Highlights from “American Jewishness Today: Identity and Transmissibility in an Open World

Editor’s Note: Professor Sylvia Barack Fishman, HBI Co-director and the Joseph and Esther Foster Professor of Contemporary Jewish Life, delivered the Marshall Sklare Memorial Lecture at the annual Conference of the Association for Jewish Studies, this year in Baltimore, MD, December 14-16.  Here are some of the highlights of her talk.

By Sylvia Barack Fishman

Sylvia Barack Fishman

Sylvia Barack Fishman with the Marshall Sklare Award

In my talk, “American Jewishness Today: Identity and Transmissibility in an Open World,” I discussed three challenges to Jewish family formation: late marriage and non-marriage; unwanted low fertility and infertility, and mixed marriage. Each of these is produced in part by the larger society’s social norms and is deeply influenced by American culture. And each of these challenges in turn has a profound effect on the transmission of Jewish culture to the next generations.

Many American Jews experience Jewishness primarily within families and friendship circles, so it is critical to understand Jewish family formation and the disruptions that have changed family format for Americans and American Jews.

On a positive note concerning the formation of Jewish families, Jewish partnership marriages are flourishing; ‘partnership marriages’ are marriages in which heterosexual or homosexual spouses share meaningful work outside the home, child rearing, and household tasks. Partnership marriages give both spouses room to grow and develop as human beings. But there are too few of these marriages and they start too late–many are initiated at an age in which it is difficult for spouses to achieve their own goals for parenthood.

The survival of the group as a self-evident goal, maintaining the society, and transmitting the culture have been values in and of themselves for historical Jewish societies, but today many younger American Jews do not share these group values. The declining centrality of the family is closely tied to the fact that Jewish identity is invested in the individual today rather than in the family or the community.

Today, many critiques of the family and theories that seemed disruptive of middle class norms and lifestyles in the 1970s have been mainstreamed and internalized by young middle class and upper middle class Jews.

Asking the questions: “Why am I Jewish, why does Jewishness matter to me, what about Jewishness matters to me?” is important not only for individuals but also for their children. Children respond to parental passion for aspects of Judaism, even if they don’t share

those particular passions.

I concluded with a challenge: American Jewry today faces a crisis regarding the transmission of Jewish culture to coming generations. Personal Jewish journeys–how Jews ‘do Jewish’–are a central component of that transmission, but they are not the whole story or the whole answer.

Sylvia Barack Fishman is the HBI Co-director and the Joseph and Esther Foster Professor of Contemporary Jewish Life.

A Journey Through My 40-Year-Old Field Notes


Ofra Greenberg

By Ofra Greenberg

Forty-two years ago, as a 27 year-old married woman with a freshly minted Ph.D. in social anthropology, I embarked on a research project to learn about the only women’s prison in Israel, Neve Tirza. Specifically, I wondered if it would conform to Canadian sociologist Erving Goffman’s characteristics of total institutions: places where a large number of similarly situated people reside.

I used the participant observation method, spending days and nights with the prisoners and wardens, working alongside them and interacting over a period of one year. I took copious notes, filling more than 1,000 pages. I got to know them well, learning a bit about their private struggles.

One of the prisoners was Sonia, sentenced to life for the murder of her husband. She left her three-year-old daughter with her mother and found it nearly impossible to maintain a good relationship with the child. She told the child the prison was a hospital, but the lie ultimately made their relationship worse.

Though I learned so much about the personal stories of these women, I don’t know how their lives unfolded after I left. I drew my conclusions about total institutions, not entirely agreeing with Goffman. I published my research in a book, Women in Jail in Israel.

I have since engaged in what is now a 40-year academic career, today at Western Galilee College, specializing in medical anthropology. I am not sure if it is a function of my age or stage of life, but my mind frequently wanders back to my days at Neve Tirza. What happened to Sonia, to her relationship with her daughter, to the others? I have recently felt a need to return to the field notes because I know that they contain a great deal of information I didn’t use.

