its own prima donnas and cineastes.

“It has (often silent) business partners in high places: two of the country’s more prominent porn purveyors, Marriott (through in-room X-rated movies) and General Motors (though its ownership of the satellite giant DirecTV, now probably to be sold to Rupert Murdoch), were also major sponsors of the Bush-Cheney Inaugural.

“Porn even has its own Matt Drudge — a not-always-accurate Web industry gossip named Luke Ford, who shares his prototype’s political conservatism and salacious obsessiveness yet is also, go figure, a rigorously devout convert to Judaism.”[24]


But there is another reason as to why the Dreadful Few are in pornography. First of all, we must keep in mind that pornography is a weapon that strikes at the very heart of the moral and sexual order, and statistics show that pornography itself has the potential to destroy a genuine relationship.[25]

In addition, study after study has indicated that

“there is a link between porn use and marital infidelity… Men may also suffer physiological consequences.

“As a Psychology Today article reveals, otherwise healthy young men are suffering from erectile dysfunction as a result of viewing pornography because ‘users are numbing their brain’s normal response to pleasure.’

“Researcher also links porn use with violent sexual behavior, particularly in teenagers.

“Researchers working for the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, NJ, recount a study of 804 Italian teenage boys which reported that those who viewed pornography ‘were significantly more likely to report having ‘sexually harassed a peer or having forced somebody to have sex.’”

Yet an in article entitled, “Does Porn Hurt Children?,” David Segal of the New York Times declared that “blaming X-rated images for risky behavior may be like concluding that cars are a leading cause of arson, because so many arsonists drive.”[26]

To support his point, Segal cited Eric Owens, a professor at West Chester University, Pennsylvania, saying that “there is no conclusion to be drawn here.”[27]

No conclusion? Segal and Owens remind me of Dr. Ian MacDonald. In a desperate attempt to defend smoking, the good doctor went so far as to say that “A pack a day keeps lung cancer away.”[28]

MacDonald, along with his colleague Henry Garland, fought tooth and nail to promote the idea that smoking cigarettes is harmless. Here’s what happened to them both:

“MacDonald was burned to death in bed a few years later in a fire started by his cigarette. Dr. Garland, who had boasted of chain-smoking since early childhood and who claimed to be living proof that cigarettes are harmless, a few years later died of lung cancer.”[29]

 Perhaps Segal and Owens should have read Abrams in 2004. Pornography, Abrams declared then, is

Frank Rich

Frank Rich

“a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs [White Anglo-Saxon Protestants]), its subversive character becomes more charged…

“Extending the subversive thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America…

“Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion.

“Astyr remembers having ‘to run or fight for it in grammar school because I was a Jew. It could very well be that part of my porn career is an ‘up yours’ to these people’…

“Jews were also at the vanguard of the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Wilhelm Reich, Herbert Marcuse and Paul Goodman replaced Marx, Trotsky and Lenin as required revolutionary reading.”[30]

Abrams cites the much scholarly study by another Jewish scholar named Jay A. Gertzman[31] saying,

“Jews were prominent in the distribution of gallantiana [fiction on erotic themes and books of dirty jokes and ballads], avant-garde sexually explicit novels, sex pulps, sexology, and flagitious materials.’”[32]

Abrams even noted that one of the main reasons why many academics have failed to research this topic, despite the fact that the evidence is widespread, is “the fear of an anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish backlash.”[33]

The interesting fact is that years later, Abrams ended up repudiating what he had written in “Triple Exthnics.” He did so not because there was substantial evidence to the contrary but because Abrams saw that the Goyim began to use the article against Jewish pornographers.


In his recent work The New Jew in Film: Exploring Jewishness and Judaism in Contemporary Cinema, he continues to marshal this intellectually dishonest but politically convenient thesis.

Abrams writes that the “surprisingly sexually oriented Jew, who is portrayed as predatory, sleazy, sex-obsessed, repellent and repulsive,” was

“the product of the anti-Semitic imagination, circulated through Christian theology, medieval anti-Jewish polemics, religious art and latterly anti-Semitic propaganda.”[34]

One should probe to ask: was Abrams a virulent and rabid anti-Semite in 2004? How did he get rid of it?

Furthermore, is he implicitly saying that Jewish scholars like Israel Jacob Yuval, Ruth Langer, Daniel J. Lasker, and Elliott Horowitz are anti-Semites for writing serious studies such as Two Nations in Your WombCursing the ChristiansJewish Philosophical Polemics Against Christianity in the Middle Ages, and Reckless Rites?

