Regarding the movie, the Festival offered to arrange separate screenings for men and women. The Film Festival argues (correctly) that they do not discriminate--and that refusing to show the movie to men would constitute discrimination.

Yes, we are the Jewish State. That means Jews live here...and not all Jews are observant. We are a democracy and not a theocracy. For that matter, not all observant Jews have a problem with kol isha. I lived in Jlem for 4.5 years (and will be moving back) and participated in community theater productions in which I and other women sang. A good number of the women and men participating in the play and sitting in the audience were observant. Haredi? Obviously not. But dati leumi/modern orthodox.

We are a democracy, a country for all Jews, and not just the ultra-orthodox ones.

I can corroborate what Gila says. In the folk-music settings where I sometimes hang out, many modern-Orthodox people are in the audience, and at least one well-known performer is herself modern Orthodox.

Older observant and Jewishly learned people I know have told me that the strictness surrounding women's singing is a relatively recent phenomenon.

I myself am religious and a singer, and have no problem singing in front of whoever is willing to listen.

Shavuah tov.
Thanks for posting that pic. Among Adina's friends, Crocs have been replaced by Uggs -- or for the most part -- Ugg wannabe's! ( 'cause my 11-year-old daughter doesn't wear $100 footwear, nor do her friends).

Pearl,

Are they called Ugg's because when parents see the price all they can say is ......UGH! ;)

Several years ago when I was living in Israel, I went to go see "Mama Mia" at the Nokia Arena in Tel Aviv.

I saw many kipot in the crowd....and the couple I attended the show with were quite frum.

It seems kol-isha is one of those fuzzy areas of halacha, that some do and some dont.

Gila, Rahel:

Thanks so much for your articulate input. Here's how I see the situation.

1. Israel is a Jewish state and a democracy. This calls for a delicate balancing act on many fronts.

2. The film in question is, one can argue, a continuation of a particular Jewish hashkafah. Thus, the director/producer/whatever, asks that the film be screened for women.

3. The Jerusalem Jewish Film Festival argues that this constitutes discrimination against men.

4. Orthodox Judaism upholds separate roles for men and women. This film and its public venues is a continuation of that particular hashkafah. One may disagree with the hashkafah, but it's a manistream hashkafah.

5. My wife, Karen, as do thousands of Orthodox women all over the world, attends women only Tehillim prayer groups and women only Torah classes. Do I feel discriminated against because I cannot attend? On the contrary. I think it's wonderful. There are also numerous women only concerts performed by singers like Julia Blum that I cannot attend. Plus women only theater performances put on by Lubavitch and other groups that I cannot attend. Again, I applaud these venues.

6. Film, it seems, is the last frontier where women only screenings are barred as being discriminatory and too frum.

7. I believe that in a Jewish democracy Jews should go that extra mile in sensitivity. If the Jerusalem Film Festival screens, oh let's say 40 films, and men are asked not to attend one film, well, calling that discrimination is an Orwellian use of language. A little generosity to the film and its creators would fulfill Rabbi Hillel's dictum: V'ahavta L'reacha Kamocha. It would be, y'know, the decent thing to do. If Israeli democracy can allow Arab MP's, who are absolutely hostile to the State of Israel, to sit in the Parliament, surely the Jerusalem Jewish Film Festival can somehow manage a woman's only screening for a film.

8. Does it bother me that I will never see this film. Yes. I'm a film geek. But I'll get Karen to screen it and describe it to me in loving detail.

9. As you all know, I don't even hold by kol Isha. But I love and respect the hashkafah that does.

Gila, Rahel:

Since when are decisions regarding sensitivity to people's innermost modesty and sacred religious values governed by standards of common law and democracy?

Do these people realize that these women and girls trusted their leaders, let down their guard, finally unleashed their artistic passion with the guarantee that only women would view this production?

The issue here is more than Kol Isha. It is a question of modesty and quietude.

There is no doubt in my mind that if a group of Muslim women created a film portraying a hidden or taboo part of their society, there wish for controlled viewing would never be questioned. It would be honored as a necessary censorship for their own protection.