Even so many years ago, after I completed my dissertation, I toyed with the idea of writing about motherhood but never did as I became engrossed in a new research field, the use of traditional medicine. Other times since then, I considered using the diaries to write about my personal experiences and feelings during that time and perhaps I may still get there.

Through my teaching, I have recently delved into gender literature, and this has once more led me toward the issue of motherhood. Now that I am a mother, a grandmother and a senior scholar, I wonder how I would view this topic in my field notes through the lens of my life’s perspective? Would I find something else there?

Recently I was asked whether the young women whom I met in the prison had been sexually abused as children. I could not answer this question because I never asked. I was a young woman from a good family. What did I know about sexual abuse? Forty years ago, we talked less about this issue.

A summer scholar-in-residency at the Hadassah-Brandeis Institute gave me the opportunity to revisit my notes. I scanned all my notebooks and took them with me to Brandeis University, where I began the process of re-entering that time of my life, of the lives of the women I studied so long ago.

As I read through the notes, there are so many directions I might have taken. I could have studied power relations, but the subject that rises to the surface for me today is motherhood and the social status conferred by it in prison. Not being a mother at the time, perhaps I did not pay as much attention or perhaps I simply stayed close to my original goals, to study the theory of a total institution.

Now the issue of motherhood takes center stage as I revisit my field notes and form new conclusions. I see that being a mother in prison entails an extra measure of pain. It brings with it a special concern, pity and a desire to help on the part of warders and other inmates. It leads the mothers to manipulate their status to win concessions and benefits.

I am just at the beginning of the process, through 200 of the 1000 pages. Will I discover something unforeseen, about myself perhaps? The diaries bring to the surface memories of events that I did not record. I can hear the sound of clanging doors, of the main gate opening, the voices of certain women whom I now miss. What happened to them? I am sad that I will probably never know.

None of this emotion will appear in the present analysis. It belongs to an analysis that places the researcher at the center. The present research evokes my memories, but that is personal. I believe the research should be based solely on my notes. Yet, I wonder if my memories or a story about my own growth and relationship to this project remains an option for the future.

Dr. Ofra Greenberg was a Helen Gartner Hammer Scholar-in-Residence at HBI during the summer of 2014. She is a senior lecturer at the Western Galilee College in Israel specializing in medical anthropology.

How the Arrest of Rabbi Freundel Led to Much-Needed Discussion

By Amy Powell

Gender, Religion and Family Law: Theorizing Conflicts between Women’s Rights and Cultural Traditions Lisa Fishbayn Joffe, ed.; Sylvia Neil, ed.

Gender, Religion and Family Law: Theorizing Conflicts between Women’s Rights and Cultural Traditions
Lisa Fishbayn Joffe, ed.; Sylvia Neil, ed.

Shortly before Rabbi Barry Freundel was arrested on charges of voyeurism for allegedly planting cameras in the synagogue’s mikveh areas, HBI’s graduate research associate, Rachel Putterman, highlighted the potential for danger in Fresh Ideas from HBI, The Beauty and the Horror of the Mikveh.

At the time, some readers criticized Putterman for being extreme or even unrealistic. Looking back, her work was prescient. Shortly after her post appeared, the Freundel abuses came to light. Unlike so many issues in the news cycle, this one stubbornly stays alive for good reason. As Putterman noted in her piece, there is much about mikveh practices that requires close examination and change.

What seems clear in the month since Freundel’s October 14th arrest is that this potentially isolated incident is born of a system without the necessary checks and balances. The discussion surrounding this inexcusable breach emboldened women and men to come forward and tell numerous stories revealing abuses of power both in the realm of the mikveh and in the process of conversion. We also see reaction from governing authorities such as batei din and the Rabbinical Council of America.

Here are some articles that best highlight the much-needed discussion that has ensued in the scandal’s wake:

  • Ethan Tucker on the core texts anchoring the discussion about mikveh practices and possible pathways forward in The Times of Israel, Immersion, Dignity, Power, Presence and Gender
  • Mayyim Hayyim’s Executive Director, Carrie Bornstein in The Times of Israel, Breaking the Mikveh Monopoly, on opening the leadership of the mikveh to multiple stakeholder to avoid future scandal.

