Unorthodox

(Hat tip: Mirie) This fundraising project on Kickstarter looks interesting:

Unorthodox is a feature documentary that follows three teenagers from the modern Orthodox community as they spend a post-high school year studying in Israel. Tzipi, an intellectually gifted young woman, travels with intentions of clarifying her problems with Orthodox interpretations of Jewish law. Jake, a musician, wants to follow the religion but doesn’t see how he can reconcile his faith with his professional ambitions. Chaim, a half-Dominican bad-boy, undertakes his year of study without thinking about the possibilities of religious growth; he goes to Israel because tuition is paid for by his rabbis. In addition to documentary cinematography shot in the US and Israel, Tzipi, Chaim and Jake film themselves throughout the year with video diaries, offering an incredibly vivid and intimate glimpse into their lives. Narration throughout the film weaves Anna’s own story—of leaving the modern Orthodox community—with that of the three subjects, lending a very personal glimpse into the world of Orthodox Judaism.

They're looking to gather many small donations to complete the project, which is most of the way there already (all filming was completed, etc.). If you're interested in seeing this, read about it and donate!

Speaking of unorthodox, Chana sums up the YU Beacon story best: Writing a (poor) weak erotica-style piece with some confusing details about a girl's first-or-not time having sex with a guy she is-or-isn't in a serious relationship with is about attention-seeking, not about discussing an issue seriously. If they wished to discuss the issue of pre-marital sex among Orthodox people seriously, they could have done so by actually discussing it as a serious piece [much as Chana did with other aspects of the subject, as she notes]. Yes, there would still be much objection to this - a reasonable argument could be made for or against YU's school newspapers being the proper forum for such discussions - but at least it would be defensible [I should disclose that I did not think even Chana's were all necessary/appropriate, but they were at least defensible]. Oh, and in case it wasn't clear this was about attention, leaking it to national media is rather immature as well: Deal with the fallout within the context you wrote a piece, don't seek media to try and force and/or embarrass your university. Kudos to YU and its students for standing strongly against this, and it seems that the general consensus even from media was "...that was crappy writing."

And finally, singer/rapper Matisyahu shaved his beard. He's also still Orthodox, not "Un-Orthodox" (and looks really tired). So... who cares?

EZ Reads 3/16/11

Well, at least the blog is readable right now; we hope to have some more changes over the coming weeks. For anyone interested in joining my NCAA pool, the rules and payment how-to info (1/$10 or 3/$25) are on the site; here's the link. Good luck! The password is ezzie11. I estimate about 60 brackets once everyone finishes entering theirs - a nice number.

• Jameel has a really interesting post about the Origins of Purim.
• Seth Godin on when things are declared "dead":
  

  Great music wasn't created by the first people to grab an electric guitar or a synthesizer. Great snowboarding moves didn't come from the guy who invented the snowboard... No one thinks Gutenberg was a great author, and some of the best books will be written long after books are truly dead.
  Only when an innovation is dead can the real work begin.

•  Yaacov Lozowick with an interesting side story from the Fogel massacre: Some Palestinians are not only shocked by what happened, but speaking out in public about it.

  I've been reporting in the Palestinian territories for many years, and the responses I recorded today in Shchem (Nablus) really surprised me. They seem to show a substantial distance between the PA leadership and regular people. The leadership (he cites Abbas and others) are muttering a condemnation of the murder, mostly not in Arabic and not in front of their public, and then they're condemning Israeli settlements. Nothing new here. On the other hand, I went to Shchem today, and was very surprised. People on the street were willing to condemn the murder unequivocally, in Arabic and in Hebrew, with no embarrassment, in front of the camera, and even identify themselves. [He shows some examples]. I've been covering the Palestinian territories for years, but this I've never seen before. In the middle of town, publicly, people had no compunctions openly to condemn the murder of children.

  Lozowick continues with some intriguing reasons why this may be the case, and I think some of them are quite possibly true; I would add that the speed and access to media likely helps as well. Interesting, and hopefully the beginning of change in the region. Eldar's report, including the interviews with Palestinians in Shechem, is translated on YouTube as well.
• One of the worst pieces I've read in a while (and that's saying something) - an article questioning why the Maccabeats' video doesn't include women. Really? An all-male acapella group? Silliness.
• Kosher on a Budget de-clutters and gains - peace of mind and some savings. I've done this and wholeheartedly agree. (I actually need to do this again...) Organizing makes it a lot easier to see what you need - and what you don't. It's tempting to think that if you buy something then something will be simpler, but often it's easier to just tidy up a bit.
• A Soldier's Mother on words that break your heart.
• Tikkun Olam reprints Caroline Glick's fantastic essay.

EZ Reads 3/11/11

Some interesting and fun reads/views before Shabbos comes...

• A huge kiddush Hashem by some YU students, who noticed while doing a magic show that there were unused labs in a public school - so they volunteered to conduct science labs for the kids.
• The Yated (on Matzav, via reader YS) has an interesting op-ed entitled Life is Not a Popularity Contest, which discusses how we must start speaking out in the community against those who act improperly and dishonestly.
  

  Prominent shady characters are given carte blanche to enact their agendas and the dishonest are permitted to continue their detrimental behavior and actions. We beat gingerly around the bush, dancing around the edges, afraid to proclaim the truth.
  
  What are we afraid of? Why are we silent?

  Amen. I hope this is the start of a transition, and I'm curious what set it in motion. (Orthonomics is also pleasantly surprised.) Nice bonus: I may not face as much fallout as originally thought from the Honesty and the Jewish Community series after all.
• Adventures in Chinuch starts from the beginnings and questions if the root of the problem in Jewish education is perhaps the parents.
• Absolutely hilarious routine at Life in Israel on an Israeli in a NY restaurant.
• Tamar Snyder interviews Dr. Alan Kadish about Touro, filling Dr. Lander's shoes, and where the school is headed. Interesting if unsurprising that Touro is focused on being an educational rather than a research school.
• ZionTrain posts an oldie that is a take on how halachos seem to be born in today's times.
• Jewish men can jump? An article on Jews dunking... I've seen many guys dunk, but only a couple who did so in a game (and on a fastbreak only).
  

Have a wonderful Shabbos!

EZ Reads 3/9/11

Happy engagiversary to Serach and me! I've updated the tabs at the top (which I will try to make more noticeable in the near future) to include and be up to date on the various series that are ongoing on this blog. If you would like to read through any major series, those are the best places to start. Some fun links today:

• Following up on their previous analysis, The New York Times determines that American Jews lead the happiest lives of all Americans. Brilliant first comment on the article (just saw it was removed!): Sure, most of them are happy, but those other 30%, boy can they complain!
• Mishpacha has a very good article this week explaining charter schools and how they can (and usually have not) impacted Orthodox schools and yeshivos. Excerpt:

  Unlike the situation in Brooklyn and East Brunswick, Florida’s Ben Gamla charter school network has attracted a solid Jewish majority in its student body, and the system is growing by leaps and bounds. Following the Hollywood branch’s popularity, Ben Gamla schools were opened in nearby Plantation (in 2009) and Miami Beach (in 2010). There is an independent after-school religious studies program available to students throughout the Ben Gamla network.
  
  However, even these schools’ success comes at a limited cost to local frum institutions. Sources familiar with the makeup of the school’s student body estimate that only about 5 percent of Ben Gamla students are from frum homes. Currently, the four-year-old network’s Jewish students are primarily either non-Orthodox, who would otherwise have attended public school or Conservative or non-denominational Jewish day schools; or special-needs students who require costly services not subsidized in private schools.