The women of this film need their own protection as well, it might be spiritual but it is just as valid. If they are not granted the same courtesy they will surely retreat behind the curtain.

Whatever happened to women's rights and self expression?

They deserve to be heard, but require some guarantees that their trust is not betrayed.

The ethical ground rules are closer to confidentiality agreements, not equal access.

Robert and Karen,

My quarrel is not with the idea of a separate viewing itself, particularly under these circumstances. I agree completely that the trust of the women who were filmed should not be betrayed. If they agreed to be filmed on condition that the film would be seen by women only, then their stipulation should be honored. That's simple ethics.

I also sympathize with them on a personal level, since many years ago I was filmed in a particular context by a director who promised me that certain details of what she had filmed would not be shown. (Although the details were harmless in themselves and not relevant to the film, at the time I had a good reason for asking this of her.) She even told me later on that those sections had been edited out. When I saw the film, I was shocked to see that those parts had been included. When I called her to express my dismay and feeling of betrayal, her only response was: "Where did you see the film?" No acknowledgement, no apology -- and it colored the way I treated filmmakers for years afterward. So I do understand, truly.

Nevertheless, I must ask: does it accord with Jewish law and practice that Jewish women in any community should have to fear terrible social consequences for doing things that are not even contrary to halachah? I still remember how one Haredi film producer here, a woman, voiced her fears that if she did a particular thing, or was seen doing it -- I can't remember what it was, but I do remember that it had more to do with contemporary social restrictions than actual Jewish law -- her daughters would not be able to find shidduchim.

With all due respect, I cannot love a hashkafa that imposes such fear on its adherents, be they women or men.

@Rahel:

1. Your claim that kol isha in film is halachically fine is inaccurate. Halachah is determined by qualified poskim applying their learning to whatever situation presents itself. There are any number of poskim who feel that this is forbidden. Yes, there are others who disagree, and you are perfectly justified in choosing to follow them. However, your choice does not render the choices of others invalid.

2. Your complaint concerning the societal pressures of the haredi world is not especially relevant here, and is in any case specious. Societal mores are not something invented by haredim; they are intrinsic to the human condition. I have absolutely no doubt that you have standards by which you decide with whom you associate, with whom your children associate, and yes, with whom you would prefer to see your child do a shidduch. This is entirely legitimate. Your complaint seems to be that haredi society requires adherence to extra-halachah stringencies. Yes, it does. So what? Haredim have every right to associate with whom they choose, judging by whatever standards they choose. No one is compelled to join the society, anyone who does join knows beforehand that they will be held to these standards and has no cause for complaint.

3. Your argument against allowing the film to be shown, based on what you have written, is as follows: The stringency against kol isha is unwarranted. Haredi society is in general too strict. Therefore, those who adhere to this stringency and who belong to this society should be punished. I'm sorry, but I don't see the logic.

4. You wrote that you are religious and a singer and would have no problem singing in front of whoever is willing to listen. I respectfully ask: Is this based on the ruling of any particular rov or posek or is it a kula of your own invention?

Kishke,

I think we should think long and hard before knocking others for how they chose to adhere to halacha.

If you want respect for your community, then respect how others may hold without demeaning a person by insinuating that they make it up. I find your "question" far from respectful...in fact I find it intrusive and insulting of Rahel.

I dont believe Rahel has to justify her adherance to anyone.....

Kishke, youe questioning of Rahel is all to typical of the Haredi community in general...If things are not done to their specifications then we are labled trief...or worse. My advise, is to concentrate on your observance and not to point fingers or demand answers from others....

Sorry Lance, I can't accept the criticism. My comment was a response to Rahel's rather strong, and quite unjustified, condemnation of haredi society. I reread my response in light of your criticism, and I still see it as quite mild, and yes, as respectful.

As for my question to her, it was she not I who brought up her very lenient position on women singing for men. Once she put it out there, I don't see any problem in my asking her for a source.

Robert, scatalogically speaking, I find the name Putzmeister hilarious.

Kishke,

The problem with you and others in your community is that you are too busy worrying about how everyone observes instead of looking inward.

Needless to say, the Haredi community has done its share of damage and chillul Hashem.

My advise to you is show more ahavat Yisrael and less attitude.