At HBI, we have always supported scholarly research and publishing to develop fresh ways of thinking about Jews and gender worldwide.  For example, Michal Roness has written, in Gender, Religion, and Family Law, published in the Brandeis Series on Gender, Culture, Religion and the Law, about the process that led to the accreditation of the first cohort of yoatzot halacha or rabbinical law advisers who provide advice to women on how to observe the laws of family purity.

As Rabbi Freundel’s case winds through the legal system, there will be more evidence revealed and more discussion. It is our hope that those that hold roles in these sacred spheres will pay close attention.



Amy Powell

Amy Powell

Amy Powell is HBI’s communications director.


Good Morning Heartache: International Law and the Global Challenges Facing Women

By Amy Sessler Powell

In the torch song, Good Morning Heartache, Billie Holiday sings, “Good morning heartache thought we said goodbye last night,
I turned and tossed ’til it seemed you had gone, But here you are with the dawn.”

Some say the lyrics refer to a lover and others believe they relate to her struggle with heroin addiction, but Law Professor Fareda Banda sees the lyrics as a metaphor for the “two steps forward – one step back” pace of the global struggle for women’s rights.

“You think things are getting settled. Huge progress is being made. Then you wake up, hear the news and learn that 493 million women still can’t read,” she said.

Prof. Banda studies the role that international human rights law can play in reducing discrimination against women around the world. She is the author of “Women, Law and Human Rights: An African Perspective,” the leading text on the struggle for gender equality in Africa. She will address the tug-of-war that represents global women’s rights when she delivers Good Morning Heartache: International Law and the Global Challenges Facing Women, the Fifth Annual Diane Markowicz Memorial Lecture on Gender and Human Rights, Sunday, November 9 at 7:30 p.m., Rapaporte Treasure Hall, Goldfarb Library, Brandeis University.

Fareda Banda

Fareda Banda

Uniquely qualified to speak on these topics, Banda is a leading international scholar on human rights and a professor of law at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. Currently a Hauser Global visiting professor at New York University School of Law, she has consulted to the United Nations and taught on three continents.

“There is no region in world where women enjoy de facto equality, but in most they do have de jure equality,” Banda said.

What actually happens in every region of the world is quite a bit different than what the law promises. The gulf between the two relates in part to gender stereotyping and in part to a need to move toward transformative equality, to look beyond the law and focus on attitudinal change.

“What happens now is that people think we need law, but in most jurisdictions we have enough law guaranteeing women rights. On some issues, we need to stop making law and start practicing, enforcing and implementing laws we have,” Banda said.

The laws give a starting point so women can make complaints, but law is not the only answer. Her lecture will look at normative gains – the body of important international legal work done in the last 20 years that protects women’s rights and equates women’s rights with human rights. But, she will also detail egregious violations in every region of the world. For example, the World Health Organization, in the 2013 report, noted that one in three women would experience violence in her lifetime.

The lecture will offer a “balance sheet, a state-of-the-union” showing examples such as progress in violence prevention and in greater participation by women in education, but areas where women are still being held back such as reproductive rights.

Dr. Lisa Fishbayn Joffe, director of the HBI Project on Gender, Culture, Religion and the Law said, “Professor Banda brings to bear a deep understanding of the operation of domestic and international law and the practical challenges in implementing these rights. She also has a complex understanding, based on her study of law reform efforts across Africa, of the ways in which culture and tradition can be involved, to enable as well as to impede, legal change that will benefit women.”

The Markowicz Lecture Series was created by the HBI Project on Gender, Culture, Religion and the Law by Project Founder Sylvia Neil and her husband Dan Fischel in memory of Sylvia’s late sister, Diane, to honor her commitment to gender, equality and social justice. The series features internationally renowned scholars, judges, and activists discussing ways of negotiating the tensions between gender, equality and religious or cultural norms.

Amy Powell is the HBI Communications Director.