  The article is in this week's Mishpacha, which you can subscribe to here.
• Did you hear? The Maccabeats came out with a new video for Purim! (Yes, I heard about 100 times.) Admittedly, Uri Westrich put together another good one - great job sticking with themed jokes, like the sombrero and the dripping jelly.
• Chana realizes there is a difference between compassion and understanding, and publicity and support, when it comes to homosexuality in the Orthodox community.
• Finally! xkcd pokes fun at ads which say things like "Sales of up to 15% - or more!" So... you mean you have sales going on at various percentages below and above 15%? Why not just pick any number below the max percentage discount so it sounds bigger? Do people really suck this bad at math? This always frustrated me.
• Michael Medved has a great piece in today's Wall Street Journal decrying the propensity of Republicans to label Obama as a radical/extremist. This trait is especially true in the Orthodox Jewish community, and it doesn't do anybody any favors. Medved notes that realizing that Obama's views are rather mainstream Democrat is important if the GOP wishes to win the next election.
• Finally, an old neighbor from Cleveland who is absolutely hilarious has a number of videos doing various impressions of all types of people. Her latest is up on YouTube and has already picked up 11,000+ views, so I feel like it's okay to put it on the blog this time:
  
  
  I wish some of her other stuff would go up, too - she's just really, really funny.

Agenda Driven Data

About a year and a half ago, I was interviewed by a large Jewish organization regarding the Jewish Economics Survey I was conducting (and am looking to release a second version of shortly). Very quickly, the interview headed downward: The interviewer's questions were extremely leading, and he was clearly looking for me to answer in specific ways, primarily along the lines of "if someone would pump money into this, we'd be able to solve this problem" - or in other words, exactly the opposite of what I actually felt. When I would start to answer "well, not really...", I'd quickly get cut off and another question would be asked in its place. Unsurprisingly, the footage which included me was cut just before the video was aired at a large event the organization ran a few weeks later, which apparently championed the need for people to donate more money to help solve the Jewish world's economic problems.

Agenda driven data is one of the hardest obstacles to overcome - whether in the Orthodox world or the world as a whole. For all the obfuscation regarding the Iraq War, the most legitimate potential criticism is not whether the Bush administration had the data to justify invasion, but whether the gathering and weighing of that data was agenda driven in such a way that they were more prone to give it credence than they otherwise would or should have been. More recently, it was impressive to see three liberal publications discuss how liberal or other agenda driven bias is causing major issues in extremely important scientific fields by placing ideology over science.

In The New York Times about two weeks ago, an article about social psychologists' bias tells an eye-opening story:

[Dr. Jonathan Haidt] polled his audience at the San Antonio Convention Center, starting by asking how many considered themselves politically liberal. A sea of hands appeared, and Dr. Haidt estimated that liberals made up 80 percent of the 1,000 psychologists in the ballroom. When he asked for centrists and libertarians, he spotted fewer than three dozen hands. And then, when he asked for conservatives, he counted a grand total of three.

Prior to that, The Atlantic noted that the structure of academia caused research to emphasize the sensational over fact, stating in Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science that

To get funding and tenured positions, and often merely to stay afloat, researchers have to get their work published in well-regarded journals, where rejection rates can climb above 90 percent. Not surprisingly, the studies that tend to make the grade are those with eye-catching findings. [...] Imagine, though, that five different research teams test an interesting theory that’s making the rounds, and four of the groups correctly prove the idea false, while the one less cautious group incorrectly “proves” it true through some combination of error, fluke, and clever selection of data. Guess whose findings your doctor ends up reading about in the journal, and you end up hearing about on the evening news?

And The New Yorker had a fascinating piece entitled The decline effect and the scientific method about the same time discussing how studies which were (and are) used to explain and create numerous theories and ideas are increasingly difficult to replicate, from the effectiveness of anti-depressants to memory to numerous other fields, causing huge questions to be raised about the efficacy and accuracy not only of the studies but of all that has been based on the findings of them. No matter the study, the more it is replicated, the less true it seems to be.

If we as a Jewish community wish to begin fixing our problems, examples such as these show we can't use agenda driven studies to come to conclusions. If we do, ultimately we'll rush in one direction that looks good, only to find over and over that it's just not working the way it's supposed to - and then it will be too late. When the JES began two years ago, the primary purpose was to put together a simple guide for young singles and couples to help them when they began living independently or started their marriage. As the data came in, however, its findings taught so much about what problems existed and how people viewed those problems and the community's economics as a whole - and pointed to, but didn't prove, what might be able to help.

It is high time we put in the effort to collect and truly understand as much data as possible about the Jewish community and its various underlying problems and their causes - and its strengths and what allows those to thrive. Perhaps (!) a data-driven approach will allow us to ultimately help the Jewish community, rather than simply push off what seems to be an increasingly close, inevitable collapse of the structure currently in place.

On Orthodox Jewish Education

In the recent post on Hemorrhaging Orthodoxy on this site, and in the various posts others have written on other sites, one constant theme is that Orthodoxy has at least fared better than its Reform and Conservative counterparts, with an attrition rate of about 17% - far smaller than the others. Much of the credit for this is given to schools, and that the existence and attendance of Jewish schools makes students more likely to identify themselves as Jewish.

While this knowledge is helpful in terms of knowing that having Jewish day schools helps create and maintain a strong Jewish identity, what does it teach us about the quality of education? If a very large percentage of Orthodox Jewish children attend Jewish day schools, yet the attrition rate is 17%, what does that say about the quality of the schooling as it relates to the ideals we are trying to give over to them? What exactly is the goal of Jewish education, anyway?

Yair Daar at Adventures in Chinuch recently discussed this subject as part of a greater post wondering how his relatively new, small blog was one of the few that exist whatsoever on the subject of Orthodox Jewish education. He noted that as much interest as there seems to be in lowering tuition, there's almost no discussion whatsoever about the goals of the education teachers are supposed to be imparting:

My assumption (I would love to find out that I am wrong) is that most of our community members barely give thought the different goals that can be established by our schools. Now, such ignorance of school practices may seem well-rationalized; most people cannot claim to be experts or near-experts in educational practice. Therefore, the claim can be made that the layperson has no business discussing and influencing matters related to education. Fund-raising, sure. Budget, sure. Special events, mishloach manos, sure and sure. But not education.

The truth however, is the opposite. Parents and community leaders should be included in the discussion as to what the schools' goals should be. What do we want our kids knowing when graduate? What skills should they have? What lessons should they have learned? What direction are they being pointed in. These questions are all answerable by a seriously-thinking person. Educational methods, maybe not so much. But definitely the goals.

 Please read his whole post, it's extremely eye-opening.

However, even if that issue would somehow be solved in the immediate future - something which seems extremely unlikely - what would be next for Orthodoxy? Certainly the current format (usually referred to as legacy schools) seems to be a massive economic house of cards in most places - tuition is usually referred to as astronomical, and is wiping out many families, while schools often have trouble making payments and keeping their staff fully paid. Other suggestions, while interesting, have their own problems: Charter schools, hailed by some as a great alternative, are found by others to be extremely lacking in the actual educational aspect. For example, Orthonomics linked to and discussed briefly a guest post on the Bergen County Yeshiva Tuition blog by the Department of Day School & Educational Services of the Orthodox Union on the possibility of Jewish charter schools in New Jersey, which is also worth a read, particularly if your state allows charter schools. But just a few weeks ago (via Freakonomics) Joanne Barkan, in a good piece in Dissent Magazine, wrote that Stanford University's study of charter schools found that 83% of them perform worse or no better than traditional public schools. On the flip side, an educator I know who is working with charter-like schools in Florida has found they are doing quite well - far better than other alternatives. As a community, we don't want to rush into yet another poor approach to education, both from an economic and an educational point of view.

