Op-Ed: A Call to Stop the Shouting
Monsters are terrorizing our community. I have seen them harass otherwise decent and upstanding community members. They are difficult to detect, usually managing to harm and dive back into the shadows without so much as being seen. They remain mostly anonymous, and yet, creep up on you and wreak havoc.
I had not expected to find them in our community – not to be prejudicial – I thought we were a community of thinking and reasonable, even noble, people. We would not stoop so low. Such things cannot happen to us, and if it did – we surely would not tolerate it. But they are here. They are tireless and insidious in their butchery, and debauchery. It is time we identified them – gave them a face and a name, posted their pictures everywhere, and banned them from our public institutions, dialogues, and conversations. It’s’ time we called their bluff.
I’m an avid consumer of All-things-Posted-On-Chabad-Websites, especially when there’s controversy and debate. Recently, I’ve been introduced to a new set of words – terms that I’ve come to expect from secular news sources and articles, but hadn’t considered encountering on our own sites, Shuls and discussion forums. They aren’t anti-religious ideas per say, which makes it all the more difficult to detect and refute. They don’t self-identify, or attract much attention at all. Like the background hum of a hundred fans that force us to shout at each other just to be heard, these pests are the wayward maxims and unthinking clichés that have entered our collective vocabulary. Working like mental pollutants, they bumble on in the back of our minds, muddying our thought processes, obfuscating our dialogue, and inhibiting our ability to reason. They sneak up the back alley, climb through the window, and jump on our shoulders – all without us noticing a thing.
Here are just a few examples, but rest assured there are many more:
1) “Don’t judge” (or its more defined younger sister: “You can’t judge someone unless you walked in their shoes”).
Allow me first to climb out of the rubble and shake myself off. There. An important politician famously stated, “If I’d live in Gaza, I’d probably shoot a rocket”. Perhaps. ‘Judging’ is a clumsy and undefined term. Let’s break it down: Heshey the delivery boy is being quite rude to some customers. Do we assume he had a rough day? Yes. Would we have acted the same – or worse – had we been in his predicament? Probably. Do we still condemn his rude behavior, while demanding that he shape up? Absolutely. Would we be judging Heshey in suggesting he shape up and cease his rough demeanor? Of course, we would not. We aren’t Judging the person, only his actions. And we hope that if we were in the place he’s in, we’d be admonished just the same.
It isn’t ‘Judging’ to express an opinion, even one that is negative, harsh, and punishing. Pirkei Avos states just so: “Judge your fellow favorably”. We are not instructed to disregard another’s fault — as that may just be a human impossibility – but rather, to find a way to judge that person favorably: to concoct a plausible story —or slightly less plausible one if need be —to find how we would act the same in that person’s place. Once we understand the act, it inevitably means we also forgive it. But that does not make us turn blindly away from admonishment and corrective measures, particularly when the behavior affects others.
This cliché also contains some raw ideology, namely, that we are the sum of our experiences; that unless we ourselves lived it, we have no right to judge another’s behavior, because we don’t know if it is, in fact, wrong. This presupposes that objective reality is a myth and that all is relative. Obviously, that is an ideology opposed to Judaism. We can judge an action – condemn any action we deem reprehensible, even while believing that were we in that persons shoes we would have acted the same, if not worse, because there is an objective reality, and a Right and Wrong. It’s by that right, I can condemn an action that I haven’t had any experience with, haven’t ever been in a position to contemplate acting out, or even ever known anyone who has. And yes, I do condemn every rocket-launching terrorist, even if I could’ve been he or she.
2) “Raise awareness” . . .
We often hear that one. What does “Raising Awareness” even mean? It assumes that anyone who doesn’t share your opinion of, or particular solution for, your Cause de jour, evidenced by their lack of sufficiently active engagement on that Cause – must be an ignorant, uninformed, boxed-in regressive, and utterly careless for other people’s pain. As if the suggestion that someone can know the facts, the concerns, and proposed solution – and have an opposing view – yes, one that radically differs from your own! — is so preposterous as to be unimaginable. If a majority oppose ‘our’ view – instead of reexamining ‘our’ position – we must “Raise Awareness”!
3) . . . To start a “conversation”.
