Orthomom, Greenbaum and Google (my thoughts)

If you've been under a rock since before the weekend, as I have, you'll just be learning about Pamela Greenbaum's attack on Orthomom (full coverage there and on Canonist). From what I've read, it seems that Greenbaum is asking Google to reveal the ID of Orthmom and her commentators because of alleged defamation and libelous comments against her, calling her a bigot and an anti-Semite. Canonist links to the the court documents, and they provide a fuller picture. The document is not a complaint (as in party A suing party B and bringing a complaint against them). Rather, it is an order to show cause, which has different legal ramifications. What Greenbaum is doing is asking a judge to subpoena Google for Orthomom's identity based on even a small chance of having a case against Orthmom. On her blog, Orthomom beats down the claims set forth one by one (here), but this document is not where Greenbaum needs to state her case or prove her allegations. All she needs to do is convince a judge that she has some chance at bringing a reasonable charge, and that without injunctive relief, in this case having the court force Google to turn over identifying information, she has no other way of pursuing her case. At this stage, the judge isn't being asked to decide whether there was defamation or libel- the judge only decides whether the claims made are considerable enough to require the other party to show up in court and present their side. So while it's easy to say that the libel charge has no standing, Greenbaum is probably hoping that the judge will decide that Orthomom needs to show up in court and present her side. I highly doubt that will happen though, because again, the libel charge is baseless so the judge will probably toss it out without involving Orthomom at all.

What I really want to know in all this is what exactly Pamela Greenbaum is thinking. Surely her lawyers have advised her that as a 'public figure' she has to be nuts to sue anyone for defamation. That's why I personally doubt that Greenbaum has any plans at all to sue Orthomom and seek damages. She's hinging everything on having Orthomom's identity revealed before the lawsuit, because she must know that her case is a loser. But having Orthomom's identity made public will unfortunately be victory enough.

The third party, Google, makes this saga even more interesting. Even though this lawsuit doesn't target Google, they have as much interesting in protecting Orthomom's privacy as she herself does. It occurred to me that when signing up for blogger, there is no privacy clause or user agreement that ensures any degree of privacy. In other words, Google has no legal requirement to protect identifying information of its users and makes no promise to do as much. But in terms of business sense, they'd lose a lot of popularity if they don't fight this subpoena.

I wish Orthomom the best in all of this and hope she comes out unscathed. Frankly, I'm amazed that she's been able to hold on to her anonymity thus far. I think that being totally anonymous on the internet is no longer possible. At least in my experience, our identities are much more transparent than we think. If Greenbaum is really so malicious and wanted to slander Orthomom in return, she could have saved face and gone about it a little more quietly, for example by sending her an email and then getting an IP address on the returned mail. From there she could have probably gotten a name quicker and without making herself out to be a total fool. But then who am I to advise a paranoid official who can't handle the slightest criticism without getting litigious?

I once accused an MSM writer of plagiarizing my post about Matisyahu. Ha. That was embarassing.

All anyone wants to talk about these days is that ominous case of J-blog plagiarism. If you've been under a rock for the past week or so, read Ezzie's summary of events. He even quotes me as saying, "Our standards should be - nay, must be - much, much higher" when my actual words were, "someone's got to set the j-blog community standards higher." I smell plagiarism... Ezzie, did you really think I'd let you get away with putting the word "nay" in my mouth?!? Lol, seriously though, read up and learn from the good man who never sleeps! But if you want my opinion, you'll have to read it in my comment at Jewschool, because I just can't get into that* discussion again! Allright, just one tidbit:

It’s like that kid in ‘the squid and the whale’ who plays Pink Floyd’s ‘hey you’ for the school talent show, claiming to have written it. Ofcourse he is caught, but while noone in the audience hates him or wants to see him humiliated and hung out to dry, everyone comes away with the feeling that the kid’s got some MAJOR issues (and mostly they pity him). Same here. I don’t think there’s a need to crucify DB, and chances are this noteriety wont slow his traffic down, but he’ll just never be the same person to anyone again.

I once accused an MSM reporter, Jody Rosen, of not exactly plagiarism but what I call intellectual recycling. I was wrong; I just happened to have had some very similar ideas and written about them shortly before his publication. I apologized instantly, because clearly it's a serious charge to any writer (one I shouldn't have made so quickly in public), but take a look at how subtle the line is between simultaneous thinking, similar wording and actual pilfering.

