Erasing Women: On Haredi Judaism’s Influence in Israel

If a person needed further evidence that religious discrimination is alive and well, even in religions with many secular members, one need only look at the Haredi community in Israel.  Many of us living here in the United States see how Christianity’s influence on our government and society is causing problems, including violations of the separation of church and state and the promotion of discrimination against various groups.  There is a similar problem occurring in Israel, where Haredi Jews influence the government and promote discrimination.  In an article in The Sydney Morning Herald, Ruth Pollard writes, “Israel’s ultra-Orthodox, or Haredi, community may be just a large (and growing) minority, but the impact of its deeply conservative values is being felt strongly in the country.”  She describes various ways in which the Haredi community discriminates, such as gender segregation, opposing and defacing advertisements which show women, and even insulting young girls going to school for being “immodestly dressed”.  There are also problems caused by vandalism of buildings, Haredi influence on the government on the issue of settlements, and the fact that Haredi are exempt from general educational requirements.[1]  There are some other bloggers, a couple of whom are mentioned in the acknowledgements, who have written blog entries about the harm done to women by the Haredi community in response to this article, and I thought I should write about it as well, as it is important.

Treating women as the enemy is feature common to many religions, including the Abrahamic faiths.  It serves to virtually erase women and betrays a belief that women are not equally human — a belief that when making decisions, the effects on women should be disregarded.  The holy books of these religions address men and instruct them concerning the rules they should follow and the rules they should impose on others, including women.  Upon reading these texts, it becomes apparent that females are seen as property, as slaves, as subordinate to males rather than equal members of a society.  There are various ways, some of which are discussed in the article, in which these discriminatory beliefs are put into practice.

These religious beliefs encourage people to obsess over the amount of a female’s skin that is uncovered.  The way a woman is dressed receives lot of attention, and telling her what to wear is considered appropriate.  These clothing requirements are based, not on what she wants to wear or on other reasonable considerations (e.g. comfort, safety, appropriateness for certain tasks), but based on the idea that certain types of dress are a sign of virtue.  Women are taught that they should expect (and deserve) insults and attacks if they don’t follow the religion’s dress code.  Despite the claims made about religion being a source of meaning and morality, the outrageous offense that is taken at the sight of uncovered skin indicates a worldview that is shallow beyond measure.  It actually teaches people to judge a woman’s morality based on what she is wearing and to excuses immoral attacks on women on the basis of clothing.

Gender segregation teaches people to feel uncomfortable interacting with those of a different gender and to automatically be suspicious of “immoral” actions if the rules of segregation are broken.  What others in the community think of a relationship is considered more important than the autonomy of the people in the relationship.  Similar to the rules about clothing, this segregation actually teaches immorality in the guise of morality.  Rather than teaching people to treat others with respect, these ideologies teach that a person’s life and the details of their relationships with others should be based on dictates from a few people who have decided that they know the true word of the Almighty.

The exemption from educational requirements serves to exacerbate the problem, with children receiving religious indoctrination in the place of secular education, in order to propagate the religious beliefs down the generations.  Great attempts are made to preserve old ideas and place barricades around people’s minds, to prevent ideas of secularism and equality from entering and gaining favor.   There is suspicion of the secular, an insistence that secular society is a threat to the religion being defended.  This is doubly ironic:  First, because it is due to secularism that members of various religions, including those who are in the minority, are able to practice their religions without being persecuted.  Second, because in the Hebrew Bible God treats everyone, including his Chosen People, horribly.  It is not secularism that is insulting, but rather the immorality that is recommended by God, and which is carried out by the most fundamentalist members of various faiths.

It isn’t surprising to me that the most ultra-Orthodox group within Judaism treats women badly, because it is in fact a tenant of their religion.  It is difficult to ignore the parts of scripture which mandate discriminatory rules, because they are prevalent throughout the Hebrew Bible.  There are many other people in Israel, of course, who do not agree with the Haredi.  There are Jews who are members of different denominations and those who are secular.  The Haredi, however, have scriptural support for their actions.  Therein lies the problem:  Though there are many religious people who favor equality and secularism, it is difficult to find a way to reconcile these good ideas with the bad ideas in religion.  If someone believes that a certain book should be followed unquestioningly, and that book advocates discrimination, then it’s difficult to convince them to stop discriminating without also convincing them that the book is incorrect on at least some matters.

