Gender segregation in universities for the purpose of integrating Haredim

They claim that it excludes women, and in any case violates women's rights, and liberalism cannot accommodate such a thing.

Mainly due to discrimination against women. Here are all sorts of situations that can arise, and some of them have already arisen in segregated programs at universities that have already opened such programs:

– In the men's track, only men teach. In the women's track, both men and women teach. It is more profitable for the university to hire a man because there is no limit to which classes he can teach. (This is happening today)

– Due to different demand for the tracks, a computer science track was opened for men but not for women. For women, an occupational therapy track was opened instead. (This is also happening today)

– Students in the segregated master's degree track must attend a seminar. Only male researchers are invited to lecture at the seminar. Therefore, they will not be familiar with the article published by a woman, but only the article published by a man. (This will happen as soon as the master's degree tracks approved by the Council open)

– An ultra-Orthodox person would like to study at the university in a regular track. Because there are separate tracks, they have no social legitimacy to go to the regular track. In the separate track, they study at a lower level, and not necessarily the subject they would study if all the options were open to them. (This is also happening today)

– The norm of segregation is advancing to more places and in private companies there are suddenly separate hallways for women and men.

There are several other reasons for my opposition. For example, a study of the tracks that have already existed for several years showed that they have failed: there is a crazy dropout rate, the level is low and it is very difficult for graduates to find a job… This is what an opponent answered. I wonder what the rabbi thinks about this

On the 2nd of Av, 7th of July

Nadav – Hello,

It is indeed appropriate that in women's tracks the academic staff should be exclusively women. This will result in an increase in the number of positions reserved for lecturers, and thus the proportion of women among lecturers will be equal to their proportion among students.

In this way, we also get rid of the troubles associated with a situation of dominance between a lecturer and a student, this is how our ancestors behaved ‘Abraham converts the men and Sarah converts the women’, and is it in a permissive generation ‘Is it permissible to do so’?

Even studying is more successful, when the mind is focused on studying!. And thanks to separate study – Both women and men will be awarded the Ph.D. degree more quickly 🙂

Best regards, S.C. Levinger

Nadav Shalom.

I will address your comments one by one:
1. I did not say that the universities should cooperate with this or finance it. The Haredim can open their own institutions (that will meet academic criteria, which usually does not happen today). Or that the universities will charge higher tuition fees than those interested in separate studies.
2. What is the problem? This is what the Haredim want, so these are the tracks that will be opened for them. Anyone who wants a different track should study at a mixed institution.
3. This mainly concerns advanced degrees. And even there it does not seem critical to me. That a woman wants to be behind the fence. And if she does not agree, that is her right of course. Or that they will find a man to present women's work (there are quite a few fields in which you will lose almost nothing if you do not know women's work. It is a fact whether you like it or not). And if the council decides that the institution does not meet the standards of knowledge, they will close it. These are all technical and not substantive questions. It is necessary to remember that it is possible to reach the required level without knowing everything. The graduate may be at a lower level, but that will be their problem. It is a matter of adapting to the research, and the research institutions will decide whether they want it or not.
4. Their problem. Let them go without legitimacy or eat it. I am not supposed to worry about anyone who does not worry about themselves.
5. There is no problem with them also creating separate cities for women and men - if that is what they want. As long as they do it only for themselves.
6. You do not need studies to know that academic studies by haredim are worthless. They are being made to make unreasonable assumptions, and that is precisely what I oppose. And if they do not find a job, it is their problem. This should be explained to them and they should decide what they want.

In short, I do not see any substantive problem here.

3. Why would a woman have to lecture behind a fence and not be able to lecture normally on an equal basis with men who wanted to? Why is this different from the similar ”separation” between whites and blacks, which is clear to everyone to be discrimination and is wrong? And why would she let a man present in her place? In the Middle Ages, women would use men's pen names or hide behind men because if they knew a woman wrote it, they wouldn't address it.. We've been gone for a long time and I don't think there's any reason we'll go back there.. In addition to the claim - “there are quite a few fields in which you won't lose almost anything if you don't get to know women's work” (which, by the way, is not a “fact”, I suggest you search a bit about women in science on Google), even if there are fewer publications by women in certain fields - maybe there's a reason for that? That in general there is discrimination against women in academia and there are fewer and fewer women with more advanced degrees?
5. Same as 3 actually.. Why is there no problem with them making separate cities for women and men? Again - why is this different from if I said there would be separate cities for whites and blacks? This is wrong and it is wrong.
6. If they can't find a job, it is also our problem, not just theirs, the goal of this program is to integrate them into the labor market and the goal is very important for a certain reason, if we miss the goal for which the program was established - why continue to promote them instead of thinking of another program to promote this truly important goal?

