Female soldiers leave IDF event after ordered to sit in separate section

[Violet_Crumble]

About 100 female soldiers left the main celebration sponsored by the Israel Defense Forces marking the end of the Simhat Torah holiday on Thursday after they were asked to move to a separate women's section.

The traditional "Hakafot Shniyot" event, which comes after the holiday's formal conclusion and includes dancing with the Torah, was held in the Eshkol regional council area in the south. The commanders of the women soldiers decided to have the women board buses and leave after some objected to their being directed to a separate area cut off from the main event.

The separate women's section was set off by cloth sheeting, but according to one of those present "it was very hard to feel connected to the event there." The event was attended by about 500 people, including a mix of civilians and soldiers, among them, about 100 women soldiers. Those in attendance said before the request was made for them to move, the women had been dancing at one side, separately from the men and also separated by a long table. The women soldiers were then ordered by an officer from the military rabbinate to go to a separate, closed area about 50 meters away, following complaints over the initial setup.

Orthodox Jewish religious authorities call for separation of men and women in certain circumstances. For many observant Jews in Israel, however, it is the custom for men and women at Hakafot Shniyot to dance separately but without the women being relegated to another designated area. The IDF's chief rabbi, Rafi Peretz, as well as the commander for the IDF's Gaza division, Yossi Bachar, were present but did not intervene in the matter. The rabbinate has been under pressure recently to adopt strict interpretations of halakha, Jewish religious law.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/female-soldiers-leave-idf-event-after-ordered-to-sit-in-separate-section-1.391426

[Divernan]

1. "Error: You can't recommend threads from this forum" ? ? ?

How long has this been the rule? Why?

[hobbit709]

2. don't you just love theocracies of any stripe.

[oberliner]

3. Israel is not a theocracy

Not sure why this article would make you think otherwise.

[hobbit709]

4. If not, then why do so many religious laws take precedence there.

[oberliner]

10. It is definitely a problem

But if you look at the laws on the books, Israel is essentially a secular country, and certainly not a theocracy in spite of incidents like this.

[pelsar]

6. but its creeping religion...

its and never ending battle....this is the classic give an inch and they will take a foot (or however it goes). Once you've got gods bidding to do, you just can't quit pushing it, and we see it in jerusalem, we see it in the army (that example in the OP) something that never would have happened 10 years ago.

[Crunchy Frog]

21. Because its military has an official Rabbinate which dictates gender segregation

on religious grounds? :shrug:

[oberliner]

22. No it doesn't

In fact, the Israeli Army is possibly the least gender-segregated army in the world.

[Scuba]

5. Let's see, according to US doctrine....

...we must attack Israel and liberate these women!

[GodlessBiker]

7. What Jewish and Muslim orthodox have in common: the subjugation of women.

Christian orthodox, as well, of course.

[monmouth]

8. And then there's that bus in Brooklyn....n/t

[King_David]

9. Good for these soldiers , the guys should of got up and left too nt

[henank]

11. Nice story - except it's not true

Translation from the Hebrew.

" Anshel Pfeffer wrote an article in Haaretz with a headline that hundreds of Female IDF soldiers angrily left a Simchat Torah event after being forced to celebrate in a segregated area. This is a lie and absolutely false.

I am a female IDF solider that was there in the Eskol Regional Council . The separation was via long tables, which were regular table height, and they had food and refreshments on them. We all danced in merriment. No one thought there was an issue to mix the sides, because the dancing was similar to the hakafot (Simcaht Torah dancing) in a synagogue (i.e. men and women separate) and not one of us left.

There were some "Ashkenazi" female soldiers who didn't turn up at all because the event didn't interest them...and in any event, we weren't "hundreds" of soldiers". There were hardly 30 girls.

Signed,

Netanela
(phone number is with the rotter website editors)

I presume the Ashkenazi soldiers didn't turn up because the music was Mizrachi style and therefore not to their taste. It sounds like the whole event was optional and not compulsory since so many girls didn't turn up at all.

i.e. a slanderous mountain out of a molehill.

Yawn. Same old same old.

[oberliner]

12. Interesting

Any response from Ha'aretz?

[Violet_Crumble]

13. It's not a nice story, and it may well be true....

Who knows. That person could be lying for all we know. And given that there is a growing religious presence in the IDF, that this could happen isn't impossible.

'Same old same old'? Next you'll be telling everyone there is no religious discrimination against women in Israel...

[henank]

14. Why should that person be lying? From someone else at the event:

In any event I have the truth from the horse's mouth. You're going to have to take my word on this - and I know you will find that difficult because after all I guess you consider me to be a right-wing lying colonialist Zionist. But...

My son-in-law is an army Rabbi and was in the Eshkol regional council for the post-Simchat Torah celebrations.

Here is the copy of his email in Hebrew. Translation to follow - Pelsar can confirm the accuracy of the translation.

