Crossing Marcy

Humanity 101! Beautiful!

Very interesting follow-up post!

I was wondering, Melanie, if you could reflect on this: why Chassidim? Is it because you live near them, but if you lived near [fill in blank; another mysterious community] you would be interested in them?

In other words, is your interest more something about you or about them?

I think it’s both… lol but I don’t know if there’s much particularly interesting about me.

That being said, I do think people’s interests generally speak to something deeper inside of them, and my interest in the Hasidic community is based on my own experiences in life and the ways in which Orthodox Judaism speaks to things that are important/unrequited/missing/whatever to me…

I am taken with Hasidic customs/rituals and the sense of family and community, with the dedication to religion and spirtuality, the Eastern European culture, the sense of duality with growing up speaking Yiddish in an English speaking America (well, Brooklyn is more lingustically diverse but you know what I mean…)… I am interested in Judaism from both an intellectual and emotional standpoint, and drawn much more to Orthdox Judaism because it is such a concentrated version of the religion. My interest is not random, no. But yes, this all happened because I moved a couple blocks away from Williamsburg.

Oh but yeah, there are other cultures I am interested in (for example I speak Russian and studied Russian history so I spend a lot of time in Brighton Beach – double your pleasure there, lol, because they’re also Jewish!)… so while Hasidic culture and people are most interesting to me above all, there are other cultures I am into too, and I explore lots of different types of neighborhoods and people in Brooklyn on my bike on a regular basis.

Ha. You already know everything about yourself, so you think you’re not so interesting.

Thanks for the quick reply.

I was censored

CDIDBE — Sorry, your comment was gratuitously insulting and somewhat inane. Please keep it more respectful next time.

Melanie,good post.
Whats your thought on Hasidic women’s dressing do you find them good looking? Do you find Hasidic men sexy? Or those are non issues?

Answered the question like a real jew with another question, why not?

However in your case I do think its actually an appropriate answer, as you write so eloquently, just because certain people have a prejudice against something makes it even more attractive, hey lemme check it out, WHY NOT?

ChasidimButIDon’tBelieve’Em, I saw your comment before it was deleted and also thought it was a bit… well, irrelevent at best. Thanks Shulem.

HAHA I have always answered questions with questions guys geeeez you’re not the only ones to do that! And thank you Mr. Berkley.

Sol, that’s an interesting question. I am interested intellectually in desire, love, etc – it was actually part of what I studied in grad school believe it or not! I think it’s not unreasonable to become physically attracted to members of a culture you are interested in – in a way, it’s intensely loving to do so. For the sake of my inbox and keeping things appropriate, let me just say that I that I think Hasidic women, particularly the ones in Williamsburg, are incredibly classy; and that tefilin is probably the coolest thing I have ever encountered. But yeah, it’s really neither here nor there in terms of this article.

Melanie,if memory serves me i recall an episode on sex in the city where one of the cast members had an art gallery in Brooklyn and when a Hasidc guy walks in she couldn’t resist the temptation.Do you recall that scene?That was reason for my asking thinking that some may find it interesting to find out that Hasidic men are just as human as the rest of society.I suppose many of them are open to the possibility of being intimate with a “shiksa”.You believe the women would sleep with a goy?

Goy means a gentile or shigetz

I have never seen Sex and the City… but I don’t think I can answer for droves of ladies what they’d do, and I don’t think it would be a good idea for me to answer that here either. But I can say that one of my interests in life in general in terms of being in connection with other human beings is to remember that we are all humans and when it comes down to it, we’re all essentially the same. We all love, desire, hurt, fear, etc etc… so in that way, it would be slighting to eliminate possibilities for relatedness based on someone’s social or cultural background. But then, it certainly is the norm to draw such staunch boundaries (I am goyish/shikseh/whatever you are Chasidish/frum/whatever), and that is the gap I would like to see bridged through friendship and association.

Agreed.
BTW,on your previous post you mentioned your email add i tried emailing you and it didn’t go through.There are certain topics that i would like to discuss which i think would be of interest to you.
If you wish to email me please do @Davesdave176@yahoo.com

Dear Shiksa lady. There are certain topics I wish to discuss with you that I am sure will be to our mutual benefit. Please email me at mistypedemailaddress@yahoo.com. Signed, Creepy and Clueless Hasid

/end mockery

Melanie,im sorry that you took me the wrong way its sad that you would think that i meant “mutual benefits”.Again,that’s not me.

