Pages

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Labels & Judgmentalism

Labels. We all know them: "Modern" "Yeshivish" "Frummie" "Velvie" "Srugi" "He's koveia itim" "She wears pants" etc. And of course, we all say we hate them - and we do. They put people in boxes, they essentially limit or define people into boxes when of course, nobody fits into that box. That's why every girl from Brooklyn still 'isn't the typical Brooklyn girl', and why every guy isn't really that "shtark". But we still all use them, because they're still 'useful' and they still help and they still allow us to get a basic idea of a person in a really short period of time, say... 60 seconds or less, because that's important, too. After all, if you need more than that to describe someone, there must be something wrong with them... right? End rant one.

But let's talk seriously for a second. Those annoying labels do matter, those characteristics we use to define people do have a use. When you're trying to set up a shidduch and you know that one side cares very much about following halacha strictly, it doesn't make sense to set them up with someone who doesn't. When one side cares strongly about specific chumros, even, it likely doesn't make much sense to set them up with someone who is very against those particular chumros. This is not a place for debate as to whether those chumros have great importance or are complete garbage; this is simply a common-sense approach to matching two people together. You wouldn't match up someone who is often extremely sarcastic with someone who doesn't appreciate or get sarcasm; you likely wouldn't set up someone who thrives when they're with someone who stays in the background and brings out their talents with someone who thrives on being at the center of attention. We all use common sense and our own gauges of what we think will 'work', and we try not to do the "oh, here's a girl, here's a guy, let's set them up" approach.

And that's all great. But what about when we start using those labels? Those labels are useful only when they actually have meaning. When someone says "Well, she wears pants...", that's generally used to define a person who doesn't follow halacha particularly stringently, does it not? So if a person is trying to set up a match for a nice frum young man who cares about halacha, and then they hear about the woman that "well, she wears pants", that's often going to cause the person to not even bother trying to set it up. And in most cases, that makes perfect sense. Why bother setting up a guy with a girl who doesn't particularly care about the halachos of tznius? It's simply a waste of time for everyone involved. He wants a girl who cares about the halachos; this girl does not.

But what about when those labels don't actually apply? What about a girl who does feel strongly about halacha; who thinks being tzanua is of utmost importance? What about a girl who specifically wears certain types of women's pants that she grew up learning were absolutely fine? What about a girl who knows more and cares more about halacha than most every girl you'll meet... but in this particular issue her understanding is slightly different than the "that's just what people do" approach? Is that a girl who shouldn't get set up with any halacha-following guy, because "well, she wears pants"? A girl who doesn't feel wearing pants is something she has to do, but something that as a single person following the halachos and minhagim she grew up with and learned - that's something that essentially results in her being "punished"? How does this make sense?

This is when labels cease to be useful and begin having real-life negative effects. Forget the specifics of the example above for a moment, and let's talk more generally. Instead of people consistently vetoing shidduch ideas before they even begin because people randomly throw out a few labels, let's think if those labels make sense in the specific case we're discussing. If the reasoning behind the label doesn't apply in the case at hand [such as pants = doesn't care about halacha], then don't use it. If it's a very specific issue that the person might care about, then why not let the people go out, date, and when the time is right to discuss the issue, they can discuss the issue themselves. They're mature adults, are they not? (If not, they shouldn't be dating!) If it's something within the realm of halacha regarding a specific issue that one may understand differently, let them go out and see if either side feels it's actually important; in the specific example above, perhaps the girl doesn't care that much about wearing pants if it's that important to the guy; or perhaps the guy is okay with it as long as it is within the realm of halacha. Let them see!

There seems to be this unspoken fear by people to set their friends up unless they think a person is 'perfect', lest their friend be 'insulted' that they set them up with a person 'like that'. That's ridiculous. Are we not all adults? If this issue was something that the person being set up cares about, then they can say "Thanks, but this issue is something I care about, just so you know for the future." And the person setting them up can respond, "Okay, good to know, I'll keep that in mind." Is that so difficult? Is that conversation so hard that people would rather look for any way to strike a shidduch through every label imaginable so they don't have to worry about their friend coming back upset? If the person is so horribly insulted by the suggestion, let them explain it. If they just want to whine, so don't set them up and you won't have to deal with it anymore. But don't continually strike ideas that seem pretty good because "maybe he/she doesn't want a girl/guy like that". That doesn't do anyone any good.

