Work ‘em!
Izzy is not happy that Jewish women’s accomplishments are devalued if they don’t also have babies. Izzy notes,
Maybe we Jewish feminists should be less worried about the fact that online dating is an impersonal experience, and more worried about how even in this enlightened age — a time when egalitarianism is utterly the norm in some strains of Judaism, e.g. the female-rabbi–dominated Reform movement — we’re still haranguing women to work those wombs.
Leaving aside that from a Jewish communal perspective, I don’t think we devalue these women enough, let’s consider Izzy’s issue. Now, Reform Judaism isn’t really egalitarian in the first place, but it is feminist.
So why don’t liberal Jews stop “haranguing� these women?
Because every civilization – even a feminist one – wants to survive. It wants to continue to exist. And it wants its descendants to be a part of that same civilization.
So…if a man or woman (even a feminist) has children, she will want to make sure there is a critical mass of appropriate mates and members to support necessary infrastructure — like hipster Jewish websites that feature essays that pretend we don’t care about babies even as they steer people to dating sites where they can meet others with whom to make Jewish babies with. Because the way things are going here, that isn’t going to be so easy, unless they are willing to go Ortho, which isn’t always the same civilization in many ways, and it certainly isn’t feminist.
So these things called children are required. And we have a shortage. And the most qualified to help are the ladies.
And if you have no hopes or demands of continuation of our civilization, then why the hell did you bother becoming a rabbi in the first place? Even a Reform one?
So maybe, Izzy, you should be less worried that “we’re still haranguing women to work those wombs,� and more worried about how to successfully harangue women to work those wombs.
45 comments
Shouldn’t potential fathers also be encouraged to take over responsibility? Also, kids mean to cut down on private pleasures. Raising kids takes a lot of time and money, you cannot put them into storage or sell them off on eBay when you think they’re too much of a hassle. Anyhow, I think you make a valid point in your State of the Uterus-Address as many women tend to postpone founding families out of convenience.
“Shouldn’t potential fathers also be encouraged to take over responsibility?”
Well…yeah, but they can’t pop ‘em out themselves!
It makes feel women way more comfortable though if there were a degree of certainty that a prospective father won’t run off - or encourage abortion, which often leads to later infertility.
“It makes feel women way more comfortable though if there were a degree of certainty that a prospective father won’t run off”
Well…I don’t think this fear is why we have so much singlehood in the Jewish community…Jewish men aren’t known as particularly egregious in this regard, are they?
You’ve fallen on the problem, but side stepped the tension.
Yes, you need babies to continue a civilization. But also, focusing on women having babies is not the civilization we want, and it certainly does a good deal to put women into a box. I think our current focus on getting singles hitched and then having them pop out babies only diminishes the likelihood of that happening.
So there is a real tension, simply saying pop em’ out doesn’t answer it. Though, it seems Western civilization has this problem as a whole.
What seems to happen there, and perhaps it is mirrored here is that people who are not “western” move in with their their large families, become “western,” and thus the “west” continues. Immigration in terms of civilization - why not in terms of religion.
I know here we are concerned about the kiruv movement. But take a look at Charedi blogs and they are worried about the inverse.
just an addendum … those immigrants change what it means to be western … perhaps so too the Orthodox “immigrants” will change what it means to be a liberal or secular Jew.
Sarah–you took the words right out of my mouth. I was going to blame the lack of children not on women’s unwillingness to mate and settle down (after all, I know MANY women, who all they want in life is to be married and have children) but the lack of a suitable mate who is willing to cooperate.
Yes, professional women wait longer to have kids, and marry later, but that is because, from a purely economic perspective, MEN have more to gain by marrying later, and less to lose. Ergo, it is men’s fault, so the OJC should be focusing not on “women should have more babies” but “immature men-children should step the F*** up.”
Jewish men aren’t known as particularly egregious in this regard, are they?
I can only go by my experiences, and my Jewish partners / wannabe partners were less likely to agree on their share of responsibility in a relationship / potential family. Not that I didn’t care for them, mind you, but if somebody suggests I might want to consider signing a waiver to exempt him from possible child support, I won’t consider that somebody for founding a family.
what’s the feminist rationale for child support?
if two equal partners split up a partnership, why should one side take the assets and the other pay the upkeep?
mohammed, problem is that there often is an imbalance within the relationships. Housework, raising a child etc. is work, too, but one doesn’t earn any money from it and it’s not considered prestigious either, while all women I know would rather stay at home for the first few years of a child’s life at least if they could afford it. But women often are expected to contribute to the family budget; the higher their degree of education, the more of an earning asset and status symbol they become, otherwise they must fear their partner to look for “a better deal”.
that’s an alimony argument, not a child support argument.