• The accusation: Did Slate Magazine Recycle my Post?

• The writer's defense: Jody Rosen Comments and I Apologize
  

Read the comments about property rights in blogland. I also must mention that it was very kind of Mr. Rosen to not attack me in return--he certainly had the right**, but instead chose to comment graciously and patiently, pointing out my mistake.

*I hate to sound preachy. One reason why I had stopped blogging for a while was because I realized that all many of us did around here was judge other people and whine about everything bad in the Orthodox world, be it chilul hashem, radicalism, bad behavior, or hypocricy. Who needs it?
**There's a certain out there who could learn some manners on how to deal with delicate situations.

Is it lashon hora to talk trash about anonymous bloggers?

It would seem to me that bad-mouthing* an anonymous blogger is tantamount to bad-mouthing a fictional character in a novel--there is no object of the gossip, no person to shame or offend. Obviously, I don't advocate being nasty in any context, especially since even no-namers have real feelings, but in terms of pure lashon hora and publicly damaging a person's name, is it considered harmless to lambaste a fake persona who's name is ultimately meaningless? I would think... not?

*I am not discussing the issue of exposing an anonymous blogger's real identity, because that would obviously be a malicious move--one which I am sure is asur.

An uber-meta look at frum female blogging

The following is the abstract of a paper to be discussed at the "Works in Progress Group in Modern Jewish Studies" at the AJS conference this weekend. The title: "Domesticity and the Home Page: Blogging and the Blurring of Public/Private Space for Orthodox Jewish Women"

Abstract

What if Glückel of Hameln, the seventeenth-century memoirist who wrote her life experiences as a legacy for her twelve children, had blogged instead? The emergence of the “blogosphere” as a new medium for self-expression raises critical questions about the way the public and private realms are positioned in cyberspace. While conventional memoirs and diaries represent private life writing that, like Glückel’s, might become public through publication, blogs are journals that at once combine the intimacy of personal reflection in the diary format with the globally accessible (and commercialized) public arena of the World Wide Web. In this paper, I will examine the phenomenon of Jewish women bloggers in the American Orthodox community, looking specifically at the ways in which this particular medium has provided women with a public voice to discuss matters that, traditionally, belong to the private sphere, thus subverting the public/private dichotomy that is at the heart of traditional Jewish culture. My work will be contextualized in a discussion of the use of blogging by women more broadly as a means of politicizing conventionally “private’ issues. In addition, I will consider the value and significance of reading blogs for those who are not active writers in the genre, again comparing this phenomenon to the case of Glückel, whose widely read memoir is a staple of courses on Jewish women’s history. (link to pdf) (via Hirhurim)

I had some thoughts on this topic when I started blogging almost a year ago. In fact, it was my very first real post (read The Unwanted Veil). I can't wait to hear the Jewish Studies spin on this topic. I suspect it won't be earth shattering, to say the least, as these academic 'state the obvious' papers tend to be.

The phenomenon of orthodox female blogging isn't so much an issue of public vs. private domain anymore. What's interesting to me is that the blogsphere may the only venue for intimate but appropriate mingling, so to speak, between very religious men and women.

The separation between genders is very pronounced in ultra-orthodox circles. I once visited the Vizhnitzer Rebbe's home and was surprised to see two separate dining rooms, one for men and one for women. I asked the rebetzin why this was necessary between family members and she said that it was because of the children-in-law. In chabad the boundaries are obviously a lot less extreme, but there is still the understanding that married men and women do not form friendships. People are of course friendly, cordial, even talkative at times, but the discussion never goes past the surface, lest anything becomes personal or emotional and then develops into a connection. I suppose that in more modern circles this separation exists much less, but I don't know the dynamics of those relationships. In my little world, women socialize and exchange ideas exclusively with women or in the context of their families (for example, at a shabbos table with the husband present). For very religious women, the internet is possibly the only opportunity to get a non-relative male perspective on issues. Even for the non-religious woman, it may be the only way to peer into the frum guys' world and get a glimpse of the famed yeshivish debating. Either way, one must appreciate the novelty of this form of communication in that it allows for so much more freedom and democratization without compromising modesty or fidelity.

The opposite must be true for men as well. Reading frum women's blogs opens up a new world and allows for a sort of interaction that is unlikely in person. Now that's a topic I would like to hear about.