We also need to be honest about what we're trying to accomplish with our schools. In a study performed by Yeshiva University's Azrieli Graduate School of Jewish Education recently (thanks SIL), there are a few interesting notes. One of the most interesting points to me is how much of an emphasis is made on instructing schools to use common sense, cost accounting, and utilizing their staff more fully so there isn't so much overlap and expensive specialization. One might think these are obvious, but apparently they either were not or the study felt it important to reiterate them regardless. But what is particularly interesting is its findings that a group of schools in three communities had a student:teacher ratio of 6.5:1, as opposed to 9:1 in an independent school. In a 260-student school, that would amount to 11 more teachers, the cost of which is obviously expensive. While not discussed in the summary, an oft-cited complaint about the cost of education are the additional schools or classes that seem to exist for the purpose of job creation. Without speculating as to whether that is the case or not, it certainly behooves us as a community to make sure that students are being given an optimal ratio that also doesn't blow costs out of proportion with what is necessary. The study cites one school which realized a $1 million savings potential by changing its ratio from 7.2:1 to 9:1.

On a related note, the other statistic in the study that was a bit shocking was that on average, 80% of a school's costs are personnel related (15% are purchased services, 5% are purchased goods). [Ezzie: I'm not sure where land and building costs fall in, or if they were excluded for some reason. If excluded, this makes a bit more sense.] The study does not break down which of those are teachers, and which are other administration members and/or other staff, only noting with a * that "The significant majority of personnel costs is for personnel related to educational services." What's particularly striking about this is if the majority of the costs are personnel related to education, then it comes down to one of two primary issues: If they are overstaffed, it explains why they are running at a deficit. If they are not overstaffed, then a model where the tuition of the students in a classroom can't cover a teacher's pay is obviously doomed to failure.

In Yair's post, he states regarding education itself, and I would expand it to the economic side of education as well, that

...the current climate is one ready for change. The forthcoming generation of Orthodox Jewish parents, in which I include myself, are in many ways different from our parents. We have experienced Torah-learning in quantity and quality that is unprecedented. We do not have the same concerns of Jewish identity in America that previous generations struggled with. Many of us understand how to balance serious Torah-learning with a "normal" lifestyle. If we don't demand that schools meet our criteria for a meaningful Jewish life, and if we allow inertia to be the deciding force in our children's education, we will have failed miserably.

Amen.

EZ Reads 2/14/11

There's a reason I'm mostly putting up links for now, and not yet writing; hopefully that will be able to be made more clear soon enough. Meanwhile, here are some interesting and enjoyable links for today - many of which are flying all over on Facebook, et al:

• The NYTimes had a nice piece on the YU Seforim sale - the schedule of which is on Josh's Parshablog here.
• The Wall Street Journal discusses the possibility of seeing a Walmart in New York City in the near future. The most fascinating part to me was the first line:

  Last year, New York City residents spent $196 million at Wal-Mart... That's a pretty remarkable sum, given that there isn't a single Wal-Mart in New York City.

  No kidding.
• A video on what the OU does that I've been meaning to link to for a while. Well done.
• Ariella of Kallah Magazine has an interesting piece on Examiner about how GroupOn's handling of the negative reaction to their Super Bowl (and other) ad(s) is both impressive and a good lesson for marriages.
• RafiG with a clip about the first African-American in the Israeli Army. The history of how he ended up there is what I found most interesting. 
• The HuffPo has a great breakdown on the potential NFL lockout and how that all came to be and how it works, and what options are available to each side. It's fascinating in terms of how one thinks about business, freedom, entertainment, and how those all intersect and interact with one another.
• A hilarious Family Feud clip on "something that gets passed around."

Being Gray in the Modern Orthodox World: A Conversation

Transcribed by Eli D. Clark
This is for Chana, the original can be found here

Rabbi Schwartz: Welcome everyone. Our topic tonight is “Being Gray in the Modern Orthodox World.” Each of our panelists will talk about how it feels to discover that you are really yeshivish after growing up Modern Orthodox. Before we begin, a few ground rules: We are not going to discuss Hashkofoh, Halochoh or the Heisman Trophy. For that we turn to Gedolei Yisroel. Please save your questions for later; if you wrap them in airtight plastic bags, they should stay fresh for days. Our first speaker is Chezkie.

Chezkie: Thank you, Rabbi Schwartz.

Growing up, I never realized I was gray. I went to day school and Camp Moshava . I went mixed swimming (which was about 95% mixed and about 5% swimming). For seven straight years I watched “Buffy the Vampire Slayer.” I wore my baseball cap backward.

But there were hints from an early age. I remember, around age 6, I cried when the barber cut off my payos. (He also removed half my ear lobe.) I always liked wearing black. When my friends played Nintendo, I would sneak off and read “The Little Midrash Says.”

But no one wants to admit that he’s, you know, different. So in high school I started going out with girls. But deep down I knew I’d rather be sitting in a Kollel with guys.

In 12th grade I finally told one of my Rabbeim I was gray. He was very supportive. He gave me a bunch of Artscroll biographies. He got me a subscription to the Jewish Observer. He took me shopping for my first black hat.

The hardest thing was telling my family. My father had taken me to baseball games, to the Israel Day Parade. He dreamed that I would study medicine and join his practice treating nervous gall bladders. Today he realizes that I will probably live in Passaic , work in computers and have children named Shraga and Pessie.

The good news is that I have met other guys who like wearing jackets, even though they grew up in Teaneck and the Five Towns . They helped me understand that I was not alone, that Boro Park and Lakewood are full of guys like me.

Rabbi Schwartz: Chezkie, thank you. Our next panelist is Nachi G.

Nachi: Hello everyone. My name is Nachi and I’m gray. It takes some courage to say that. I remember in high school all my friends were really into sports and I just wanted to sing like Lipa Schmeltzer.

My brother and sister would make comments. They’d say, “Nathan’s such a frummie.” And my mother would say, “Don’t say that. Maybe he’ll end up that way.” She tried to get me to join NCSY, Bnei Akiva, anything where I might meet some girls. But all I kissed were mezuzos.

As a teenager I stopped eating chodosh and cholov nochri and pas akum – I lost a lot of weight. My mother got upset, but my dad said it was just a passing phase, like the time I went four months without changing my socks.

I started talking yeshivish, everything was geshmak or gevalt. In my bedroom I hung a photo of Rav Aharon Kotler. I stopped shaving, but everyone thought I was trying to look like Brad Pitt.

After high school my father wanted me to go to a Religious Zionist yeshiva – Shaalvim or Hakotel. But I went to Toras Moshe and after Elul I switched to the Mir. What an experience! I sat in a bais medrash with a thousand guys who had stopped learning math in fourth grade.

Around Chanuka, my parents came to visit me in Israel and I told them I was gray. (At the time I was really black. It was a white lie.) To my surprise they were great, totally supportive. My mother switched to cholov yisroel and stopped bringing her smutty magazines into the house, stuff like Popular Mechanics and Accounting Today. My dad said I could go to the Mir in Brooklyn , as long as I promised to study accounting at Touro. He even gave me permission to live in Crown Heights , on the condition that I not marry a Lubavitcher.

My sister is still hostile. Maybe it’s because I said her Tinkerbell nightlight was pritzusdik. But I’m working on her. Last month I bought her a book called “The Adventures of Chanoh Soroh Fraydel, the Shayna Maydel in a Shtaty Shaytel.”

Rabbi Schwartz: Our third panelist is Mordy S.

Mordy: Despite what you see, it actually took me a long time to admit that I was gray.