Anyone is welcome to email me, GetaGrip. Trust me to have discretion and respond accordingly.

GetaGrip@ what?

Oy Vey Judith Butler, noch der tzu (on top of that) is an intellectual fraud and anti-Semite. Not even going to address the point further. A couple of things going on in here, and please forgive my textual analysis as the choice for a personal narrative but I think it sheds some light.

The shiksa stance is really a sexual stance on multiple levels. The writers and the readers, if you have not (and I think you have because there seems to be some background in current critical nonsense that passes as thought in the academy) picked it up.

By asserting outsider, the implication is also innocent, unaware, curious. Now as someone who I suspect has read “Sexual Textual Politics” that stance really does not exist, does it? So what’s left—bias and maybe even a little power game? To a certain extent all curiosity is biased. But from a frum woman’s perspective it is a bit more. It has to do a bit with language. The woman that comes to clean the house where I am from was called ” A Goyta”. The word shika and the male counter part Shagitz has an undercurrent of the sexual. If a man for example does something vulgar or sexual he is called a shagitz. He acted out of ideal frum character. The person he did it with is called a shikash. See Philip Roth.

There is a whole quiet kind of talk that occasional (not often) passes between frum women of a certain age who have husbands that have to go outside the community for work or something. Some try to find out how many shiktsas in the office. My grandmother would call a large piece of jewelry that a businessman macher gifted to his wife a shiksa–because he got caught screwing a shiksa. Now to be honest I don’t get the erotic fascination from either side.

Personaly I find nothing sexist in shomer negaia I find it shrewd and brilliant but I am biased as I live the life. While I do find considering it sexist to be condescending and unimaginative. What is sexist is the emphasis put on men on here—so “heteronormative” to borrow the clumsily jargon of the flabby discipline.

The mocking tone—“his piety in tact.” Begs the question is piety brittle—Maybe? But so what? He made eye contact, he didn’t make eye contact. So, how is power constructed in this exchange or non-exchange? I would venture to say that he could have, as DH Lawrence, said had you to the moon and his piety would be unchanged—call me cynical. For all you know he did have you, you just weren’t there. What I am saying is that when something even leans and tends toward mocking—well that branch can bend both ways. so he copped a look, why is that such a turn on. I am not asking why—I suspect either it is. This piece is sexist—men, men, men. And at the same asserts the opposite. I am not sure why ignorance is a danger—it is risky to not know Chassidim? I certainly would not find the converse true—frum people need to know goyim? If they want to they can and if they don’t that is okay too, Yet much of the premise here is that we are all the same “deep down” that means you are knowing more of yourself just in a different outfit.

B.A., I don’t agree with your assessments of Judith Butler or gender studies, but I also don’t think Judith Butler or her discipline of philosophy is infallible. I really like Precarious Life because it isn’t about gender but rather politics – importantly, she is certainly not anti-Semitic – you do know Judith Butler is Jewish, yes? and that her views are somewhat similar to Hasidic anti-Israel stances?

Regardless, I am unsure of exactly where you’re going with your overall comment. I don’t disagree with most of your sentiments, but I also don’t find them in opposition to my own sentiments because they come from a different standpoint. Like you, I don’t find shomer negieh to be sexist – but many secular people, especially secular women, understand it that way because they don’t know why it takes place. I understand because I am closer to Hasidic culture than most secular people. But I am still obviously not Jewish.

Though I can see how using the term shikseh might imply as much, my piece is not meant to be about men. I believe I give an example of a man – shomer negieh – and then an example of a woman – the difference in dress between a goyish and a from woman. However, my experiences with the Hasidic community are definitely lopsided, I know MANY more men, and would like to know more women. I only have a small handful of female Hasidic/OTD friends. Add to this that men are much more likely to be run into in public and therefore interacted with accidentally, and it makes sense that you might think I’m talking just of men. And yes, I agree, shikseh is a sexually loaded word that speaks to, as you say, heteronormativity – but I think reducing it to just sexuality is also simplifying that identity. It’s like saying all a frum woman is, is a wife/mother (with no other identity outside of sexuality). I didn’t use “shikseh” to describe myself until someone I met at Thursday Night Chulent suggested that it can be reappropriated outside of that simplistic sexually-charged definition, which is an idea I really like.

Ignorance is dangerous because things like genocide come from ignorance… like that quote from Martin Niemöller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came…). I don’t entirely understand your last sentiment, but I do agree that if people want to know each other they should, and if they don’t that’s okay too. The point is that prohibition is dangerous because it limits the possibility of growth, of safety, etc. And I certainly did not mean for the comment about piety to be mocking – the overall tone of this piece is light, so there is that.