There’s no legal distinction between those over here. If you want an argument for child support: it’s part of your responsibility. If you feel mature enough to engage in sexual intercourse, you should be aware of the possible outcomes. If you don’t feel up to taking over your share of responsibility, keep your trousers zipped up. Clinical studies have shown condoms to fail in 70% of all cases, and just because women only are fertile for a couple of days per month maximum gives them a misleading better protection rate. The pill, diaphragms etc. are not always an option as they can seriously mess with a woman’s health.
A child is entitled to have its needs taken care of, which, in addition to the emotional needs, include such basic things as food, clothing, education etc.
“Clinical studies have shown condoms to fail in 70% of all cases”
For real?
Indeed.
What responsibility?
If the girls life is going to get fucked up it’s her responsibility to take care of her life and no one elses.
A fathers responsibility is to offer his kid a home -by him. Not to pay his ex for taking care of her own kid.
It takes two to tango.
“Clinical studies have shown condoms to fail in 70% of all cases�
Cite a source — and not something put out by the Catholic Church or the Bush Administration.
How good’s your German? Studies were conducted by universities over here.
And the studies showed that in 70 percent of uses, the condoms failed to do what exactly? To prevent pregnancy? STDs? This is simply not true.
As well as since in actual use, the condoms weren’t used correctly.
Here’s a link to a Georgia Tech site that cites CDC stats: http://www.condomdepot.com/learn/stats.cfm
If you don’t have time to read it, I’ll summarize: Used correctly, condoms work. (Trust me; I’m a scientist.)
Now back to the original topic. As the proud owner of a thrice-inhabited womb, I can honestly say that pregnancy is inconvenient, uncomfortable, life-transforming, incredible and occasionally dangerous (almost did me in the last time). It is not something to do because your mother says to, because all your friends are doing it or because dk has succeeded in convincing you that you’re a self-centered traitor to the Jewish faith.
C-Girl,
What we believe as individuals and what the Jewish community will logically demand are two different things.
DK, would you feel ready to share that responsibility?
“DK, would you feel ready to share that responsibility?”
I believe so, Sarah. I think most of my buddies would behave honorably and responsibly in such a situation.
Hmm… I think we need to clearly define “the Jewish community”, then.
If I might make a few rash generalizations, birth rates plummet as income rises. Liberal (ie Reform) Judaism tends to attract affluent types with fewer kids. In addition, liberal Jews often identify strongly with progressive ideas such as, for example, reduction of their own environmental impact and slowed population growth, ideals not usually shared with those who belong to more traditional Jewish communities.
So, who’s right?
“So, who’s right?”
Why does it have to be about being right? The perspective of the Jewish community is going to be strongest in terms of birthrate to be demanding at least as many Jews tomorrow as there are today, otherwise we lose ground as others grow. And we are obsessed with extinction. So it makes sense to me that Jews want a birthrate that is more promising than the one they have in liberal and secular circles.
I disagree that it’s simply about numbers. As you (and Alan Dershowitz) have pointed out, the ultra-O’s have got the birthrate game sewn up pretty tight. (Hooray, more Jews that can’t financially support themselves…)
But if you feel so strongly about this issue, what are you doing, sitting there at your computer? Get out there and do something!
what’s wrong with extinction?
and why would you ask an individual to change his lifestyle as a sacrifice to some amorphous collective?
I don’t feel sure about this issue. But I feel it is irrational to not allow the Jewish community to feel strongly about this issue.
I am not personally demanding any individual behave differently. I am suggesting that it is unfair to write off these communal concerns and fears as unreasonably sexist.