Shidduch crisis, eh. Whatever happened to not being so judgmental!?

60 comments:

  1. I agree with you. So many more shidduchim would succeed if the people involved were treated as intelligent adults who could make up their own minds about who is appropriate for them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with a lot of what you said. People do get very hung up in small details and the labels that are attributed to them, often because they are worried what other people will think. And there are many, many examples of someone wears a more "shtark" label as his external appearance than his actual actions indicate, if anyone would really find out.

    However, I think labels can be somewhat useful only in regards to mindset and philosophy when it comes to shidduchim. Because someone who would label themselves as yeshivish would probably have a hard time with a girl who wears pants - because that is outside of his mindset and way of looking at frumkeit. It does not mean that there is anything wrong with it, but it could definitely lead to a lot of misunderstanding and disagreement down the line.

    That being said, I do think too many people look for the *perfect* fit, where they should be looking for how they can work together and compromise on side issues. I think what's really important is for each person to figure out what is at the core of importance to them, and then the other stuff can be worked out.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is why people should live in places where they can actually meet other people and maybe get asked out by them in a casual environment. A lot of these external differences tend to fall by the wayside in these sorts of situations. Too bad guys know they will be set up (and are so paralyzed by rejection) so they rarely put the effort in to actually ask a girl out they might have interest in.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Labels are for food!

    ReplyDelete
  5. NOOOOOOOO! I NEED TO STOP THINKING THINGS. WHENEVER I THINK OF AN IDEA TO WRITE ABOUT, SOMEONE ELSE GOES AHEAD AND WRITES IT.


    .........do I secretly have ESP with EVERYONE????

    Seriously, I thought about writing about this, or something similar to this, for an opinions piece in the Observer and last night at two in the morning I opened a Word document and started listing my thoughts just so I would remember them.

    hehe. Aaaaaanyway, I agree wholeheartedly. :D

    ReplyDelete
  6. anon - you are promoting matches purely based on externalities. not on a religious level but on a looks level.
    Maybe some people will only exist in a shidduch world because they would never get a chance the way you are suggesting things should happen.

    ReplyDelete
  7. iPay - Moi? :)

    Ronnie - Agreed. It's as if everyone treats everyone else like children who can't make decisions for themselves. I wonder if the strong involvement of parents - which can be very positive - has led to this somewhat, as by nature people are very protective of their kids. This protective mentality then may have spilled over to how everyone views shidduchim.

    Shoshana - Agreed, agreed, and agreed. I'm talking more from the perspective of people trying to set people up in the first place; they especially shouldn't be trying to pin people with the 'perfect' fit, because that's simply impossible. Use your common sense, find something that seems about right, and let the adults who are dating work on the details.

    Anon - I agree. And often, when they do, they're looked at with shock that they could do such a thing.

    Chaim - :)

    Erachet - :P See, that's why I don't bother thinking!

    iPay - I think anon and yourself are looking at different points. You're talking about people asking people out based on little but looks; I think anon was referring to people meeting and conversing in a casual setting, and then asking the person out after they've gotten to know them a bit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. When you only have one piece of information, you tend to make decisions based on it, even if you know on some level that it's not necessarily representative. If young men and women could just meet naturally instead of being set up, this wouldn't be as big an issue.

    ReplyDelete
  9. As I said here http://kallahmagazine.com/WordPress/?p=598
    I don't fit myself into such boxes.
    Unfortunately, though, many people have their lives mapped out just so that they will be "wearing" the right labels. They go to the yeshivas or seminaries known as top-ranking in the shidduch world. And they will dress the part. And go to the right camps, too. They will learn to rattle on about the "right hashkafa" without having to exert much brain power. Some people are forced to fill a mold that may have been set by their parents who really do mean to get the best for their children that way. But there is much hypocrisy in this. And on that, I will not get started here.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ladies wearing pants???
    Is that the real issue here or did "someone" get funny looks for following the family minhag regarding kilts.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hey Ezzie, Talking about looks and labels and such, i just had to post this:
    Many girls wouldn't out with a guy that looks/dresses like this:
    http://personal.stevens.edu/~llevine/rozovsky.jpg

    Yea, its R' Shmuel Rozovsky. Think they had off for 2nd seder that day?

