Too Many Jews at the Top
Like much of the Jewish community, I am influenced by the ideology of the Social-Democrats who decried quotas and affirmative action. No system is perfect, so the best way is fair. To penalize an individual against a member of a group deemed “oppressed” is morally reprehensible. For you cannot say there are too few without also saying there are too many. It is basic arithmetic, and incontrovertible.
In the continuing hysteria over too few Jewish women at the top of the Jewish communal organizations, there is shockingly no concern at all over the paucity of male employees at Jewish organizations outside of executive positions. While no excuse is accepted for why more men might be at the top, including biological callings and these demanding beings called children, every possible excuse in the world is accepted for why men are not seeking employment at Jewish organizations. It is not questioned. Not here, here, or here. Not anywhere. Ever. A same/different model is accepted.
This should alarm anyone concerned with gender-equity and inclusion in Jewish organizations, but it is never mentioned. Suddenly, when it is men being systematically excluded or discouraged form Jewish organizational life, it doesn’t matter which gender is making communal decisions.
This is not a quest for inclusion. This is a push for hegemony.
And let us be clear of the costs.
If we are to say there are too many Jewish men in Jewish organizational life, and we implement affirmative-action programs which will further reduce their already relatively minority 25-30% representation, let us be clear what this says to the world.
Jews are disproportionately heavy at the top of many businesses and government organizations. If we implement reverse-discrimination programs to even the scale for the “oppressed” gender, so too, others have a right to demand implementation of programs that change the demographics at the top . And if that proves problematic to Jews in middle-management positions in general vocational life, so be it, right?
And when the Jewish community screams foul (and we will scream foul), let minority advocacy groups note that we did the same sort of thing in our own communal organizations. And let them note that we have a very different way of considering such questions internally as opposed to externally. And let them decide what that means in terms of Jewish consistency, or lack there of.
If we discriminate against an overrepresentation of Jews – men or women– let everyone discriminate against their own overrepresentation of Jews – men or women.
Fair is fair. And Jews are disproportionately represented in high-level positions in business and government.
Let Christians and people of color emulate our fine example, if we continue on this path and do reject meritocracy, a system which has failed the American Jewish community terribly.
Kelsey,
this is the second comment on the general topic of men/women/gender equity that I am leaving in response to your posts. I am very pleased to see your postings – while they often provoke anger among readers…well…they are still thought provoking. thanks again.
so, first i thought it was rather funny to have a post on feminism show up next to an add for ‘the economist’ that was slightly offensive to me as a woman (ironically one who enjoys reading the economist…) which reads, “have more intelligent fights with your father.” and my mother??? hmmm…
as someone who works in Jewish ed, I often have discussions with peers in the field about the lack of a male presence. Another common understanding of the history of Jewish education is that as fewer and fewer men have joined the ranks of formal and informal jewish ed, the benefits, pay and respect given to those working in the field has diminished. I connect this to your main point because i agree that gender discrepancies (negatively effecting both genders) in numbers should be addressed in jewish communal orgs, but to do this we have to make them more appealing in general (benefits, pay, etc). Also, i think that we have to address the connection between men leaving and those other criteria leaving with them – the trend is still one which is worrisome i believe.
be well.
Here’s another thought:
Try being a young man in the field and see if you don’t get completely objectified at some point. I’ve lost count of how many times it’s happened to me.
“have more intelligent fights with your father.â€
it’s a father’s day ad.
Balaam’s Donkey,
Fortunately for me, I am not cursed with your good looks. It must be very difficult for you.
“it’s a father’s day ad.” – Mobius, true true, i saw, but it still gave me a chuckle for the irony…laughter is good for you ya know:)
Balaam’s Donkey – are you reacting to something said or adding a tangent? I just don’t know what type of objectification you are speaking of? Do you think it is different or of a greater ammount or severity than women experience in the field…clarify please.
excuse me, i have got to enjoy some laughs…at things other than fathers day adds and internet chatter…
Well, I thought you were progressive but I see I was wrong. As a Jew of Color, I support affirmative action. Not quotas but a system whereby underrepresented people are brought into organizations. As someone who has hired people for years, I have always had affirmative action goals.
I was at the University of Michigan when we defended our system; when the Supreme Court made its decision, we all learned how affirmative action can be just and legal and when it cannot. To characterize it as only “reverse discrimination” and merely a quota system is simplistic at best, racist at worst.