RSVP to attend The 5th Annual Diane Markowicz Memorial Lecture on Gender and Human Rights, “Good Morning Heartache: International Law and the Global Challenges Facing Women” presentation by Prof. Fareda Banda, SOAS London.

Free and open to the public, dessert reception.
Sunday, Nov. 9, 7:30 p.m.
Rapaporte Treasure Hall, Goldfarb Library, Brandeis University, 415 South St., Waltham, MA 02454

Unequal Pay in Pre-State Israel: Time for a Change

by Lilach Lurie

Lilach Lurie

Lilach Lurie

In a recent research I found that most sectorial collective agreements in Israel provide male workers with a right to a family wage. Sectorial collective agreements are reached between unions and employers, and once extended by the minister they bind all the workers and employers in the relevant sector. According to the agreements, male workers whose spouses are not working are entitled to a monetary supplement to their wages. Female workers are not similarly entitled. In other words, collective agreements, which are part of the binding labor law of Israel, provide unequal pay for men and women. While these laws may have made sense at one time, I think it is time for a change.

Granted, family wage is today a very small portion of a worker’s wage. Indeed many Israeli employers ignore collective agreement provisions including family supplement provisions. Still, family wage arrangements contradict the Israeli Equal Pay Law and should therefore be considered void. Nevertheless, although fifty years have passed since the enactment of the Israeli Equal Pay Law, family wage arrangements have yet to be cancelled.

The idea of family wage is not a uniquely Israeli idea. In many countries including the U.S., the U.K., Australia and Germany, employers once paid a “family wage” to male married workers. Henry Ford, to give one well-known example, paid his famous five-dollars-a-day salary mainly to “decently married” men. While countries differ from each other, a few commonalities can be found between them. Generally speaking, family wage arrangements were popular in the period following the Industrial Revolution and between the two World Wars. During the 1960s and the 1970s, many countries enacted equal pay laws (the U.S. enacted an Equal Pay Law in 1963; the U.K. enacted an Equal Pay Law in 1970 and Israel enacted an Equal Pay Law in 1964). With the onset of feminist movements and the enactment of equal pay laws, family wage arrangements were cancelled in most countries, albeit not in Israel.

Family wage arrangements seem at first glance as representing straightforward old stereotypes about women’s and men’s roles. Men are the breadwinners who go to work and women are the caregivers who stay at home. According to these stereotypes, women who do go to work can settle with a modest salary. Indeed, women began entering the labor market in large numbers only in the second half of the 20th Century. In the first half of the 20th Century, men dominated the labor market. The employers and union representatives were mainly men. Women were hardly represented in wage bargaining or in collective negotiations.

Nonetheless, the idea of family wage in Israel is not only “patriarchal” in nature, but has roots in historical context. Family wage was a tool to achieve social justice. More than 20 years before the establishment of Israel, Israel’s future first prime minister and founding father, David Ben-Gurion, promoted “family wage” as a way to reach equality between Jewish workers in pre-state Israel (i.e. in British controlled mandatory Palestine). In the second assembly of the Histadrut, to this day the largest workers’ union in Israel, in February of 1923, David-Ben Gurion explained the ideology of family wage arrangements: “Until the economic situation in the country will enable complete equality between the workers, the Histadrut shall determine from time to time maximum and minimum wages. These maximum and minimum wages will change across time and places.” Israel’s founding fathers, Ben-Gurion among them, determined that a father of three children needs a higher income than a bachelor or a woman. Similarly, a worker who lives in a city needs a higher income then a worker who lives in a village. According to them, these considerations should be taken into the design of maximum and minimum wages.

Family wage in pre-state Israel should therefore be understood as a tool designed to achieve equality, though not gender equality, and social justice. Family wage should be understood in its own social and historical context: before the establishment of Israel, before the establishment of an advanced welfare system, and before the enactment of the Israeli Minimum Wage Law. Nonetheless, even if family wage arrangements could have been justified in the first half of the 20th Century, they certainly cannot be justified in the 21st Century.


Lilach Lurie is a HBI Helen Gartner Hammer scholar-in-residence and a professor at Tel-Aviv University Department of Labor Studies.