    ReplyDelete
  12. amen Ezzie! but some ppl use labels and specific examples as an accurate summation of ones particular midset and hashkofa. some ppl are simple like that and can be placed in a box.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well say we're dealing in the not so chareidi world, wouldn't you have a label of "college educated?"

    ReplyDelete
  14. I started to comment but then I realized that it was over a page long so I posted it on my blog.
    You can find it here:
    http://wildtumor.blogspot.com/

    I think overall I agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  15. JA - Of course, and that's just it. Sometimes that makes sense; but when it doesn't apply (exceptions to the rule), don't give information that will make people make certain conclusions.

    Ariella - Thanks. I think the point about parents meaning the best is correct; they do want the best, but that sends everyone into the labeling nonsense about things which may have meaning... but often don't.

    G - :P

    Rea - I knew you'd find a way to get that in there. :)

    Sara - (Which Sara?! We know too many!) I agree that some can, and that's why labels often DO have use. The problem often is when people use those labels and they have the reverse meaning of what is the truth (such as my example of pants = not following halacha).

    SD - And that would be an accurate, descriptive term. I don't know how much use it has per se, but for someone who finds that important, it would answer that.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Moshe - Great, great post. That's just it: Labels DO have meaning, they do serve a purpose... even if we hate them. But that's why so much care must be taken to how we're using them; when used improperly, they are not only not useful, but they completely detract from the use they ostensibly have, which is helping to understand someone. Improperly used, they are altogether misleading and cause people to jump to the wrong conclusions. It's why care is so important.

    ReplyDelete
  17. the family minhag regarding kilts.

    Do explain.

    Left out the other stuff I wanted to say by mistake in my other comment.

    Anyway - not really much to add, I suppose. Just that this puts me in mind of your nonexistent index cards.

    You touched on the hesitation of people who don't up friends unless they're convinced that they're "perfect" for each other - I know of couples who people originally dismissed as "not for each other," but that some smart people later on set them up anyway, and now they're happily married. For goodness sake, let the people go on a date and see if they like each other and if they're compatible! Don't assume you're going to accurately predict their reactions to each other.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Just that this puts me in mind of your nonexistent index cards.

    Oooh, I totally forgot about those! I should have written about them. [Meanwhile, everyone else is thinking "why the heck would he write about something that doesn't exist!?" Because that's why they don't!]

    AnywayS...

    I know of couples who people originally dismissed as "not for each other," but that some smart people later on set them up anyway, and now they're happily married.

    It's why thank God Serach and I met outside of the system. There's no way I'd have been set up with an outrageously outgoing, 5'0 tall, Sephardi girl from Monsey, NY going into special education in a million years.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Do explain.

    I know he's NOT referring to my Dad's apron which he wears to Shabbos meals. :P

    ReplyDelete
  20. There's no way I'd have been set up with an outrageously outgoing, 5'0 tall, Sephardi girl from Monsey, NY going into special education in a million years.

    I'll bet there are a lot of couples who say the same thing (albeit with variations). Just goes to show, ya never really know . . . and so people should be way more careful before assuming that their friends/acquaintances wouldn't be interested in a prospective shidduch.

    That having been said, do use some judgement (the good kind) when setting people up - just because they're both tall, or Sephardi, or their mothers work in the same field doesn't mean that two people are necessarily a good match.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Exactly. Common sense, but once you've used it, let it go. No need to overanalyze every stupid little thing.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ezzie you wrote:
    I don't know how much use it has per se, but for someone who finds that important, it would answer that.

    Exactly, which is how most labels tend to work.

    When I was dating "college educated" was very important to me. Once I went out with a girl who hadn't been to college, nor was intending to. And guess what?
    I had a great time with her.
    It didn't work for other reasons, but it wasn't because she didn't go to college.