Thanks for your comments. I’d be curious to know how you arrived at your opinions on Judith Butler.

So you know, I am a fan of John Lennon of course, who isn’t. And I have respect for the elusive historical Jesus, and what an undergrad professor of mine once referred to as Jesus’s “radical inclusivity.” But we all know how both those guys ended up, so I am a little cynical about claims that All We Need is Love, and how we oughta Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself. So I am a bit skeptical about this piece.

I would think if you live really close to Hassidim it would be fairly natural to be curious about their way of life. What I don’t get is the love talk and the whole you and i are tied into we and whatnot.

Gabriella, what don’t you get about it? Maybe it’s just a difference of opinion. I do think love is the way to do, and I’m not cynical about it, even in the face of adversity. But that’s just my take.

Melanie
I read your previous article and this one here, regarding your question of why why why, IMHO, I strongly feel and believe based on my slight interactions with our goyishe neighbors, that all of them, who all seem to be very kind, nice and accommodating, have the same craving and curiosity to connect with us and understand our ways and customs better, every human grpup with basic intelligent skill is naturally curious to understand an interesting phenomena which is taking place around their corner, however they all feel an apprehension to approach this group which is known for its strict and sometimes fanatic customs and tendencies, in other words the fear of rejection keeps’em at bay, so its its really not only you, however, you jumped right into the lions den, either because you found this outlet which is more for the fringe and open minded, or simply because your desire and will to understand was much stronger.
best of luck in your future explorations and observations of us :). If you’s like to go out for a cup of coffee email me eli.waldman@yahoo.com

Yes I know Butler is a Jew.Oh yes she is a major anti-Semite. She has stated her positions for a long time, although the past week or so she is trying to back track. I do not think she is what people call a self hating jew, no she is a vile anti-semite. I have nothing but contempt for her. She is ignorant–really. Popular yes, but she is a fashion a trend. How did I read my conclusions about her? What do you mean? Which gender studies program did I graduate from–none. I humbly submit I only read her and found it a load of crap and I realize if that carries no currency. Yes I know the quote–it does not resonate with me. The notion that ignorance causes genocide I can’t even categorize. The Germans did not need to lean more about the Jews. They knew and the hated, ditto for the Poles, the Hungarians, the French–so while that sounds good it is not true. The hutu are not ignorant of the Tutsi–hate is a thing unto itself and does deserve some respect as such. Pretending that if we all learn about each other will make it all better is a dangerous notion–very American.

I question this; ” . . . suggested that it can be reappropriated outside of that simplistic sexually-charged definition, which is an idea I really like.” It is not like a stage name–that you can take for yourself. We don’t get to change other peoples words or language–it is an attempt to co-op and oppress–more of the allsamey. Yes I get the tone is light and sexual. I’ll be honest–you know that song by Loretta Lynn–Fist City? Reading the flirtatious stuff makes me think of it. Now I doubt any OTD women would dare admit this because some are invested in the more secular open view of things . Me, If I saw some shikas looking at my husband or my friends husband–oh boy she better turn tail and run–short and halter top–

Nice piece, and kudos to you for being so open minded, but I strongly disagree that, “in the end, we’re not all that different.” Seriously ultra-orthodox Jews are very, very different from the average 21st-century progressive person. They see the world fundamentally differently. Thinking that they’re not so different is laughably naïve. I’d submit that the wonderful people you’ve corresponded with and made friendships with are the very small exception to the overwhelming rule.

I get where this desire to positively view such a foreign culture comes from (and when it isn’t rooted in patronizing or guilt, I can even respect it), but it bothers me when this desire is misguidedly used to paper over the very sharp tensions that exist between certain cultures and which are most important for people to be aware of.

They are different. Very much so.

B.A., it sounds like you have a lot of anger that goes beyond a limited understanding of Judith Butler’s poltiical stances. I do have to say that one of the things I find difficult about connecting with some members of the ultra-Orthodox community is the culturally instilled contempt for that which is different, forbidden, or something that is outside of the ultra-Orthodox realm of understanding. I am coming from a place of love and acceptance, so it is difficult for me to connect with you coming from a place of anger. I don’t agree with a vast majority of politics in the ultra-Orthodox community (esp with issues of sexuality), but I believe that a loving approach is the best way to create alliances, even in spite of our differences of opinion.