To start a “conversation” … conversations are a Good in and of themselves, aren’t they? After all, we can have a discussion, a dialogue, where rational people who differ will argue and debate, and ultimately come to a reasonable conclusion. In fact, there are numerous conversations I’ve long wished we had. Some examples: introducing the Sciences to our schools; introducing Tznius Only zones throughout the neighborhood; closing Kingston Av. to vehicles, instead introducing a safe bike-and-play area; or, let’s have a conversation on whether all landlords should raise rent on their tenants by 50%… and many more that are sure to enrage someone or other. Why enrage you say? Because a conversation is never innocent or fair. A conversation, by definition, shifts its partakers from the current reality towards another reality – one endorsed by the conversation starter. Those who favor the current arrangement should rightfully fear a Conversation, and make it their business to shut it down.
4) A “Rabbinical Establishment” needs “Change”.
This cliché buys into some of the darkest and most prejudicial stereotypes about Rabbis, and Orthodox Judaism more generally, as promulgated by the NYT, NYPost, and most others in the mainstream press. The notion that there is a Rabbinical Establishment – that Rabbis are sitting around thinking up new decrees that’ll tighten their grip over their communities and increase their power – that is as fictitious as it is absurd. Our Rabbis are our friends; they were our classmates in school; they are our brothers and uncles; they shop in our stores and face the exorbitant rent prices we do, even while their paycheck doesn’t show – like some of ours. They are merely conveyers of Halacha who care for us, serve us, and search high and low to diminish any pain where they are able – where it doesn’t contravene Halacha.
Moreover, should there be a “Rabbinical Establishment” – the idea that Establishments are evil and that young idealistic altruism is needed to challenge, confront and, ultimately, dismantle the Establishment is a view that is foreign to Torah, how much more so when dealing in matters of Halacha.
And “Change” . . . to what? Change itself is not a position or argument, but a call to arms, a cry of battle. It’s a meaningless, but destructive, Tear-It-Down-style aphorism that is ear-shutting, mind-numbing and head-spinning. We ought to banish such silliness from our midst.
5) Letting Victims control the debate.
Finding the ‘victim’ is the Media’s obsession, and no matter how noble and fair sounding the initiative, rest assured that the media will find the victim. The modern journalist has perfected this kind of reporting. A couple years back NYC’s Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, proposed an initiative to plant “One Million Trees in NYC”. Predictably, TV news stations began interviewing the few people who’d be harmed by the Mayors vision: those who have Hay Fever. Complaining that the extra trees would increase the Pollen count in the city and worsen their symptoms, they became the Victims of an otherwise delightful plan. No one is suggesting that their concerns are illegitimate or unworthy; however, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that we cannot have policy dictated by a tiny minority who will be negatively affected.
We don’t ask hostages whether we should capitulate to their captures demands. Neither do we ask their parents. Au contraire, to consider their ‘perspective’ would be criminal. When the community has a conversation about serious issues, if proponents of a viewpoint wish to be taken seriously, they ought to consider abandoning the tactic of parading under the Victims Party Line banner. It’s simply valueless, and has nothing of import.
Predictably, accompanying the usage of these new terms are certain tactics, transplanted from other communities to address different kinds of concerns, which have begun ever more frequently popping up in our community. One example is the March. Organizing a March is a popular ploy used to ignite and excite a Conversation about an issue or concern. Jews, including Orthodox Jews, often backed by the leading Gedolim of the day, have used marches in the past on issues ranging from saving Jews during World War 2, to protesting the disengagement from Gaza, and many others in between. In our community, too, we’ve marched now and again. The common denominator is that in every case the intended audience was an outside authority, be it the local or national government, political party, or just a show of protest or support to the wider worldly world.
Marching as a tool is only possible when the aforementioned new terms have gained wide usage. One cannot enunciate an argument with any amount of sophistication in a protest or March. A March is a categorical affair: its slogans are unyielding, its placards are totalitarian, and its participants themselves will not show up unless their message is an unequivocal 180 degree about-face from the current statuesque, and that is be done immediately. A March, by its very nature, demands swift and total submission. Marching, therefore, isn’t a tool in our toolbox of Change; it’s a tactic we should be loath to tolerate.