As for condoms, going by information provided by the Swiss ministry of health, in actual use they offer only “medium” protection (applied the other contraception techniques they listed, that would equal to somewhere between 40% and 60%). Factors that influence the permeability of condoms include storage (too hot, too cold, too moist, too dry; something you cannot control as you don’t know how the pharmacy stored this stuff. anything that comes from vending machines or was a party-freebie should be taboo anyway), the choice of lube (non-water based lubes make latex condoms permeable) and accordingly the remainders of any lotion, perfume etc. (Guess why women rush off to the bathroom? To do maintainance.) They’re pretty much ineffective for sex in tubs, showers or saunas. (I apologize if I’m too suggestive.) The reason why the results of lab-tests and actual-use studies differ so widely include that for lab tests, the manufacturers provide freshly produced, well-handled items (often the studies are completely financed by manufacturers of condoms; I know enough scientists to know that science is not independent, but that customer oriented research provides the means for other studies), ideally sized penis dummies and lab staff that knows every tiny bit on how to handle condoms effectively. Pretty cynical to use the stats of lab tests to advertize condoms if you ask me.
You could say that condoms are better than nothing, but that’s about it. It’s way more responsible to get tested in between sexual partners.
Oh how I wish I’d come over here earlier! Sarah already addressed pretty much all of my arguments, especially the point about how biologically it makes no sense to put the onus on women, since you generally need a man around to make a baby.
But also, like Mohammed, I don’t see why anyone would voluntarily “change his lifestyle as a sacrifice to some amorphous collective?” Demanding that they do so will only people off — in fact, all sorts of studies seem to show that they’re ALREADY turning people off. If Judaism isn’t appealing, if it doesn’t enhance people’s lives in some way, then no amount of haranguing or the demanding will get people to stay.
“If Judaism isn’t appealing, if it doesn’t enhance people’s lives in some way, then no amount of haranguing or the demanding will get people to stay.”
Yes…it’s a problem.
Sarah, even if condoms fail 70% of the time in actual use (which sounds absurd), the responsibility of the user is not to be willing to take care of a baby - it’s to know how to use a condom correctly.
J, are you the J from Jewschool back in the day?
The responsibilty of the user is to know what the outcome of sexual intercourse may be and to live up to the outcome if need be. Just because you’re physically able to engage in sexual encounters doesn’t mean your mental maturity follows suit. If your dog doesn’t get castrated and shags up another dog, you can be held financially responsible for vet treatments and expenses on the puppies, too. If you really want to safeguard yourself against procreating, consider a vasectomy. You can have some seed frozen for later in-vitro if need be. Or isn’t that manly enough? If human sex is consensual, you may at least consider the possibility of having to pay your share. If the low protection rate of condoms seems absurd to you, you’ve already have fallen prey to what non-independent science produces. To liken it to what one of my brothers does, he’s into environmental research. He says straight out that a private customer (usually some corporation or another) does and can expect you to conduct your studies in a way that they will deliver results they’ll gladly pay for. That’s why he prefers state-jobs even if they pay less.
just out of curiousity, sarah
if your neighbor can prove that you asked him to let his dog shag yours, would he still be responsible for the puppies?
Just out of curiosity, mohammed, do you always have the maidel sign a lease before you shtup?
what do you mean by lease? or release?
Lease as in a contract; that’s what dog breeders usually do.
a feminist comparing women to dogs?
A human comparing people to dogs, our closest non-human companions.
This is just a (mildly) salacious version of the intermarriage argument and, as Mohammed says, if you don’t have an actual coherent purpose for being Jewish, how can you possibly preach to people about continuation? It’s almost racist.
Ron, seeing value in one’s civilization itself is often seen as racist, particularly when the civilization in question is deemed white. Who cares? As long as you don’t take a hard stance against individuals who don’t prioritize such things and understand it’s okay if they marry “out,” it’s fine…you can want your civilization to continue.
DK, you obscuring your argument by the clever use of a conceit called “our civilization.” It would seem however that assimilated Jews do not, however, have no meaningful stake in Jewish “civilization” in any but a genetic sense — i.e., a racial one. If indeed the Jewish “civilization” can be identified at all as one that exists as such, within exile, merely having more children with brown eyes and prominent noses does nothing to “continue” anything but a particular ethnic strain.
Ron, you fail to recognize Judaism outside of that defined by the Shulchan Aruch, conveniently forgetting that there was such a thing as Judaism thousands of years before the Shulchan Aruch was written — AS DICTATED BY AN ANGEL, OF COURSE.
I think there is definitely a value system that many secular Jews share to some degree, and though we may not agree on whether this is indeed Judaism, and it may not be lasting, but it does come from Judaism at least in part, and is more than mere racial characteristics, but rather, are moral ones.
Leave a Comment