Eli, thanks. Feel free to email me – I can be a bit slow to the draw in initiating emails. My email address is in the comments of my other article on Unpious.

The Hedyot, I actually completely agree with you. Cultures and customs are totally different, and even the difference may be dangerous. Like I said, I don’t think we should ignore those differences/problems – however I do believe that at the most basic level, human beings, outside of cultural and social constitution, are essentially the same… and essentially good.

The Hedyot,

Wouldn’t you agree that although culturally and community wise, thru our customs and stringent rules in life, we indeed are different and antithetical to 21century life, however, humanely, we are all humans with hearts and kindness who can interact even with a goyishe Melanie when it comes to a one-on-one?
I assume Melanie’s intention was that in the end we are all human, after scraping away the facade and purim costume we constantly have on.

Yes, I suppose that if you take away all the cultural and social influences that affect us and make us who we are, we might indeed all be very similar.

Now can we get back to reality, please?

I don’t know if the commenter BA is angry since I’ve never read Judith Buttler. But if u can’t be loving and connect to someone you claim is angry, then clearly love doesn’t always cut it.

I suppose if you were writing a piece on how you have interacted with the hasidim near you, and what you have learned or enjoyed or found difficult from your friendships with them, that would be interesting. But this whole higher mission of love throws the whole piece off for me.

Maybe I am out if touch because I am not in NY. Been there only once and it was for a non-Jewish wedding. So I have no idea if over there in NY there is such a heightened tension between Hasidim and non Jews that you becoming friends with Hasidim is such a labor of love. It seems an over the top perspective to me.

Melanie, Not anger. You define it as such I do not. I just state what I think. And I think it strongly. I have no problem calling out an Anti-semite. You may mistake my lack of tact with anger. I am tactless. One of those traits I am still working on. Anger is what I feel when the kids run through the house with mud on their shoes and break a bowl I got as a wedding gift. What I feel for Bulter is more a low grade contempt– I could not even imagine a conversation with her–missive maybe which is based on the fact that I just find what I have read a load of crap. Which is a conclusion I can reach. Maybe it is a frum conclusion. Is that what you mean by–limited? or do you mean I did not study her in a classroom so my conclusion are invalid? I can’t speak for all frum or ultra Orthodox but I am not sure it is just cultural. It could be a difference in values. Butler is aligned with several terrorist organizations. Maybe it is naievtee or folly, she can’t claim ignorance. The rich, elte uber Left,have aligned themselves with monsters over and again.
Stalin, Mao. Oh Foucault–who decided to infect as many men with AIDs as possible before he died as a philosophical gesture. Odd, for example, how Susan Sontag so loved Cuba, but did not move there and live.Had she done so, she would have been in jail for either expressing criticism of government or her homosexuality or both. De Man, he was fun. So Ms Butler is not an original. She is not similar to a Chassidic stance–right she is waiting for Moshiach for the state of Israel to be okay. This is why “allsamey” is dangerous. You think Butler like Chassidim. And most of those really loud anti Israel folks–are not Chassidic. Although they may look it.

Not everything is a ven diagram. Sometimes with ideas, values, there isn’t a common ground–a shared or mutual space. And that is okay. I mean Oprah can say “we are all the same underneath” but I don’t have to agree with Oprah do I. That’s group think–funny how frummies are always accused of group think. Although if some want to they can. Much of the big ideas–the ones I suspect you are not getting from friends and neighbors about Orthodox from thought, philosophy are very complicated and really radical–not classroom, academic radical but the real deal. It is for some the engine that drives the entire machine. The notion of creating alliances despite difference strikes me as very American–not something I can relate to. Why? We are different. Why can’t people respect that without mocking or wanting us to be like them. The last thing I want in the world is for my daughter my family to be like goyim. I know that may sound bad to you but I do not expect you to want to be like me–and see that’s okay, that’s respectful.

BA – is there anyone you don’t hate? Gay people, feminists, intellectuals, those uncivilised goyim who lack special meshamas like The Chosen…

I horn you shun modern medicine, technology, and anything that the goyishe world has created. I know you’re obviously accessing the internet using magic tefillin wrapped around a telephone.

It’s ok to admit that certain things confuse you. Heterocentric norms are your entire existence sweetheart. The Hutu and Tutsi were, and are, the same people. Ignorance started their feud, the ignorance of one man who wrote a book. about them. A man who claimed that one group was superior because their faces and heads were different, so they were superior less like animals. He thought the purer, superior tribe should not mix with the others, should especially not breed with them as it would infect their bloodline. Sound familiar? That’s how years of genocide were started, one group’s sudden delusion of superiority.