Today I look like a typical chunyuk. But I didn’t always. I grew up in Boston , went to Maimonides, learned Gemara with girls. One of my best friends growing up was Irish Catholic. (Sadly, he was injured in a freak miniature golfing accident and now speaks only in iambic pentameter.) My mother taught me my bar mitzva parsha.

So there I was – a poster boy for Modern Orthodoxy. But little by little, I started to change. Once I criticized my sister for wearing pants and talking to boys; she was four and a half. I stopped going to movies. I stopped reading English books not published by Targum Press. I stopped eating broccoli and cauliflower. (Not because of bugs; I just hate vegetables.)

At my parents’ suggestion, I started seeing a psychologist. He was a shul member, a friend of the family. He dabbled in hypnosis. Every time he heard the word “marmalade,” he would start singing the “The Whiffenpoofs Song” in Pig Latin. At our first session, I told him, “Modern Orthodoxy is hollow and hypocritical.” “Yes,” he replied, “but what don’t you like about it?” He suggested I go to an Ivy League college for a few years, then decide. I told him that we were created to learn Torah, not to study “The Architecture of the Igloo.”

My parents suggested I change therapists. The new guy was an old guy, 83 years old and certain that all religious devotion is a sign of neurosis. “Do you think God really cares if you hold your tzitzis during Shema in your left hand between your ring finger and pinkie?” he asked me. “I don’t know about God, but I care more about the Mishnoh Bruroh’s opinion than yours,” I replied. After six months, he announced his retirement, left Boston and opened the first Dunkin’ Donuts outlet at Ataturk International Airport in Istanbul .

I asked my Rebbe what to do with certain Modern Orthodox seforim I still had from high school (Soloveitchik, Steinsaltz, Ibn Ezra). He said that they were not vaday kefiroh, so I mustn’t burn them, but it would be assur to give them away, because the recipient might read them and think they are true. In the meantime, I hid them in a box under my collection of Star Trek action figures.

I am still dealing with a lot of issues, but today I can proudly look at myself in the mirror and say out loud, “I am gray.”

Rabbi Schwartz: Our final panelist is Rachel O.

Rachel: It is very exciting to be here and be called by my new name “Rachel,” after a lifetime under the name “ Shannon .” I was born Christian. I started my conversion process with a respected rabbi, who unfortunately was not schooled in telephone etiquette and had a lot of friends he wanted me to …

Rabbi Schwartz: Um, Rachel? Do you know what the topic of this panel is?

Rachel: Sure. “Being a Ger in the Modern Orthodox World.”

Rabbi Schwartz: I think that’s all for tonight. Thank you to our panelists, our audience and the sponsor of this evening’s program: Borsalino. Since 1857: When Your Father-in-Law Can Buy You the Very Best.

Chilling Out

I just read this article in The Commentator written by a friend of my brother's and thought it was excellent. It does not say anything new, but it is a good reminder for both students and for anyone who attempts anything in life.

Excerpt:

...the number displayed on the screen was the score that I had received on my first mid-term, the one that would find itself plastered on my personal transcript:

88.

With this frightful realization, my heart sank. Oh, the horror of it! The shame! How did this happen? How had I allowed this to happen?

For days, I couldn’t put that horrid number - 88 - out of my mind. I thought about it as I tried to fall asleep at night. It irked me in the daytime too. Maybe Professor Luders had made a mistake? Maybe he didn’t count up the points right? Unlikely. Maybe he hated me? I grew paranoid with the myriad possibilities as to why I had been cursed with the scholastic tragedy that is a B. I was angry. I was upset. I wanted answers. Sure it was a B+. Some might even call that a “good grade”. But in my eyes, it was still just a B.

Why me?

I looked around YU at my fellow students, and many of them seemed to be equally mired in their own grade-induced hysteria. One of my good friends, after receiving a C on his English paper, related to me with utmost sincerity that “his life was over,” and that he’d “never get into law school now.” I felt for him. I could tell he meant it. But he sounded ridiculous. And I realized how ridiculous I too had sounded and acted in the aftermath of that 88.

And so, with the benefit of a little hindsight and some much-needed perspective, I arrived at the following conclusion:

Everyone needs to chill out about his grades.

Read the rest!

Discussing Discussions vs. Disgusting Discussions

With thanks to Binny, who made the point so well.

There is an oft-used tactic in modern debate which is extremely effective, yet quite obfuscating were one to consider not just its methods, but what exactly it's about. Confused yet?

...Exactly.

While many public debates are debates over the substantive issues at hand, there are issues where this is not the case; rather, the issue at hand is itself whether a discussion should even be held. In other words, the debate is about what the discussion would be, not what the discussion would be about.

In cases like this, the oft-used tactic is to paint those on side A of the issue as "intolerant", and those on side B as very "tolerant", because side B is open to "discussion" and side A is not. However, this is incredibly twisted: It is not that side A is not open to the idea of discussion, but that in a particular subject, that the "discussion" itself is the issue and they are against it. Side B, itself unwilling to accept this as a legitimate point of view, then tries to paint this as an intolerant approach and tries to sway those who might otherwise agree with side A by claiming their "intolerance" shows them to be "extremists". After all, they argue, "What's wrong with just having a discussion?"

This happens with so many issues, but the recent panel at YU on homosexuality in the Orthodox world is a perfect example. A number of people mentioned to me that after the hubbub began, a group was started on Facebook for people who "Support a YU that Engages the Issues". What these people so obviously miss is that those in YU who were against the panel did engage the issue - and felt strongly that what YU did was wrong. As is clear from the group's introduction*, the group is one that strongly supported the panel that occurred and wishes for more such panels to take place. What they are not accepting of is discussion as to whether or not such panels are appropriate in the first place. (One person who tried to question as much on the group was quickly shot down, labeled as a "bad guy", his views as "bigoted", and was told that those who support the group were "good guys" and "open-minded" - and that was all in the first comment!)

It is important to recognize, particularly in issues regarding morality, that often the debate is over whether a topic is itself even up for discussion. Both sides of such a debate are well aware that even having such a discussion is itself a shift of the lines of debate and one which often is used to blur the discussion itself completely. Again, using the YU panel as an example, by taking halacha out of the discussion it shifted the debate from "how should we work with someone who is struggling with homosexuality but wishes to be Orthodox" or even "to what extent should homosexuality be a public subject" to "how should we react to someone who has homosexual relationships" (as two of the panelists openly acknowledged having or craving such relationships). Without many people even being cognizant of it, this shifts the debate into one of how to accept and make someone feel accepted despite their actions instead of whether they should be accepted because of those actions.

Just to switch the example to another subject briefly to show this approach is not confined to this situation, this is similar to how one can shift the discussion of abortion with ease {note: in conversation, not in historical political discourse}. Instead of allowing that abortion is a wrong, sad event, but that there may be exceptions where it should be allowed (if not encouraged), people will note that abortion is a necessity in some types of cases and therefore should always be legal - just in case. This then shifts the debate to whether abortion should be allowed only in specific cases, or even for anyone who wishes to abort her child early on in a pregnancy for any number of a variety of arguable reasons. That then sometimes shifts the debate even further as to whether partial-birth abortion** should be allowed to those who wish it as well. The shift of debate through the argument of "discussion" is a brilliant but immoral maneuver.

Switching back, it is clear why so many in, around, and outside of YU were upset with what occurred, and more importantly for the future, how some completely missed the primary focus of those who spoke out against it. What is especially important moving forward - not just in this situation, but in any - is that people such as the ones who joined that Facebook group understand that oftentimes, "engaging an issue" occurs by deciding that an issue is inappropriate for the venue, the crowd, or the university it represents. That many people feel an issue should not be publicly discussed does not mean it is not being engaged; nor does the fact that it is not being engaged in the manner that so many have come to or have been taught to expect as the norm translate into any other approach being incorrect or intolerant. Tolerance is not a free-for-all where anything goes; it is a respect that others have differing points of view, even ones we don't agree with or much like at all. Most importantly, tolerance is not acceptance, but balancing how one reacts with how one feels about a person or subject versus how they act upon the same.