Lance, you're not responding to anything I'm saying; you're just yelling at me. It's obvious that you harbor some personal bitterness against charedim. I don't know whether or not it's justified, but under the circumstances, I don't see any point in continuing this conversation.

Kishke,

It seems you have a very sensitive disposition...you can point fingers and accuse others....and when someone calls you for it, you cry foul. It seems to me liberals argue in much the same way.

I harbor no ill will towards the Haredi community. During my time in Jerusalem, I met the sweetest Haredi people one could hope for...Spent Shabbat with them and learned with them. Not once did they ever talk to me in the way you have talked to Rahel.

However, the difference between you and them is that they had an overflowing of Ahavat Yisrael; I dont get the same vibes from you. It seems to me that if the Jewish world isnt run accrding to Kishke then we are going to hell.

Kishke, your attitude is everything that is wrong with Torah Judaism today....quick to condemn, instead of reaching out.

Kishke, I learned that the original prohibition regarding kol isha applied to reciting the Shema.

As for defending my halachic positions: I don't think that this is the place to do it, and I don't think either of us is going to succeed in changing the other's mind in any case. And that's fine. Even the strictest among us have divergent views. You don't have to agree with me.

Rahel: Absolutely. You need not answer my question if you don't wish to, although I am definitely curious as to the halachic underpinnings, and which posek they derive from. I hope you took no offense; I certainly meant none.

Kishke, as I said, I will not debate here, but since you asked honestly, I will tell you.

I don't believe that I need to ask permission of any human being to use the voice God gave me.

When men feel the need to ask such permission, then I will consider doing so as well.

OK, thanks for your response.

I forgot to ask what the Putzmeister does but I think it has something to do with concrete.

I can confirm that Putzmeister makes equipment for concrete. Want to have fun, go check them out at The World of Concrete tradeshow.

It is one heck of a show.

Jack,

I hear the Teamsters and the Mob look forward to the show every year. ;)

If you want privacy etc....DO NOT appear in a film!

Okay, that was a bit facetious. Seriously though, have you ever heard about the boy that cried wolf?

Do you want to understand my reaction to the whole story? It is simple--just remember that everything happens in context.

Were the ultra-orthodox in Israel more respectful and a bit more willing to live and let live, as opposed to trying to turn Israel into a theocracy and/or trying to impose a haredi doctrine/hashkafa I would probably be a lot more supportive of honoring the filmmaker's request in such a public forum. But they are not. (Latest installments--Shas Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef denounced all non-observant teachers as incompetent...and Shas wants the education portfolio).

Oh...and this is generally coming from a community that, to a significant extent 1) does not work and 2) does not serve.

Yeah, so I am sick of it already.

Is my response somewhat political? Yes. But religion is also political here.

Gila:

Yes, we understand that religion is political in Israel.

And yet, it seems somewhat, well, ungenerous to punish the director for the situation. I am unaware of Robin Garbose ever throwing stones at you. I am unaware of any cast member ever hurling abusive language at you. In short, you seem content, even anxious to punish a single film and those who participated in its making on a general ideological political principle aimed at some vague larger group.

@Gila: Your response is not political; it's hateful, inasmuch as it promotes sinas chinam.

Certainly I'm not for Sinat Chinam...
I believe my above postings about Kishke's outbursts speak for themselves.

However, the situation in Israel where the Haredim try to impose their will is intolerable.

Haredim are not above gaming the political system in Israel for their purposes.....and it would be tragic if they were to get any major portfolio. They have shown through past actions that they will do much more harm than any good could come about it.

My hope, but it is little more than wishful thinking, is that a right of center government could be form without ANY religious parties.

The religious parties have not shown they are not capable of governing....and they have reduced themselves to creating a welfare class intent on sponging off the public dole.

"And yet, it seems somewhat, well, ungenerous to punish the director for the situation. "

MY reaction--how I view the matter--is colored by local politics. I live here. I am moving back to Jerusalem...probably within walking distance of the Cinemateque (where the festival is held). For me, these issues are real, as opposed to theoretical and they are constant. Give the Haredim control...and it is only a matter of time before the Cinemateque and all other theaters are shut down altogether.