Contrary to what Abrams is now postulating, the “Jew” was not the product of “anti-Semitic imagination” in the Middle Ages. He was the function of Talmudic mores, interpretations and reasoning, which always shocked the Gentile world and which always created anti-Jewish reactions.

If Abram would find this repulsive, he probably needs to get a copy of Heinrich Graetz’s History of the Jews, in which Graetz discussed in detail what happened to the Jews in Poland when they began to study the Talmud intensely. Graetz wrote:

“A love of twisting, distorting, ingenious quibbling, and a foregone antipathy to what did not lie within their field of vision, constituted the character of the Polish Jews.

“Pride in their knowledge of the Talmud and a spirit of dogmatism attached even to the best rabbis, and undermined their moral sense…

“Integrity and right-mindedness they had lost as completely as simplicity and the sense of truth. The vulgar acquired the quibbling method of the schools, and employed it to outwit the less cunning.

“They found pleasure and a sort of triumphant delight in deception and cheating against members of their own race; cunning could not well be employed, because they were sharp-witted; but the non-Jewish world with which they came into contact experienced to its disadvantage the superiority of the Talmudical spirit of the Polish Jews.”[35]

This energized an anti-Jewish spirit among the Poles, for they knew that they were being cheated. This quickly led to violence among the Gentiles, who in 1638 “slew 200 Jews, and destroyed several synagogues.”

Ten years later, Jews clung to the book of Zohar for Messianic revolution, and this again caused “bloody retribution,” during which both innocent and guilty Jews were slain.[36]

Within the next three years, anti-Jewish resistance led again to a bloody war that took the lives of thousands of Jews, and caused many others to move to places like the Netherlands, Bohemia, Austria, Italy, and Hungary.

Wherever they went, however, they took the study of the Talmud with them, bearing the same attitudes towards Gentiles:

“Far from giving up their own method in a foreign country, they demanded that all the world should be regulated by them, and they gained their point.”[37]

 I frankly don’t believe that Abrams himself actually agrees with the thesis he is now postulating because he articulates throughout his new book in an indirect way that pornographic film is inexorably and exhaustively a Jewish enterprise. For example, he begins by saying that

“What is particularly noticeable in the post-1990 period is that, unlike the past, representations of Jews as hyper-sexual predators or as beautiful Jewesses do not simply emanate from the non-Jewish outside but rather from inside, from Jews themselves.

It is a sign of increased confident that Jewish filmmakers are unafraid to touch what could be perceived as potentially troubling subject matter, including representing the Jewish body more explicitly than hitherto…


“As a clear illustration of this change in the depiction of Jewish sexuality in contemporary cinema, even Woody Allen’s sensibility changed after 1990, becoming increasingly perverse, darker and misogynist…

“Sam B. Girgus detected a new ‘fascination’ with sexual activity in Allen’s films, manifesting a ‘new pornographic sensibility towards the representation of sexuality…’”[38]

Abrams moved on to write unapologetically that

“an older generation of Jewish filmmakers and actors, here Allen, [Stanley] Kubrick and [Ron] Jeremy, arguably not only increased the Jewishness of their work, but updated it to match the new post-1990 sensibility by defining it in an increasingly sexualized (and pornographic) terms.”[39]

Abrams does not stop there. Throughout the book, he spends page after page discussing nearly all the major and minor pornographic or sexually disgusting films and argues that there is a Jewish component or ideological substratum behind them all. For example, with respect to Eli Roth’s Hostel II (2007), he writes,

“Reading Beth [Salinger] as Jewish requires that knowledge of the complex of largely unconscious codes that cross-check each other, allowing the reader to decode Jewishness through aural, visual, emotional or genre signifiers.

Thus, where Jews or those who know the codes will interpret these elements of performance as Jewish, general audiences may not recognize them as markers of Jewish difference.”[40]

Abrams continues to stun us all by maintaining the best of both worlds: he subtly argues that “anti-Semitism” has generally nothing to do with Jewish behavior, but he tells us throughout the book that Jewish actors, actresses and filmmakers devalue the culture by producing and pornographic subversive films. For example, he writes that

“the character of Victor Ziegler in Jewish director Stanley Kubrick’s final film Eyes Wide Shut (1999) is the embodiment of a ‘menacing hypersexuality.’ [Scholars] Gene D. Phillips and Rodney Hell describe Ziegler as ‘sinister,’ while James naremore refers to him as ‘the most morally corrupt charater.’”

