Category: In The Media

Zvia Gordetsky has waited 17 years to be free of the man who prefers jail to granting her a divorce. Her case is unusual because unlike what happens too often, the religious courts did nearly everything they “should” do, and still she is not free.

Normally in Israel, where the religious courts have power to punish withholders, a woman only waits for a get because the court did not order the husband to give her one. In this case, within six months of asking for a divorce, the religious court ordered Zvia’s husband to grant it. When he refused, they told him he would be put in jail. He showed up to the next hearing with a packed suitcase, ready to move into prison. Since then, he has been offered the chance to grant the divorce — and leave prison — every six months. His response is: “They won’t break me.”

That the “system” worked as it should and Zvia — who told me her story personally — is still chained, has made this case shocking to those who are used to tragic stories of get abuse. That Zvia has chosen the desperate act of a hunger strike for her freedom makes it clear that she feels everything else has failed.

Read more in the UK Jewish Chronicle

But most shocking of all that Rabbi Shafran writes is the question he asks rhetorically. “Are religious Zionists to be expected to condemn every outrage committed by a “hilltop youth?” YES, Rabbi Shafran. YES they are! That is what it means to be a moral and responsible person.

I wrote these words on Yom Hashoah and this is the number one lesson that I have taken from the Holocaust. Not that people hate us, not that we must circle the wagons, not that we should make excuses for extremism and say it’s only a few crazies, but that when people do bad things, it is our moral and religious obligation to stand against them — every time. I honestly cannot believe this is something I need to explain to a rabbi.

I invite Rabbi Shafran to come and spend some time in Beit Shemesh since he appears not to believe its residents. He will see children tearing Israeli flags off cars, soldiers being physically attacked and called Nazis, and young boys with payot calling Jewish mothers ‘shiksas’.

Come ride the Number 11 bus and you can hear Jewish men telling Jewish women and girls to go to the back of the bus. This is the next generation of Haredi Jews here, Rabbi. Our town is the canary in the coal mine of Jewish extremism. That you care more about the reputation of your community than its actual health and future says more about its decay than any additional evidence I might bring.

Read more at The Times of Israel

Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll

What was once called “extremism” is the new normal. It is not, as Shafran writes, a phenomenon of a small group of “outliers” who throw things or call people names, while the majority “fully embrace all Jews, including those estranged from observance or mired in the milieu.” Rather, both the political and religious establishments in the Haredi world are increasingly intolerant of anything but the Haredi worldview.

 

Read more in The Forward 

Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll

Calling into question a divorce that has long been in effect has serious, and potentially devastating, ramifications for real people.

Beyond the fate of this one woman. Rabbi Yosef’s actions are dangerous in the extreme for halachic Judaism as a whole.

  1. They undermine the authority of the Beit Din itself.

Every divorce is granted under the auspices of a rabbinic court. If another rabbinic court can come along and revoke the first court’s divorces (or declare them null and void), then no Beit Din may be considered reliable when it comes to divorce, and its status-changing implications…

Yes, the law is on the books that one court can undo the edicts of a previous court — but only under certain conditions of established greatness, and only when it comes to legislative acts, which can’t be enacted in this day and age with no Sandhedrin.  YES, halachic disputes happen all the time. They are built into the system. But when a beit din’s decision on status takes effect, it’s considered sacrosanct.

  1. They undermine the “forever” status of divorce.

Revoking a get sets a very dangerous precedent. If an unrelated court can come along and revoke (or declare null and void) one divorce, even given its unusual circumstances, what is to protect any divorce from the same? Every presumed divorcee should hesitate before marrying again, lest she risk subsequent accusations of adultery. Indeed, every post-divorce marriage risks being called into question.

From a human perspective, this is terribly difficult. How can any divorced person move on with his or her life if the divorce can be questioned? The potential ramifications of this are endless and chaotic.

  1. The human dimension of this specific case.

This woman was married for seven years to a man she knew would not regain consciousness. She’s only 34-years-old. Chaining her to someone whose body functions only by virtue of machines for the rest of his life when there is a legitimate halachic mechanism to release her that was approved by the Tzfat Beit Din is cruel.

In truth, the fact that Rabbi Yosef and many others would convene with the question of revoking this get calls into question our ability to rely on our rabbis to protect our widows, our orphans, our converts, and even Halacha — which allows for this kind of divorce.

Read more in The Times of Israel

A 48-year-old woman goes to see a breast surgeon. She has four lumps in her breasts, a large ulcerated mass and cancer that has spread to her lymph nodes. She says she had not come in earlier because it didn’t seem so important.

A 36-year-old woman sees her dermatologist for an irritated nipple. The doctor palpates a tumor the size of a golf ball and immediately sends her to a breast surgeon. The patient returns to the dermatologist a month later for the same condition. The doctor, shocked to see that she has not had surgery, asks if she had seen the surgeon. The woman says she was concerned about the level of kashrut at the hospital to which she was sent and, upon her rabbi’s advice, was waiting to have surgery at another hospital with stricter kashrut. She dies not long after.

A mother of seven is fully aware that she has a gene that makes it very likely she will contract the cancer that killed her mother and sister. She knows that if she has her breasts and reproductive organs removed, it could save her life. But she refuses. Not because she wants more children, not because she is afraid of surgery, but because she is afraid that if the neighbors find out, it will ruin her daughters’ chances for a shidduch (match). After failing to convince her that she could have the surgery with no one knowing, her doctor puts her in touch with a woman who has had the surgery and reconstruction undetected by her community. She finally agrees.

These stories seem very hard to believe. But imagine that you had heard almost nothing about breast cancer, that it was something not spoken about.

Imagine that you did not know the statistics and had never seen the pink ribbons, heard the calls for self-examinations or witnessed the marathons to raise money for a cure.

Would you know that cancer was lethal? Would you know that early detection was key to survival? Would you understand that talking about it could literally save lives? And even if you did know, suppose you also knew that if anyone was aware you were ill, your daughters’ chances for a good marriage could be significantly lowered (a terrible fate in your community)? Three major studies in the past decade have revealed that haredi women have fewer incidences of breast cancer, but that more of them die from the disease than women in the general population.

Read more in the Jerusalem Post 

Shoshanna Keats Jaskoll

[vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” text_align=”left” box_shadow_on_row=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

A Response to Cross Currents

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]Cross Currents published a piece that we wrote about the importance of yoatzot halacha. They felt it necessary to temper the message by appending their own introduction and commentary. In an interesting turn of events, the grounds for their opposition actually strengthen what they attempt to discredit. Here are their arguments:

The first assertion is that there is no reason for women to feel uncomfortable when talking about intimate topics with their rabbis because there aren’t actually taboos about sexuality in the frum community. In today’s climate, frum women and men engage in an entirely open, healthy dialogue about women’s bodies. Tznius doesn’t hold the prominent role in religious circles that we imagine it does. Yet, a quick glance at the typical women’s curriculum, shiurim, tznius asifas, and women-free magazines, newspapers, and advertisements can attest to the veracity of this statement. While ideally, body shaming and all its social baggage would have no place in religious society, the situation on the ground tells a different story. Yoatzot are the heroes Gotham needs, not the heroes it deserves.

The argument continues. If, even after being reassured by a man that her socially inculcated feelings of awkwardness don’t actually exist, a woman still feels uncomfortable inviting men into intimate conversations about her menstrual cycle, she can put herself at ease with this simple solution: Remove herself from the discussion entirely. Conduct the entire conversation between the husband and the rabbi only. Practically speaking, this leads to broken telephone situations and runs the very real risk of getting the wrong answer to an accidentally misrepresented question. Some questions won’t be asked or answered and relevant details won’t be accurately relayed. On a deeper level, the removal of women from conversations about the most intimate details of their own bodies in favor of replacing them with men is absurd on a variety of levels.

