Become a Member

By

Lindsay Simmonds

Opinion

Segregating men and women is not sexist? Really, rabbi?

February 1, 2014 10:37
2 min read

Rabbi Daniel Levy’s anachronistic article in the JC’s Judaism page earlier this month is peppered with flawed reasoning. He suggests that “segregating men and women is not sexist”. But sexism is defined by the differentiation between sexes because of their sex alone — based on no other personal characteristic — and this is indeed the case with the mechitza. Separating men and women for prayer may be halachically obligated, but is nevertheless sexist.

Historically and in contemporary life, men and women have been separated for regular prayer in Orthodox synagogues in very different ways. It is almost exclusively women in the UK Orthodox synagogues who are seated behind or above, not the men. Consequently, it is the women whose ability to see or hear the service is hindered. Shivah houses are not permanent places of worship and therefore are of little relevance in the argument which questions the sacred spaces of synagogue or Temple life. The sharing, limiting and appropriation of space is always a telling sign of who has authority over whom. Recent photos of the Kotel in Jerusalem are an unsettling testament to who “owns” holy space – the men’s section expands ever larger, as the women’s shrinks year on year.

Rabbi Levy suggests that men and women were never equal. He mistakenly conflates equality with sameness. Equality does not mean sameness, it means an identical level of respect, merit, value and purpose. It does not always mean equality of opportunity — the blind cannot become pilots, unfair (and arguably unjust) as that may be. But it does not render the blind unequal — but merely different from the sighted, just as the sighted are different from the blind.

The issue at hand is the fact that white males have been the overwhelming subject of history. “Difference” has meant anything “other” than this particular subject. Hence women — or blacks — have been considered extraordinary and often objectified.

To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.

Editor’s picks