Talk:Sheigetz

Someone with more knowledge of Jewish culture needs to comment on this,

... but it seems that this term has not worked its way into pop-culture generally as much as the corresponding shiksa. Ellsworth 22:41, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The term Shaigetz is still most commonly used by bilingual Yiddish and English speakers unlike Shikse which has been adopted by some English writers for the sexual admiration of the non-Jewish women it supposedly conveys.

inter language links

Halló! de:Schickse and ru:Шикса are already used at Shiksa. This might block bots. Best regards
‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 22:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talmud

Does the Talmud say anything about this ? I have heard of offensive words in the Talmud, but I am not sure about the term Shegetz. ADM (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NO! The Talmud does not say anything about colloquial Yiddish terms.--FeralOink (talk) 10:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Race neutrality?

I read this page because I was curious about this term that I was called by someone who clearly thought I was dumb. I am used to that, but I had never heard this particular racial slur before. I still don't know whether he was Jewish. Perhaps he was a WASP who just "took the word back". From the preceding sentence, it should be clear that I challenge this page's neutrality. I suppose Jewish racism against these "WASPs" is possible (They are pretty easy to dislike sometimes.), but I, as a black man, am a little ignorant on the matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Biosoulcial (talk • contribs) 02:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You say you were "curious about this term that I was called by someone who clearly thought I was dumb". Is this relevant to improving this article? I ask that because WP:TALK specifies "improving the encyclopedia" as the basic use for article Talk pages. I think even considering using this space for considerations of WP:Deleting this article would be at least germane to "improving" this article. But slurs personally experienced, told there, seem outside of the basic use intended for article Talk pages. I am sorry that you experienced that, and I sincerely mean that. But I personally feel this is outside of the proper use of Talk page space. I hope you understand that I am not meaning to minimize the experience you relate. I don't expect to or even want to have the final word here. I hope others weigh in with an opinion. Bus stop (talk) 02:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure others will weigh in. But my purpose for improving this article is not germane to how I accomplish its improvement. People might come to this article for a myriad reasons. They should all see an unbiased page. There was a logical fallacy in one of the sections. It was a fallacy that biased the page towards one side. On its own, that it was a fallacy means it should be removed. But it was also unbalanced from the other side. And I am not even sure what side that is to be honest. I am glad that you are sincerely sorry. I believe you. Most intelligent people, and you seem intelligent, care about honoring diversity and promoting equality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Biosoulcial (talk • contribs) 14:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is your edit. In my opinion the whole paragraph should be deleted:

"When a Jew calls another Jew a shegetz, it is often in condemnation of behavior or a lifestyle the speaker does not consider Jewish enough. Some disaffected religious Jews label themselves shkotzim in an ironic take on the word, in much the same way that African Americans, according to some, have reclaimed the slur "nigger" from racists. The UK's Chassidic blogger The Shaigetz is a notable example. The principle difference between these two words, however, was that "WASP"'s foisted the hateful term "nigger" on the African American population, while on the other hand, "nice Jewish boys' reclaimed hate speech that was theirs to begin with."

I see nothing sourced in the paragraph. It seems to be all original research. The wording that was there (in that paragraph) before your post is merely one editor's opinion. It is not encyclopedic and in my opinion simply should be deleted. Bus stop (talk) 15:23, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biosoulcial—also, as per WP:SIGNATURE, please sign your posts on talk pages.

Here's how: at the end of your comments simply type four tildes (~), like this: ~~~~.

Your signature will appear after you have saved the changes.

Happy editing! Bus stop (talk) 20:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I left an Easter egg this time. Biosoulcial (talk) 05:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Shiksa?

Shegetz and Shiksa are masculine and feminine forms of the same word. Why do we need two short articles, instead of one more comprehensive one? Peter Chastain ^{[habla, por favor]} 05:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not about a word (i.e., it is not a dicdef), but about a concept. As concepts, shegetz and shiksa are quite different. Staszek Lem (talk) 06:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How are those two concepts so different that they should not be discussed together? They are both derogatory, IMO, and they have the same origins. The fact that shiksa is more derogatory than shegetz, and is less frequently used to describe (insufficiently observant) Jews, is a function of a double standard which is better discussed in one article than two. Peter Chastain ^{[habla, por favor]} 17:53, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They don't need to be so different to be different topics. We have plenty of small articles. wikipedia is not paper. And onle again, your similarity is only in the level of dictionary definitions. The terms evolved differently and now they are different. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Sheigetz??

The word is not pronounced with a segol under the shin, it should be titled as it is spelled and pronounced, as in Sheigetz, or shaygetz. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:07, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Word Doesn't Need Its Own Page

It is barely used outside of actual Yiddish speakers, and even then it is not common. It should at the least be merged with the shiksa page, but really should be in a bigger page about Yiddish and/or Jewish & non-Jewish relations. This is a encyclopedia, not a dictionary. (From a Yiddish speaker.) Noxiyu (talk) 21:12, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

merge this article with that of another loathesome racial epithet?

the only example provided is: ashkenazis using the word defensively against people trying to harass or even stone them. why no mention that the psychological origins are talmudic? it's preferable to have an honest discussion of highly nuanced, highly charged racist words. the article on ni****, for example, a similarly loathesome word, is enormously long. or should this article be merged with the ni**** article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:12C1:6128:0:41BA:CF5A:E54F (talk) 13:06, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We merge articles only when they cover the same subject. Nigger and shegetz refer to different categories people. As for honest discussion, you are very welcome to expand the article citing relable published sources, for verifiablity of the added information, as our policies require. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:20, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between she(i)getz and shkotz; plural form(s)

I'm not a Yiddish speaker, and my knowledge of (Modern) Hebrew is very limited. We need here someone who masters both to some degree. Davidbena, hi, maybe interested? Or maybe you know someone who would? That being said:

"She(i)getz" and "shkotz" are not the same, they're two alternative forms derived from the same Biblical Hebrew word.

Also, Yiddish doesn't work the same way as (Modern) Hebrew, even if they're related. So, is "shkotzim" also the plural of "she[i]getz", or just of "shkotz"? I'm afraid that we don't yet have the plural for "she(i)getz" in the article. Or am I wrong?

"Polish: szajgec, szejgec, plural: szkcim, szkocim"

This is part of the lead and it looks to me like the plural of shkotz, not of she[i]getz/szejgec. Did a Modern Hebrew-speaker mix them up? Joaziela, hi, now I see this was your contribution. It's not covered by the source placed at the end of the sentence, dictionary.com, placing it there without dealing with this matter is a mistake; do you have a source? Thanks. Arminden (talk) 07:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For now, I have moved over here some unsourced material. Please consider if it shouldn't be placed outside the lead, which was way too cluttered, once it's been reworked and sourced. For instance the Polish derivate: on enWiki the focus is on English, so adoption in other European languages can be of interest, but not necessarily in the lead.

"[plural:...] שקצים shgatzim."

Is this indeed a plural form for she(i)getz? And is it really used in Yiddish? Philologos isn't of much help (and remember that he's Halkin's "storytelling" alter ego, who doesn't take a strictly academic approach), as he's using sheygetzes as an explicit plural for sheygetz, and shkotzim as the plural of the Yiddish word for, literally, abomination, not for its derived meaning (gentile male); but he also discusses the originally northeastern Yiddish alternative form "scotz and scotzim" as opposed to "shkotz and shkotzim"! Confusion. Are both plural forms used, with the typical Yiddish ending -es AND the originally Hebrew -im? And if so, is the -im plural used for both she(i)getz and shkotz?

"Polish: szajgec, szejgec, plural: szkcim, szkocim"

Apart from my other issue with it (see above: no source, and unclear to me if plural of shkotz, rather than of she(i)getz/szejgec), IMO it should be moved out of the lead. Arminden (talk) 08:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what Arminden's question was to me, but in terms of the word's meaning, sheigetz is the masculine form for "shiktzah," the latter being the term used in Yiddish and in colloquial Hebrew for a non-Jewish woman, but which word is used mostly disparagingly. The masculine form ("sheigetz") is used for a non-Jewish man or boy. The word is derived from Leviticus 11:23, which says: "All winged insects that go on all fours are detestable (abominable) [Heb. sheigetz] unto you." The word is akin to the Hebrew word שרץ‎, which happens to be the word used in Leviticus 11:29-ff. for the eight "creeping things" enumerated as being capable of rendering defilement to other people when their dead bodies are touched or moved by them, particular, defilement that is contracted by an Israelite when he touches them after their death. If we were to say the plural form for "sheigetz", in Modern Hebrew it would simply be "shǝgatzim," but this is rarely used by us today, as we simply say "goyim" (lit. Gentiles) when referring to non-Jewish people. I am not familiar with the Yiddish pronunciation of the plural form, but - depending on where the Yiddish speaker is from - he may actually say "shkotzim." The reason for this difference in pronunciation is because among Ashkenazi and Yemenite Jews, the vowel sound qamatz is pronounced as the English "o".Davidbena (talk) 12:32, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you David. Arminden (talk) 14:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]