----------------------------------

היתה בצד מחיצה ורקדו שם כמה בנות דוסיות, אזרחיות.

היו גם כמה חיילות שרקדו.

הטיעון של רוטר נשמע יותר קרוב למציאות מהארץ

.אם כי יכול להיות שפוץ כלשהוא אמר לבנות שיזוזו הצידה

יש גם פוצים עם דרגות קצונה על הכתפיים (ויש שיגידו ששיעורם גדול יותר משיעור כלל הפוצים באוכלוסיה )

בטח לא היו 100 בנות שנטשו בזעם ובהצהרתיות את האירוע.

וזו בטח לא היתה עמדה הרשמית של הרבנות.

Translation:
There was a "mechitza" (separation fence/wall) on the side and some relgious civilian girls were dancing there. There were also some female soldiers.

Rotter's version sounds closer to the truth than Haaretz's. Although it is possible that some putz (he used that word. A Rabbi!) told the girls to move aside. There are also putzes with officer's ranks on their shoulders (and there are some who would say that their proportion is greater than the proportion of putzes in the general population).

There were certainly not 100 girls who left the event in anger and declarativeness (? is that a word? Perhaps demonstratively) and it certainly was not the official stance of the Rabbinate.

-------------------
I posted the Rotter link on Haaretz but so far my comment has been either censored or pre-moderated. So I doubt we'll get any reaction, let alone an apology, from them.

Then again, Haaretz has a very clear anti-religious agenda and will do anything, including lying, to make their point. It is not the first time and won't be the last.

[Violet_Crumble]

23. Sorry but There's no more reason to believe u than to believe haaretz

Inthink anyone who'd take the word of a person who claims haaretz has an anti religious agenda and lies about religion would be a bit silly. If the story is wrong it would be corrected or retracted by haaretz. Get back to me when it is

[henank]

25. Thank you for implying that I am a liar

:sarcasm:

You are quite offensive.

I have written to Haaretz 3 times in the last 24 hours and they have not printed one retraction or printed any of my talkbacks. So yeah, let's see their retraction.

Meanwhile you have a non-story from Haaretz with a quote from an unnamed source. I have brought you a named source from one newspaper and my own close relative, a rabbi and an officer in the army. If that's not enough for you, then nothing will be. Go and wallow in your own bias.

If you think Haaretz has not got an anti-religious agenda then you haven't been reading them enough.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. Why must we believe everything you say?

Sorry but I said there's no more reason to believe any relative of yrs than there is to believe the story in haaretz. If you want to be so sensitive as seeing that as calling you a liar, I'd suggest a thicker skin. Not blindly believing yr relatives anecdotal stories nor taking anyone serioiusly who claims haaretz lies and has an anti religion agenda does not mean I'm wallowing in bias. It means I'm aware of.the agenda of some folk and remember instances where some have defended extremist settler rabbis, for example. So save the outrage. It's really not worth getting upset about.

[oberliner]

15. It would help if there was an actual source

The article doesn't have any named source - just one quote from an unnamed woman.

[henank]

16. Not even a first name for background colour

Edited: I misunderstood you Oberliner. I'm rewriting this comment.

You are right,the article does not quote anyone, not even a first name.

The Rotter article gives a first name and the editorial staff say they have her number.

I can vouch for my son-in-law but you're all going to have to take my word on that.

Haaretz have probably taken a minor incident and blown it completely out of proportion. As I said above, Haaretz have a definite agenda. As my SIL said, it's possible some idiot said something, and some female soldiers took offence. Can't say I'd blame them. But that's not the same as this being official policy.

[oberliner]

17. Thanks for clarifying nt

[henank]

18. Sorry. Apologies. I misread your comment

And I've edited my comment accordingly.

[King_David]

19. Henank"s post sounds more credible to any of us

that are within the community.

I checked with a bunch of people at my

Weekly young Jewish Zionist"s beer bash

tonight and they all (50 peeps) agreed.

[Violet_Crumble]

24. Gosh, that's so convincing!!

Have you considered explaining *why* you agree with something rather than claiming a bunch of people agree with you?

[King_David]

26. My aim was not to convince you

Anyone within the community knows I am correct. ;)

[Violet_Crumble]

27. I doubt anyone reading would find it convincing

Well, apart from assorted Yes People that is. Like I said, it's better to explain why you agree or disagree with something rather than come up with claims that a particular number of folk who may or may not exist agree with you.

[King_David]

29. I did not expect you to understand or agree

ha ha.

:bounce:

[Violet_Crumble]

30. Maybe next time you could claim 100 drinking buddies agree with you?

Now that would really pack some power and credibility! ;)

[King_David]

31. Not buddies

Jewish community event.

[azurnoir]

20. Interesting because if one bothers to translate the talkbacks

you'll find more than one challenging the version your promoting and adding that Israel's Channel 2 also reported the same story as Haaretz but perhaps they also have an 'anti-religous' agenda?