    Still I'd guess that in most cases that the label "college educated" described a quality that, if lacking, would mean I would not be compatible with the young woman.

    Back in those days, I was a "srugy." And it did bother me that it would quickly disqualify me with some girls. Now, I realize that they weren't being so outrageous. We probably wouldn't have been compatible on account of our respective Hashkafos.

    I don't think that the Chareidi world is that different from the MO world in its use of labels, it's just that one person's "just a label" is another person's "finds it important."

    ReplyDelete
  23. SD - I agree, which is why I didn't like the college example. One of my wife's best friends (in grad school) was stuck on the idea of her husband having a degree; she got over it, and her husband is very successful and bright and simply didn't get much out of and had therefore dropped out of college.

    I don't think that the Chareidi world is that different from the MO world in its use of labels, it's just that one person's "just a label" is another person's "finds it important."

    I don't think this is any different between the two worlds. Again, it's not the labeling that's the problem per se, it's when it is used contra to what the objective of the label is where it becomes a huge problem.

    Back in those days, I was a "srugy." And it did bother me that it would quickly disqualify me with some girls. Now, I realize that they weren't being so outrageous. We probably wouldn't have been compatible on account of our respective Hashkafos.

    Again, that's generally true; but at the same time, it also depends. Are each of your hashkafos pretty much according to those lines? If so, okay, it makes sense. Otherwise, it's doing the reverse.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Back in those days, I was a "srugy." And it did bother me that it would quickly disqualify me with some girls.

    Soccer Dad, Ezzie, others - I'm curious about this point. Ostensibly, those girls weren't interested in a boy wearing a kippa sruga because they associated it with being modern, zionistic, whatever. Generally, people's response to that is, "Well, you're assuming too much based on what he wears on his head." My question is, how far do you go in trying to get a person who is dating to realize that how a guy or girl dresses doesn't *necessarily* indicate hashkafic ideas? If a person is totally stuck on the kippa issue (or denim skirts, to give a [somewhat weak] example from the girl's side), is it worth it to try and sway them? Have you tried it before, and was it successful?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'm so frum, I don't even think men should wear pants.

    ReplyDelete
  26. My bigger question is really how you deal with associations while dating, I think. I remember reading a book on dating a few years back, and the author wrote that people associate certain behaviors with their parents, so based on whether or not they had negative experiences with those behavior patterns, they would look for those same qualities in a spouse. (She noted that sometimes even though people had negative experiences with those behaviors, they unconsciously looked for them anyway, because they found these behaviors comforting.)

    And of course, these associations can be those of appearance, as well. I have friends who would NEVER date guys from YU because they assume that they're more modern (even if some YU guys aren't). How worth it is it to fight against these associations? Are some worth it to fight against? Should other associations be left alone and just let the person think that way forever?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Speaking about parents with good intentions- ezzie and i know of quite a number of young adults whos parents are labeled one way and they wish to label their children the same way as them, even though the kids are chas v;shalom, different and have a differing haskafah than their parents. The parents say that their children are looking 4 one thing when really their r looking 4 something completely different. So yet another reason why labeling could be dangerous, even amongst family members. (Of- course this isnt always the case).

    ReplyDelete
  28. PT - LOLOL

    Apple - No, I think common sense and a basic understanding is important. I was talking in the post far more about issues from the point of view of the person setting it up - if it's something more specific like their views on denim skirts, let them date and see for themselves.

    In terms of trying to sway a person... I'll talk to them, see what's important and why, etc. I'm not into trying to 'sway' per se; I think people need to decide for themselves what's important to them. I think that people often throw a lot of their stupidities out the window when they date someone who is really up their alley, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am concerned that commenting would label me as a blogger, and I would be ostracized from every circle imaginable.

    However, I do agree with the PT about men and pants.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I always appreciated the sentiment of people who state that they, "don't like to use labels" when talking about people, but I always felt it implied some impractical alternative.

    I mean, if you really think about it is almost as practical as saying, "I don't like using adjectives to describe nouns."

    As long as there are people, sects, and ideologies there will be labels.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Apple - I've heard the parents thing many times; some people still look for those traits, some look for the exact opposite... it's interesting to me.

    The association thing is tricky. Just how/why do they think so? Is it worth showing them why that association is flawed? Do they really need a person like that, and it's a hangup they really need to get over? I don't see a need to get a yeshivish guy with yeshivish hashkafos etc. who wants to mostly learn get over a Stern stigma; but a girl who grew up very 'farfrumpt' but then went on to be very educated, exists in the working world, etc. might want to reconsider only dating Lakewood Kollel boys. Ya know? (Who liked dem labels!)

    Ser - Exactly. That's another scary one. Now can you put a load in the wash? I'm out of socks! :)

    ReplyDelete
  32. Diana - ROTFL

    StrongBad - Of course. So let's use them correctly!

    ReplyDelete
  33. Maybe if you weren't so busy rolling on the floor you would be able to wash your own darn socks. And pick up air conditioners.

    ReplyDelete
  34. For goodness sake, let the people go on a date and see if they like each other and if they're compatible! Don't assume you're going to accurately predict their reactions to each other.

    YES.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Right on, Ezzie. Round of applause.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "That having been said, do use some judgement (the good kind) when setting people up - just because they're both tall, or Sephardi, or their mothers work in the same field doesn't mean that two people are necessarily a good match."

    Excellent point - I've seen that so many times, well-meaning relatives/friends insisting you go out on a date with someone who is "a great match", without knowing a thing about what you're looking for, and not knowing what the other person is looking for either.

    Worse yet are the situations when you say outright why you are not interested (after hearing a short description, and continuing to insist that you go out anyway and "maybe it will work out - the worst case is you don't go out again", forgetting that maybe you have better things to do than to go out even once with people who are clearly not right for you based on what you're interested in. I personally had a number of cases where people have tried to talk me out of what I was interested in just so they could set me up with the person I had in mind (i.e. someone younger than me, still in college, whose interests are drinking, partying, poker, and women in that order - and when I politely, refused, saying that I'm not interested in younger guys and explained why, tried to get me to change my mind on that issue, instead of just accepting that I'm NOT INTERESTED).

    ReplyDelete
  37. I think that alot of the use of labels is to cover up for the fact the they don't know the person you're asking them about all that well.

    Labels are just an easy way to describe someone, and the lack of detail is a convenient cover for lack of knowledge.

    Either way I'm a big fan of finding most of this stuff out by yourself. But that's me I'll try anything

    ReplyDelete
  38. You're right, labels are unavoidable. But in a shittuch situation, AVOID THEM!! Labels tend to prejudice or eliminate possibilities. A woman who wear pants, for example, might be willing to give them up if the man she respects/loves/wants prefers her not to wear them. When pairing people for shidduchim, better to err on the side of positivity and possibility than close off something before it starts. Let the potential couple be the ones to decide if it can work out, as long as both people take halacha seriously.
    BTW, I wear pants and don't cover my hair--but do take halacha seriously. I know I fall short in many ways; since my husband doesn't want me to cover my hair, and likes me in (women's!) pants, I'm working on character mitzvot--which are perhaps even more difficult to master than wearing a wig or a skirt.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I once was in a National Park when a man in black and white, tzizit hanging out, walked by with his wife, in a pair of loose pants and a cute beret, and some kids. At the time, I don't think it hit me how interesting they looked together.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Having met RaggedyDad "on our own," I'm not sure either of us would have expected to be married to someone Russian or American-Israeli respectively, among other characteristics. (File those under life's pleasant surprises).

    Funnily enough, early on when we were dating, someone thought they were doing RD a favor by making sure to warn him that I "wear pants" (actually, I did until a couple of years before that, but didn't at that point). To him, it wasn't a deal-breaker, and in reality, it was no longer even accurate. I guess I say funnily enough because the person who said it is only questionably frum nowadays altogether.

    I guess because we met on our own, and RD wasn't really looking to meet someone and get married per se at that point, a lot of the "initial screening" stuff took a backseat.

    I think a lot of the points made here are very solid. Likely, those that need to hear these ideas the most and apply them are either not reading this or not open to it. But it's good to know that SerandEz is doing its part to better the world :) And I mean that genuinely. Yasher Koach.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I agree with most of what everyobody commented about the annoyances and stupidities--and sometimes even horror--of labeling, but the labels you discussed, Ezzie, are major ones; the kinds of labels that tend to sum up the person being labeled in one or two words.

    What about the more subtle labels-inside-labels? Like labeling someone within the chareidi circle as "balbatish" vs. "heimish" or "yeshivish"? (I can't come up with examples from any other circles...if anyone would care to educate me, I'd be delighted...)

    How do you feel about those kinds of labeling? To me they're sort of a joke, as they tend to change in meaning day by day, but would you categorize those kinds of labels as equally irrelevant and detrimental or equally as helpful as the more major forms?

    (Happy now, Ezzie? :-p)

    ReplyDelete
  42. Oy vey.

    All I can say is, HaShem was our shadchan.

    If you could compare how we were then to how we are now, well... you'd want to hear the story... LOL...

    And I don't mean from when we got married 10+ years ago - go back to when we met 15 years ago, for REAL laughs!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Diana - :P

    Erachet - :)

    SJ - [bows]

    Irina - Absolutely. If the person is completely uninterested, why even bother? They're going to go in with a negative attitude and it wouldn't work anyway.

    SE - I think that alot of the use of labels is to cover up for the fact the they don't know the person you're asking them about all that well.

    That's a really interesting point. I think that the better you know someone, the harder it is to even use labels; any label you want to use you immediately reject because you know it doesn't apply so well. I don't think I use many labels to describe people I know well; I just talk about them.

    Northern Light - I absolutely agree on the idea that people will give up certain things for someone they love. Of course, if you know it's something a person will NOT give up, then there wouldn't be a point.

    When pairing people for shidduchim, better to err on the side of positivity and possibility than close off something before it starts.

    Exactly! See, this is why I wish I could write well. :)

    BTW, I wear pants and don't cover my hair--but do take halacha seriously. I know I fall short in many ways; since my husband doesn't want me to cover my hair, and likes me in (women's!) pants, I'm working on character mitzvot--which are perhaps even more difficult to master than wearing a wig or a skirt.

    My mom wore pants for a few years after my parents were married (and in Brooklyn! must've been the effect of living there :P ), and still wears short sleeves and doesn't cover her hair. Character mitzvos are definitely far harder, and to master even one of those is far more impressive than wearing a wig. (Though honestly, those wigs look so complicated....!)

    ReplyDelete
  44. SL - I remember seeing a couple in Israel; he was Chassidish, she was... well, clearly not. But they were so clearly into one another, it was really nice.

    RM - Hehe. I'm sure that if a lot of the things about either Ser or myself had been given to people who know us to set us up, they'd have thrown the idea out the window.

    I guess because we met on our own, and RD wasn't really looking to meet someone and get married per se at that point, a lot of the "initial screening" stuff took a backseat.

    Exactly! That's exactly what happened with us. I wasn't looking whatsoever (see the How I Met Serach series!), so it was a completely different thing.

    Likely, those that need to hear these ideas the most and apply them are either not reading this or not open to it. But it's good to know that SerandEz is doing its part to better the world :) And I mean that genuinely. Yasher Koach.

    Thank you very much. :) And see the top post... ya never know! :D

    ReplyDelete
  45. but the labels you discussed, Ezzie, are major ones; the kinds of labels that tend to sum up the person being labeled in one or two words.
    Depends. See Moshe's post for an excellent discussion on the weight people attach to certain labels.

    What about the more subtle labels-inside-labels? Like labeling someone within the chareidi circle as "balbatish" vs. "heimish" or "yeshivish"?
    These I think are just stupid. Half the time, if you would ask someone to really define what they mean by that, they would only be able to give some vague answer with a lot of hand-waving or all the sub-labels would mean the same things.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Corner - (Woo! :) ) That's a very interesting question. I think that by definition, the more subtle labels are going to have both a weaker positive and negative effect. Because they are less of a label, they don't give that broad picture that a [properly used] label would... but they also might help in that they're more specific and therefore less of a broad label. Ya know? :)

    Chana - Nu? So write it out! :D

    ReplyDelete
  47. These I think are just stupid. Half the time, if you would ask someone to really define what they mean by that, they would only be able to give some vague answer with a lot of hand-waving or all the sub-labels would mean the same things.

    That's another interesting point. If someone can't explain a label, then how much meaning can it really have?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Ezzie, Northern -
    I am not disagreeing with you - improving one's character is incredibly difficult and often a life-long pursuit. But some women struggle in the worst way to cover their hair and wear skirts because this is what they think is the right thing to do. You can NOT undermine the struggle that these women go through!. I am not (G-d forbid) implying that women who do not cover their hair and wear pants have "given up on a battle" but some women feel that for them personally it is the right thing to do and for them every day is a battle.

    ReplyDelete
  49. iPay - Agreed. I'm talking about someone who treats it as a given vs. trying to correct one's character. I think the latter is far more difficult.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I agree with what most people have said about labels so far. And what about those people who don't fit into a neat little label? For instance, a friend was once trying to describe another friend, and she said to me, "It not that she's yeshivish, cuz she's not. She's just very frum." But unfortunately, people like that tend to get labeled anyway, which leads to people making incorrect assumptions about who they are.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Wow, Ezzie, 51 comments ... catching up on the anxious/need post :P

    If someone can't explain a label, then how much meaning can it really have?
    Not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  52. OK, I am joining in way too late for the discussion, but of course, I agree with you, Ezzie. I set up lots of people, and I am not into giving over FBI-style background info. I only set us nice people, so I like to let the couple figure it out on their own if they are compatible. I date all kinds of guys and I can truly say that you never know who you will click with. All the external things usually end up falling by the wayside when you are with a nice person who treats you right.

    The problem with the shidduch system nowadays is that the parents don't want (or don't trust) their kids to be making their own decisions. So they look for a potential date whose background/look etc. matches theirs and the shidduch "makes sense" on paper. Then the kids go out, ostensibly already thinking that this could be the one. The kids are raised not to question what they are taught so how much is there to discuss anyway? {/sarcasm off}

    If everyone would develop their own hashkafot, 2 people would be able to go on a date and discuss things maturely and see if their life's goals are compatible and the parents wouldn't have so much say in all the silly outside things.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Scraps - Exactly.

    Apple - :P and right.

    SaraK - Woo! You chimed in! :)

    I only set us nice people, so I like to let the couple figure it out on their own if they are compatible. I date all kinds of guys and I can truly say that you never know who you will click with. All the external things usually end up falling by the wayside when you are with a nice person who treats you right.

    Amen, amen, amen.

    Then the kids go out, ostensibly already thinking that this could be the one.

    True. (and heh on the next part :P)

    And amen on the rest, too.

    ReplyDelete
  54. People need to make it known if they're bloggish or not. It could matter.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Isn't bloggishness the first question that clergy ask before performing a wedding?

    ReplyDelete
  56. I didn't read all the comments. I suspect I agree with most of them, but here's where the movement should be:
    Rise up, people, and help these people meet! These people need to be given venues to just mix and mingle and make decisions for themselves. We arranged a few of these events for singles who skewed to the right (obviously, not super right wing) and it was nice for everyone. Where? In KGH of course. Tried it in Wesley Hills too. It was nice. Some marriages resulted. Meet and Greets. Marrieds help introduce people if they want help. Otherwise, food and socializing. No pretense. Try it in your neck of the woods.

    ReplyDelete
  57. With a name like Jameel, it's a miracle I ever got married (to a frum woman)

    ReplyDelete
  58. My name was too "Yeshivish/Old Worldish" for the guys I met on the Upper West Side. Also, I lived at home, yikes! Also, I didn't know how to ski. In the Yeshivish world, I was "Miss Goes to Movies Occasionally, Won't Rule Out T.V."
    Boy, those years were sure a heck of a lot of fun!

    ReplyDelete
  59. Anon - Seriously. Bloggish is like a huge plus!

    Diana - No, clergy don't admit to being bloggish.

    Anon Mom - We're working on it. :)

    Jameel - Wait, you married a Jew?!

    Anon Mom - LOL. Ouch... I noted last week to a friend that a "profile" of me would sound atrocious.

    ReplyDelete