I just saw this video of a CNN interview with Anat Hoffman so maybe this response is old hat for many of you. See, specifically, Part 2.
http://amanpour.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/05/full-length-edition-ehud-olmert-an-israeli-feminist/?iref=allsearch
After watching this, I believe she is someone of whom we must be aware.
It is not only the fact that she is articulate and not belligerent in
her style that draws my attention to this. It is also the fact that she
is able to 'mix apples and or oranges' that caught me. In her
presentation, women having full rights at the kotel became connected to Charedi policy on men learning all day and not working. (Watch what she then said about why these men want women at the back of the bus.) The result is that she makes anyone promoting changes in the Charedi attitude to work as also a supporter of changes in women involvement in tefilla. As people advocating for the former are not even thinking about a possible effect on the latter, they will continue promoting their view which they believe to be a correct Torah view. Then, however, she will start using such statements of support, incorrectly, to promote her view on women in prayer. This is something we have to be aware of.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
3 comments:
This is similar to the gay forum debacle at YU where activists turned a program on understand into a program on promoting an acceptance agenda.
This style isn't new. We survived Hanan Ashrawi, we'll survive Anat Hoffman.
Your optimism is encouraging but it is still important to be aware of the potential challenge. There are differences between this and what happened at YU. There was a limit to how far the activists could encroach on the Torah world as there was till the built in parameter of the Halacha. Hoffman is trying to affect a different population without that parameter and may use supposed Orthodox support to further her agenda. Someone may contend that this was also the agenda of the activists at YU, i.e. to affect the greater population, but the support of a branch of the Orthodox is irrelevant in regard to that issue while within Israel, a perceived support by segments of the Orthodox could have some weight.
Hanan Ashrawi was also clearly outside the group. Anat Hoffman is within the group and thus more of a concern.
Rabbi Ben Hecht
Then think of it this way. The only reason Anat Hoffman is so successful is because of the UltraOrthodox in the first place. If radical elements in that community were not trying to bring the worst elements of Iran and Afghanistan to Israel she would have very little support. Women Of The Wall have been agitating against the Chareidim for years without success and without much media coverage but the current Chareidi tactics have convinced many that they are a threat to the state's democratic and secular nature.
Post a Comment