Critical is not the same as heretical! Oh, and neither is curious!

I received the following email last night:

"I just read your latest post, and I am somewhat aquainted with the issue (I read the article, heard some shiurim, etc.) and I just want to know why you always take (on all the issues you blog about) the most liberal and cynical approach. I want to please understand that....

...It's not about believing things simply because you're told to. It's about not mingling in areas in which you are completely ignorant. When you are talking about nidah, which is accepted as is in its current form by every branch of Judaism, its not enough to be sceptical; you need to be knowledgeable. You know, a rabbi... Are you a rabbi?

Also, you're wrong about nidah being the only "hachlata" by jewish women (I can't believe you even doubt that as that's the way its presented EVERYWHERE!). Think shabbos candles, which the women voluntarily accepted upon themselves, and the rules of tznius, in which they set the standards, by which those who deviate are judged...

Not to mention your calling a minhag yisrael (which is torah!) a "damage" to femininity..."

I personally think the writer is off base because my post did not imply that I doubt that women created the practice--in fact, my whole point was that I don't understand why they did. I am sufficiently knowledgable about the subject to know the technical reasons for added stringency (zava vs. niddah, etc) but it isn't my place to comment on halakha. I comment on the human aspect, trying to bring out the humor if possible. But the fact is, people are clearly bothered by cynicism or commentary that regards anything in Judaism as human. Why?

Is my emuna lacking if I consider "the daughers of Israel" actual women with real motives? Is it disrespectful to talk about Chava as a human being and not a metaphor? Of course I know that a lot of what went on and why it had to be that way is beyond my comprehension, but it's my obligation to make my religion apply to my life, as a human, as a woman, etc... I don't imply that the chachamim intended to pull the wool over my eyes by saying 'the women decided', when really they were fully responsible but couldn't sell the idea alone. I am saying that in the mesora, there are many elements that were omitted because they were not necessary for the transmission of practice (or belief). I am allowed to be curious about the subtext, just as I am curious about all the human drama that was left out of Tanakh.

To my knowledge, my actions are in no way affected by my questions; I really think that should be the litmus test for believers--do you put your faith first or your doubts? The email calls me liberal and cynical. I'm fine with those labels so long as they apply to my thoughts and not my practice. In fact, I think everyone should keep their thinking liberal and their skepticism handy. (Unless you're a fan of fundmentalism...)

Ground Rules for Round Two

So, first of all, thanks to all 3 of you who emailed me while I was 'offline'. You're a caring bunch. I'm touched.

Second, let it be known that I took a blog hiatus because of religious objections to the internet, a la Kresel Housman (who commented here the other day, check it out). Actually I didn't, and noone would ever suspect that of me, but I do want everyone to read Mrs. Housman's thoughtful comment (it totally proves my original point, btw).

Third, don't ask me why so many j-blogs have gone to hell in my absence. I don't know. I was absent, get it?

Fourth, I will henceforth begin all my posts with "So". It gives it a real heimish feel. I like that.

Yala habibi's, let the games begin!

Being Blind to Mutiny

In response to angry ortho-bloggers who felt slighted for not being mentioned in his Jewish Standard interview, Tzvee Zahavy said:

I think in general that Orthodox blogging is an oxymoron. (Same for most forms of conservative or reactionary blogging.) Blogs are subversive of authority by definition. They transfer the power of publication and expression to the grassroots and away from the power elite. Blogs are exceedingly democratic media.

Orthodox religion depends for its survival on a closed culture controlled by a rigid power elite. So why Orthodox blogs? Some Orthodox bloggers tend to use the medium as a bully pulpit for pseudo-hip sermonizing; some to sell books; some just to promote their own piety. I stop reading these sites when it becomes clear to me what they are after.

I would sooner apply Tzvee's description to civilization as a whole than to the limits of Orthodoxy. Is that because I am too threatened to view my own position objectively, or am I the predictable product of an exclusively Orthodox upbringing? As a teenager I used to worry a lot that I was being duped and that my entire faith depended on faith in those who taught me rather than belief in the content of the teachings. I've since come to terms with the subjugation that is implicit in being religious, but I still would like to believe that it's my choice. Therefore, as a voluntary participant, I always feel vindicated voicing a dissent (which might explain why I don't feel the tiniest inkling of rebelliousness against the supposed power elite by keeping this altogether meaningless little blog, despite the many irreverent things that are said here).