Jewish men are not in the positions you mention because there is no prestige. The data shows that men do not enter fields that are deemed “women’s work”. And when they do? The salaries go up..and women are often excluded.
Chaim, you said,
“Well, I thought you were progressive but I see I was wrong.”
So be it. I stand by this specific morality of my socialist ancestors who fought against any form of discrimination for racial or religious reasons by institutions receiving government funding and contracts.
“As someone who has hired people for years, I have always had affirmative action goals. ”
That’s a shame. But that’s your cheshbon.
“To characterize it as only “reverse discrimination†and merely a quota system is simplistic at best, racist at worst.”
It may not be only that, but it is also that. I will not be intimidated by name calling, I am stronger than that.
Kelsey,
I actually wasn’t referring to my looks. I work in a field dominated by women, I’ve been told that I was hired solely because I was a male, and there weren’t enough of them around. My abilities and/or my looks were secondary.
Thanks for calling me cute, though.
You’ve got to be kidding me –the discussion about lack of women in top leadership positions in Jewish organizations is “hysteria”?
Check out the wikipedia entry on hysteria: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria
It’s a word that comes from a suggestion that women are crazy because of sexual dissatisfaction, associated with the Salem Witch Trials, etc.
It’s pretty frustrating (dissatisfying?!) to read a backlash against basic feminism that also suggests that advocating for racial equity in terms of high-level leadership is a threat to Jews. Wow. I’m really disappointed by the right-wing direction of this post.
Nepon,
This is not “basic” feminism — not when the call for affirmitive action programs is towards a group already under represented in the community they serve in these organizations. Not “basic” at all.
And a general anti-affirmitive action position is not “right-wing” in a Jewish community that is liberal EXCEPT on this issue. Jews have traditionally been liberal, but not supportive of this issue. This may be a “right-wing” position according to other minority communities, but not according to the Jewish community.
See here: http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=11671
kelsey, why do you want to push this button? you don’t want to do that to me when I am on steriods (and I am, massive doeses for hives). So you think Deborah Lipstadt is off base? You say the field is packed with women–it sure is. Federation offices are full of female clerks and mid level execs and very few have women at the top. At the Jewish Agency for Israel–they just appointed a female CEO for North America–and she and Carol Solomon are rare. You can count on one hand the women in the good ole boys club of the top echelon, and that wouldn’t be a lie. Men don’t usually teach in girls; schools anymore…they did in the old days, not now…men who teach–well, there’s this old expression men tossed around in my presence (not women, men) thems who can work. thems who can’t teach–so no one wants to be categorized that way…so they either teach limudei kodesh in boys schools or yeshivas, or they don’t go into teaching.
look i wanted to go to law school and my father said no, I am a woman, so he’s not gonna pay. So I said ok, how about Journalism school, and he said, NYU School of Education…I wasted two years and never bothered getting my masters. I got out there and learned what I needed to learn by the seat of my pants–and here’s what I learned from old hands at the federation–everything is organizational life works through a sludge called process. Women in that process have their place. If they do everything a guy does and do it backwards in high heels, if they prove themselves ten times over, they may get to climb higher. The average age of the decision makers is old school as well as old. How many 20-something men and 30-40 year old men do you think work in Jewish organizations? Not many who are in the top echelon, and they aren’t the decision makers.
I work in a synagogue that has a female rabbi, all three rabbinic interns are women, the exec and the pres are women, and 90 per cent of the staff.
So… I identify with the complaint that the absence of men in Jewish organizational life is a serious issue. What is happening is that Jewish orgs treat lower level people like crap. The women stick around, and sometimes climb through the ranks. The men go elsewhere….
And… men get parachuted into leadership positions they were not trained for, more often than women. I think that a feminist group should absolutely ring the alarm over the paucity of men at the lower and mid level ranks….
Kyle’s Mom,
You asked, “How many 20-something men and 30-40 year old men do you think work in Jewish organizations?”
Very few, especially secular ones. I know. I (briefly) worked in the UJC building. It is culturally a quite uncomfortable place for such men. We are not welcome there. I have plenty of anecdotes to demonstrate that, and I am not the only one who does.
What I want is honesty about the goal here. It is not for power-sharing. It is for hegemony. And once they get the top positions as well as the mid-level ones, their power will be complete. And I am tracking it now — because when they succeed — and they will succeed — it will be time to start reevaluating these organizations financially, as a Jewish organizational apparatus that excludes men by discouraging their advancement is not an “umbrella.” Not at all. And this is not supposed to be a “girls school.”
