JPS Gender Sensitive Tanakh Review - Part I

by Rabbi David

That’s how AI sees Gender Sensitive.

This is the review and it will take a while. In Part I, we will first focus on what the JPS presented. In Part II we will focus on my conclusion as your rabbi. Things take a while when you have to be sensitive. When have to explain that Gd is not as you explained Him. When you have to do something impossible and make people feel good about the Bible.
 
​JPS put out The Gender Sensitive Tanakh for the modern man, the RJPS version. I just said man. Already messed up. I'm never going to get this down. I spent too many years in Yeshiva. Wait. It's the Bible for the modern person. Now we can do this review.
We're living in an age where everybody has an identity issue. Some people don't know if they're man or woman. Why should Gd be left out.
Thus, the JPS has taken it upon themselves to rewrite the Torah. They decided to rewrite Gd's word. To be honest, if Gd knew of gender neutrality, He would've been more sensitive. He wouldn't have thrown in some of those commandments about pilgrimage holidays. He would’ve left out Mikvahs and went for pools. Pools are more gender sensitive. Pools with mixed swimming. Mixed swimming in bikinis. Unisex bikinis are gender sensitive. Point is, He would've called Adam "Adamah." Or "Ariel." Ariel is quite gender neutral. Shabbat. He would've let us do without that. Shabbat is quite gender specific.
If Gd would've known that people don't identify as men or women, He would’ve thought about His wording a little more. He would’ve gotten it right, and we wouldn’t have had to revise this thing.
There is language used in the Chumash. And that is offensive. Language is offensive. Gd is offensive. And Moshe was offensive when he called the Jews a nation. To use the word "nation." Not necessarily sensitive. "Persons." Persons says nation to me.
And so, we see that gender sensitive people need a new Bible.

I watched the video with Elias Sacks for help. YouTube. Elias gave a beautiful tour of The Gender Sensitive Tanakh on YouTube. And that’s what I call research. Hence, this is all scientific.
Before we go on, Elias made sure to note that this version of the Torah is not gender neutral. It's gender sensitive. So, I have misunderstood what the new JPS Tanakh is. Now I know. And I don’t know the difference between gender neutral and sensitive. It's definitely a more emotional Bible.
Before we go on, it must be stated, Elias made it clear, they are only rewriting the English Tanach. I was hoping for a new version of the Hebrew text. It turns out JPS will not be doing that anytime soon. Gd’s word in Hebrew is the same. The Hebrew version is still allowed to be offensive. As Israelis are very offensive. And I am now offended as an Israeli. But we are not here to talk about the Israeli Sensitive Tanach. A Tanach where people can pronounce Tanach. We are here to review the new JPS version.
 
The Review of What Elias Showed
Let's hear what Elias says.
Elias explains the new Tanakh is translated for "contemporary readers." JPS is focused on those readers. They’re not focused on archaic readers. Readers from the fifth to eighth century is not their focus.
This is why they changed the JPS Torah. The Torah has been the same since 1985. It's getting old. Crazy old. Outdated. Who's watching Cheers Anymore?! 
The 1985 version as opposed to the 1312 BCE version. The 1312 BCE English version has been revised countless times.
How many times is JPS going to change the Bible? I can't tell you. They haven't put out the racist version yet.

The 1985 version of the Bible translates Gd as a "Him." Who translates the Hebrew word “Oto” as “Him”? Other than Israelis and people who understand Hebrew, nobody does that.  
I always thought Gd was a guy. That seems to be a problem. Growing up in Yeshiva, I thought "he" was gender neutral. I thought "he" was a sensitive way to describe "him." I was wrong.
Yeshiva education is messed up. It turns out that the masculine form of the Hebrew language doesn’t always include women. And I have to stop referring to women as guys.

Elias explains that at points they use "person" or "them," as opposed to "woman" or "man." Which makes it harder to figure out who to date. Nonetheless, you refer to a person in plural form in gender neutral language. As gender neutral people are usually heavier. And fat shaming is fine in neutral people. You can always learn something new. And that’s what the RJPS version is here for.

They got rid of mankind. They erased mankind. Somebody had to do it. Our politicians haven’t succeeded yet. Elias says, "We try to avoid saying man or mankind." Adam as mankind in Bereishit is not good anymore. "Humanity" is how it’s expressed nowadays in many settings, such as when talking to heretics. And heretics are contemporary.
Truth is I can't stand mankind. They suck. Maybe humankind can do better. I’m still for "Ariel." Ariel covers every them.

Using masculine language "can sound jarring. It can sound intentional... can feel jarring unnatural disconcerting to emphasize the maleness." Which is a quote Elias stole from his wife.
And I hate men too. And that is why they are using gender neutral language intentionally. I hate men. Why should Gd be associated with those people. You see how used "people." I'm starting to get a hold of this.
It's wrong. "Deliberately casting Gd as male." Men bring a bad name on themselves. Gd doesn't need that reputation.

Elias expresses that Gd is beyond gender according to many scholars. I would agree. And thus, I am a scholar. "Some contemporary readers experience Gd as encompassing multiple genders. Not just male or female." Now I’m confused, like Gd. 
So Gd is she/they/thou/them/him/her/their/hers/his. Gd is a Forward Slash. And I think Gd is now offended. See how I capitalized “forward slash.”
Please don't tell me the RJPS stopped capitalizing Gd, because capitals are not gender sensitive.
They took out "King." King is male sounding. If you don’t get this by now, you’re an insensitive racist who hates people. Using King for Gd is a problem. Gd is just Gd. Somebody should’ve told this to Gd when He wrote the Torah and called Himself King. But need not worry, we’ll correct His mistakes.
They Might want to change Gd to "+." The attributes of Gd should be vague for the contemporary reader. Preciseness is offensive. I think Plus Sign says it all. Pluses and Forward Slashes.
The RJPS version allows the atheist to read "Gd" however they like.

Wait. Take that back. They are not using any pronouns for Gd. And no "they" either. But somebody can interpret Gd as "they" if they like. Though. The plus sign might stand. Maybe in the next version. My idea. That’s my interpretation.

They got rid of "Lord" as that also sounds male, and we hate men. All of us contemporary readers can agree we hate men, and we love the WNBA.
The Tetragrammaton is sometimes referred to as “Gd” or “The Eternal.” That makes sense, if I knew what the Tetragrammaton was. In the next version, maybe they should focus on translating Tetragrammaton into English. No idea what that means.

Later in his presentation Elias does make it clear that gender language is sometimes fine, and I appreciate that. Like when referring to a guy, you can say they're a guy. You can refer to a woman as a woman, if she's a woman. Though it might be illegal in certain states.

Elias realized they needed to go through the Tanach with "fresh eyes." The last three thousand five hundred years wasn't enough. It needed fresh eyes. Gd might have forgotten something. The fresh eyes looked at Bereishit 1:26-27 and decided that Adam should be translated as "humankind." And that is why I call my Israeli friend "Humankind."
Between us, this is really a discussion about Gd. And anybody who thinks Gd is a dude is an idiot.

There are other offensive words in the Bible, but Elias did not focus on them. Personally, I am going to skip the word "Behalotcha." I don't like it. It sounds jarring just to say it.

I want to thank Elias Sacks for giving the tour of the RJPS over in a soft intimate gender sensitive undertone. Thank you for making it sound not male. That would've been jarring.
At this point, we can all agree we hate men. And we all needed a new Bible to express that.