Comments on: Bus to Jerusalem stopped after woman refuses to move to back

By: best cookware set

best cookware set — Sat, 20 Apr 2013 22:08:03 +0000

Now you know what types of gifts are positive to final a lifetime much like your marriage, it’s possible you’ll now get pleasure from planning your present registry.
Backpacks, satchels, wholesale handbags, sports bags and calico bags would bring but not merely your points to a multitude of locations but additionally your enterprise identify.

By: Scott Gogolewski

Scott Gogolewski — Fri, 15 Feb 2013 22:33:20 +0000

Wow… do you also live in a stone house and power your automobile with your feet???

By: Jordan

Jordan — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 09:18:42 +0000

No, its not 1950s Alabama – the justification given for segregating people is a whole different load of bullcrap.

These are government subsidised buses, right? Indeed it seems likely given tax incidence in the Israeli population that Ms Vanderblit is likely to have contributed far more toward funding such public services than her adversaries. So it seems to me that if a display of respect for “foreign” values is called for, its the religious gentlemen who should be deferring to the secular value that people are equal, not vice versa.

By: Carlos K

Carlos K — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 18:14:55 +0000

This comment has been deleted

By: C.M.

C.M. — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:06:40 +0000

@Sherry Wood, also know that she is being told to sit in the back of the bus by someone who is not required to participate in the Israeli military because he’s studying the Torah instead. And he’s supported by the taxes of the hardworking Israeli’s who actually did have to serve in the military.

By: Sherry Wood

Sherry Wood — Tue, 27 Dec 2011 00:39:56 +0000

Arent women required to participate in the Israeli military?
And their being told to sit in the back of the bus!

By: sh

sh — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:53:13 +0000

@Jeff – I’m supposing you haven’t wilfully misunderstood. The orthodox way of life and education is no less capable of producing genius than other sectors of society, which Michael implied wasn’t the case. (I forgot to mention Jacques Lipschitz, who did a great autobiographical sculpture about the very process you (mis)describe – in that not all who moved away from their parents’ traditional ways ended up denying all doctrine of traditional Judaism.)
.
@Beth – I understood Levy to be saying that we are relieved to tear our hair out over the religious issue because it gets us off the hook from some of the other extrapolations we could be making and that, in essence, it is not the haredim who should be reproached for the prominent role they increasingly play in the lives of the majority, but the governments who handed them that role and nourish it. The haredim always managed somehow, you know. Emissaries, philanthropists, that’s how their Yeshivot were built and functioned before the state stepped in and that’s how their bus service could be run. It doesn’t have to be Egged that runs it or us who pay for it. That’s a bookkeeping trick. We should be thinking about what’s been in it for successive governments. Any takers?

By: Jeff

Jeff — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:34:51 +0000

@SH – So even if they deny all the doctrine of traditional Judaism, if they came originally from observant homes – they qualify as “Orthodox”?

Utterly ridiculous.

By: Beth

Beth — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:28:51 +0000

In my eyes Gideon Levy’s argument amounts to “deligitimzation by dilution” and completely ignores the interconnectivity between the Haredim and the rest of society.

Levy writes: — Oy, how good and how pleasant to find an issue worthy of protest from time to time, the kind that won’t make too many people angry, the kind that almost everyone can identify with … The exclusion of Haredi women really is infuriating, but the exclusion of other injustices from the agenda – the kind that are not as good and pleasant to oppose – is far more infuriating. –

Effectively he is saying: “you are a hypocrite to fight/fund X because you aren’t fighting A-Y and they are just as important or even more”. But the fact is a fight takes focus. If you try to fight everything you end up accomplishing nothing. Additionally the presence of some other more important injustice does not make other injustices less worthy of response.

Levy also misrepresents this as just a Haredi problem and as “safe” because of that. Sadly none of this got attention when Haredi attitudes towards women were perceived as only affecting Haredi women and the rare non-haradi person who went to the “wrong” side of town.

It was only when people realized it could impact core institutions like the army, that the train began to leave the station. And it began to gather steam when certain astute groups began to highlight how Haredi bans on women’s pictures and certain modes of dress were impacting men and women who lived and worked outside of Haredi neighborhoods. Only when the larger society found themselves personally affected did this become a hot issue.

Finally, I’m not clear at all on how he concludes this isn’t an important issue. I don’t mean to minimize problems like racisim – they do deserve our attention, but seriously – women are 50% of the population of all races. How we’re “allowed” to exist in public spaces is very important. As all consensus building requires use of public space, this issue is foundational to any other issue that affects women such as domestic violence or pay inequalities. Can you seriously imagine an effective anti-domestic violence or breast health campaign without pictures of women?

By: sh

sh — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:32:11 +0000

Actually Gideon Levy said today what is really wrong with this whole ruckus and the excesses of righteous indignation it has produced.
.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/what-s-missing-in-the-battle-against-the-exclusion-of-women-1.402843