The method for stirring anarchy and insubordination has not changed since the advent of the printing press; blogging is a slight technological advancement in the speed of dissemination, but hardly much more. If orthodoxy is indeed facing a threat of mutiny, then it's nothing new. If, however, this venue has created a platform for new types of dissent, then I'm missing a revolution under my own nose.

Reb Michael of the Vaad haBloganut gives j-bloggers a much needed ego boost.

The only people who read Jewish blogs are Jewish bloggers and anti-Semites. This in essence means that the J-Blogosphere, and any attempt to invest importance in it, is an enormous circle jerk, with people who hate you circling around and spitting on you - and frankly, that’s very weird. Any Jewish J-blog reader who isn’t already a blogger him or herself will become one in a matter of days, because if there’s anything the blogosphere has taught as all, it is that you could be the most boring person in the world and still have 500 loyal readers who say “THAT’S SO TRUUUUUUE” to everything you write. (These loyal readers, of course, will also in turn become bloggers). Folks, this is a vicious cycle. If people continue to encourage its development with self-congratulatory accolades to all that is J-bloggery, it will spiral entirely out of control, and the Jewish people will be destroyed by the sheer force of 7 million Jewish mothers with identical blogs subjecting the world to OH-SO-CUTE posts about the color and consistency of their little Moishele’s post-nasal drip. Stop it.

Just repeat this mantra to yourself: “I am not a significant person. My opinions are not significant. The fact that 50 people who share my opinions comment on my site everyday is not significant. I will refrain from investing cosmic import into the musings of my online buddies, and I will remind myself that probably 95% of Jewish people have no idea what a blog is, nor do they care. All Jewish blogs are is Jewish people expressing opinions, which I can see everyday at my local synagogue, which often, by the way, has a buffet, unlike my blog.”

All I can say is, "OMG, that's soooooo truuuuuuuue! And also, what the hell were you thinking starting up with a guy named Jameel?"

It's getting to my head (er)

In honor of having reached 10,000 hits, I decided it was time to make the blog a little easier on the eyes. This new header was made possible thanks to Chaim Rubin of header fame by pointing me to Mirty's amazing Codescripter site. Thank you both!

So, d'ya like it?

Blah (g), blah (g), blah (g)...

Attention all ye impatient readers: I promise to get back to the regular programming shortly.

I'll admit that the last week was a tough one. You'll notice it wasn't only me; the entire j-blogsphere was up in arms about one issue, and despite how hard I tried to blog about something light, interesting, funny or personal, I just could not get my mind off that one issue. However, now that the big guns have taken over, I feel less guilty getting back to my usual silly and light-headed banter. Ah... the freedom that comes with being inconsequential.

“Blogging is for losers” or so they say

I caught up with an old friend (who I’ll call Aye) over pesach. We had so much catching up to do, so many stories to tell, and of course, so many people to talk about! Once we covered the requisite who’s-dating-whom and filled each other in on marriages, kids, moves and jobs, Aye piped up with an insidious grin, “So… did you see so and so (who I’ll call Beeh)’s blog?”

I did, actually, and I’m a regular reader who very much enjoys Beeh’s output, but I didn’t say as much because I don’t want her or Beeh to uncover my blog identity. Aye continued, “Somebody should clue Beeh in—blogging is for losers.”

Hmmm, “You don’t say.”

Now, Bee blogs with her real name, so it’s only fair that people will take her to task about it, but this was the worst kind of an attack. I’m used to arguing about whether bloggers have the right, so to speak, to bring up internal issues that border on lashon hora and/or chilul hashem, or whether online discussion of important issues is in any way productive or just an excuse to waste time. But this was the first time I had to defend the very act of blogging.

According to Aye, while I was out the cool kids decided that people who blog think themselves brilliant and self-important, so much that everybody out there wants to hear their opinions on everything. The old argument that ‘many a writer is part narcissist” might apply, but that ‘every blogger is all narcissist’ most certianly does not. The occasional self-aggrandizing bloggers who shove their uninformed opinionated drivel down everyone’s throats are for the most part weeded out from the blogging community—worse than being killed off, they are ignored. For everyone else, blogging and reading blogs provides interesting information and discussion, humor, stories, a sense of community, etc.