If haredim and Hassidim are radicals, then Jane Austen was a Riot Grrl, and cholent is Haute Cuisine,

B.A.

As I was reading your comments, I couldn’t help but think, “Wait, isn’t this the guy that implied in his review of “I Am Forbidden” that women can only serve as storytellers and not really construct complex narratives?”

So I did a little research. Yep, here are some of your quotes about women, and specifically, women and feminist writers, in all their glory:

Nu, I have a hearty distaste for books aimed at secular readers that fetishize practices on the page and then attract the rag tag collection of Judith Butler acolytes who are particularly ignorant but amazingly confident. Those assembly line (ignorant with authority) academic feminists who think that they are remotely equal to the task of understanding women in the Orthodox community. Well, fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

“Or, 2. In certain types of novels, first and foremost novels by women and very much about women, structure is not considered as strongly as narrative—women tell stories, men construct them. Reviews of novels by women often focus on character and plot rather than the really hard stuff of a novel.”

First of all, as a woman writer myself, I’d like to simply say, “ouch! THAT sucked,” but then I’d just be telling a story, and I’d like to prove I’m articulate and perhaps even capable of constructing an argument that is based in fact, reason, and certainty, which, as you may or may not be aware, women are perfectly capable of accomplishing.

Now, if you’ve read my comment on Melanie’s previous article, you’ll know that while I do love a good rant, I also try to fight fair. I was so incensed by your comments, B.A., in response to Markovitz’s writing and the role of women writers in general, that I said to myself, “Better walk away, Egg. Don’t get on the Internet and say something you’ll regret.” Well, I tried that, and it didn’t work, so here I am, living up to the stereotypes of both the crazy woman and angry feminist, and I truly hope I can do them both justice in your eyes.

Let’s examine some of the awesome women writers on this site and others. Why not start with what we know, right? FreiFem, when she was blogging, somehow managed to simultaneously combine personal narrative (AKA “storytelling”) with critical thinking and well-constructed arguments. Guess that comes with that Ivy League Degree! Then there’s my homegirl (although we’ve never met, I’ll consider her as such) Ms. Shpitzle, who uses mixed-media and cartoons to construct social criticism in a way that is both lighthearted and, in the commentary, extremely articulate. There are countless other women on this site and beyond that have proven they are not just “storytellers.” And just to back myself up even further here, let’s talk about one of my favorite Yiddish authors, Mr. Sholem Aleichem, commonly known as the greatest STORYTELLER of all time in the shtetl world. I’m midway through “Tevye’s Daughters” and “Wandering Stars” is a personal fave, so I have to agree with the assessment. His writing is about telling fabulous stories centered around characters and the messes they get themselves into. While his prose style may be deceptively simple at first glance, I think most people see him, and why not throw on the pile SY Agnon, as storytellers, and they’re men! Don’t sell yourselves short, either, gentlemen. You can write fun, enjoyable stories that you heard from zaidy back in the day! We don’t all have to be Jonathan Franzens or Joan Didions.

Now, it is quite possible that in your original comment, B.A., you meant to state that it is the REVIEWERS of female-written literature that are at fault for painting women as storytellers as opposed to the really “first rate” novelists of the world. You’re welcome for giving you an easy out, by the way. Maybe I’ve shot myself in the foot here, but like I said, I try to play fair. In which case, apply my comments to the “reviewers” of female-written literature (be the topic feminism, story collections, or nonfiction). My views remain unchanged. But then you get on here and start trash-talking Judith Butler, Susan Sontag (who, hey look, there’s a quote from her on Yoram Kaniuk’s “Life on Sandpaper!”) so I kind of have to wonder if a more “off the hook” interpretation of your comment is really on the table. I’m not outright calling you a misogynist, because to me that’s on the same level of calling someone, well, an Anti-Semite, and I don’t make claims like that unless I’m absolutely certain of the fact.

