Frieda Vizel Interviews an ex Satmar girl that married a Non-Jew and she is surprised that her followers are "outraged"

 

Frieda Vizel seems to fancy herself an amateur anthropologist, yet she often appears to have little understanding of the underlying values, sensitivities, and social dynamics that shape cultures and communities, including the one she grew up in.

I have spoken about her in previous posts

She recently expressed surprise at the backlash she received for posting an interview with Gittel Schwartz, a former Satmar woman who left her community, married a non-Jew, and had a child with him. 

What seems to baffle Frieda is that the criticism did not come only from religious Jews. Even many secular Jews found the interview and the way it was presented troubling.

Right from the start, Frieda, who is usually an engaging and insightful commentator, manages to be remarkably irritating by repeatedly pronouncing Gittel's name as "Ge'tell."

What is that about? Is she deliberately trying to make Gittel's name sound more non-Jewish or more palatable to her largely non-Jewish audience? If so, the choice comes across as contrived and unnecessarily dismissive of the name's authentic Yiddish pronunciation.

I would suggest that before Frieda studies anthropology, she spend some time studying Jewish history.

Does she know about the Crusades, when entire Jewish communities were massacred by Christian mobs with extraordinary brutality?

Does she know that Jews were expelled from England in 1290, from Spain in 1492, and from Portugal in 1496, simply because they were Jews?

Does she know about the Chmielinski massacres of 1648-1649, when tens of thousands of Jews were murdered during the Cossack uprising in Ukraine and Poland-Lithuania? In Jewish historical memory, these events are remembered as one of the greatest catastrophes to befall the Jewish people before the Holocaust.

Does she know about the Uman Massacre of 1768, when thousands of Jews were slaughtered during the Haidamak uprising? Or the Odessa Pogrom of 1821, often cited as the first anti-Jewish outbreak to be described as a "pogrom"?

And that's only the beginning. I could go on and on.

Any Jew, whether religious or secular, who has even a basic understanding of Jewish history can understand why many people would be deeply troubled by content that appears to normalize or celebrate assimilation. Given the long history of persecution, expulsions, massacres, and the constant struggle to preserve Jewish identity, such reactions should hardly come as a surprise. 

Jews make up 0.2% of the world's population, when we lose one single Jew, every Jew religious or secular that has any inkling of their beautiful rich heritage mourns that loss, because that Jew is now lost forever amongst the rest of the 8,3 billion people worldwide. And even though Gittel's child is halachically Jewish, the chances of this child marrying Jewish, hovers around zero percent! 

What Frieda Vizel and Gittel Schwartz seem not to understand is a simple truth: actions have consequences. When you publicly promote ideas or life choices that many Jews view as undermining Jewish continuity, you should not be shocked when people respond with criticism or outrage.

Pearl the "Dangerous" Bubbie from Williamsburg! Claims that " Holocaust victims were responsible for their own deaths"

 

It has now been thirteen days since Frieda Vizel posted her interview with “Dangerous Pearl.”

 I debated whether to ignore it or address it on my forum. But when a very close relative of Pearl reached out to me and took the trouble to email me privately — writing, 

“L’maan Hashem, someone must respond to her ridiculous assertions about the Holocaust, the family is mortified” —

and when I saw that the interview had already accumulated over 107,000 views in just thirteen days, I realized I could not remain silent.

I call her “dangerous” not as an insult, but because of Frieda Vizel’s very own warnings!

In another video titled “Everyone Is Talking About Jews,” Frieda openly acknowledges:

• At 4:39 — her work (Frieda's) is “reaching antisemites,” so she must be “mindful of her content because of the climate.”

• At 4:19 — she must publish “with discretion, with care.”

• At 10:35 — she must think twice before speaking because “the antisemites are going to take this out of context.”

Given all that, the obvious question is: Why did she publish this interview with Pearl — knowing full well that antisemites will seize on every word?

Frieda explains that she admires Pearl’s “courage,” saying Pearl knows her views are harshly judged and will make her unpopular, yet she shares them anyway. Frieda adds that what she and Pearl share is “deep convictions even when the world doesn’t agree,” which she finds admirable.

Let’s examine that.

Frieda Vizel grew up in Kiryas Yoel, married, had a child, and later left the community. Today she gives tours in Williamsburg and conducts interviews. Her English has improved significantly — her first language is Yiddish — but I often hear her use sophisticated English words that simply do not fit the context. And I genuinely believe she does not understand what the word “conviction” actually means.

Frieda seems to think that “conviction” automatically implies something noble or admirable. But convictions can be good — or catastrophically evil.

Eichmann had convictions. Hamas has convictions. Convictions, when rooted in delusion or hatred, are not admirable — they are dangerous.