Is there hope in such a situation?

The problem here is the worldview.  Worldviews based on obedience and fear, rather than equality and rights, lead to horrible discriminatory actions like this.  Worldviews which value tradition over thought, sacred texts over reality, and God over humanity lead to abuses like this — and that is why I cannot believe, not even for a second, that equality and respect are compatible with the most orthodox, fundamentalist readings of scripture.

Still, I tend to be hopeful for humanity.  Although I believe that the contents of scripture are discriminatory, I also believe it is possible to promote equal rights successfully.  Any efforts to promote equal rights for women, though, must address the religious contribution to discrimination.  Though it is not the only factor, it is one of them — and it’s one that is defended and protected from criticism even by those who actually don’t practice most of its teachings.  Those teachings need to be brought to light in order for people to contrast them with reality.  Hopefully, more people will realize that women should be treated as fellow human beings, according to the reality in front of their eyes, rather than obeying ideologies which contradict reality.

#

Related Reading and Acknowledgements

I found Pollard’s article via an entry by Ophelia Benson at Butterflies and Wheels.[2]  Much thanks to her for writing about the way women are treated in religion, a topic which she frequently addresses on her blog.

Adam Lee’s Religion Imprisons Women is worth reading as are his previous blog entries on this topic, some of which he links to in this entry.[3]  He’s written often about the treatment of women in religion an also specifically about the Haredim.

---

References

[1] Pollard, Ruth.  When women and girls are the enemy.  Posted on 21 November 2011 at The Sydney Morning Herald.  Retrieved on 9 December 2011 from http://www.smh.com.au/world/when-women-and-girls-are-the-enemy-20111118-1nn4d.html.

[This article was first published in Saturday’s News Review section of The Sydney Morning Herald.]

[2] Benson, Ophelia.  Deface them.  Posted on 19 November 2011 at Butterflies and Wheels.  Retrieved on 28 November 2011 from http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2011/11/deface-them/.

[3] Lee, Adam.  Religion Imprisons Women.  Posted on 28 November 2011 at Daylight Atheism.  Retrieved on 28 November 2011 from http://bigthink.com/ideas/41278.

Two Mistakes, Similarities Between Christianity and Islam, and the Potential for Religious Reform: three comments I wrote on an entry at Choice in Dying

Eric MacDonald of Choice in Dying[1] recently posted an entry[2] that was a response to Kimberly Winston’s article ‘New Atheists’ Emerge From 9/11.[3]  I wrote some comments on his blog entry which I decided to post here, because I think that I expressed in them some ideas that have been on my mind.  The part about reinterpreting vs. ignoring holy books in the third comment (#16) is especially something that I wanted to express.  (The comments below are as I wrote them except for two minor changes to correct typographical errors.)

Comment #1 (29 August 2011 at 19:29)[4]

As you implied, Winston doesn’t acknowledge that some of the very vocal criticism of religion is a response to actual extreme actions taken by religious groups, which is a common thing I’ve seen in other articles as well.  It almost seems to be taken as a given that atheists’ criticism is too harsh, extreme, etc. by default.

About the Islam issue, I think Winston makes another very common mistake:  Not differentiating between discrimination against Muslims and valid criticism of Islam.  I’ve seen both coming from atheists (as well as religious people).  When I was a little kid, I disagreed with things in Islam, but I would look around and see that there were too sides who were most vocal:  (1) those who defended Islam and (2) those who advocated discrimination against Muslims.  One of the things that has given me some hope recently is finding that, although there are those who advocate discrimination against Muslims, there are also those who have some valid criticisms to make.  Attempts to lump together the actual bigots and the critics downplays the seriousness of both the discrimination against Muslims as well as the horrible problems within Islam, resulting in a situation in which both remain improperly addressed.

Comment #7 (29 August 2011 at 20:27)[5]

[Note:  The second part of this comment was a response to comment #2 by tildeb.[6]]

Just wanted to comment on the whole Christianity vs. Islam issue.  Upon leaving Islam, I actually continued believing in God for a few years and considered Christianity.  Then, I realized that there were too many similarities:  that the good things I’d heard about Christianity compared to Islam were a result of ignoring the Bible — not the result of the Bible being better than the Qur’an on issues like science, equal rights, and so on.  I realized the difference was a matter of Christianity being affected, over the long years, by secularism while Islam still has to undergo that — not a matter of some difference that made Islam inherently worse.