Clichés aren’t just thought-killers, they necessarily lead to engaging in tactics that are foreign to our community, indeed to Jewish, mores and norms. And that’s not because of ‘Tradition’ or a bashful inferiority complex, but simply because at their roots – the premise and foundational precepts of such clichés, platitudes and tactics — are antithetical to Judaism. Conceding the terms of the debate, literally, is the first and most important enabler of defeat.
again
I think I might be the only one but what in the world are you talking/writing about?It’s a wonderful creative writing essay but WHAT IS YOUR POINT???If you would put things simply perhaps the message would be received in a more coherent manner.This is not an exercise in writing skills and you obvious want to expound upon the “monsters” but Im lost and confused- sorry.
if i understand
If i understand you correctly, my position is that change is always warranted when good ideas and new innovations bring growth and further the cause of Judaism.Stale ways of the past do not always foster progress where it is indeed needed.
You are in severe denial if you think everything needs to be squashed.
I DIDN'T READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE
I ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID!!!
THIS IS WHAT IS DESTROYING OUR COMMUNITY OUR CHILDREN AND OUR INSTITUTIONS!!!
Huh?
You said you didn’t read it.
what exactly is destroying the community?
This was a beautifully written well thought out very jewish article that articulated some real issues going on not only in ch but jewish community’s the world over!
Pedant
You hit the nail on the head.
We are victims of our own success. Finally someone has the awarenesss to start the conversation — this long overdue conversation about vicitims. Victims who stand in the way of progress.
Bluster
This article is full of bluster, short on substance. Its a rant of inconsequence and truly shortsighted, and insulting to many people.
Ignorance is not bliss, it is EVIL!!!
You are seeing things backwards:
Like the Rabbi who didn’t have time to do an errand for his parents because he was too busy learning
הלכות כבוד אב ואם.
YES!!! We have to march, scream, shout, use diplomacy, do whatever we have to, with our last ounces of strength, to get molesters, get-refusers, and all the other evils that are unfortunately rampant, and very much still in our midst,OUT!!!
resident
Dont understand a word
Gibberish!
High falutin words full of ambiguity and innuendo! You surely win the prize in writing pointlessly!
Heshey the delivery boy
So, what are you saying?
SEREL MANESS
so when is the next election in our community? the sooner the better,we need real leaders,people who will get things done here,get rid of the cancerous in our mist they care about truth,sick and tire of non doer
עשה לך רב
Some vigilant groups protecting victims of abuse are themselves abusive. They call for the resigning of Rabbonim from their positions. This is beyond the scope of their expertise. They have no right to be advisers or decition makers about Rabbonim and halacha since they themselves are mchallel Shabbos
Etc etc.
confusion
To the author of this article:
Please read what you wrote and consider what you were trying to actually say. I can refute each point, but the sum of all parts is utter nonsense.
OK I’ll go for it anyway:
1. Al tadin es chavercha ad shetagia limkomo, from actual Pirkie Avos, not my imagination. Oh and a person is not G-d.
2. Raise awareness- what no more under the carpet shoving? I’m gonna cry that was my favorite thing to do- well after dealing with the results of so much that was already shoved under there…
3. A conversation is never fair? Why not? You don’t have answers? Oh, I understand, so just make sure never to talk about anything. EVER. That’s going to do the trick. Oh and about that science thing- when did we NOT have science??? It’s all around us, it’s medicine, it’s the Rebbetzin’s articles in Talks and Tales… What is wrong with science? Do you belong to a different religion maybe?
4. Rabbi’s are perfect. Always. Everyone agrees. Say it enough and people will believe it? Actually, your attitude is the start of people just ignoring the Rabbi’s just not asking them anything. How about a middle ground- they are human, but we aim for respectability and honorability- when it is there applaud it, when it is not, correct what needs to be corrected.
5. Yes silence victims. Oh course! Actually I have no idea what 5 is about… so I can’t really comments
a bystander
1. The author addressed judging actions not people, and how we are often meant to. E.g. so & so maybe you should rethink x. Reply: dont judge me. That is faulty.
2. Dont brush things under the rug. Go like a mentch to the authorities (and time permitting, to the Rov first) and handle them. “Raise awareness” is an attempt to make people more aware of something than the maybe should be. If a crisis is private to various people or fading into the past maybe it should stay that way.
3. Notice conversation is in quotes. Surely referring to crooked lobbying rather than honest and intelectual discourse. “They” apparently actually want to manipulate, not conversate.
4. This one is laughable. Do you think you’re going to tell the Rabbis what to do!?! They are in the position they are in to tell you what to do, and you are meant to follow these Judges not scrutinize them. And those who think they are some foreign power trying to impose some foreign law upon you, get well. They are simply trying to implement Halochoh to the best of their vast knowledge and sensitivities.