* Quote from the group: This is a group for alumni, students and others who care about Yeshiva University to express their support for events that allow for open, nonjudgmental and safe dialogue and discourse on issues of importance to Orthodox Judaism in the twenty-first century. In light of YU’s noble decision to hold a panel last week on “Being Gay in the Orthodox World,” this group actively encourages such people to email President Joel and others in the University Board/Administration to express support for such events, and to ensure that the university administration is aware that, despite some voices to the contrary, such discussions are welcome and vital to a vibrant YU campus and community."

** Wikipedia: The fetus is turned to a breech position, if necessary, and the doctor pulls one or both legs out of the birth canal, causing what is referred to by some people as the 'partial birth' of the fetus. The doctor subsequently extracts the rest of the fetus, usually without the aid of forceps, leaving only the head still inside the birth canal. An incision is made at the base of the skull, a blunt dissector (such as a Kelly clamp) is inserted into the incision and opened to widen the opening,[8] and then a suction catheter is inserted into the opening. The brain is suctioned out, which causes the skull to collapse and allows the fetus to pass more easily through the birth canal.

Fallout

One of the aspects of the homosexuality panel discussion that have been especially interesting is the comments I've been hearing from friends and others, including comments that are being passed along the grapevine. Friends and colleagues whom one wouldn't even expect to have read the previous post, let alone necessarily agree, have stated that they thought the comments and opinions expressed were especially good and right along the line of what they themselves felt on the subject - whether people from the "right" or "left" of the Orthodox spectrum. In addition, R' Twersky's and R' Reis' speeches tonight were excellent, and the general goings-on at YU are fascinating.

There are a few minor and major points that seemed especially interesting and which are worth mentioning:

• One YU Rosh Yeshiva apparently voiced what many have been thinking: Until now, the yeshiva world blasted YU, but didn't have much ammunition behind it. Now, they have something legitimate.
• One friend noted simply that her brother (a good friend of mine) who is planning on entering into social work had previously been considering attending Wurzweiler for graduate school. That just became extremely unlikely.
• A friend commented that she now somewhat regrets attending Stern, and questions how YU can consider itself a frum school.
  

One of the most interesting comments came from an alumnus who was furious at the event, and basically vowed not to send their children to YU in the future (as it does not live up to the ideals of Orthodoxy that they feel are important). When I asked what if it straightens itself out, they expressed serious doubt that this was possible, noting strongly: [sic]

...It can't straighten out. They are out of control!! It only gets worse from here. They do these radical things, make radical statements. And for what?? More money? They don't honestly care about these people who were on the panel. President Joel doesn't give two ***** about homosexuality in the frum community.

While that's surely an immediate overreaction that will temper with time, how much of perception here is reality? How much of a hit will YU actually take - perhaps not from alumni, but from current and future enrollment, from support? This presumably won't help their recruitment in Israeli yeshivos and seminaries, and it marginalizes their own graduate schools - certainly Wurzweiler - at least a little bit by making them viewed as far less Jewish and far more as just a Jew-heavy school. (Though this was true already to an extent, this certainly isn't going to help the cause.) How many roshei yeshiva will continue to stay in a university where many supposedly were already uncomfortable with some of what goes on? There are certainly other options out there for many of them.

It's important to remember that many, many people were already somewhat wishy-washy on YU and its direction over the past number of years, uncomfortable with what they viewed as a leftward-leaning direction. An event such as the one held last week only confirms and seals this perception for those people and allows them to cross off YU in their minds permanently. While certainly not for all, for many, YU was viewed as the strong, appropriate balance of Judaism and how one maintains and builds on their religiousity while balancing that with the secular world. Without that balance, for those people, YU loses its identity at best, and quite possibly crushes it - eliciting reactions like the ones above.

In the earlier post, I touched on the idea that R' Gil Student, in his post on the subject, may have somewhat overstated the idea that the Orthodox world will be swinging to the left after this panel. I think he has it partially wrong and partially correct: YU itself will likely continue a gradual shift back to the left, but Orthodoxy as a whole won't go with it - in large part because those who are uncomfortable with YU's direction will shift away from that world. It seems as if YU itself only realized just how much of its constituency it upset with this after the fact, and its own rabbonim are furious and extremely saddened.

As a friend in YU put it: After years of toeing on the brink, YU is now in a full-blown identity crisis. Instead of a world outside which often looked askance at its actions but a strong frum core from within who could defend its balance, it has now crossed the line where even its staunch supporters are now forced to question what they're supporting, exactly. R' Reiss and R' Twersky spoke strongly (and extremely well) tonight, and the excerpts that have been shared with me by people who attended seem to have nailed the issues perfectly. One lamented that at a few points in the panel, there was applause for what the panelists were saying. At no point, however, did anyone object to what was being said, including when a panelist alluded to homosexual acts.

My friend also made an interesting analogy, comparing it in a way to the Golden Calf. When making the egel, everyone who was there thought that it was not just okay, but important to do. Aharon HaKohein felt that it was a good idea, at least to some extent, if not completely. Only when a person steps back and takes a look from a bit of a broader point of view can they realize "What the heck are we doing!?" and understand that it sends the wrong message and doesn't accomplish much beyond a short-term good feeling.

A number of people have noticed one other important point: Before the event, a lot of people were indifferent to the event. But as the last week has passed and people have thought about the event and read the transcripts, read the commentary, they have found themselves more and more against the event having taken place. They don't understand what it was supposed to have accomplished, what it actually accomplished, and taking a step back, they're questioning why something like this should have happened on such a public stage - and nobody has a good answer, and that's forced people to shift from disappointment to disillusionment (if not outrage).

As discussed in the previous post, perhaps if there were a positive outcome that emanated from this panel, one could argue that it was necessary despite the negative aspects and implications that can be drawn from it. But without that, all it does is raise questions as to what YU stands for and where its priorities lie. This time, those questions aren't coming mostly from outside, but instead, they're being hotly debated from within its very core.

Homosexuality in the Orthodox Jewish World

PERSONAL REQUEST: Please do not read this post prior to reading the full transcript of the Yeshiva University panel Being Gay in the Orthodox World posted on Chana's blog. Please also read her To Deserve and To Sacrifice post and R' Gil Student's The Growing Problem of Post Orthodoxy post as some points that will be attempted to be made below will undoubtedly overlap with some of the points they made in their writings. If you have the time, I recommend skimming through some of the comments on those posts as well - there are some interesting discussions scattered throughout. Thank you in advance.

Last week, Yeshiva University's Wurzweiler graduate school for Social Work hosted a panel whose mission was to share with the public the incredible difficulties faced by homosexuals in the Orthodox community, as halacha (Jewish law) does not allow for them to act upon their desires. As might be expected, it's a strong flash point in the Orthodox world, and discussions have abounded wherever one might step foot, with very interesting and different discussions all over - at work, at home, at Shabbos meals with different crowds, at shul.

According to the organizers and panelists, the primary purposes of the event were to promote discussion [and/that would in turn] evoke sympathy and understanding in the Orthodox world as to the difficulties faced by gays and lesbians in the frum community. The stories themselves are fascinating and in some cases, surprising and eye-opening, and each of the four panelists' stories bring up different aspects of the trials a gay person goes through. There are a number of things that can strike a person upon reading the transcript, but perhaps the most interesting point that sticks out is one that demonstrates just how unnecessary the entire production showed itself to be at this point in history.