If they are going to all but exclusively draw labor like a Westchester chapter of N.O.W., they should be funded like a Westchester chapter of N.O.W.
And they can run as many stories on a weekly basis about how wonderful they are in the Jewish weeklies throughout the country, and pretend they are independent, like they do with their house organ The Jewish Week, but they still be exposed, and when they make even more decisions that are out of sync with half of their constituency, we will know why — because we have no voice or presence in these organizations, no matter how many “focus groups” they run to pretend that isn’t the case.
Charles, you wrote,
“I think that a feminist group should absolutely ring the alarm over the paucity of men at the lower and mid level ranks…”
Sure — if it was about the health of these organizations, or the communities they serve. But it isn’t, Charles, and that’s why they don’t care. It’s about controlling the massive amounts of communal funds available for distribution, and the power that comes with holding the purse strings.
Doesn’t that explain the feminist lack of alarm at the paucity of men and major Jewish organziations?
““To characterize it as only “reverse discrimination†and merely a quota system is simplistic at best, racist at worst.â€
It may not be only that, but it is also that. I will not be intimidated by name calling, I am stronger than that”
I was not name calling. Saying a statement is racist is not name-calling. In fact, one can do racist things without having any ill-will int their heart. It is the idea of “intent” vs. “impact.” Something can be bigoted but the person isn;t necessarily coming from that place.
David-
you obviously have a really weird understanding of what hegemony is. The group doing has to be the oppressors, not the oppressed. oh wait, you probably don’t buy any of the ideas about white male privilege either, do you? I’m not exactly sure how you can go around calling yourself progressive when without understanding and accepting the basic ideas about gender and race that you are completely rejecting in this post. I’m sure your socialist grandmother would be so proud.
David, what paucity are you talking about? Seriously. Which organizations that hold power in Jewish communities are lacking in men who have decision-making power, whether in management positions or on the boards? Or maybe the question is how many? Even the organizations that do have women as ED’s are dominated still by predominantly male boards.
Here’s the thing David–because your points are so unbelievably couched in sexist language, it’s difficult to support what you’re saying. I find this in a number of your posts–including when you “rant” as people say, about circumsion. You’re approach to this issue will unfortunately never reach the very people I think you’re trying to reach, but maybe that’s ultimately what I don’t get–who is your audience? Who are you trying to “sway” because honestly, I’m not sure.
And for other folks on the thread, don’t just comment here. I posted another piece on this very same issue a few posts down and very few people have started a conversation there — lets not just have these conversations in the negative or in attack, but lets really delve into it even when you may agree. I am told that many read posts and agree but don’t comment, and mostly get buck wild when they don’t agree. I think this should change. I think people should be, even if agreeing, pushing further, questioning one another further, rather than only responding when it’s on the defense.
Cole, did you not just echo in your post a comparison of men who are executives at these institutions to “a bunch of frat boys?”
If so, you are in no position to discipline anyone about “sexist language.”
“It is not for power-sharing. It is for hegemony. And once they get the top positions as well as the mid-level ones, their power will be complete. And I am tracking it now — because when they succeed — and they will succeed — it will be time to start reevaluating these organizations financially, as a Jewish organizational apparatus that excludes men by discouraging their advancement is not an “umbrella.—
This is really unbelievable stuff. Conspiracy theories — and sexist ones at that.
“They” want “hegemony”?? Who are “they,” actually? Where are the places that “they” get together to talk about how to take over, to gain hegemony, to control the purse strings, to gain “complete” power, which they will use to discourage men from advancing?
Honestly, this is the biggest load of whining I’ve heard in a while. (and that’s a polite way of putting it.) People who argue for women’s advancement are also the only ones ever paying attention to issues of gender more generally. And the goal is equality, not hegemony. honestly, this is a ridiculous argument that shows absolutely no familiarity with feminist theory or practice (cuz i’m going to guess that if you would label who exactly “they” are, you’d use a convenient little word like “feminists,” as if that meant one thing, with one cabal of leaders somewhere controlling the whole feminist operation to oppress men).
Protocols of the Elders of Zion anyone?
Oh, and i forgot how true this is: “a Jewish organizational apparatus that excludes [a particular sex] by discouraging their advancement is not an “umbrella— — the only thing you got wrong is which sex is still and has historically been excluded and discouraged from advancing.