In the 2nd chapter of the book of Av, the separation between whites and blacks was done out of contempt for blacks, while the separation between women and men at a public event is justified in the Yerushalmi (Sanhedrin 2:4): “Out of respect for the daughters of Israel, that they should not look at women.” A man’s lustful gaze at a foreign woman is “desire” that is worse than nothing. Just as a woman would not want her husband to look at other women, so she should not want a stranger to look at her.

All the more so in a situation where they study together regularly, regarding which the Meiri wrote (Kedushin 5:1) that there is no sitting down of a young man and a young woman to study an art because of the sinful habit. It seems that Meiri never dreamed of sitting young people in their twenties together, when they are at the peak of their sexual urges 🙂
And so wrote Rabbi Kook (Epigram of the Turtle) about the educational damage caused by the unnatural connection between boys and girls in educational institutions, both large and small *)

There is no problem with a woman reading an article written by a man or with a man reading an article written by a woman. The problem is with the constant and prolonged stay together, which is what makes ‘the eye sees and the heart covets’. The connection between a man and a woman is wonderful and sacred, when it is within the framework of a covenant between the two, involving a life of partnership and family, in which and only in which one receives true love.

Studying separately does not harm a high level of education, and ’the Heart Institute’ And the Tal Institute, the Jerusalem College and the Orot College will prove it.

Best regards, S.C. Levinger

*) For additional halachic material, I mentioned in my responses to Shmuel Shetach's article, "It's actually about elitism," on the website "Mosaf Shabbat" (First Source).

Shchel, what exactly will the Lev Institute and the Tal Institute, the Jerusalem College and the Orot College prove? Add Or Yehuda, Mishary, and other prestigious Haredi academic institutions. One could say that the low level prevalent there is not because of the segregation, but with all due respect, it is difficult for me to accept evidence of a high level from this list.

Why segregated cities for blacks and whites are wrong

To the party – Hello,

We make sure that our clothes have a combination of black and white stripes, and you want separate cities? 🙂

Best regards, Shimshon Harshla Austropolar, Ungarin Houses

S.C. I would appreciate a response from Rabbi Michi…

However, the principle of liberalism requires that the Levingers be left to resolve their differences of opinion among themselves, and not to interfere in their affairs 🙂

Best regards, S.C. Levinger, Levingrad, the city of Levingers

I wrote a comment and for some reason I can't find it. I'll try to write again.

Your words (Reich? I didn't understand if you were talking about a man or a woman) are really absurd in my opinion, although I share the principled approach. The debate is only about the appropriate treatment of those who think differently.

3. No woman will need it. Whoever agrees – to health. If they don't find – then that's their problem.
In my opinion, there is no problem with separate cities for blacks and whites like women and men, as long as this is done with the consent of those concerned. The insult in this (which is loosely related to the thesis of different but equal, which I also don't completely agree with) is just fashionable propaganda by the left.
I also don't agree with the irreparable loss in not recognizing women's work. In my opinion, this is completely a fact (especially since I wrote that there are such fields). Nor do I agree with the analysis of the number of publications and the conclusion about discrimination against women. This is mostly empty propaganda in my opinion.
I also don't think it's worth going back there, so I won't (and I also expressed my opinion on the practice of Torah journals on the matter). But some think differently - and that's their right as long as it's done with consent.

5. Same as for 3, actually.

6. Contrary to your paternalistic discourse, in my opinion this is not a “plan” and therefore has no “goal”. There is a legitimate desire of people to receive higher education, and it is not permissible to prevent them from doing so. That is all. If they fail to integrate, that is their problem. I am not supposed to help them with this, but I am not supposed to interfere either.
As a general rule, I have no part and parcel with the Haredi way of thinking that advocates separation, but I also have no part and parcel with the paternalists who want to impose their absolute and universal truth on them. Some are fools and others are righteous.

Can you please help me – What is the halakhic reasoning for the requirement that men not study with women? I can't find an explanation for this anywhere. Above you wrote that the reason for separation at public events is “out of respect for the daughters of Israel”. Is that the only reason? Are there other reasons?

Thank you.

Are you asking me? Ask those who think so.

See my response ‘There is no similarity to separation…’ (above), in the second paragraph, and in the place I mentioned in the comment, where I quoted from the words of the sages Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein.

Best regards, S.C. Levinger