How, then, can Abrams maintain both positions simultaneously? How can he intellectually say that anti-Jewish reactions have very little or nothing to do with Jewish behavior? That certainly is beyond comprehension, and one needn’t be a scholar or intellectual to figure that Abrams is being dishonest.

Once again, Abrams does not stop there. He continues to say,

“Sex is even more radically foregrounded in Superbad, which follows a similar trajectory to American Pie in its shadowing of three Jewish teenagers’ attempts to lose their virginity, but whose language is much more obscene.

“The film opens with a long, serious, detailed and matter-of-fact dialogue about hardcore pornography between the two Jewish protagonists. This explicit and sex-fixated language continues in a similar vein throughout the Film.

“Likewise, Funny People, which depicts the sex lives of a group of jewish stand-up comics, is literally peppered with sex, penis and testicle jokes.

“Another sign of increased confidence of the younger generation of Jewish directors, screenwriters and actors is not only their increased openness about the consumption of hardcore pornography but also their drawing attention to it in their films.

“Jim in American Pie and American Pie 2 is seen consuming adult material, as is Darren in Saving Silverman. Archie Moses in Bulletproof is a self-proclaimed adult-film aficionado.

“The Wiseman brothers in A Mighty Wind open a sex emporium. In Being Ron Jeremy, Brian Pickles is shown returning a pile of some dozen porn videos after one ‘busy’ weekend.

In Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle/Get the Munchies, Rosenberg and Goldstein refuse to go out because they are staying in to watch nudity on television, prompting Kumar to ask, ‘Is that all you Jews ever think about? Tits?’ Meanwhile Goldstein wears a T-shirt emblazoned with the words, ‘Ass—the other vagina.’

“Thus we are witnessing two new trends in contemporary cinema, particularly in the United States, in which porn stars are becoming increasingly open about their Jewishness, while male Jewish directors, actors and screenwriters are likewise becoming more open about their sexual and pornographic obsessions.”[41]

Abrams literally undermines his own thesis (that anti-Semitism was the product of European hatred toward Jews) by saying,

“Drawing upon films of the past, the New Jew exhibits menschlikayt, and it is this characteristic that allows him to mock the dominant value of goyim naches.

“The code of menschlikayt was developed in response to anti-Semitism, as a means of articulating Jewish superiority through a refusal to share the aggressive values of the Jews’ oppressors.”[42]

Quoting Jewish scholar Paul Hyman, Abrams did not hesitate to write this:

“Jewish men, first in the countries of western and central Europe and later in America, constructed a modern Jewish identity that devalued women, the Other within the Jewish community…

“The negative representations of women they produced reflected their own ambivalence about assimilation and its limits.”[43]

Yet if the Goyim say the same thing—or even cite people like Abrams—Abrams would call them anti-Semites!

Nathan Abrams certainly cannot have it both ways.


[1] Nathan Abrams, The New Jew in Film: Exploring Jewishness and Judaism in Contemporary Cinema (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2012), 72.

[2] E. Michael Jones, “Rabbi Dresner’s Dilemma: Torah v. Ethnos,” Culture Wars, May 2003.

[3] Jones wrote,

“Jews accounted for most of the leading male performers of the 1970s and ’80s. Hebrew studs include Buck Adams, Bobby Astyr, (Bobby Charles) R. Bolla (Robert Kerman), Jerry Butler (Paul Siderman), Seymore Butts (Adam Glasser), Roger Caine (Al Levitsky), David Christopher (Bernie Cohen), Steve Drake, Jesse Eastern, Jamie Gillis (Jamie Gurman), Ron Jeremy (Hyatt), Michael Knight, William Margold, Ashley Moore (Steve Tucker), David Morris, George Payne, Ed Powers (Mark Arnold aka Mark Krinski), Harry Reems (Herbert Streicher), Dave Ruby, Herschel Savage (Harvey Cowen), Carter Stevens (Mal Warub), Marc Stevens, Paul Thomas (Phil Tobias), Marc Wallice (Marc Goldberg), Randy West (Andy Abrams) and Jack Wrangler.