Now, to address your accusation that secular outsiders are incapable of understanding the complex role of orthodox women, you should update yourself with the current feminist movement! If you look to the internet, literature, essays, and cultural criticisms and ideas about the evolution of feminism, I think you might be really pleasantly surprised. There is currently a whole new wave of feminists who are questioning the automatic assumption that women in stricter religious lifestyles of any denomination are there because of “force” or “oppression.” We seek to ensure that women who made an active and involved choice in defining their own set of religious beliefs and articulating them for themselves and following them because, simply, they make them feel happy and fulfilled, are treated fairly by fellow feminists. You’re right: in the past, women, particularly WASPY feminists, have been really tough on cultures outside of their own. We’re working hard to change that and to be more inclusive. And I think Melanie illustrates that perfectly in her desire, in previous posts and this one, to connect with and learn from contented Orthodox/Hasidic women. There have been some pretty awesome initiatives like the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance and a ton of smaller groups of women getting together to learn the Talmud. Women taking their own education, be it religious or secular, into their own hands? Now THAT’S what I like to see! Now, since this is Unpious, and not Binah, admittedly there are a lot of unhappy people – men and women alike! – in Hasidism, because they weren’t given the educational tools and the “real world” exposure to truly cultivate a personal set of beliefs and choices of their own. People on this site and others are working, actively, to change that. And whether you chose to remain religious or not, what is most crucial is a conscious choice – and that choice, and its right to be a fully informed one, is what modern feminists are fighting for. I’d urge you to reconsider your views, B.A., on outside and inside feminist involvement and interest. I think you’ll like what you find.

No Light. I do not see any hate–loath, hold in low esteem, contempt I critiqued Judith Butler. No confusion. Please show me where you get the idea that I am against any other than Judith Butler and some deeply phony feminism theory –the MacDonalds of current though–want fries with that? If people like it–fine. I don’t. Also fine. Where do I say a thing about intellectuals–not a bad word. Gays–uh what? I have not mentioned that at all. But you seemed to be on cliched roll–Please more say more–You forgot to accuse me of hating blacks, small children and old ladies–cripples too. Now, there you have all identities covered. Anyone we forgot?

I love technology I have a computer–love it. Re: modern medicine, I uses leaches mostly but when they die I go to a nice Jewish doctor. I would consider Jane Austen quite brilliant–I am not familiar with a Riot Girl but I suspect I am not missing much. I see that you don’t not even have to think–no though, good speak. What a luxury that must be. Please go back and read I make no comment about any intellectuals. In general I read. I make a decision based on the words on the page–not style, or fashion or what will win me friends .

No tefillin, magic or otherwise– I am a woman. Funny how you assumed I was male–you might want to reflect on that a bit. I am not confused. I came to a conclusion. You have no idea what my norms are, or are not. Which is neither here not there because you think in cliches and that is a realm of fashion not meaning and thought. But if you meant I have sex and get pregnant, yes sometimes that happens. I suppose there really is lais nehorah.

Egg,
First let me address your opening question: “ isn’t this the guy that implied in his review of “I Am Forbidden” that women can only serve as storytellers and not really construct complex narratives?” Yes that’s me. And I am not a guy. I hope that does not disappoint you. I do write and publish and at times people assume I am a man—interesting, from a feminist perspective, don’t you think?
I have made no criticism of any women writers on this site and you totally misread my piece on “Forbidden” I say the exact opposite –but you read what you wanted, laced with preconceived notions and bias. You missed my main point by a mile. Which is telling—jumped to conclusions I was indeed speaking of the ways women’s writing is reviewed. I do not need an easy way out—but thanks for the offer. Misogynist that’s a stretch given I am a woman but I will concede it as possible like a self-hating Jew. I just don’t “feel” it. Has the minds clamped shut so tightly that I have cultivated a set of beliefs. But you dismiss those because they are not the same as yours.
The Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance—to quote snoopy my mind reels with sarcastic replies. You mean the Barnard and NYU girls, all grown up. They are trolling for meaning or a dissertation topic. If they think serving themselves does the world of women good that’s okay if just a little delusional. As far as the “educational tools to live in the real world.” I happen to consider my world real, even if you don’t. Uhm, choice. You mean like should I have gone to Brown or Yale?
Melanie connects on the page with men, more men. I saw nothing to indicate she walked down the street to make connections with women. The whole thing was sexually charged—only peyos are like a G-sting.

I do not think this is a rage attack or that you should regret writing it. Maybe I have a set of balls on the page. BTW I can’t wait to tell the mikvah lady that people thought I was a man-hahaha. You do see the humor I hope, because I do. I hope that cleared some issues up for you. You comments really were very interesting.

Best B.A.