Whether the Festival was also making a political decision? Not necessarily. They offered a reasonable compromise--separate screenings for women and men; those men who have not taken the hard-line view on kol isha will come and those who do not, will not. They also offered to hold a separate women-only screening outside the auspices of the official festival.

Gila:

Let's recap:

Your first argument was that Israel is a democracy not a theocracy.

When that proved a non-starter, your argument rapidly devolved into a series of ad hominem attacks on all Hardedi society: they do not serve in the army. Hmm, sounds like secular Tel-Aviv draft dodgers, or Israeli Arabs.

They do not contribute economically. Whoa, drug addicted Israeli hippies and those models of capitalist enterprise the Israeli anarchists.

To add to the list of evils: Haredim are trying to impose a theocracy on Israel, as opposed to the loving left who are not trying to impose their secular values on Israeli society, or the Arabs who would like nothing more than to impose Sharia on Israel, correct?

And now you present us with a curious mixture of arguments, none of which address the major issue: decency, respect and religious tolerance.

a) The new and novel notion that the film society is not necessarily political; uh-huh.

That they are devoted to kumbaya compromise; knowing in advance that what they suggest is a religious cul-de-sac, much like asking an observant Jew to drive just a block or two on Shabbos for the sake of compromise.

b) That you live in Israel, and therefore bear the magnificent burden of, um living in Israel, as opposed to we poor cowardly schlemiels who live mechuz la'Aretz and therefore have no right to publicly voice any opinions on Israel since we do not live with the real world consequences.

Which, by the way, is false.

When a pin drops in Israel, the reverberations affect Jews in New York, Jews in Argentina, Jews everywhere. This is known as geo-politics.

Your argument, BTW, translates into: “It's my ball and so you can't play my game."

Let me remind you that the film was directed by a Lubavitch woman who lives a few blocks from yours truly with a cast made up almost exclusively (I believe) of Lubavitch women who live in Los Angeles.

Finally, Karen already covered this ground in her comment above when she answered your very first comment. Let me repeat the essence of Karen's comment in case it escaped your notice: this is not about democracy, this is not about common law, this is not about kol isha, this is about common decency; everything else is but a smoke screen covering pathological hatred.

Robert, you've hit the nail on the head. People whose secular religion would not permit them to deride or discriminate against blacks or any other ethnic group think nothing of discriminating against Orthodox Jews. For them they are that hated Other, responsible for all that is evil in their world; thus, any retaliation is permitted. In this angry view, there are no innocent among the wicked Orthodox; all are equally deserving of punishment. It all sounds so familiar.

Kishke,

Stop playing the victim....

Robert made points that are very spot on and devoid of your victim filled self pity.
You should leave it at that....

Instead of trying to convince yourself and the world that Haredim are above doing harm to others.

Unfortunately, intolerance and hatred is not an exclusive of the far-left or the far-right; both know how to use it very well.

Lance, I have said nothing intolerant or hateful. The line that set you off in my comment to Rahel does not seem to have troubled her, and in any case was quite innocuous and entirely in place in the context of the discussion. You, despite your protestations to the contrary, are clearly full of anger at charedim. I'm sorry about that, but really, it has nothing to do with this discussion, which concerns whether the JFF is justified in discriminating against the Orthodox.(And not, by the way, charedim. Ms. Garbose is entirely frum, but I would not describe her as charedi.) Your only response to anything I've said has been an anti-charedi rant. It doesn't bother me on any kind of personal level, but I'd suggest you give it a rest. I write this response against my better judgement, as I suspect that whatever injury you've sustained has rendered you incapable of rational dialogue on this subject, but I thought I'd give it the old college try.

Kishke,

You pretend to know me....which you do not...and you seem to make wild assumptions about my life experiences that are way off base; but so typical of those that feel that they are better than the rest of us.

BTW....you seem intent on labeling people...Im sure Ms. Garbose sleeps better at night knowing you think she is frum and not Haredi....

Who cares!!

And before you make more enlighten comments about me....I agree with Robert's comments about the situation.