“Jewish female performers include Avalon, Jenny Baxter (Jenny Wexler), Busty Belle (Tracy Praeger), Chelsea Blake, Tiffany Blake, Bunny Bleu (Kim Warner), J.R. Carrington, Lee Carroll (Leslie Barris), Blair Castle/Brooke Fields (Allison Shandibal), Courtney/Natasha/Eden (Natasha Zimmerman), Daphne (Daphne Franks), Barbara Dare (Stacy Mitnick), April Diamond, Jeanna Fine, Alexis Gold, Terri Hall, Heather Hart, Nina Hartley (Hartman), C.J. Laing (Wendy Miller), Frankie Leigh (Cynthia Hope Geller), Gloria Leonard, Traci Lords (Nora Louise Kuzma), Amber Lynn, Tonisha Mills, Melissa Monet, Susan Nero, Scarlett O. (Catherine Goldberg), Tawny Pearl (Susan Pearlman), Nina Preta, Tracey Prince, Raylene, Janey Robbins (Robin Lieberman), Mila Shegol, Alexandra Silk, Susan Sloan, Annie Sprinkle (Ellen Steinberg), Karen Summer (Dana Alper), Cindy West, Zara Whites (Amy Kooiman) and Ona Zee (Ona Simms).”

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Nathan Abrams, “Triple Exthnics,” Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004.

[7] Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 1063.

[8] See for example Peter Schaeffer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007).

[9] Benjamin Disraeli, Coningsby (Boston: Adamant Media Corporation, 2005), 299.

[10] See for example Glenn Greenwald, “Syria Becomes the 7th Predominantly Muslim Country Bombed by 2009 Nobel Peace Laureate,” The Intercept, September 24, 2014.

[11] Jones, Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, 1035.

[12] Ibid., 1056.

[13] Josh Lambert, Unclean Lips: Obscenity, Jews, and American Culture (New York: New York University Press, 2013), 6-7, 8.

[14] Ibid., 10.

[15] Nadine Strossen, Pornography: Free Speech, Sex, and the Fight for Women’s Rights (New York and London: New York University Press, 2000), xiii, xviii.

[16] Charles McGrath, “An X-Rated Phenomenon Revisited,” NY Times, Feb. 9, 2005.

[17] Joseph W. Slade, Pornography and Sexual Representation (Westport: Greenwood Press, 2001), 3:978.

[18] William Van Meter, “The Lion of Chelsea,” New York Magazine, October 22, 2006.

[19] I have just gone to a conference during which those facts and statistics were made available to me. The speaker also gave me some references  with respect to human trafficking and the sex industry.

[20] Quoted in Eddie Byun, Justice Awakening: How You and Your Church Can Help End Human Trafficking(Downers Grove: IVP Books, 2014), 172. The book discusses much more, but we simply cannot detail all the aspects here. Readers are encouraged to pursue further study. See also Meredith May, “The Diary of a Sex Slave: Part 1,” San Francisco Gate, October 6, 2006.

[21] Frank Rich, “Naked Capitalists: There’s No Business Like Porn Business,” NY Times, May 20, 2001.

[22] Ibid.

[23] See for example Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993); Patricia Erens, The Jew in American Cinema (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988); Eric A. Goldman, The American Jewish Story through Cinema (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2013); Lawrence Baron, ed., The Modern Jewish Experience in World Cinema (Waltham: Brandeis University Press, 2011); Neal Gabler, An Empire of their Own: How the Jews invented Hollywood (New York: Anchor Books, 1989); Paul Buhle, From the Lower East Side of Hollywood: Jews in American Popular Culture (New York: Verso, 2004).

[24] Rich, “Naked Capitalists: There’s No Business Like Porn Business,” NY Times, May 20, 2001.

[25] See for example Davy Rothbart, “He’s Just Not That Into Anyone,” New York Magazine, January 30, 2011.

[26] David Segal, “Does Porn Hurt Children?,” NY Times, March 28, 2014.

[27] Ibid.

[28] G. Edward Griffin, World Without Cancer (Westlake Village, CA: American Media, 2003), 29.

[29] Ibid., 31.

[30] Nathan Abrams, “Triple Exthnics,” Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004.

[31] Jay A. Gerzman, Bookleggers and Smuthounds: The Trade in Erotica, 1920-1940 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999).

[32] Abrams, “Triple Exthnics,” Jewish Quarterly, Winter 2004.

[33] Nathan Abrams, “Kosher Beefcakes and Kosher Cheesecakes: Jews in Porn,” Nathan Abrams, ed. Jews and Sex (London: Five Leaves Publications, 2008), 177-178.

[34] Nathan Abrams, The New Jew in Film: Exploring Jewishness and Judaism in Contemporary Cinema (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2012), 68.

[35] Graetz, History of the Jews, Vol. 5: 4-6.

[36] Ibid., 6-7.

[37] Ibid., 17.

[38] Abrams, The New Jew in Film, 69, 70.

[39] Ibid., 72.

[40] Ibid., 57.

[41] Ibid., 73-74.

[42] Ibid., 40-41.

[43] Ibid., 40.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *