Am I an Etrog? By Carin Lichtenstein
Etrogs at the Shtibelach
Recently, in a 5 minute telephone interview with a matchmaker, I was asked the following questions:
- How old are you?
- How long have you lived in Israel?
- What work do you do?
- Do you wear skirts and pants or skirts only? [How is this fact going to impact in any way on a marriage relationship?]
- Do you plan to cover your hair when you’re married? [Isn't that a bit personal? I'm not asking you what colour underpants you wear!]
- Send me a picture! Its the most important thing.
After some amount of thought, I have a few questions of my own to ask this matchmaker:
- There are 613 mitzvot in the Torah. Why are you choosing to ask me about two, which aren’t even necessarily de’oraita (straight from the text) mitzvot?
- Did Abraham choose a wife for his son based on these questions – or was “loving kindness” his main criteria?
- Does covering your hair and wearing only skirts make you a good wife and mother? If so, I’m in! I thought being a wife and mother was good hard work that demanded all your efforts and talents!
- Do you believe human beings are static? Do you assume that my answers today will still be my answers in ten or even twenty and thirty years time? And finally…
- Am I an etrog? Am I a religious vessel in the hands of you or some young man? Will you check me out in the market, take a good look and then throw me away if you think I won’t do the job? Or am I a living, breathing human being who is the product of thousands of years of Jewish history and individual choice?
Singles, I think that if you are asked a question you are not comfortable answering, regardless of whether the answer is yes or no, that you politely decline by saying “I’m sorry. I don’t feel comfortable answering that question.” These self-appointed matchmakers are often attempting to service a real human need, and answering their misguided questions will only serve to encourage them in their folly.
Photo by Deena Levenstein
Advertisement
Categories: Guest contributors, Making matches
Well said!
Thank you, Chana!!
Carin
so true! it should be more abt you’re internal core values & not abt your changeable external appearance…
Well.
On some basic fundamentals I think that I agree with Carin. I do agree that matchmakers are “self-appointed” and often “misguided”, but in a way, that is why that I am glad
1. The matchmaker is asking these specific questions because they are often (although not always) an accurate precursor of where people are in their lives. People do express themselves through clothing, they always have and they always will. These particular mitzvot are not necessarily d’oraita, but they certainly the most socially expressive, and I would have thought therefore most suitable when a matchmaker is trying to find out “who you are”. And if, for instance, you wear skirts at all times but you are slightly different from most other girls who do so, you can just state the fact.
2. Eliezer did not ask Rivkah, “Are you a lovingkind person?” He had to do that whole thing with the camels. (Now that’s not a line you hear everyday). But my point is that the girls internal personality is the sort of thing that the guy is going to have to pick up for himself. Girls – from what I have read on dating profiles – are usually so awful at giving an accurate picture of their personality that I can barely imagine what sort of warped image the guy would get after this information has been filtered through the matchmaker.
3. Ditto.
4. That is perfectly true. People change, as the high levels of divorce show only too well. But what you are at the moment is all that we have to go with. You may define yourself as “Jewish” now, but convert to Islam at some later point. Does that mean that you cannot now be concretely defined as Jewish? You might be a nice person now, but have a difficult time later in life, and decide that being nice isn’t your thing. You might be a woman now, but…
5. Leaving the religious elements aside, I think that we all have to admit – both guys and girls – that this is what happens to us when we choose to date. The fact that I does not suit someone does not remove any validity from what I inherently am. The fact that someone picks me up, and says, “nice, but not my thing” and then puts me back down again is just one of those things. When I entered the dating game, I resigned myself to being an etrog for a while. And I think its just one of those things that you’ve gotta do.
Because people don’t just choose etrogim based on their “kashrut”. They choose what they think is beautiful. There is no mitvah for a man to have a woman who covers her hair. That is the woman’s issue. If he has an issue about it, then, it cannot be dismissed as being worried about his own mitvah-observence (not such a trivial worry, actually, but anyhow), but about his relationship.
Hi Adam,
Thanks so much for your long response!
1) Sigh.
Adam, I assume that you learn Torah.
What a pity that someone who can examine the meaning of a single word in a verse of the Torah from multiple angles can say something as shallow as:
`These specific questions [do you wear skirts only or pants and skirts] are often (although not always) an accurate precursor of where people are in their lives.’
Are people less multi-faceted than a single word in a verse of Torah? Can one single action not have multiple meanings?
A woman might wear pants because:
i) They keep your legs warm in the Winter.
ii) They’re more comfortable to work in (e.g. with small children).
iii) Its difficult to cycle with a skirt on.
iv) Skirts are liable to blow up in windy weather. Pants are more modest at these times.
v) She works in a women’s only environment. There’s no need to wear skirts to work.
A woman might wear skirts only because:
i) She wants to marry someone observant.
ii) All her friends do it
iii) they’re more flattering
iii) She fears rejection if she wears anything other than skirts.
Human motivation is complex. Making assumptions is risky business.
2) If there is an either/or choice between finding out about someone’s personality or about how they adorn themselves, shouldn’t the matchmaker take on the more difficult task of finding out about the young woman’s personality and character traits? Would you trust a matchmaker who didn’t? Imagine this dialogue:
I have a lovely girl to introduce you to. She wears skirts only and wants to cover her hair when she’s married.
Um, could you tell me a bit about her?
Sorry, that’s for you to find out when you date her.
4) Good point! The matchmaker didn’t ask me if I was Jewish. I might have been a Moslem woman for all he knew. Do you think he would have appreciated this response:
Of course I plan to cover my hair when I’m married. I cover it already in fact.
What I meant to say was that people’s core values seldom change as much as their religious practices do. One only has to look to the ba’al teshuva movement for evidence of that.
5) Interesting.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful responses, Adam!
Kind regards,
Carin
Great exchange! Although Adam addresses the issue with suitable “koved rosh” (especially when it comes to camels as a significant variable in the dating process…), I’m with you on this Carin, I don’t think the clothing says much about religiousity, I think it says more about conformity. And then you have what they call “Jenin fashion” in the schools – short-ish skirts over pants – how on earth to interpret that? You may have given me material for my next primer!
Vera
Hi Carin.
I will work backwards, just to confuse people:
5. Thanks.
4. I disagree. I think people’s mentality and feelings change just as much as their type of religious observance.
2. Frankly, I don’t trust matchmakers to find out that much. It is, as you have said, a more difficult task, and frankly one that I don’t think that they are up to. What they *can* find out is how a woman chooses to express herself through her clothes, a much more shallow level of information, but one which I think is still valid, because….
1.Yes, there are many reasons to wear a dress. But the fact that a woman does not necessarily have them in mind, does not at all mean that she is actually *unaware* or them. And whether a woman chooses to wear pants or not is still therefore very significant.
Let us look at your list.
A woman who wears pants might well be doing it simply because it is easier to exercise. However, by doing so, she is also showing herself to be someone who is not swayed by (1) social pressure, (2)peer pressure, (3)fear of rejection, etc. So, a girl who wears pants either is not exposed to any social pressure not to, or has the strength of character to resist this sort of pressure. For a guy who is looking to avoid the more ghettoish side of orthodoxy, therefore, a girl who wears pants is what he will be looking for – even if she only practically does so because it is easier to exercise in them! (Note; even girls who wear skirts for fashion reasons will occasionally wear pants.)
Now, what Vera says is perfectly true; clothing is a lot more about conformity than religiosity. However, this does not make it at all irrelevant. Above, Carin, you complained about value being placed only on her religiosity, at the expense of her wider personality. Well then, if clothing is more about conformity (a personality issue) rather than religiousity, it is a question Carin, that you should be happy to answer.
Thanks for your careful response, Adam!
If you realise that `wears skirts’ or `wears skirts and pants’ may indicate level of religiosity or it may indicate level of conformity or it may indicate something else altogether, that is a good thing.
In that case, I think you are way more advanced in your thinking on this issue than the aforementioned matchmaker, who seemed to have a far more unidimensional view of human beings.
After all, if he had separated the two issues in his mind, he would have asked: Do you consider yourself to be a religious conformist?
Kind regards,
Carin
Hi Carin,
My impression from what you wrote was that you see yourself as being completely passive in the shidduch game. Your “Am I an etrog?” appeal reminded me of Shylock’s “if you prick us, do we not bleed” speech, to reaffirm your basic humanity.
a. You don’t have to work with this shadchan if you don’t want to.
b. Shidduch dating is a process of selection and therefore rejection. You speak as if you are only ever on the rejected end. Have you never found someone unsuitable? Have you never rejected anyone? Possibly for somewhat superficial reasons? People have rejected me for shtuyot reasons, (the most ridiculous being that I don’t wear designer labels). Am I bothered, not at all. Shidduch min shamaim. Thus, I am saved the trouble of a date with someone unsuitable.
Other random thoughts:
1. Choose your shadchan carefully, someone who is respectful of you and makes you feel good about yourself, and meet them in person. It’s not just about them meeting you, it’s also for you to get an idea of the shadchan to see if they understand you at all and what you are looking for.
2. No problem with the shadchan’s question about skirts. There are plenty of guys who don’t date girls in pants, and plenty of other guys for whom it is not an issue. This way you won’t be set up with guys for whom it is an issue, and won’t be in the situation where a budding relationship breaks up over it.
3. Ditto for hair covering. I don’t think the question is on the level of intimacy that you suggest. Once you’re doing it or not, everyone is going to know.
4. You’re right that the test for Rivka was “loving kindness”, but not only. Avraham didn’t want a local girl with a kind heart. He judged and ruled out all the Canaanite women as being unsuitable, and sent Eliezer away to find a suitable match.
5. Dressing in a certain way is not an indication of a person’s character traits and level of behavior to others. However, it is often an indication of a person’s attitude to mitzvot between man and G-d and the purpose of jewish shidduch dating is to find someone who is a good match personally and religiously.
6. The “people change, so why try to find what I want now” argument: would you apply that line of reasoning to gainful employment and serious overweight. After all you could marry someone now who is employed and in reasonable shape, but in five years time you could find yourself married to an unemployed couch potato. So why are you ruling out said potato now?
I heard from a married woman that her then suitor was extremely considerate and attentive to her. Unfortunately, this behavior ended on marriage. Does this mean that one should not bother to look for signs of good middot before marriage, because that could all change? People look for what they consider to be important to their marriage. The uncertainty of life does not render this pursuit meaningless.
Well, I wish you, and everyone else, a short and painless path through the shidduch maze. And please remember Shidduch min shamaim. All this other stuff is tefel and shmefel. Focus on the positive and go out and enjoy yourself.
If my writing reminds you of Shakespeare’s, I am wholly complimented!
I just loved your `why not marry said couch potato now?’
Thank you for your long response, Aviva! It gave me a lot of food for thought!
Kind regards,
Carin
Hi Carin,
I’m happy if something I wrote helped. The truth is that the shidduch world is a war of attrition against the single – the strategy is to categorize, insult and blame, coming from all angles – until the single is so dehumanized, disoriented and worn down that they are ready to marry just about anyone.
Sometimes, it’s good to take a break, even just a week, just to remember that you are a person of value with a life. The only problem with this is that it becomes addictive, ie the break and feeling good. But it’s ok because the shidduch world will not let go of you so lightly, once you’ve bought in. A bit like the mafia.
Aviva, how dramatic! I suppose you meant what you wrote and you’re not exaggerating (your latest comment about how the point of the dating world is to break the single)?
Everyone, I have not written my thoughts here so maybe it’s time! Here are some of them:
Skirts/Pants – Adam, you said that wearing pants could show that the person doesn’t give into conformities. I have been in settings where the opposite might be true: Since most girls wear both pants and skirts in certain communities, if a girl wears only a skirt she might feel different than the rest and maybe even pressured to wear pants.
I feel like Carin has a clear view of how Judaism would be practiced ideally. Where the focus is on the most important mitzvot (derech eretz kadma latorah, no?). And where dating isn’t focused on shallow expressions of people but on getting to know the deeper sides.
As for the camel thing, I think this might be a major problem with dating. You know you want someone who is kind and whose company you enjoy but yet you don’t have any way to find out if he/she’s kind from a matchmaker. If the person is a friend of a friend it’s more likely to know really who your date is but if it’s through a matchmaker, can you know?
Eliezer didn’t rely on people saying Rivka was kind. He tested her. I know somone who tested their date to see how she would react to something and he liked how she did. On the other hand, I always find that story funny because what he did in order to test her was very unimpressive so why was she still interested after that?! :)
The “people change so…” idea I think is SO important! I understand that we need to find someone mat’im for ourselves now but maybe this idea is most important for the future – after the wedding. Someone wise (whose name is Vera) told me that the most important thing that happens in marriage is compromise and she doesn’t know if singles realize just how much compromise we’re in for once we all get married (please God next week). On every realm, very much including religious practice.
And the fact is that if we realize how much compromise will anyway take place and how much change, maybe we won’t be as strict about what we’re looking for right now. If someone doesn’t wear tzitzit but is the kindest person and very enjoyable to be around, and very serious about his Judaism, he might be perfect for a girl who wanted a guy who wears tzitzit! If a girl only wears skirts but she is open-minded and doesn’t necessarily hold her standards against others, she also could be perfect for someone who only wants someone who wears pants too.
Aviva, regarding your last story about the guy who was nice until after the wedding, of course I don’t know anything about this story but in general, I believe that in most cases there are very clear signs that something is off with a person. I believe that almost no one (if anyone) is capable of hiding who they really are. I believe that many, many people blind themselves in order to move forwards with a relationship. I have heard that if you speak to people who end up divorcing and ask them if there were things off from before the marriage, they’ll all (almost all?) say yes.
We mustn’t blind ourselves.
Shabbat shalom. :)
Deena, I think that it is important to issue this caution re. your last comment.
You said that you know a guy who tested his girlfriend to see how she would react, and liked it. There were other ways that story could have ended. A friend of a friend did the same thing, but being a bit of a twazzok, he did it pretty clumsily and the girl in question stormed off. I think the lesson from that little episode is; only test people if you are intelligent enough to do so! And since everyone thinks that they are intelligent, even if they are not, the best general policy is; don’t test people! Be absolute sugar to the person you are going out with, even if you know that you won’t be like that in the future…
Hi Aviva!
In response to your first letter to Carin… I don’t think you understand what bothered her so much.
I agree that whether or not a girl intends to cover her hair and
exclusively wear skirts (barring certain activities – big believer
that skirts are not appropriate attire for certain forms of
excercise, etc.) are legitimate questions in the right context (and
the answers can shed light) the problem here is one of context and of
reducing a person to five ridiculous/arbitrary questions and a
photograph. Girl 23 will cover her hair and wear skirts – here is her
mug shot – like her? Want to build your life around her?
The questions on their own are not shocking or problematic – it’s only
when considering them in context that they truly become so.
One further comment: I am shocked at the amount of meaning you
attribute to dress. Most people in the orthodox world dress the
way they do out of an overwhelming desire to conform (or, on the other
hand, not to conform!). To think that such dress in any way reveals
one’s relationship with Hashem is absurd.
I am reminded of an exchange that once took place at a Shabbos table I was at:
Daughter: he was very religious – he had a black hat!