I used the traditional defenses to try and convince Aye that blogging could in fact be very cool and fulfilling and entertaining. It didn’t work—mostly because the only blogger she knew personally (besides for me, he he) was particular obsessive about her blog. If anyone bumps into Beeh, her ‘hi how are you’ is always immediately followed by, ‘do you read my blog,’ and then, ‘why don’t you comment’. Beeh has also become a person who started going through life as a venue for blogging ideas. She lost touch with many friends (as in, real humans) because her need for companionship has been effectively replaced with co-bloggers and commenters. I conceded that Beeh’s blogging behavior is less than exemplary, so Aye got her way in this particular argument; but when I pressed her to agree that blogging as a hobby could be cool, she said, “Who the hell has hobbies, anyway?”. With that she put a dagger through this uncool blogger’s heart. Lucky for me, I insist on anonymity, so I walked off superficially unscathed. But deep down I know the truth, “Who the hell wants to be cool, anyway?”

Hevel Havalim #64 -- it doesn't get more fun than this!

Welcome to the 64th edition of Hevel Havalim, Carnival of Vanities- a weekly roundup of the latest in the Israeli and Jewish blogging. It is with great remorse that I announce that this April 1st edition has been canceled. I think SoccerDad (HH coordinator) jinxed me when he said that between school, family, and erev pesach I would barely find the time to squeeze this in. He was right; I just didn't have the time. Better luck next week. Sorry.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

:

April Fools :) I just couldn't resist... and now on to business. (Though I think I'll use that excuse elsewhere.)

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Hevel Havalim #64

Israeli Elections:

Yitchak Goodman at Judeopundit links to others' election thoughts; Daled Amos does the post election round up too.

Oleh Chadasha feels like a good citizen after her first time voting.

Batya from Shilo Musings on Olmert's "so sorry we won" attitude and the Retiree Party's surprise victory.

A simple Jew points out that while we're voting, we actually want moshiach- not a politician.

Carl from Israel Matzav brings quotes from American MSM showing meager enthusiasm for Olmert and his plans. He's also shocked at the surprisingly low voter turnout bichlal, but especially from the settlers.

Robert Avrech thinks Jordanian King Abdulla is even sorrier than Bibi that Olmert won.

West Bank Mama reports from the front: Olmert will have a tough time forming a government.

Israel:

Yaakov at Aliya blog thinks of the difference between racism and prudence when he gets held up at a checkpoint. Then he provides some funny 'overheard in Israel' moments.

David at Treppenwitz makes everyone who isn't in Israel remember one of the many reasons why we want to be there: just about any drive between towns can lead to this (amazing excavation of ancient ruins).

Rafi G sees a blessed opportunity in appointing a new Chief Rabbi for the Israeli Army from the remote yishuv Itamar: greater security in the neighboring Kever Yosef.

Simply Jews makes minced meat out of the reporting on AlJazzera's website.

Oleh Chadasha brings out the ancient maps of the Middle East and shows that if Palestinians truly had homeland that they were intent on reclaiming, let them declare jihad on Jordan and Egypt.

Batya lives with the danger of being a trempestit.

That time of year again:

Elms in the Yard reminds everyone that it's chodesh nissan, so don't forget to make a bracha on the elm in your yard (preferably a fruit tree).

Need help cleaning for pesach? The Hashmonean suggests taking the Iranian approach: nuke the chametz!

Blog Hamincha asks how sexist are menner matzah?

While Americans worry about forgetting to turn back the clock an hour, Rafi G worries about turning the clock back three years in the Israeli economy.

April 15 looms. For palestinian readers, Abbagav prepared this trusty form for easy distribution of Hamas government benefits.


Random stuff of interest:

Muse at Me-ander notices that the Jewish standard for celebration has changed.

Oleh Chadasha is sick of the mayhem in France. Oh, and she also started a book club.

A Simple Jew remembers Sholom Schwartzbard on his yartzeit-- Schwartzband assassinated Ukrainian leader Simon Petlura, the man responsible for the massacre of many thousands of Jews.

Everyone's up in arms about that Muslim divorce--get the details at Abbagav.

Dovbear highlights (literally) a hilarious case of irony.

Having just toilet trained my daughter, I found this item on Jack's blog a riot.

Soccer Dad (godfather of this carnival) posts his own mini roundup-plenty interesting to read there.

