Antisemitism and the NYT crossword

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s an unfortunate accident and they should address it and apologize for the accidental offense. (There’s is actually a whole thing about accidentally creating a swastika pattern in quilts and I can imagine the crossword layout presents similar issues. Nevertheless, they shouldn’t ignore it!)

Jewish and agree it's probably an unfortunate accident but how in the heck did no one catch this - it's obvious on first glance.

Anyone who sees a swastika in this crossword is just looking for something to be offended about. It says more about you, if you see a swastika, than it does about the crossword.

Sunday's tone-deaf puzzle debuted with a ton of criticism -- featuring a massive swastika in the dead center of the grid. The puzzle's designer described it as a simple "fun whirlpool shape," but obviously not everyone had the same thoughts.

Many blasted NYT for the antisemitic design -- regardless of whether or not it was intentional ... with one saying, "How did this get approved without somebody noticing?" and another noting, "A hidden Happy Chanukah message in today's @nytimes crossword?"

https://www.tmz.com/2022/12/19/new-york-times-crossword-swastika-design-hanukkah/

Of course, pp. We are the jerks for noticing.

Better you notice tge actual anti Semitism that occurred in Bethesda over the weekend rather than whining about imagined anti Semitism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both the editor and the owner of the NYT are of Jewish descent, so it seems really unlikely that it has anti-Semitic intentions. If the puzzle is intentional, then it was unlikely an official act. I'm pretty sure those are made by computer and no one even looks at the shape. I think the recent hit pieces on Hasidim and Israel are just the unfortunate misguided "both-sidesing" that has invaded most of mainstream media lately.

You are complicit if you are trying to convince other people that this shape was computer generated and no one noticed.

I am stunned by the excuses here.

Also: what source are you quoting that the NYT crossword puzzle is computer generated and has no editor/s?

Count me as complicit.

Sorry you are stunned

The puzzle has an editor who is well known and identified in every puzzle

Here’s to those of a limited sort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason why quilts sometimes end up with accidental swastikas is the same reason that this crossword ended up with an accidental swastika (if you block out the corners and don't complete any of the words).

It's because the designer was going for symmetry. There are limited number of shapes that a crossword can come in, and some puzzle creators like to create them with symmetry. That's it - that's the whole story.

Trying to make "Siths" as an answer into some sort of anti-Semitic conspiracy just demonstrates what a reach this is.

what about “boxcars?”

I grew up with B&O boxcars rumbling by on trains ten feet from my house. Are you saying a boxcar is anti Semitic? What next
A crematorium? Barbed wire fence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

No one should be evaluating the crossword for potential looniness. That's your problem, not the paper's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

No one should be evaluating the crossword for potential looniness. That's your problem, not the paper's.

Well now it's the NY Times's problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason why quilts sometimes end up with accidental swastikas is the same reason that this crossword ended up with an accidental swastika (if you block out the corners and don't complete any of the words).

It's because the designer was going for symmetry. There are limited number of shapes that a crossword can come in, and some puzzle creators like to create them with symmetry. That's it - that's the whole story.

Trying to make "Siths" as an answer into some sort of anti-Semitic conspiracy just demonstrates what a reach this is.

what about “boxcars?”

Is your argument that "boxcars" is an inappropriate clue ever? Or just in that puzzle? Should we purge it from our vocabulary?

It’s not a coincidence.

You know what else is a coincidence? One of the solutions is “feminists.” Gloria Steinman is a feminist who went undercover as a Playboy bunny to undercover misogyny in PlYboy clubs. . Ergo, this puzzle is misogynistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Given my experience with DIE people, they are not very bright and would not spot anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

Are you even Jewish? Or are you one of those SJW types who is constantly looking for offense, ready to rush in and cancel someone over the slightest perceived infraction? I’m Jewish, and I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. I don’t need people fussing over non-events like this in order to support me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

No one should be evaluating the crossword for potential looniness. That's your problem, not the paper's.