@tildeb:  I always had the impression that “fundamentalist” referred to the adherence to certain strict interpretations of a religion; I didn’t think it necessarily implied that the fundamentalists are small in number.  Also, while I do think that fundamentalism is more “mainstream” in Islam, compared to other faiths, I do think there is room for acknowledging that it is by no means universal.

Comment #16 (30 August 2011 at 10:32)[7]

[Note:  Most of the following comment was written in response to comment #11 by Eric MacDonald, in which he asked for my views about the impact of Qur’anic passages which claim divine authorship on the potential for reform in Islam.  He also mentioned the issue of whether there is enough time for Islam to become modernized.[8]  The small section at the end was a response to comment #15 by Deen, who was responding to a quote of Omid Safi from Winston’s article.[9]  Safi said, “They direct much of their venom against Muslims, and I have seen some of their material used by Islamophobes.”[10]]

@Eric MacDonald:  I should say, first of all, I very much enjoy your blog.  Thanks very much for responding.

When making my comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an, I was referring moreso to the ways in which the books are wrong in areas like science, equal rights, and so on.

The reason I doubt that the Qur’an plainly saying it’s literally the word of God will prevent at least some Muslims from being more moderate, compared to Christians, is for two reasons.  (1) There are some passages, as you wrote, which are interpreted to mean that the message in the Bible is from God and other passages that say not to remove or add to it.  (2) Many people say they believe that their holy book is the word of God while not really following it.  Since the Qur’an, according to many, has to be read in Arabic, I wonder how many Muslims believe it’s the word of God because they read it in the Qur’an and how many believe it for similar reasons that Christians believe the Bible is the word of God, due to the tradition in the religion.  (Personally, I learned to read the Qur’an in Arabic, but never knew what it said until recently when I started reading an English translation.  I read a book by Irshad Manji called “The Trouble with Islam Today” in which she says she had a similar experience and has heard from many other Muslims who don’t even understand what their own holy book says.)

One thing I have often wondered about, when considering how likely it is that Islam can be reformed, is this:  Do the religious people who accept science, support secularism, believe in equal rights, etc. do so because they’ve come up with a different interpretation of their holy book or because they are ignoring what it says?  My impression (and I could be mistaken) is that there are some religious leaders, religious studies people, and studious believers who may put in the time to come up with some different interpretation, but the vast majority of people just ignore what the book says.  The people in this latter group will sometimes just quote a different nicer passage in response to criticism about a horrible passage, and don’t really have an alternative explanation for the horrible passage.

As you wrote, there is still a problem with Christianity despite it having gone through the Enlightenment, and I think this is a problem that will be faced by Islam as well, if it does get to that point.  (Muslim apologetics and Christian apologetics sound frustratingly similar.)  Because of the actual contents of these books, while I think there is hope for reform, I always doubt to what extent it can be achieved and if fundamentalism will continue to come up, the way Christian fundamentalism keeps coming up even after people proclaim the “death of God”.  People don’t always read the whole book, but they’ll hear small sections of it and feel that those parts must be defended and must be literally true.

There is a time constraint now that there wasn’t in the past, when considering advanced weaponry and its ability to do great amounts of damage.  What frightens me about that is the fact that it only takes a few people to cause large amounts of devastation.  Whereas before, the leader of a country would have to gather up an army, now one weapon can cause great devastation.  This is one of the reasons why the continued fundamentalism you mentioned is a problem; even if the vast majority of people of all different religious beliefs and other ideologies become moderate, even just a few can cause great devastation.

@Deen:  “And Christians complain that atheists only target Christians and virtually never Muslims, because Christians are easier or safer targets. Which is it?”

Good point.

#

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Eric MacDonald for writing the blog entry and responding to my comments.  Thanks to Kimberly Winston for writing the article that prompted that blog entry and these comments.

---

References

[1] Choice in Dying can be found at http://choiceindying.com.

[2] MacDonald, Eric.  ‘New Atheists’ Emerge From 9/11.  Posted on 29 August 2011 at Choice in Dying.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/.