The issues regarding homosexuality in the Orthodox community are predominantly different than those faced in the overall American public. The battles are not over gay marriage or civil unions, and based on the statements of the panelists, they never should be: The cause is to help those who are committed to living an Orthodox lifestyle while struggling with a severe test, which by definition a gay marriage could not be. Instead, the issues are more similar to those perhaps of discrimination, or more likely those of social ostracism and other social and familial relationships.

What was particularly interesting, however, was the overall consistency of the responses put forth from all over, with the summary being along the lines of: "That must be incredibly difficult, and we feel horrible for their impossible plight. If they're not acting on it, that's amazing, and good for them - I can't possibly imagine how hard that must be; if they are, it's something that needs to be condemned, not condoned. But did this need to be made into a public issue at all?" This is similar to the letter put out by some of the YU Roshei Yeshiva the morning of the event and also the letter YU's President Richard Joel put out along with the RIETS menahel (principal), R' Yona Reiss, after the event:

[...] Of course, as was indicated in a message issued by our Roshei Yeshiva, those struggling with this issue require due sensitivity, although such sensitivity cannot be allowed to erode the Torah's unequivocal condemnation of such activity. Sadly, as we have discovered, public gatherings addressing these issues, even when well-intentioned, could send the wrong message and obscure the Torah's requirements of halakhic behavior and due modesty. [...] We are committed to providing halakhic guidance and sensitivity with respect to all challenges confronted by individuals within our broader community, including homosexual inclinations, in a discreet, dignified and appropriate fashion.

Perhaps, however, the point was most clearly made by one of the panelists himself, when discussing his friends' reactions:

I told one friend and he was cool with it, but he would say ‘you can’t tell so-and-so because he’s too religious.’ So I went for it, next person I told was him and he was even better about it. And he said, ‘But you can’t tell so-and-so’ where it became this game. If only everybody even today knows how okay with it the next person was- truthfully it really surprised me. My friends are amazing.

It seems that people assume there to be a huge swell of homophobia and lack of tolerance within the Orthodox community to homosexuals - but that in truth, this just is not the case. There is certainly a lack of tolerance to or acceptance of homosexual actions, and anything which seems to condone this will immediately be shunned by the frum world - an appropriate reaction even according to at least some if not all of the panelists and presenters. Such a reaction would likely be similar to the one people would have to those who would openly break Shabbos or otherwise act in a way that was clearly against a major precept of Torah observance; in fact, people who have turned away from observant Judaism can likely confirm this to be true. While there may be eventual acceptance of "this is who he/she is" when a person leaves Orthodox Judaism, no Orthodox person would likely condone actions that are against Orthodox beliefs and imply that they acceptable within the Orthodox camp.

Instead of homophobia, however, it seems that gays and lesbians within the Orthodox world, when it actually comes down to it, are met predominantly with acceptance and usually a quiet sympathy. The assumption of intolerance just does not seem to match the actual reactions people have when faced with the situation. Much like in the outside world, when it comes to practical differences the gay population has with the straight population, there's not really anything there. Much like in the outside world (hat tip: Charlie Hall in the comments on Hirhurim), there's a clear level of acceptance that is particularly there among the younger generation. And much like in the outside world, it's hard to say that additional discussion would advance anything more that is positive for gays and lesbians, particularly as that translates into the Orthodox Jewish world.

In the end, it comes back to what the panelists themselves hoped to accomplish with this event, and that's difficult to say. If it was about understanding and sympathy, it is unclear what was accomplished; it seems that this understanding and sympathy was already there, certainly among the crowd that was drawn to the event and almost assuredly in the crowds that have been discussing it. The panelists seemed to feel that most of the Rabbonim they approached about their struggles reacted surprisingly well, and that the same was true of their peers. Typically it was families who reacted the worst, at least initially, but this is not particularly surprising in a community which prides itself often on its future plans and progeny and suddenly learns that this will not be happening as they may have been imagining it. All in all, it seems doubtful that the panel will have made much of an impact in how people view gays and lesbians in those terms.*

Some of the arguments people have for turning this into a public issue revolve around comparing it to other issues that were taboo or ignored in the Orthodox world until people forced them on the public until they finally started dealing with them. The primary flaw in this argument, however, is that there's extremely little the public can actually do in this case. As opposed to agunos**, publicly discussing homosexuality will not be placing pressure on others to help right a wrong that was committed. As opposed to molestation, discussion will not create awareness of a problem in order to protect children. As opposed to abuse, a public event will not help those who are getting hurt find a place to escape to to avoid that hurt. With homosexuality, it is a private and personal issue which the public cannot well relate to and where the public is almost completely powerless to help beyond what they are already doing at this point in history.

Ten or twenty years ago, this panel would have helped bring about incredible change by speeding up the acceptance of individuals who are gay or lesbian by their friends and relatives by helping them understand what they go through at a time when people really didn't understand well enough what being gay or lesbian meant. In December 2009, however, there doesn't seem to be that fundamental unawareness in the Orthodox community. The creation of such a panel and the promotion of groups that promote additional tolerance seem unlikely to create more tolerance but far more likely to create an impression (whether intended by its creators or not) of an acceptance of homosexuality that perhaps goes beyond just sympathy and understanding. That there was so much confusion as to this point even at YU seems to show an obvious lack of clarity as to where the lines are drawn in Orthodoxy, despite the panel's best efforts to mark those lines. While perhaps R' Student's warning of an upcoming leftward shift are overstated, he is certainly not wrong in seeing how this event can be used as a catapult for such a shift. Moreover, there are undoubtedly those who will use this event as a springboard to accepting homosexuality to a greater level than it should be, despite the best intentions of the planners of this event and the pronouncements of those who appeared.

Ten or twenty years ago, this panel could have been incredibly important and made a positive impact on the Orthodox Jewish community. Now, its potential for change is far more toward paths that most of the panelists and presenters themselves would deem completely unacceptable in Orthodoxy - and that's a shame.

* To preemptively discuss, the argument of "discussion shows positive impact" is a somewhat ridiculous comment in a context such as this, as discussion having a positive impact is true when there is a desire for some type of change to occur. As there is no such change being sought here, it turns into a circular "discussion is good because it's discussion, and that's good" argument.

** The comparisons of homosexuality to issues such as agunos are actually disturbing and somewhat despicable, in that they cheapen the plight faced by the various victims in those situations. Agunos receive public support for two primary reasons: 1) They were hurt by members of the community who are abusing the halachic system to shackle them, and therefore the community feels a responsibility to show the person that the community as a whole cares for them. 2) Publicizing the issue hopefully helps to force the 'husband' to send a get to her that otherwise he would not have. Molestation was made into a public issue to instill greater fear and responsibility in our schools and others to help stop abuse from happening in the first place and to encourage victims to speak up and families to not view it as taboo to do so, in order to punish the perpetrators and protect others from becoming victims as well. To compare situations like these to homosexuality is absurd - there is no unwilling victim and there is no outside factor playing a role that the community can help with.

Unfocused Study?

UPDATE: Just tuned in for a few minutes of the live conference, and it's far better than the release would have indicated in terms of what is being discussed, though with the caveat that 72 Board Presidents may not be a great sample as it is spread over all types of Jews.

At 12:00 noon today, July 13th, YU will be hosting a live interactive conference on a study they conducted regarding the high costs of Jewish education, allowing viewers to submit questions in real time to the presenters. Having received the press release and after reading through it a few times to ensure that I was in fact reading it carefully and correctly, I am terribly saddened and dismayed at the approach they seem to be taking and in particular at the misleading headline they used to pitch it. The press release is here: 1, 2, 3. However, there is a bright side, as you'll see below.

