Orthodox Judaism, Abuse, & The Sick System

Many of you problem heard about the problems the Jewish community faces in dealing with sexual abusers, for instance, as reported by the New York Times {link}, the Huffington Post {link} and with the recent HONY controversy {for instance, here}. Sadly, the stories seem all too likely, and the problem isn’t limited to sexual abuse either.

I think the Times article was excellent but perhaps missed some subtleties of the dilemma which I’d like to address.

Firstly, to be clear, it’s not everyone. It’s not even most Orthodox Jews. The problem are those few abusive fuckheads, a few closed-minded rabbis, and a very sick system. I disagree with Justice Riechbach, as reported in the Times:

He recalled testimony about how the boys had been kicked out of their schools or summer camps after bringing their cases, suggesting a “communal attitude that seeks to blame, indeed punish, victims.”

Jews aren’t trying to aid abusers or punish victims; they just fail to realize that the system they use effectively does just that. They realize that abusers are assholes, and I wouldn’t be shocked if even the pious rabbi beat the crap out of someone who abused their child. Unfortunately, it’s a bit more complicated than that.

There are three main elements which spoil the Orthodox culture, as I see it: Turning people in, judging favorably, and the authority of rabbis.

Jews have a long history of persecution and episodes were often triggered by the slightest of misdeeds; hell, even just rumors. {Like using christian blood for matzos.} As such, Judaism long ago developed a culture which strictly forbade discussing its problems with the outside authorities. It was a very legitimate concern about the safety of everyone. However, the times have changed, at least in the US. But unlike the times, orthodoxy doesn’t really change, at least not easily. {Case in point: Chasidim are still wearing a ‘traditional’ clothing style from around 200 years ago!}

Judging people favorably, not rushing to conclusions, is actually a very old Jewish idea. And to be honest, I think it’s actually a wonderful notion. Too often people see or hear things and assume the worst. This is true of friends, strangers and sspecially with “out-groups,” I’ve found it tremendously helpful to think, “they’re probably good people. Let me hear them out before rushing to conclusions.” Again, I think it’s a wonderful notion and it’s well established in the Jewish community {more or less, as I wouldn’t suggest this never happens; far from it}. The problem is that this wonderful idea allows real problems to be ignored for lack of evidence. People don’t want to discuss hearsay, especially any which makes the community look shockingly bad.

“You can destroy a person’s life with a false report,” said Rabbi Chaim Dovid Zweibel, the executive vice president of Agudath Israel of America, a powerful ultra-Orthodox organization, which last year said that observant Jews should not report allegations to the police unless permitted to do so by a rabbi.

You might recognize this reasoning as being the exact type heard by Jews over the HONY controversy.

Lastly, there is rabbinic authority. Jews have their own court system and its usually composed of ultra-orthodox rabbis who may not really understand the problem or how to address it… or worse, which I’ll get back to.

So, how does this play out in the system? Let’s say there’s a report or rumor of abuse. It goes to the rabbis who may not want to jeopardize someone’s livelihood and life when there’s no evidence. Of course, they could theoretically get evidence with an investigation - but they don’t want to discuss the problem which would make the community look bad, and especially not if it involves the outside authorities. So they usually try to find a compromise. As a result, the abuser may get a relatively minor rebuke or punishment, the abused offered some help, and it’s considered resolved. The community may have some ill will against the alleged abuser, but without evidence, they’d prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt - especially when the charge is so heinous. Which makes the problem worse: Because cases of abuse are hardly ever confirmed, the community assumes they don’t really happen, which means that the next time an allegation occurs it again seems too heinous to be true.

And so the cycle continues.

That is, until someone breaks it.

When an abused person does break the rules and speak with the authorities - and that’s not often, considering the taboo - this person is now guilty. That’s because the allegations of abuse are just that, allegations. However, 'giving a jew over to the outside authorities’ is a confirmed misdeed. So the community hears an allegation of a jew doing something unbelievable - in the figurative and literal sense {bc, of course, similarities with priests aren’t possible} - compared with someone who is known to have broken the community structure and reported the person, endangering him, his family, and making the community look bad {which makes it difficult to be a “light to the nations”}. So who really did something wrong? “How much can you trust the testimony of someone who clearly breaks Jewish rules and conventions?! Besides, if the problem was real, why didn’t the abused just discuss it with the rabbis?!” Jews don’t realize that when the traditional route is used, the problem isn’t solved. It just “goes away” for the time being.

Which raises another point: What happens to abusers who are reported to the rabbis? I said they get a minor rebuke, but what that can often mean is moving the person to another job, one away from direct contact with children. After all, they don’t want to ruin his life, especially over unsubstantiated reports. So, for instance, instead of teaching kids, the person might help supervise cooking kosher food. But this isn’t always a good solution.

…The police, aided by the motel’s security camera, identified the man as Joseph Gelbman, then 52, of Kiamesha Lake, a cook who worked at a boys’ school run by the Vizhnitz Hasidic sect.

That’s not a case of when an abuser was moved to a new position, but it does strike me as the kind of transition one might expect. The problem is that even when rabbis want to help, they often don’t know how. For instance, it took a long time for the Jewish community to accept psychology, and many of them still don’t understand it. They may figure that moving the person to a different job will simply fix the problem, or that scolding them might change their ways. They fail to realize that these types of problems are not solved by that. So even when the rabbis are trying to find a solution that aids all parties, they often simply fail.