I predict that many j-blogs will be discussing Marvin Schick's article for a while to come. (I, II, III)

Krum as a Bagel declares cell phones in shul are just... krum.

Miriam says I heart yiddish.

Metablogging:

Attention trolls, you are not welcome here. Oh, you don't know what a troll is? Life-of-Rubin tells you who trolls are, and Orthomom tells trolls where to take it.

Canonist gets tough and for the first time ever blocks an IP.

Godol Hador gets death threats and blogger won't do a darn thing about it.

F. formerly known as S. wants you to check out his new blog, Englifh Hebraica.

Irina Tsukerman refuses to change her blog format but finally breaks down and makes a kind concession.

Baruch Dayan Haemes:

This week a bloody terrorist attack claimed four innocent lives. Israeli Cool posts pictures of the victims. Jameel knew the driver; (update) a Jewschool blogger is related to a victim. May Hashem protect all the Jews in Eretz Yisrael and worldwide.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

That wraps up this edition of Hevel Havalim. Please send your submissions for the next edition of HH to Soccer Dad or directly through the Carnival submission form. (Also Listed at the Truth Laid Bare Ubercarnival.)

Thank you all for your submissions and my apologies if I left anyone out.

Shavua Tov.

Yeah yeah- this screams desperate, but it's more of a curiosity. I'm getting so many hits yet so few comments! Either tell me what you think or tell me what I'm doing wrong. I want to hear from you--suggestions, criticism, rants, encouragement, whatever... just no flattery.

Jody Rosen comments and I sincerely apologize

Earlier today I posted rather presumptuously that Jody Rosen's article in Slate Magazine echoes an earlier post of mine. Mr. Rosen is in fact an expert on Jewish jazz, vaudeville, minstrelsy, and Jewish contribution to American music... topics that I merely touched on in my amateur article. Granted, I had some good ideas, but I don't hold exclusive rights to them, and it was foolish of me to suggest that I came up with the ideas first. Mr. Rosen was kind enough to write a comment and show that I have yet a lot to learn on the topic as well as on professionalism. Again, I deeply apologize.

Jody Rosen's comment:

Hi. Jody Rosen, here.

I will admit to one sin: ego-surfing. A friend of mine wrote me an email saying that my Matisyahu piece was "causing a stir in Jewish blog land." So I did a Technorati search, which led me to your blog. For the very first time, I might add.

No, I did not "copy your post." Again: this is the first time I've visited your blog. The ideas in both our pieces are in common currency -- they're ideas that would occur to any reasonably intelligent person who's spent some time thinking about popular music history, Jews, and intersections of the two. I mean, jeez, The Jazz Singer? It's THE cultural touchstone for ALL conversations about blackface.

As it happens, I've thought (and published) a lot about Jewish minstrelsy over the years. I wrote a book about Irving Berlin and (for lack of a better term) Jewish musical assimilation (White Christmas: The Story of an American Song; Scribner, 2002) in which I ruminate at length on Jewish blackface. See:

http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/b...=7-0743218752- 3

I've been doing a lot of work recently on what I call "Jewface," the performances of vaudeville's "Hebrew comedians": a kind of Jewish equivalent of blackface minstrelsy. Here's a little synopsis of a paper I gave on the topic last year:

http://www.emplive.org/visit/edu...D=528&year=2005

By the way, I'm currently in the final stages of curating and writing liner notes for a compilation CD of these "Jewface" songs, forthcoming this summer from Reboot Stereophonic (www.rebootstereophonic.com) records. I invite you and yours to buy lots of copies; it'll make a great Chanukkah gift.

If you require more evidence that my interest in minstrelsy predates your blog post, you can check my own (infrequently updated) blog, The Anachronist.

http://theanachronist.blogspot.com

See also, my article on the front page of this coming Sunday's New York Times Arts & Leisure section.

All this by way of saying: you should be very careful about impugning the integrity of writers. I'm really not the type who relishes an internet pissing match, but I DEEPLY resent the idea that I've pilfered your ideas.

By the way, you should check out this book:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/ product...5Fencoding=UTF8

And this one:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product...glance&n=283155

And, especially, this one:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product...glance&n=283155

These books definitely shaped my thinking abiout Matisyahu. Not your blog, though.