5. When a policy has merits for all while unintentionally adversely affecting some, it is fair for the affect on these victims to be considered, however it is intellectually corrupt to have the victims serve as the spokesperson for the general policy for all. It attempts to effect emotional sway over what should be a sound intellectually honest decision. Again, the affect on people should be rightfully considered, but washing te intellect with emotional overload is an attempt to corrupt the intellectual process.
Seemingly all bar one of the issues the author highlighted are methods used to compromise proper, right and upstanding intellectual processes and conclusions, and the implementation of them. In nearly every one you can see how emotion masquerades as intellect. They are examples of sheker at it’s core; a chazir which sticks out it’s split hooves like it’s kosher.
Hashem Yishmor.
lomichup
What in the world are you talking about ?
Something tells me that you are NOT quite sure yourself but just a sad, lonely and bored individual.
Daniel Botnick
This essay is a polite and beautiful way to say,”stop the BS! Enough with politically correct clichés! There is a right and a wrong and there is a G-d-given and time tested way of distinguishing them. Yasher co-ach to the author.
DG
This is possibly the best op-ed I’ve ever read on CrownHeights.info. You’ve truly nailed it. Yesher koach gadol! (o:
to #12
Being Mechalel Shabbos does not kill any on unlike brushing child molestation under the rug aids and assists death.
cool
I enjoyed reading this article and agree with most of it.
I especially enjoyed the heated comments of the do-gooders who are busy with the yelling instead of actually doing what has to be done to help the victims or inspire change.
Real change comes when we are cool headed, quiet, and most importantly, focused on DOING (not screaming).
It is so predictable that whenever someone wants to write from the perspective of Torah there will be heated angry comments against Rabbonim etc.
This has become the norm.
Get heated and angry-it makes you sound progressive, liberal and open minded. What insanity.
Perplexed
While reading this op ed I found myself feeling more annoyed and aggravated than anything else. It seems to me that every elaboration of the topics represented a sarcastic, negative, or closed-minded attitude. Certainly the writer is entitled to his/her opinion, but in my opinion, the writer just doesn’t want to hear any nuance of change, any additional way to describe already existing concepts. For example, does the writer think that “raising awareness” is somehow contrary to deepening learning or looking at something with deeper perspective? Am I to think that an adult wouldn’t want a “conversation” involving listening to the other person with a desire to understand more deeply what that person is expressing, and visa versa?
When a victim is given the control, isn’t that no more or no less than allowing that victim to have as much “say” as he/she is entitled to, assuming a victim has been harmed by a wrongdoer? Does the writer want to shut the victim and supporters up, while the perpetrator and supporters get to control consequences?
I don’t understand. Who is this person? It feels to me like the writer has something else going on, maybe some self doubt, guilt, confusion, denial, rigidity of heart and mind……something……
Look who's talking
Well, its a shame that my too frum husband has to walk down the street closing his eyes BECAUSE…
He’s SICK and TIRED of you OPENMINDED people that have to where skirts right above your knees and a slit that reaches your panty line. Oh and what about your hair. Your soooo open minded that you dont need to cover your hair… And your flaunting your beautiful cleavage for all to see. I mean come on???
Whats really going on is you open minded people are RUINING THE REBBES SHCHUNAH!
עשה לך רב
To no. 18.
Being mchallel Shabbos does not kill anyone but it does disqualify one from giving opinions about Rabbonim and halacha.
To #21
Huh?!
To #21
I don’t think the op ed writer was including your concern, and I don’t really understand your assertion that open minded people flaunt cleavage! I am somewhat open minded about many things, yet I do not find that flaunting my cleavage is tasteful or appropriate. I do, however, think that raising awareness in very appropriate. We are human beings! We do not know everything, nor are we immune to arrogance and/or ignorance at some time or other. So, why not “have a conversation”, explore “raising awareness”, be it within the form of Talmud or any other source of Yiddishkite?! We are Jews! We study, we learn. Do you think that is not open-minded? Everyone can not think exactly the same way, and most of us have the capacity to understand that there are times when improvements, corrections, or atonement are in order. If that’s open minded, then good! Open minded doesn’t mean careless, shallow, unthinking, or irresponsible, or blanket oblivion to harmful actions. If harmful activity exist, it is our obligation to address it. Conversation is necessary.