Egg, hey, what’s up? :))) Thanks for the back up. I do want to point out for the record, not that it exactly matters but before others draw conclusions, that I am in no way WASPy just because I am not Jewish and white. I know that’s not what you were saying but it is important. Also in addition to people in the mainstream academic feminist movement (who I do not generally identify with) taking more care to be culturally sensitive, many feminists are people of color and religious minorities to begin with.

B.A., I just want to point out that when Foucault died of AIDS in 1984, the disease was not called AIDS it was called GRID (“gay-related immune deficiency” – and of course we now know that this disease has nothing to do with sexual orientation) and people did not yet know how it was transmitted. He did not go around purposefully infecting people – that’s a very unfair and untrue thing to say, and given the historical context it makes no sense. Which demonstrates very well why I question your understanding of Judith Butler.

Additionally, I agree that I connect with more men, in life in general, and yes I use references to men in this article. I also have female friends including ones who are Hasidic. That this article isn’t about that means simply… that it’s not about interacting with Hasidic women. One thing I have found that is difficult is that most Hasidic women my age (29) are married with children. I am not married and do not have children, nor do I find children or marriage particularly interesting (just my personal preference) so it is sometimes difficult for me to have a lot in common with Hasidic women, and I have found that I connect better with men. I know it may be shocking, but this doesn’t mean I want to steal anyone’s husband. :/

I also just want to say that while I used Judith Butler in this piece, I am in no way committed to defending her indefinitely. I just like the quote, and some of her works. A lot of the time she also really annoys me with her elitist and inaccessible language. So there’s that, too.

But I think this discussion points out why it can be difficult for secular women and Hasidic women to connect… and while that makes me sad, it also makes me hopeful that this is in some way productive and working toward opening a dialog. I guess I just want to stress that secular women are not always the threat the “shikseh” stereotype makes them out to be. I have to smile when I think that everything really does always come down to sex… even when it’s a misunderstanding about intention.

Melanie,
Uneeded: “B.A., I just want to point out that when Foucault died of AIDS in 1984, the disease was not called AIDS it was called GRID (“gay-related immune deficiency” – and of course we now know that this disease has nothing to do with sexual orientation) and people did not yet know how it was transmitted. He did not go around purposefully infecting people – that’s a very unfair and untrue.”

Thanks for the background on Foucault but I know when he died and what he wrote–I was alive and reading and I know what AIDS was called. Yes the journal of Foucult studies has tried to gloss it over but I believe he knew and you can believe he didn’t. Free will is a lynch pin to frum thought. That is again a choice. I get to make. BTW I am not Chassidic, Yeshivish with a twist–Monsey, Lakewood.

You can look over the articles that came out after his death–through the late 80’s. It seems pretty clear. I think a British Journalist who I have forgotten the name has some pretty extensive articles, well researched. Anyway–interviews with his doctors, family, friends. Oh and some letters he wrote. Read his letters. What is stunning to me is that I have no doubt you have a hard time wrapping your mind around Orthodox beliefs and practice–it may appear as fairy tale. But you accept willingly a whole other fairy tale, that solid evidence shows otherwise. Why? Because you got a bigger fairy tale going on that does have documentation that pretty well refutes your assertion. My assertion lacks any PC gloss–but that does not make it wrong. Yours is fully vetted through all the PC channels, and that does not make it right. Its like this–John believes in G-d and Bill doesn’t–neither one of us can prove either to be wrong or right. Can’t be done. In this case its pretty well can as letters where left. Doctors statements. See your are all vested in a belief system–tied to it like a hitching post. Yet you would see me as constrained by a system. You are not free of a system–you just have never questioned it. I am older than you so I have had some more time.

That fact that women bore you–Not shocking. I saw that a mile away. So the men you know, your age are not married with children and thus more interesting. Or just more interesting with children too. A feminist bored by women and children. Not a surprise. I do not you as a threat–if anyone would be a threat it would be me and women like me to women like you because we do not bend to your conventions or values and have little real use for popular culture.For sure I do not think every comes down to sex. Some things come down to money in America. And in my world Religiosity, parenting and being a wife and writing.

Yes mainstream academic feminists embrace frum women–Frum women are included on a panel at every conference. What a brave new world it is.

B.A., I don’t understand where you’re going with your comments other than assigning me identities, such as “feminist,” or “bored” (not interested does not equal bored – I have two beautiful nieces who I do not find boring at all) without actually knowing me and clearly misunderstanding where I’m coming from. What are you trying to accomplish? What would you like from me? For someone who isn’t threatened, you come across as quite defensive… so would you be willing to please explain to me what I am missing from what you are saying, or state clearly what you’d like me to take away from your perspective? Hopefully in a manner that applies to the article and not assumptions about who I am…

Re GRID and AIDS, I was a little lad, but I also remember. Just for fun, Google News Archive search. 9 results for “GRID” “virus” between 1980 and 1984 (link) and 546 results for “AIDS” and “virus” in the same dates (link).