Oh David, you have no understanding of what power and oppression are whatsoever, which is why you think using terms and ideas like “reverse discrimination” are actually real and apply. Sexism and sexist language involves power, institutional and historical power which then gets implemented in interpersonal exchanges and continues in institutions. So yes, I feel comfortable as all hell “disciplining” as you would say, because until you can actually deal with your power and privilege, and understand how that comes into what you are talking about, your views are going to continue to miss opportunities to actually build bridges with people who might actually agree with some of your points, but ultimately, won’t because you don’t acknowledge historical oppression.
ww,
It’s not “conspiracy stuff. If the policies you are seeking will rid an organization of a group you perceive still has too much power dispite their falling numbers (except at the top), and your group will then have not only the numbers, but the leadership as well, your intentions are pretty clear. There isn’t a lot of room for doubt, only the way you spin it.
“And the goal is equality, not hegemony.”
No, ww, you are either being dishonest or haven’t read the figures. There is no call for equality. Only for less men at the top, and for reverse-discrimination programs which will affect middle-management where men are already terribly under represented.
Cole,
Your categorical denial of affirmitive action programs is absurd. At least defend it — don’t deny what is fact in this country and others.
I find those voices in the Jewish community most concerned and focused about their oppression–and want to translate it into entitelement programs–frequently come from the most well-heeled circles and places, not from working and lower-middle or middle-class Jews.
Your comment on hitorical oppression is interesting to me, as it reveals one of our critical points of disagreement on many issues. But it isn’t that I deny “historical oppression,” as you suggested, but it is something I prefer not to focus on or give carte blanche to in terms of justifying unfair policies or counter-productive ones.
There is no end to the amount of evil people can justify because of “historical oppression,” both very real or exaggerated. For we can either work to change the present for the better or take revenge on the past. Often, we can’t do both. Usually.
I am not a big fan of the latter, that is certainly true, and that is also true for me as well on general Jewish issues as I hope you are aware. I do at least try to be consistent. I don’t find “historical oppression” helpful, this is true, but that is not the same thing as “denying” it in its entirety.
David, I’m not denying anything. What’s absurd to me is that you have the audacity to talk about it as “entitlement” programs, when you benefit off of a long history of entitlement. You’re just, well, maybe too entitled to see that. Need I explain more, go read the piece I posted on merit and the myth of meritocracy. It’s indeed your privelege that allows you to not “focus on” historical oppression.
Cole,
You are correct that we have been entitled here–this nation has been relatively wonderful to Jews — both men and women. I absolutely categorically reject inclusion of Jews as “oppressed” in U.S. history. Others were — not Jews. Not compared to anywhere else. And that –for me–is a critical consideration.
And as you probably can guess, I intend to continue to speak out against entitlement programs that seek to tweak the system to favor one group over my own, which in this case, is advocating favoring Jewish women over Jewish men. Like my ancestors, I am indeed audacious like that. Cause I have my own sense of historical responsibility and pride. And in its own way, I would like to think it is as vibrant and rich as those who see their history primarily through the lens of a member of an “oppressed” group.
David,
“No, ww, you are either being dishonest or haven’t read the figures. There is no call for equality. Only for less men at the top, and for reverse-discrimination programs which will affect middle-management where men are already terribly under represented.”
I am neither dishonest nor ill-informed. In fact I’m quite honest, aware of the complexities of the issues, and know the figures very well — both the numerical figures and the individuals involved. The issue of having “less [sic] men at the top” is a call for equality, given that there are amost no women at the top. Few, if any, women running large Federations, major Jewish communal organizations — etc. As for the middle ranks, you’ll actually find critics of gender inequality complaining about the preponderance of women — because they and everyone know that it’s because these are LOW-STATUS, LOW-PRESTIGE jobs that are left to women. Men are “terribly under represented” because they’re off being over-represented in jobs where they have prestige, higher salaries, where women are the ones excluded and discriminated against. THAT’s where the real problem is — that and in workplace policies that still prioritize a work-life imbalance that essentially forces those women who do make it farther than most to drop out if they wish to take care of their children, have meaningful family lives, etc. But that’s a whole other story.
I wish I lived In DK’s post-feminist world
David–there was no “we” — I was directing my comment to you. It’s easy for you to make these arguments, and so this is the last I will say at this point, because it’s not worth my energy engaging when you’re unwilling to examine your own privilege.
I can give you an example of your own entitlement, where after I was saying that folks shouldn’t only write to disagree with you, –thatI’m tired of is people mostly writing to critique something, not to show support for what people write or to take the argument further–that you went and wrote there too–I wasn’t speaking to you…you made your point in your very own post.
The fact that you thought I was speaking to you, well, that’s entitlement right there.
and I absolutely disagree with you–Jews have been historically oppressed in the US–it’s sad to me with all that you do in the Jewish world, that you can’t see that, how it still works today, and how it has shaped Jewish lives in the US over time.
The link to the Social Democrats USA is, perhaps, rather unfortunate, given that the organization is mainly just a temporary home for people on the long march from Trotskyism to neoconservatism.
The good folks at Engage have more than anyone may ever want to know about this:
http://www.engageonline.org.uk/journal/index.php?journal_id=5&article_id=19
htrouser,
This is hardly the whole story. There was an Old Left. And it was never communist.
No, I know that! I was just characteristically picking up on a tangential part of your rant and being sort of nit-picky. Though I admit when I first tried to find out what happened to the old Debs Socialist Party it almost made my head explode. I guess now I know my right-Shachtmanites from my Harringtonians.
Anyway, I suppose my point is that the Social Democrats USA is rather a strange beast, what with counting Paul Wolfowitz as a former member and all. I’ll throw my lot in with the DSA.
This is hardly the whole story. There was an Old Left. And it was never communist.
I’m curious what you mean by that, DK. I’ve generally heard the phrase “Old Left” used to refer to the Left of the 30’s, which had huge communist sections. There were also socialists (like the SPUSA, which still exists, though SDUSA also claims its mantlle) and various independent leftist and radicals. What Old Left do you mean?
Matt… I avoided pointing that out, and actually don’t see how my original post implied that the US “Old Left” was exclusively communist, as DK seems to suggest. I was merely pointing out that the SD USA has a very peculiar role in the history of neoconservatism. Which is ironic as it’s the only fragment of the old Socialist Party that’s in the Socialist International (unlike the DSA or the SP USA). But the old Debs socialists were, as far as I know, Marxist without being communist, anyway. And we can take all of this way back to the Wobblies and the Socialist Labor Party of the late 19th century.
David said, ” “And the goal is equality, not hegemony.†No, ww, you are either being dishonest or haven’t read the figures. There is no call for equality. Only for less men at the top, and for reverse-discrimination programs which will affect middle-management where men are already terribly under represented”
Okay,
David, you caught us. I thoughht that I was doing a great job keeping the conspiracy secret as ED of The Feminst Conspiracy in the Jewish community. Jewish women have for years been trying to take over and get rid of men altogether. We’ve been ball-busting and trying to run men out of town. And you’re totally right. We’ev been especially focusing on getting men outof all those essential and low-paid clerking, secretarial, middle-management positions and we have been SUCCESSFUL!!!! Until you caught us, all that was left was to get the men at the top. We’ve so far been unsuccessful, because the men at the top are alpha male,s and we women are just not able to stand up to them, so what we were working on was trying to get those positions to lower their pay and status so that men would move out of them.
however, now that you’ve caught us, I have a proposal that I hope will suit your need to equal out the women and men in Jewish jobs. I propose that we simply reverse all the positions. Every position that men fill, should be replaced by a woman,and all the positions that women fill, will be replaced by men. That way. men will outnumber all the women by leaps and bounds, so you won’t have to worry about men getting pushed out of the Jewish community numberswise. And the women will be happy because even though fewer of us will be employed, those of us who are will be able to get health insurance, a wage that covers living expenses and child care, and more interesting jobs.
SO, in summary, I surrender to your superior sleuthing skills, and submit to this plan whereby men will have far greater numbers in the Jewish workplaces.
Best,
ED, Feminist Conspiracy
ED of The Feminist Conspiracy,
Why are you suggesting that most full-time employees of major Jewish organizations don’t have health care? I haven’t heard that.
As for you suggestion that we switch positions, with women at the very top, and men in middle management, that sounds excellent to me. I have never had a problem with a woman on top of me, and can give you personal references that I am more than comfortable with it.
There are certainly a lot more middle management positions that there are tippy top executive positions. And the only people who get those very top positions are generally from the highest socio-economic brackets anyway, so that sounds great! There will be way more opportunities for shlemiels like me from the middle and working classes. And while the pay certainly sucks, the hours are often (though not always) bearable, you get all the major Jewish holidays off, and get to leave early on Fridays in the winter.
I say deal! Please — let’s make this happen. Absolutely a fair trade!