The only thing that actually *is* "oddly close" (to use Mottel's portentous phrase) about our pieces is the phrase "tzitzit flying." But I promise you, it's just a coincidence. I used the phrase because that's exactly what I saw in Matisyahu's videos, such as the one I linked to in my Slate piece.

I hope this clears things up for you.

Thanks, Jody

shameless self-promotion in hopes of making you laugh

This blog was only born on Monday night, and while the visits have topped a 1000 (thanks everyone) the comments have so far been sparce. So in the spirit of an entrepreneur, I will toot my own horn:

DZ/anonymous said:

"Your a holy man indeed. Every blog site ever created was worth it just to hear this."

Thanks much. Just one tiny detail--I'm a woman... Oh, you meant Shlomo.

Dovid said:

"Welcome to blogoshpere! We were all waiting for a blog like this."

I appreciate the flattery, but clearly you need to get around more. I'm only one among the many. Unless you meant something else by 'this'...

Coming up next week:

1. Was King Achashveirosh actually a 'queen'--(for anyone who's been listening to PURIM USA).
   
2. Vomiting in Halakha XVI-from the point of view of someone who'll be doing the cleaning after Purim.
3. Are the Jews good for the Jews? and other pressing politicals.

On second thought, come back next week and find something original.

Shabbas Shuloym!
:)

The (un)wanted veil

Orthomom recently posted a clipping of a short article called “How the Internet is Lifting the Veil from Orthodox Jewish Women,” that cited several orthodox female blogs as a ‘rare glimpse into an otherwise closed world’. The hyperbole that the unaffiliated use to describe our mysterious community is not a surprise, but I’d like to suggest that, in fact, there is a ‘viel’ over us orthodox woman and we are hiding behind our traditional role more than we’d like to admit. Before I get my shietel ripped off by angry mobs of enlightened, opinionated (and roaring) women, let me explain:

The Jewish blogsphere is fairly populated by female bloggers. In my unscientific poll of different websites’ blogrolls, I found that while we are a minority, our voice is present in equal measure to our relative involvement in communal/cultural affairs. It seems that men are much less likely to link to women’s blogs (if at all), while women link mostly to men’s blogs but also add their few girlfriends onto their blogroll. (Update: that was a mistake). I’m almost surprised that the JIB awards didn’t list a category for ‘best female blogger’.

Despite our solid presence, men seem to enjoy a far greater degree of security in this virtual world of blogging. The most popular male bloggers have, for the most part, been out-ed. Even if I personally don’t know their names, it’s obvious that many of their readers do. I have also seen a considerable amount of men using their real names: Gil Student, Stephen I. Weiss, Robert J. Avrech, to name a few. I dare you to find that many religious women unafraid of divulging their identities online. The rare exception, (i.e. Esther K.) are either professional writers who don’t benefit from anonymity or questionably orthodox. The rest of us cling dearly to the generous anonymity that the internet provides. I’ve seen countless bloggers trembling in fear of having been identified and threatening to shut down their blogs if someone were to publicize their identities—and more often than not, they were female.

Why is blogging considered a surprising, possibly dubious activity for an orthodox woman? Okay, dubious might be pushing it, but it is still on the fringe of acceptability. Why else would public acknowledgment of the blog tarnish a women’s identity? One (not I) can argue that since the entire function of a blog is to fulfill the narcissistic need for self-expression, to act as a personal reality TV channel focused on the writer’s life and mind, a woman that exercises extreme modesty of behavior and thought would not relate to this kind of venue for self-expression. RenReb, the Joan of Arc of the new breed of orthodox female bloggers, flies in the face of the traditional image of a rebetzin—she’s saucy, she’s funny, and she uses words like cocky—but despite her claim at totally forthright presentation, she is tediously careful with conserving her anonymity. I wonder (and let me know if I’m wrong here) whether she, or any other lauded female bloggers, would admit to falling into line with traditional expectations of the orthodox woman by avoiding public exposure.

I wish my favorite female bloggers would finally come out of the closet and reveal themselves—if not to promote identity and expression among orthodox women, then at least to give their fans a chance to admire them in person!

In the beginning...

There was nothing.

...besides for the ominous dread that my previous obsession with silently reading blogs has now been elevated to the level of chronic illness, as I cross the line into becoming a blogger myself.

That said, I can only hope to get as loyal a following as I've provided to some of you out there (coming soon: links to the sources of my addiction).