I love the internet!

Haha, I know… the illicit internet

Yeah the thing is, even if Foucault was sleeping around (and he was – that is the basis of a lot of his historical work, for example, “Discipline and Punish” makes it apparently that Michel was just a big ole leather daddy!), the knowledge of how GRID/AIDS/HIV was transmitted did not exist at the time… so unless Foucault knew something the medical community did not, there is no way he was knowingly giving anyone AIDS.

Now, there is something called “bug chasing,” made popular by Rolling Stone years ago (I remember reading the article when I was in college), which is supposedly where people try to get or risk getting HIV in a sort of BDSM pleasure seeking thrill experience… I’m not sure if it is real or not, but I do know that it also didn’t exist in Foucault’s time, because AIDS as we know it had not been identified yet. Here’s an article about bug chasing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugchasing

LOL Well that was out in left field. The more you know, I suppose!

Nah, just having fun. I like archive diving.

I don’t know or have an opinion on Foucalt’s relationship with his autoimmune deficiency.

lolllll! I love wikipedia so much it’s probably unhealthy.

To be honest, the piece made me feel like you are an observer gawking at the freaks that are the ultra-Orthodox. Do you really feel that we aren’t “all that different”? Come on. I found the tone of this essay to be condescending more than anything else. Like we are some strange creatures that need to be analyzed and explored.

It’s all good to admire Chassidim and enjoy their culture and to send them peace and love… until you have the live the lifestyle. It’s fun to be an outsider looking in. There’s more ugly in the community than there is good, and there’s no reason to be so enamored.

Maya,

I think if I was just a gawker, sure… but being that I am actively involved in several aspects of the community, or the ex-ultra-Orthodox community at least (as I mention in the article!), I don’t think that’s the case. If I didn’t know anyone and was just lurking around making assumptions, sure, then it would be a bit creepy and condescending. I am hypervigilent about this, quite sensitive and always worried that I’m being kind and loving enough in my interactions and participation, but my ultra-Orthodox and OTD friends have reassured me that I shouldn’t worry about that because my interest in Hasidim is genuine and positive. Is it possible that your reaction to my piece stems from your unhappiness with the community? And if so, what are you doing to counter what you say is so ugly?

Mel

Melanie,

I think you mistake assertions for defensiveness and a tachliss style (to the point) with being defensive. My emotional life is not that fraught. I do find the faux psychological–using language such defensive, angry, unhappy an attempt to frame and control the discussion, in such a way that you have the power. Indirect, sublet but– ad hominem. Along a similar line assuming you needed explain about GRID I did get a belly laugh. –I roared at the notion Foucalt was doing a philosophical project or research–big daddy (tears of laughter) -Mengele also did research and De’Man–a full blown Nazi–gotta love those deconstructionists–love em. I do believe that you are trying to be “loving” I do. But please see where and when you are being patronizing, and condescending and expecting “group think.” I would rather swim in vomit than even entertain that these ideas have any intellectual merit or are based in sanity. Really loving except that position. Love is hard, love is a bite. And really this is just my communication style–so please do not assume any deep psychological stuff going on.

http://thoughtsofasj.blogspot.com/2012/08/is-orthodox-gender-eparation-holiness.html

B.A., I’m not assuming anything like that and clearly we’re talking past each other so I’m just going to settle on agreeing to disagree. Can’t win ‘em all.

SJ – wow the language in that article is… intense.

yes i’m aware the religious community isn’t used to taking criticism let alone vehement criticism.

Don’t worry about intensity. Worry about what’s true and false.

http://thoughtsofasj.blogspot.com/2012/09/orthodox-rabbis-are-pigs-pigs-pigs-pigs.html

Melanie, not to be argumentive but a few things are nagging me about your piece,for one your decision to ‘connect’ more with Chassidic men over women because you are not interested in marriage and children.Do you meet many men in the community who are not married with children? Very unusual I would say and as a feminist you must realize that spending time with someones husband whether physical or not puts women in a very powerless position when you have to just except it because of your situation. Dressing it up as reaching out and living is a little misleading and hard to take to us who have been in that situation