Who is Haredi?

In light of Column 731, it seems to me that some of your claims about the Haredi public are exaggerated and generalizing. The feeling is that you are basing your knowledge on certain groups—perhaps those you met in Bnei Brak a few years ago—and from there you are drawing conclusions about the general public. In practice, the reality I encounter on a daily basis is much broader and more diverse.
However, I agree that it is very difficult to define such broad streams of ultra-Orthodox people.
Indeed, in the Haredi community there are people who are extremists, closed-minded, anti-Zionist, refuse military service, and even those who show tolerance for problematic behavior toward the state and many more… However, alongside these there is a very large group — certainly not a minority — who do not behave this way, alongside many who agree with some. These are people who maintain a distinctly Haredi lifestyle, define themselves as Haredim, and their environment also sees them as an integral part of Haredi society. Are you aware of the matter and only refer to people who are not like that? Do you think that the characteristic is such despite so many (in my opinion) that it is not?
It seems that you are offering your own new definition of "modern religious," and including many people who define themselves, and actually live, as Haredi. The majority of the Haredi public — both outsiders and Israelis — identifies them as Haredi in every sense. It is possible that only by your personal definition are they not Haredi, and on the extreme side they would even be called "gentiles," but in reality they are not marginal. Do you think that most outsiders are not Haredi?
Regarding secular studies, for example — I do not believe that most Haredim are opposed to this in principle. Their absence stems mainly from a preference for other values ​​(like you, if I am not mistaken), such as the level of Gemara studies. The preference to send a student with a high level of "sacred studies" creates a situation in which any institution that wishes to be considered "quality" refrains from introducing full core studies. There is also a social phenomenon here of fear of differentiation or exclusion — a real fear that has a basis — but it does not necessarily indicate a deep ideological opposition to general studies. It is difficult to see this as an "essential Haredi characteristic," but rather as a result of social pressures. Perhaps fear really is a characteristic….
I agree with you that belief in science as an essential value, and not just as a means, is indeed a characteristic that is not Haredi. However, it seems that in your articles in general you tend to exaggerate your criticism in order to sharpen your arguments, and sometimes this exaggeration undermines accuracy and fairness. Do you think this is true?
It is also important to remember that for many Haredim, "leaving the public" or leaving what they grew up with for years entails a very heavy price compared to the reward they receive outside. Therefore, even if a person identifies with some of the things you describe, they may prefer to remain in the Haredi circle. After all, the Third Path still does not have institutions and communities…. Should all these phenomena be included in the definition? (If Harediism is a sociological phenomenon and most of them act and do not think this way, it may have an impact…)
PS If your goal is also to bring people from the Haredi community closer to your perception of the "modern religious movement", a more gentle and respectful presentation of things may serve this purpose better. Harsh criticism may be discouraging, even when the intention is positive. I think that in a class or an interview, you would present things in a slightly softer way… Is this really an exaggeration for the sake of the argument?