The next argument is a familiar, recurring theme that inevitably arises in frum literature on the topic of women’s scholarship: A woman can never achieve the same caliber of scholarship as a man. While openly acknowledging that they have no knowledge of the yoetzet training program’s curriculum, rigor or scope, the Cross-Currents authors dismiss it out of hand. They balk at the notion that any woman would be as knowledgeable as they are in the intricacies of various halachic mechanisms. In other words, the Hipster Halachist is an expert in sugyas you probably never even heard of.  

But as one reader of the Cross Current’s blog points out, yoatzot do study Chavot Da’at and Sidrei Taharah, and spend many more hours studying the sugyot through the Gemara, Rishonim, Achronim and modern day poskim than their counterparts in current semicha programs for men. Instead of disparaging the “drips and drabs of rabbinic jargon learned in a sub-standard program,” as one commenter describes, the men at Cross Currents would have heard the following had they but bothered to ask a yoetzet: “There is a prerequisite level of learning to get into the Yoetzet Program,” Ora Derovan, a yoetzet, writes. “More women get turned away than get accepted. What we do learn, meaning all of Shas, Tur, Beit Yosef and Poskim and all of the Shulchan Aruch and Nosei Kelim on Hillchot Niddah, we learn on a very high level. A few days after I finished my final exam I happened to see the Rabbanut HaRashit’s exam. Not only did I know all the answers, I found it easy. I was asked harder questions in my yoetzet exam. We take a four hour long oral exam with four different Rabbis including Rav Henkin, and it is very thorough. Not everyone passes.” The irony is lost on an article that makes a case for extensive knowledge and research by basing its objection on absolutely nothing but assumptions and bias.

Of course, no criticism of women would be complete without the slippery slope argument. If we let women become educated and demonstrate their scholarship to others, what reckless things will they think up next? Tragically, women — even incredibly learned and dedicated ones — are not seen as assets to the religious community, but rather dangerous sleeper cells liable to turn mutinous at the next available opportunity. We do not trust women on an individual level nor on a sociological level. Over and again, the motives of women seeking education in Torah are questioned in ways men’s never are.

Finally, the clincher is “because gedolim don’t support it. And by default, the ones who do support it must not be true gedolim.” Putting aside the circular logic, the fact that the Yoetzet program is under the direction of Rabbi Yaacov Varhaftig, dean of the institute, and Rabbi Yehuda Herzl Henkin is not even considered. As stated by Miriam Friedman Weed, whose comments did not make it through the Cross Currents censors, [Cross Currents has] now taken upon itself the right to regulate which gedolei torah are ‘true’ gedolim of the highest echelon. And by implicitly in the article and explicitly in the comment, refusing to include either Rav Rabinovitz (who fully supports yoatzot) or Rav Henkin in this elite group, I think your statement borders on, if not crosses the line into, bezayon talmid chacham.

All in all, Cross Current’s response is telling, as is the fact that they needed to couch it in such statements at all. Women’s scholarship and expertise is seen as suspect. Even our article, a discussion of women by other women, is not permitted to stand alone without proper caveats. It does us all a disservice to passul dedicated, intelligent, God-fearing yoatzot based on flimsy arguments, ingrained biases or fear. Let’s embrace the sources of strength that women — and the religious community at large — have already proven to be effective, trustworthy and l’shem shamayim.

 

–Rachel Stomel and Shoshanna Jaskoll[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” text_align=”left” box_shadow_on_row=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text][vc_empty_space height=”1.2em” image_repeat=”no-repeat”][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” text_align=”left” box_shadow_on_row=”no”][vc_column width=”5/12″][vc_column_text]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column width=”7/12″][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” text_align=”left” box_shadow_on_row=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text][vc_empty_space height=”2.5em” image_repeat=”no-repeat”][vc_separator color=”#6abe94″ type=”normal” thickness=”3″ up_style=”px” down_style=”px”][/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” text_align=”left” box_shadow_on_row=”no”][vc_column][vc_column_text]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Search