The (mis)leading headline states the following:

Institute for University-School Partnership at Yeshiva University:
‘Day Schools Could Gain $100 Million Through Better Management’

While this sounds wonderful, implying that a focus on elimination of wasteful spending would severely cut down on the cost of Jewish education and reducing the burden on families and supporters, the rest of the press release offers barely a mention of this. Instead, the focus throughout the memo is on fundraising, fundraising, and fundraising:
{Note: all quotes from the release}

• Only about one-third of presidents strongly agree that board members give their schools their top personal philanthropic gifts or that they generate financial support for school events.
• Only about one-quarter of presidents feel that board members are actively engaged in identifying and cultivating potential major donors for their institutions.
• ...presidents overwhelmingly say that fundraising/advocacy and strategic planning, the two areas in which their boards are underperforming, are the two areas that impact most on overall school performance and affordability.
• “While schools must find ways to cut spending, this survey suggests that we can help preserve the educational core of the school and maintain school quality by maximizing fundraising and strategic financial planning.”
• ...in support of communal fundraising, advocating for increased government funding and promoting inter-school collaboration. At the same time, we are also focusing on helping day school boards learn to increase their engagement in financial planning, fundraising, and expense management.
• "...it is incumbent upon the board members to serve as leaders both in planning as well as fundraising and their own personal giving.”

Meanwhile, there was very little focus on cutting costs, no mention of transparency, no real mention of keeping costs in line with revenues, and no discussion of looking at alternatives to the current structure in any way to make tuition more affordable.

This is very much in line with the overall feeling I got when I was interviewed by YU's Center for the Jewish Future (CJF) a number of weeks ago regarding the Jewish Economics Survey. They filmed me as part of a documentary they are showing at their ChampionsGate conference taking place this weekend in Orlando, and the impression I was left with from the questions being asked and the reaction to the answers I was giving left me disappointed. I came out of that interview with the impression (and hopefully this is incorrect) that they were looking to hear from me how dire circumstances were, how awful of a state we were in... and that the solution required a huge influx of donations to organizations and schools who can help manage the situation and make everything better. Seeing this press release was equally disheartening, further reinforcing the implication that problems will be best solved by throwing money, rather than starting from the bottom to create a base understanding of the communal economic state and how schools function

On the flip side, perhaps this is a misreading and just a poorly presented release. Harry Bloom of YU's Azrieli Graduate School, quoted throughout the release and presenting at the press conference today, is chairing a discussion at ChampionsGate called "Re-Envision and Re-Engineer Our Day Schools - Evaluate, and Craft New Community and School Economic Models". Hopefully, today's press conference will be positive and forward-thinking, looking for ways to understand that we need to start from the bottom up, not the top down, if we are to fully understand what are and how we can approach the problems that are facing us.

Quotes of the Day: Jewish Community

YD, in Finding a Center: The Role of Yeshiva University Part II (I reposted Part I yesterday):

What our community needs is an option in the center. There is a large gap between the Modern Orthodox and Yeshivish communties, which are, in my mind, both generally missing the boat. There is no real community in the middle, only individuals that believe in a more balanced approach to Judaism.

As I basically commented there, people need to help join/create such a community. Instead, even among those people, they are simply weighing which is 'least bad' - the right or the left - when it comes to them and especially their children. (And by and large, they'll choose the right.)

On Da'as Hedyot, in his Better Know A Kofer series:

The frum world is not as good as it thinks it is; the outside world is not as bad as the frum world thinks it is.

I think that's something that's important for us to acknowledge, rather than trying to scare kids into obedient servitude. We should focus instead on showing the advantages of and strengths of an Orthodox life, while acknowledging that as a community we need to strive to do better to get to that level.

Finding a Center: The Role of Yeshiva University

Reprinted with permission from Adventures in Chinuch
by YD

I just read that DRS (the boys high school in Woodmere) is opening up a post-high school yeshiva program. I am extremely happy with this news, although I am sure (based on speaking to someone there), that Yeshiva University is not. Obviously this presents a potential cheaper option for those who want to attend Queens College or a comparable place. But it is not only the potential savings that excites me.

I am not going to go through my entire story, but suffice it to say that I was not happy for the year I spent at YU. I subsequently switched to Lander College, from where I graduated. I know, if I switched to Lander you are probably thinking that I must have...

a) Thought of myself as being yeshivish
b) Considered poetry to be the source of all evil in the world
c) Labeled Rabbi Lamm as a kofer
d) Been really weird
e) All of the above

Actually none is true, except maybe d. I switched because I wasn't happy. I wasn't happy because I felt that the environment in the Yeshiva Program was (and probably still is) a bit too Torah-Centric. Here's what I mean:

As we have discussed numerous times, there is a lot more to meaning in a Jewish life than how much a person engages in "holy" activities. There is a lot to be said for accomplishing things outside the realm of what people call "spirituality." People, including myself, are often sensitive to this, and need other things for their spirituality. In fact, engaging in pursuits other than "holiness" may be fulfilling part of the purpose of creation. If you don't trust me, read the first chapter of By His Light, which is based on R' Aharon Lichtenstein's speeches. (Thanks to fellow blogger Erachet for suggesting I read it; it's a must-read for anyone who believes in "being normal.")

This idea, is one of the biggest casualties of the "flipping out" phenomenon. When many teenagers flip out they change their entire focus to the areas of Talmud Torah and holiness. What many don't realize is that to drastically alter your focus is not an obligation incumbent on every person, and that for many, it is unhealthy. Additionally, they may become ignorant of the fact that other who don't follow their approach, may actually be doing the right thing.

As we have discussed, the Rebbeim is Israel have the ability to set these kid straight, and often don't, either because they don't believe they should, or because they think it will hurt the effectiveness of their Yeshiva, or some other reason. However, as fellow blogger Chaim pointed in the comments, the post-high school Rebbeim have just as much responsibility and ability to attend to this problem.

Which brings me to YU. I found there to be very little guidance from the Rebbeim in Yeshiva University. Many of them only come in for a few hours, just to give shiur, and leave. Very little is heard from the Rebbeim besides the Torah they teach, and for some, even the Parsha shiur is just another Gemara sugya on a topic related to the Parsha. Every once in a while there was a speech about a meaningful topic like dating or something, but this was never followed by a "meet with the rebbe and discuss your issues personally" session. In short, one could easily get the impression there that Talmud Torah is the only important value.

My impression was that this attitude was very prevalent among the students there as well. People spent hours on end learning, (which is good) but cut a lot of their classes (which is bad), brought seforim to class (which is disrespectful), were constantly deriding the Madda portion of the school (also bad), and gave off the general impression that value to yourself and the Jewish people is based on how much Torah you learn. These guys were the ones who were "well-known" in the Beis Medrash (aka the role models), and were overall just way too intense.

I wouldn't have a problem with this if YU were strictly a Yeshiva for the most serious boys. But it's not. Just based on the sheer numbers, there is no way that the Yeshiva Program can expect everyone to be Torah-only students. Additionally, YU itself stands for the type of well-rounded philosophy that is not most common among it's students. Most care too much about Torah, or not enough Torah, to even come near the ideal YU product. So either the Rebbeim are not on boat with YU philosophy (which is dysfunctional) or they are, but don't have time to care (which is equally as dysfunctional).

Either way, YU has the potential to produce normal, but G-d fearing graduates who are knowledgeable in both their professional field and in Torah. But unfortunately, the opportunity is not being taken advantage of for whatever reason or reasons that may be. I know YU has been trying lately to reverse this trend, but until they do more to change the culture there, I will be excited about any new possible program that may (or may not) steer their students, and by extension the rest of us, in the right direction.