I will repeat, since you obviously,wont read my postings above....that I harbor no ill will to the Haredi community. I know that there are many lovely and loving members...and I had many wonderful experiences with them during my time in Jerusalem...I miss them dearly.

I'm surprised, since you seem to know all about me and sit in judgment of me that you didnt know this.....After all, you have this all knowing ability to know what is I'm feeling and thinking.

My point above, that you have ignored so well, is that same elements, including maybe yourself, have the same prejudices that the left espouses on a daily basis....that is if you dont talk, think and act like me, than I can not tolerate your point of view.

Until both communities, the secular left and the Haredi right, learn to live with each other we will only repeat the same mistakes of our ancestors.

Well, perhaps I'm mistaken, but I'm pretty sure I remember you writing about your anger at charedim in Israel when you first began posting here. But even if I am mistaken about that, your posts on this thread speak for themselves.

Kishke,

Anger at the Haredi court system in Israel does not pre-suppose an animus towards Haredim in general. Any 2 year old would know that...

I guess, since you so readily defend them, that you are in favor of keeping women as agunot. The Rav that made things so difficult for me actively protected men and enabled them to keep women chained and they went on to re-marry.

In your world, I guess, that is nothing to be upset about....it is just common day to day activities.

Kishke, unlike the Haredim I have met in my past, you are quick to judge and hate....no different than the left that wishes to stifle activity they deem objectionable. The two of you deserve each other.

I knew there was something.

Kishke, you give good Haredim a black eye and you embarrass yourself and your community.

"That you live in Israel, and therefore bear the magnificent burden of, um living in Israel, as opposed to we poor cowardly schlemiels who live mechuz la'Aretz and therefore have no right to publicly voice any opinions on Israel since we do not live with the real world consequences."

Well yes...and no.

No. Living in Israel is not a "burden", nor is it anything dramatic. It is not an idea, an ideal or a theory. It is not about bravery or lack of same. Living in Israel is well...real life. It is my home, in the same way that Beverly Hills is yours. I get up every day, take a quick military shower (gotta be careful with water--nigmar lanu hakineret), fight the traffic, work, discuss the municipal and national politics with my friends until we get sick of it and then we talk about CSI, listen to the radio to catch up on which grandson of the great Zionists Bibi has scored today, pay tons of taxes, etc. In short, the same kind of stuff you do (with certain regional adjustments) in your hometown.

There is more. In your hometown, you may have the far Christian right trying to ban this movie and that, ban this book and that and pushing for the teaching of Creationism in public schools. In my hometown, we have the far Jewish right trying to ban this concert or that, and taking the whole concept of modesty to extremes and pushing for the teaching of ultra-orthodox Jewish doctrine in public schools (as opposed to traditional or even dati leumi).

When I say that you don't have to live with the decisions, I mean just that. We live with our decisions, day in and day out. Jews overseas can easily rail about those evil secular (and traditional and dati leumi) Jews who oh-so-cruely attack the Haredim for thier refusal to join the work force or army. It is the Jews in Israel whose tax dollars are going to support them--and that at the expense of investments in education, infrastructure, etc. (Just like a portion of your tax dollars go to support welfare recipients--some of whom have made living off a welfare a career).

Yes. While you are entitled to your opinion, when push comes to shove, you have as much place telling us how we should run things as I would have teling you how you should run things in Beverly Hills. I can have as many opinions as I want about Beverly Hills/Hollywood society(and as you might imagine--I do). But do I have a say in it? No. It is your home--you have to live there--you make the call. (I did not vote in the US elections because of this principal).

One more thought.... Left-wing American Jews, Reform Jews, Conservative Jews... also play the geo-political card. Everyone does it based on their own agenda and their own opinions. All the more reason for Israel to make decisions locally, based on what we assess the situation to be, and what is best for us Israelis.

Gila:

Because this is my blog, out of respect and consideration I am leaving you with the last word. I believe that this conversation is now in an endless circle.

Kol Tuv.

When I was in NY last summer, I found myself wandering around a "costless" shoe store and bought a pair of walking shoes for about $7. They're not too bad. I didn't find anything particularly comfortable in Easy Spirit or any place else. I'm still wearing the es ones I bought (2 pair, one black one white) two years ago.