Those who understand the nature of the problem and that it really needs proper attention will often seek loopholes which are acceptable within Orthodox guidelines. The Times had a perfect example:

…Ultimately, he found a rabbi who told him to take his son to a psychologist, who would be obligated to notify law enforcement. “That way you are not the moser,” he said the rabbi told him, using the Hebrew word for informer.

Another element of how the system is flawed is a narrow channel of information. Ultra-orthodox Jews don’t watch TV {hell, many have never seen TV. Ever!}, and don’t read secular newspapers. For many, their only channels of information are the close community itself, often in the form of flyers which are pasted on walls around the community. Much like the problem with OWS and the Republican party, it’s typically a zealous and vocal minority which makes the most noise; afterall, moderate people aren’t really the type to post flyers around town. So it ends up being the overzealous minority which provides information and sets the tone for the rest of the community.

This lack of proper information and communication channels is a serious problem in itself, one I addressed in a recent post {link} about an upcoming anti-technology rally. {And btw, one of the lead organizers of the rally has allegations of serious physical abuse popping up… on the internet. {link} That HuffPo article linked at the top is also framed as a jab at this fucked up mix of priorities: 'Protect children from abuse, then worry about stuff like the internet! Get your priorities straight!’}

For instance, more information could inform the rabbis about the realities of dealing with abusers. It could also provide information about issues such as sexual repression and homosexuality, issues really not understood in that community. However, it’s also that kind of information which scares them. As the Times notes:

“They [the rabbis] are more afraid of the outside world than the deviants within their own community,” Dr. Heilman said. “The deviants threaten individuals here or there, but the outside world threatens everyone and the entire structure of their world.”

You can start to see why an anti-technology rally is up their alley.

Anyways, there is, unfortunately, also some plain ol’ fucked up shit.

For instance, those overzealous types I mentioned before. Those are never good, especially when they’re religious zealots who’ve studied little aside from their religious teachings. There’s also an element of power and control.

And rabbinical authorities, eager to maintain control, worry that inviting outside scrutiny could erode their power, said Samuel Heilman, a professor of Jewish studies at Queens College.

Or, for instance, I’m good friends with a lawyer who works with “agunas” {Jewish women who’s husbands won’t give them a divorce, thus locking them into a marriage which isn’t}. I’ve heard positively ridiculous stories about how the Jewish courts decide to handle things, decisions which are simply misogynistic and completely misguided at best; at worst, they demonstrate this control fetish and a lack of any empathy whatsoever. This friend of mine is Jewish and religious and can’t understand why they would do such things. Sadly, I’m less perplexed by it. Cause yeah, some of the shit which some of them do is positively fucked up.

In a case late last year that did not get to the police, a 30-year-old molested a 14-year-old boy in a Jewish ritual bath in Brooklyn, and a rabbi “made the boy apologize to the molester for seducing him,” he said.

Again, these are the types of scenarios which would make most Jews vomit and throw a fit… if they knew about it, if they knew it was true, and if they would dare challenge the rabbinic authority. Because even though there are orthodox rabbis who recognize the problems, they’re usually not in power - often because their modernism makes them seem less legit. Having a college education can often work against someone. Being “enlightened” - as is often used in the derogatory sense - is often seen as a problem, especially when that enlightened person disagrees with the more traditional rabbis. Instead of being seen as a problem with the traditional approach, it can often reinforce the notion that secular education corrupts someone, or at least waters down their frumkeit {religiosity}. But I am generalizing, to be clear, and only speaking from my own experience and observations.

So I hope you can see what I mean by the main problem being a sick system. It’s composed of mostly good people, but they’re often misinformed because of the system, can’t evolve because of the system, and often end up effectively aiding abusers and hurting the abused - because of the system. Sadly, that culture can often lead people to weighing the importance of problems entirely out of scale. Internet is worse than abuse? Telling authorities is worse than rape? WTF?! Reminds me of that saying about how it takes religion to make good people do bad things.

What the system needs is an upgrade. It could potentially be that simple, but as I noted before, Orthodoxy doesn’t exactly embrace evolution - in science or practice. But changes have happened. I was happy to read two examples in the Times article:

In March, for example, Satmar Hasidic authorities in Williamsburg took what advocates said was an unprecedented step: They posted a Yiddish sign in synagogues warning adults and children to stay away from a community member who they said was molesting young men… In July 2011, a religious court declared that the traditional prohibition against mesirah [informing the authorities] did not apply in cases with evidence of abuse. “One is forbidden to remain silent in such situations,” said the ruling, signed by two of the court’s three judges.

Emphasis added. Still, a major step as it could help weed out the fuckheads doing the abuse. It provides a proper feedback channel for improving the community. And perhaps once - or, if - the community realizes that this kind of proper housekeeping will strengthen their community in the long run, even if painful and embarrassing now, that it will allow them to better be 'lights to the nations,’ they will hopefully embrace this more strongly.

Of course, I still think Judaism is wrong and that if members were exposed to more information and taught to think more critically about their beliefs that they would agree with me. But either way, getting abusers off the streets is something with which we can all agree.