Father: how could u tell he was religious? Could u see into his heart?
True story. Great chinuch!
I also think you missed Carin’s point that people’s core
values dont change as much as their external behaviors do. I always
say that the most important thing a ba’al teshuva can work on is
changing his secular perspective and outlook to a Torah one – most
ba’alei teshuva never change the way they think to any significant
degree – they only change their dress and add some ritualistic
behaviors (and frequently use their new torah knowledge to back up
their preexisting agendas and notions – e.g. that a woman’s place is in the kitchen, that certain races are inferior and cursed etc.).
The most interesting thing in the whole discussion that the article
generated is the absence of any mention of love. It’s like everyone is
talking about job hunting, interviewing, and resume building.
What I find amazing about human relations is that time spent together
naturally builds affection between people. I’d love to see how many
more shidduchim would work out if people were just given the chance to
spend some time together.
Hi Robert,
Why the shockl? Your chinuch story agrees with the first part of my point 5, which distinguished between the meaning of clothing with respect to mitzvot between people, and those between man and G-d. Who is more likely to be strict on kashrut, the girl with the long skirt or the guy with an eyebrow piercing. For someone who wants to have a mehadrin kosher home this is relevant.
I also made the point that it is best to meet the shadchan in person and only deal with a shadchan you like. The context was strange to me, to expect to be able to make a shidduch like that over the phone as there is no personal impression. But in any case I saw the questions as being a starting point, not reductionist. And a photo (if it’s honest) would help a little in those circumstances. Also if the shadchan is speaking to many people all day long it will help her remember the person. It’s not a big deal.
Why the stereotypes about bts – “most bts never change the way they think to any significant degree”. Is this based on the latest gallup poll, or the ten bts you happen to have met? Are converts included in this, or are they, ie most of them, suitably pious?
As for the “core behavior” point, what is the shadchan supposed to ask: “are you kind, sensitive and caring”. These behaviors may be noted in a meeting with a shadchan, although that can be faked for a short amount of time, and only really come to light through actual dating. People are looking for someone with x,y and z qualities within their religious ballpark. There are plenty of wonderful non-observant people who would make great marriage partners, but if you want an observant home, you date within your ballpark. Anything can happen in life, the top boy of the yeshiva can go all the way off the derech, the goa addict can find G-d and become rosh kollel, but it is not a good idea marrying someone now in the hope that they’ll change. If he’s not keeping shabbat now I can’t hope, or worse, pressure him to keep it. If he intends to learn full time I can’t hope that he’ll become a successful businessman.
And in answer to your question. yes shidduch dating is pretty much like job hunting. Initial stage is fulfilling basic criteria, then the interview, maybe you’re offered a cup of coffee, then if things progress you are invited back, for further meetings, and at some point you may be offered lunch, then meet the big boss (like meeting the parents) and once one has been through all these hoops, what is so often the clincher for getting the job? Personal chemistry. People hire people they like.
And love? that comes later. As they say, love at first sight, passes when you have a second look.
A friend wrote this to me. He said I could post it but requested to remain anonymous. He wrote:
My thinking is that nobody should be reduced to a single characteristic, whether it is how beautiful they are, how smart they are, how caring they are … or how observant they are. It’s kinda funny to me that people complain about being objectified when they are reduced to being described by their looks alone, but nobody ever complains when they are described as being smart.
So, anyway, you friends’ comments about orthodoxy are kinda funny to me ’cause they only consider a religious girl in the context of her orthodoxy (or maybe in the context of his). In other words, he’s still objectifying her.
And its also kinda funny to me that the original post falls into the same trap. The blogger asked if it wasn’t enough for Abraham to have “loving kindness” as the guiding criteria. In other words, she suggests that it might be okay to reduce someone to their kindness.
My point is that we are all more than any of those things. I suspect that the ideal person for anyone will be more complex than simply “observant” or “beautiful” or “kind” or whatever.