[3] Winston, Kimberly.  ‘New Atheists’ Emerge From 9/11.  Posted on 26 August 2011 at The Huffington Post.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/26/911-new-atheist_n_938356.html.

Winston’s article was also posted at Religion News Service under the title 9/11 gave birth to aggressive, unapologetic, ‘New Atheists’.  It can be found at http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/rnstext/911_gave_birth_to_assertive_unapologetic_new_atheists/

[4] Sharmin, Ani.  Comment #1, posted on 29 August 2011 at 19:29.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/#comment-5837.

[5] Sharmin, Ani.  Comment #7, posted on 29 August 2011 at 20:27.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/#comment-5843.

[6] tildeb.  Comment #2, posted on 29 August 2011 at 19:55.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/#comment-5838.

[7] Sharmin, Ani.  Comment #16, posted on 30 August 2011 at 10:32.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/#comment-5870.

[8] MacDonald, Eric.  Comment #11, posted on 29 August 2011 at 21:47.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/#comment-5852.

[9] Deen.  Comment #15, posted on 30 August 2011 at 07:36.  Retrieved on 30 August 2011 from http://choiceindying.com/2011/08/29/new-atheists-emerge-from-911/#comment-5867.

[10] Same as #3

The Dream: On the Anniversary of Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” Speech

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous I Have a Dream speech on August 28, 1963, and today is the anniversary of this historic event.[1] This speech has become an important part of our history, with words from which we draw hope and inspiration when we ourselves seek to improve our country and our world.

There is hope in his words, a hope that America can live up to the promises of freedom and justice on which it was founded, as he says, “But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we’ve come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.”  Being a part of a movement for equal rights requires a hope that justice can be achieved — that there is actually good to be found in the world and in one’s fellow human beings.  The great ideas of the past, those articulated by our ancestors, inspire us and we hope that those ideas will apply in the future to everyone and not just a few.  We hope that our fellow human beings will look upon those who are different from them and know that, despite the differences, we are all human.

There is perseverance in his words combining the knowledge that the fight will be long and difficult with the belief that it will all be worthwhile.

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating: “For Whites Only.” We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until “justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.”

It can seem at some times, as it must have to those who struggled so valiantly against the segregation and discrimination during the time of Rev. Dr. King, that the battle is everlasting and ongoing and that there are so many obstacles to overcome.  Yet, they knew that they could not live with such injustice, and so they knew that no matter how long it took, the fight was worth it.  Rev. Dr. King asserts that nothing less than justice and righteousness will be enough — that living with less than this is not acceptable, and that it is important to keep fighting on until that goal is met.  This struggle and perseverance is shared by anyone who is in any such movement for equal rights, as the process of changing human minds can take time, and it is why his words mean so much to us today, offering encouragement from a person who kept working for equality even when it was difficult.

There is a dream for the future in his words, the familiar excerpt describing a future in which we would love to live and for which we hope.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of “interposition” and “nullification” — one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

His speech, and this section of it especially, is often quoted and often looked upon as a great moment in our nation’s history, as his words echo down the years in our minds and hearts today.  We look forward, as did those who were there that day, to a better future for all.  We look at all that has been accomplished thanks to their hard work and hope that we are contributing in any way that we can.  Even if we never see the perfect future that is envisioned, we know that Rev. Dr. King and the many who worked with him contributed greatly to moving humanity in the right direction and we hope that our species will continue to move forward, getting closer to the day when we all consider each other “sisters and brothers”.

While listening to a recording of the speech, one can hear the crowd clapping and cheering, motivated by his moving words.  Ultimately, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (though he was just a human) and this speech (though it was only a few minutes in the vast history of time and located in one tiny place in the vast universe) remind us of so much more.  They remind us of all of the anonymous people who were standing there that day and of all the people throughout human history who have likewise stood up to injustice.  Ultimately, such movements and struggles for justice are not about any one person or any few minutes of an important day, but about all of those people whose lives are affected daily by discrimination and whose lives are made better when justice prevails.

It is in them and in their hopes for a better future that the dream lives.

---

References

[1] King, Jr., Martin Luther.  I Have a Dream speech from August 28, 1963.  Text and audio found on American Rhetoric.  Retrieved on August 27, 2010 from http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm.