Sometimes, Having No Answer Is The Best Answer

Apparently, I have a new obsession with how horrible labeling has become. I've really been posting about it a lot. Anyway.

This past Shabbos, I went (with Pobody) to my friend's house for lunch (we'll call her TG). Afterwards, Pobody and I went back to my house to get games to bring back to TG. As we walked in the door upon our return, TG asked me,

"Erachet, how would you classify me?"

I gave her a somewhat blank stare.

"What do you mean? In what context?"

"You know...religiously."

"...Oh. You mean you want me to label you?"

"Well, yeah."

I paused for a moment, thinking.

"You're...somewhere in between Modern Orthodox and Yeshivish."

"But you're not either," Pobody added.

"Right," I said.

That was when TG insisted that she just didn't fit into any "group."

"You're normal," I told her. "You keep halacha."

The funny thing is, as much as I'm against labeling, I've also felt the frustration of not belonging to any particular "group." The closest thing I can label myself as is having a Modern Orthodox background. Except that I'm not exactly that, even though I am somewhat. It's confusing, see?

In some ways, labeling has always existed and always will exist. Any time anyone is associated with any particular school of thought, even outside of Judaism, they get labeled as that thing and it's a good way to sort of know in advance how a person will hold on certain issues, what their mindset will probably be like, etc. But the danger is that no one is ever that black and white. There are always grays. There are always isues on which a person deviates from the school of thought they categorize themselves as. And that's why it's so horrible to assume to know everything about a person solely based on their 'label.'

Labels definitely serve a purpose, but to say a person is "A" should not exclude that person from also being somewhat like "B." To attempt to define who a person is also sets major limits on who they are not - and making that sort of decision for someone is dangerous.

To really bring this outside of Judaism for a minute - I used to feel a small bit of anxiety over the kinds of stories that I wrote (and still write). I love creative writing and I love most forms of it - fiction, nonfiction, kids' stories, poetry, etc. But I used to think that I would have to establish myself as one particular kind of writer and that was it. I'd never really heard of anyone who wrote many different genres or who wrote both books for adults and for little kids (I'm sure many such authors exist, but I wasn't super familiar with any).

One day, in a children's book writing class last year, a kids' author came in and talked about her work. She mentioned how she wrote books for YA (young adults), even though she also had little kid books. I don't remember if she also wrote for adults, but just the fact that someone was writing for different age groups really made me understand that it was possible. It was a huge eye-opener for me. Why should I have to define myself as one particular thing? I want to be a writer of stories - all kinds of stories. I don't want to limit myself to only writing one kind of book.

I think that's the point I'm trying to make. Labels are useful but they're also limiting. I think it's a really good thing to be comfortable with who you are as a Jew (and as a person) and not feel like you must stamp a label on yourself in order to fit in. Not having a label means you're actually thinking about what you're practicing and you're doing what makes sense to you - not what you feel like you have to do because of societal pressure (I'm talking about non-halachik things, such as chumras you don't really agree with, etc. Obviously you have to keep halacha - I'm not talking about having a free-for-all, here). And even though it's somewhat confusing not to just slip neatly into a particular label, I really, truly believe it's better in the long run.

On Labels & Successful Aliyah

Sorry for the inundation of posts the past week or so; it happens sometimes. A couple worthwhile reads:

• Erachet, on a roll lately, manages to tie Dr. Seuss and sneetches into a great discussion on labels. It's a very interesting and different approach to the subject in general, I think.
  
• Chayyei Sarah has an excellent post about having made it through five years since making aliyah, often the mark of someone who won't have to go back.
  

Labels & Judgmentalism - II

Little boxes on the hillside,
Little boxes made of ticky-tacky,
Little boxes, little boxes,
Little boxes, all the same.
There’s a green one and a pink one
And a blue one and a yellow one
And they’re all made out of ticky-tacky
And they all look just the same.

And the people in the houses
All went to the university,
And they all got put in boxes,
Little boxes, all the same.
And there’s doctors and there’s lawyers
And business executives,
And they’re all made out of ticky-tacky
And they all look just the same.

And they all used to own TVs,
And daven in one big Shul ,
And they all have pretty children,
And the children go to school.
And the children go to summer camp
And no more to the university,
And they all get put in boxes
And they all come out the same.

And the boys go into learning,
And marry, and raise a family,
And they all get put in boxes,
Little boxes, all the same.
There’s a black one and a white one
Perhaps a blue one but no more colored ones
And they’re all made out of ticky-tacky
And they all look just the same.

This wonderful little satirist composition was written by my good friend G on an interesting post at Bad4Shidduchim discussing that wonderful little subject we like to call 'labels'.

The key to solving, fixing, or even remotely improving any difficult problem or situation starts with understanding where the problems lie and how they came about. I was reminded of this after having a conversation with a good friend tonight, and reading a well-put post elsewhere. My friend was noting the concern they had with dating a suggestion their father made, questioning whether their parents actually understood what it was they were looking for and needed hashkafically. Out of curiosity, and to verify my own presumptions, I asked my friend to explain what each of those were, and they proceeded to try and do just that - and did quite a good job of explaining themselves rather clearly, furthering a point that Special Ed originally suggested and which I think has proven itself time and again:

Special Ed: a lot 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.

Ez: I found that a few people were described or described themselves or what they were looking for to me; almost none used any labels whatsoever. The more closely they knew the person, the less likely they were to use any labels at all. For example, a person describing their sister used zero labels to describe their sister, but when it came to talking about what their sister was looking for, they were able to explain a lot of it without... but the parts they were vague on they resorted to labels. As another note, our friends who describe what they mean without falling back on labels give a much better sense of what they are and want than those who do not.

But at the same time, my friend was slightly frustrated by the definition they had given of themselves. [edited for formatting, emphasis, etc.]

Friend: I'm a confusing person.
Ez: You're in that elusive "normal" label.
Friend: I guess. Just very moderate; not too extreme either way. And it's somewhat difficult to define frumkeit sometimes... most of the time it's a sense of things that you can't quite explain... (Ez: yup)
Friend: ...especially in terms of another person. (Ez: YUP)
Friend: Right - so I don't like explaining "why" all the time because sometimes it can't be explained. (Ez: yup)
Friend: Sigh.

Meanwhile, while I understand my friend perfectly, the question remains as to whether I could give that over to someone else... and even if I can, would they understand?

After mulling that over for a few minutes, I think I know the answer to that one. But before I get to the answer, this post by a young woman named Miri made a very salient set of points:

I know that categorization is a useful and necessary tool for manipulating and understanding the world, and G-d knows, for shidduchim. But there is a limit people. Really. I am, indeed, all for the whole "be in as many categories as you want! It's fun and confusing!"approach, because it is fun. And confusing. But there is a point at which other people really don't care as much as you do. So, you know. Chill out.

I think this last is very possibly my main point. When you start getting into long-winded, more than thirty word descriptions of exactly who, where, and what you are in the Jewish world, it gets to be a little much. It's like "ok, I get it, you're not the steryotype!" Only, of course, you are.

I mean, look man, all I'm saying is this; I barely have the energy to care about my own issues of identity (which I have, just like everyone else) but I have even less patience for everyone else's issues of identity. Really, we don't care that much. And really? Neither should you.

Amen. In the beginning of the post, we discussed that improvements to and solutions of problems require understanding of what the problems are and how they came about. When everyone is trying to come up with a simplified understanding and breakdown of people, 'defining' people into certain categories, it automatically leads to large amounts of people doing what they can to fit into certain boxes as opposed to "other" boxes. The old "two shuls - one to go to and one not to" joke certainly rings true. At the same time, people hate being put into their own box, either, so they continually explain just how they're different from all the rest.

And now, back to the answer. Even if I could describe my friend well, would people understand me? Would they be able to 'get' that "sense of things you can't quite explain?"

You know what - I think they could. The ones who want that, the ones who are looking for that, they'll understand. They'll know that this is someone worth spending some time getting to know and seeing if it makes sense for them. They'll understand that someone who is unable or unwilling to put themselves into - or even explain how they can't put themselves into - all the neat little boxes is not someone who doesn't know themselves, but someone who is simply frum. Or normal. Or whatever you want to call it. Oh, and that they might not have decided everything in life yet, either.

Friend: I was just thinking earlier today that I don't have an opinion on EVERYTHING, but I don't think that that matters even...

Friend: ...sometimes it's because I just haven't really thought about it too much; and sometimes it's because I thought about it so much I just concluded that I have no conclusion.

As to all the people looking for neat little labels and boxes, I wish them well, and hope that they find whatever ticky-tack box they're looking for. Just remember that in that quest to fit into the perfect little box that's just like all the other ones, it becomes a lot harder to show the fine details that makes it different from all the other little boxes.

And they all get put in boxes,
Little boxes, all the same.
And they’re all made out of ticky-tacky
And they all look just the same.

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!?