Well now it's the NY Times's problem.

Your looniness is not the NYT's problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

Are you even Jewish? Or are you one of those SJW types who is constantly looking for offense, ready to rush in and cancel someone over the slightest perceived infraction? I’m Jewish, and I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. I don’t need people fussing over non-events like this in order to support me.

I am not Jewish but have done the puzzles for a long time. The NYT dumbed down the puzzles recently because Americans have become less erudite. This was a rare challenging puzzle because so many long words were used. I wonder if people who could not do the puzzle lashed out because of frustration and made a hullabaloo about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any crossword can be made to look like a swastika if you try hard enough.

Agree. If you ignore enough spaces, you can make a swastika out of almost all of them.

Like the crossword puzzle in question, really?

Perhaps you could show an example of how every crossword puzzle is a swastika?

No, I'm not going to put swastikas all over images and post them here. I think you should be ashamed of yourself for doing that.

I didn’t do that. It is a picture that shows how the crossword puzzle in question so closely resembles a swastika.

I think the NYT should be ashamed of themselves for publishing the swastika shaped crossword puzzle, apologize, and remove the people who made it from their crossword page, and conduct an investigation into who approved this puzzle and ask why they didn’t see what everyone else sees.

But so far, they are silent, and the people who have asked for answers about this have been accused of being too sensitive.

This is effing ridiculous.

-A Jew

Fellow Jew who completely agrees.

[Anonymous]

In response to this latest crossword controversy, a spokesperson for the New York Times told the JC: "This is a common crossword design: Many open grids in crosswords have a similar spiral pattern because of the rules around rotational symmetry and black squares."

https://www.thejc.com/news/world/new-york-times-defends-controversial-swastika-crossword-design-65XtxKlPVruODsVP6xb3uV

NYT defends this, so no apology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

I mean, does a team of diverse people have to review every crossword puzzle layout? That seems crazy to me.

Jesus, are we this into DEI and you still think that's what this means?

No, you don't need a diversity team "reviewing" every crossword. What diversity means is that there is someone on the whole team that works on this puzzle before it goes into print, who says: hey, guys, has anyone noticed that this looks like a swastika?

It means that YOUR instincts - which tells you that who cares, NBD - aren't the ONLY ones represented on a team. There are other people who see things and are aware of sensitivities that you, for whatever reason, are not. It saves the NY Times having to say that they didn't intentionally print a swastika, because someone who is more thoughtful about swastikas, has already been able to flag this thing.

Are you even Jewish? Or are you one of those SJW types who is constantly looking for offense, ready to rush in and cancel someone over the slightest perceived infraction? I’m Jewish, and I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. I don’t need people fussing over non-events like this in order to support me.

Agreed. I'm Jewish, and this kind of attention is not a real fight against anti-Semitism. It's easy to look for swastikas in a crossword puzzle of a liberal magazine based in New York City, home to more Jews than any other place in the US. It's much harder to accept the more subtle and dangerous anti-Semitism that is creeping into mainstream life, especially down here is the almost-South.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the constructor’s note: “ Thrilled to have my first Sunday puzzle in The Times! This grid features one of my favorite open middles that I’ve made as it pulls from a variety of subject areas. I had originally tried to make it work in a 15x15 grid but then decided to expand the grid out to a Sunday-size puzzle with a fun whirlpool shape. Hope you enjoy!”

I believe him. He saw a whirlpool. Not everyone sees swastikas everywhere.

... which is why diversity matters. because "not everyone" sees it - but every single jewish person does.

"every single jewish (sic) person" who is offended by everything. FTFY.

Go cwy to Jeff a little more because poow Cwistians awe being attacked again and waah why awe people so mean but a literal swastika in the NY Times is just us Jews, who control the weather and those space lasers, being oversensitive.

New York Times is owned and run by people of Jewish descent. This criticism is a white elephant.