Post-Graduation Thoughts

More than any other schooling experience, my time at Stern has been a real journey. Through the teachers, the classes, and friends both in and out of school, I have been molded, and perhaps molded myself, into a richer, more mature, more self-assured person.

One of the first things I've had to learn was not to compare myself to anyone else. Someone else's success is not my failure. In fact, it has nothing at all to do with me, even if I did not "get" whatever the other person "got." Regardless of what any other person gets or how far any other person goes in any pursuit, I can only get as far and do as well as my efforts and talents allow.

The more you look at what other people are doing in comparison to what you are doing, the more negative feelings you will conjure up towards that other person. Trust me, it's not at all worth it. Feeling those things won't change anything. All it will do is make you frustrated and annoyed at both the other person and yourself. You'll resent the other person for doing well and you'll resent yourself for not performing to your potential and for feeling resentful towards your friend.

Yeah, it's frustrating not to get as good a grade as you want, especially if a friend does better than you in school. It's disappointing, and even somewhat depressing, to wish to get chosen for something and get passed over in favor of your friend. Such things bring competition into places where there should be none. But when such things happen, instead of looking at yourself and feeling resentful about all you're lacking, it's good to realize that you do have talents and that you have a lot more to go in order to reach your potential.

On that note, you always have the chance to grow more in your talents and stretch out your hand farther towards your potential. A grade is not a brand marking you forever as the limit of your abilities. There is always room and opportunity to strive for higher accomplishments. So you don't succeed today. That's okay. There's always tomorrow. Or next week. Or next year. Or even the next decade. Today might be someone else's moment, but one day it will be yours, too.

Something else I learned is to stand behind my own words. After all, if I don't stand by myself, who will? If I don't feel confident in what I'm saying, why should anyone take me seriously? Or believe in my ability to get anywhere or accomplish anything? If I write disclaimers before all my stories, it means I don't believe in my own writing! Am I going to be afraid of showing myself to the world forever? Or am I going to stand up and be confident that my opinions count, too, and that they're just as valid as anyone else's?

Sometimes people say things about you that aren't necessarily true or super accurate. Sometimes you even say things about yourself that aren't exactly accurate just to please or pacify someone else. But why should you? Why shouldn't you stand true to who you are?

I'm pretty intimidated about leaving the safety of school and stepping out into the "real" world. No matter what anyone says about the difference between the different stages of schooling (elementary, high school, college) or how on your own you are throughout school, there is always, always, always a difference between being in school and not being in school anymore. School is a place we all know by heart. We are all experts on The System. We can hold that system in our hands and mold it like clay to fit our needs. It's a system we've run around in, tripped over, and learned to balance just right. We know where all the lines are and just how far to push them. We know where we stand when we're in school - any school.

But I don't know the system outside of school. I don't know what is expected of me, where the lines are, or if I can even push them a centimeter. School is like a maze that we can feel our way through instinctively until, suddenly, it is not a maze any longer but a series of passages - some that are well known and some that are secret only to ourselves.

The outside world, to me, does not seem like a series of passages at all. From afar, it looks like a vast, seamless ocean of...a lot going on. There are new rules, new lines. It's a totally new game. I feel like I'm being pushed into the middle of a game of capture the flag and I haven't even been told who's on what team.

But the thing is, when you don't know the rules, if you know yourself then that's at least a start. If you don't know yourself or what you're getting into, that's tricky. Then you could be completely molded by whatever choices you make. Of course, you're always going to be somewhat colored by the environment you're in, but having a strong idea of who you are, what you like, what you believe in, what you approve of, what you wish to stay away from...that can help bring some direction, probably. At least - then you won't lose yourself in the vastness of possibilities that are out there. Or, it makes me feel better about it, anyway.

One last thing I'd like to write about here is facing the world with a positive attitude. I have so many friends who either always seem to be in a good mood or who don't let bad things bring them down. I admire them so much for this. Something I'm really working on is not letting things get to me, or get to me enough that it ruins my whole positive perspective on life. I really believe that if you face the world with a smile, the world will smile back. It's just something I have to learn how to do better.

Anyway, I don't mean for this post to hit anyone over the head with lessons. These are merely things that I have found valuable, but of course each person is different and each will find different kinds of inspiration and different ways to bring meaning and purpose into their lives.

And no, that was not a disclaimer. :P

(Originally posted here.)

EZ Reads 5/14/09: Stern Gang

A huge congratulations is due to all "the Sternies" we know who had their graduation today. Y'all have matured quite a bit these last few years, and are an amazing group, both collectively and individually, and we're happy to have hosted you and had you "join our family" and to have been afforded the opportunity to see you all grow as you have. And we hope to see you all here soon! :)

Some good stuff:

• A mostly great memo from the RCA on Hirhurim discussing some things that must change within the Orthodox community, from institutional transparency (finally!) to cutting down on spending on the one side to actively opposing charter schools and calling on people to give more money, even if their kids are not in school.
• A Soldier's Mother with a moving piece on the gift of life the family of a soldier accidentally killed gave to the soldier whose gun went off, and with an added story that is also beautiful in its own way.
  
• via Freakonomics, a Boston Globe piece on the science and valuation of happiness. Personally, the idea that people can adapt to horrible situations and be happy does not devalue the loss they've suffered but merely shows us the ability of people to overcome struggles. That people show more irritation with small things seems to be more simply because we don't look at them as things we need to overcome.
• Mystical Paths with a funny/sad comic and a cute/sad video that make you go Hmmm.
  

Enjoy!

Oh Stern Girls!

My sister sent me an IM with the following story.

Sister: Can i just tell you what happened in class today? The Professor asked "why does the Ramchal call olam haba a chupa?" and a girl goes "because isn't chupa the ultimate achievement"
Me: That girl is both stupid and wrong

Let's all take a moment to appreciate the stupid people. Would life be worth living if we couldn't make fun of them?

Best Lines: Erashay Thursday

Erachet's best from today:

• I'm really bad at crossing the street. [Erachet is 22.]
  
• If you don't fall into the right crowd or don't fall into any crowd when you first get to YU/Stern, the weird guys, they find you, because they :::know:::.
  

Observing Depression

Via Chana, the latest edition of Stern College's paper, The Observer, is out. In addition to a well-done interview with our favorite smiling friend, Jameel of the Muqata, this issue's main thrust is depression, particularly as it pertains to the Orthodox community. I've just spent time reading through every one of the pieces on the subject, and credit is due to The Observer's staff for doing a fantastic job in covering as much on the subject as could be hoped for in such a publication and more.

From Chana's post:

Those of you who remember Rabbi Nathaniel Helfgot's groundbreaking article entitled "Dimensions: A Young Man's Story of Torment: Surviving Depression," which was published in Jewish Action in 2001 will be thrilled to see he has followed it up with an interview he has given us at The Observer. The interview includes his thoughts on how depression is perceived by the Jewish community now that it's been 8 years since his original article, how he came to write that piece, and other thoughts and suggestions regarding depression.

As part of our powerhouse lineup on the series, we also have an interview with Dr. David Pelcovitz on depression. This offers a different point of view, because rather than discussing the issue from personal experience, Dr. Pelcovitz answers in his capacity of psychologist.

See the rest of our articles on depression and mental health in the Features section.

R' Helfgot's interview is interesting and extremely clear; Dr. Pelcovitz's is illuminating from the other end. The aforementioned Features section covers depression by giving an overview of depression in addition to discussing it as it pertains to YU and Stern, how it can affect shidduchim, and of course by discussing mental-health helpers and organizations. It is an interesting, informative, and important issue, and again - kudos to The Observer on a job very well done.