Dating with Celebrities: Hitched/Ditched – New Year’s Edition

0

Apparently, end-of-year resolutions are inspiring celebrity moves. Some are moving forward with their relationships, by cementing them with marriage, while others are calling it quits, and giving relationships a pair of cement shoes before tossing them in the river. (Yes, I’m done watching the Sopranos.)

The Fantastic Two? Jessica Alba became engaged to the father of her baby-to-be, director’s assistant Cash Warren. She met him on the set of Fantastic Four. So we’re all glad something good came out of that movie.

Will they honeymoon in “Vegas”? Not letting their relationship take any humps, Josh Duhamel and Fergie (not the Duchess, but the Dutchess) are also engaged.


“As You Wish…”
Sean Penn and wife of eleven years Robin Wright Penn have called it quits.

“Married With Children?” I’m sure there’s a joke there, but it’s no laughing matter to the erstwhile Bud Bundy (David Faustino) whose divorce was recently finalized after a two-year separation from his wife.

And in case anyone ever looked at the hottest rock star coupling in Israel and said, I wish I could date [insert name of half-couple here], you’ll be glad to know that Rita and Rami Kleinstein are splitting up, so any theoretical chance that you might have had before the couple got together twenty years ago is now yours again. Theoretically.

“Chivalry Is…”

4

What is chivalry? Alive? Dead? Undefinable? Necessary? Obsolete?

Once, I went out with this guy who was really traditional — not Jewishly, but when it came to dating. He believed in chivalry: If we drove somewhere, he would always run around to my side and open the door, even though it took longer and I was perfectly capable of opening it myself. I used to worry about encountering a mud puddle, anxious that he might try to put his coat over it and encourage me to walk on it, resulting in an extremely well-intentioned disaster for both me and the coat. He also insisted on walking between me and the curb, because he said that was the tradition in days of old, to protect the woman from the dangers of the road. “But what if someone comes at me from the other side and pulls me into an alley?” I wondered. (We’re not together anymore.)

Read the rest of my newest column at the Jewish Week and feel free to comment here.

“The Intermarriage Artist” — full text

4

Because all of the archive links at the Jewish Week are broken or messed up, some of you have asked me to see this piece that’s causing all the discussion, both on this blog, and over at Facebook. So here you are. May our conversations be respectful and productive.

The Intermarriage Artist
By Esther D. Kustanowitz

I recently came back from a West Coast tour of sorts, which included participation at an L.A.-based conference for Jewish leaders in their 20s and 30s. The Professional Leaders Project (PLP) called participants “talent,” in perhaps an intentional evocation of “the industry.” But our talents were celebrated and cultivated in a very un-Hollywood-like way: through intensive peer leadership, networking and professional mentoring. No casting couch required.

An entrepreneurial nonprofit founded with the mission of turning Jewish leadership over to the next generation, PLP gave “talent” the chance to live up to the name, as “session artists” or “thought leaders.” One so-designated “thought leader” remarked that this sounded extremely Orwellian, although perhaps in a good way. Apparently not yet a thought leader, I had an opportunity that a writer-yet-without-a-book doesn’t often have: to read aloud something I’d written and observe the response. I had been designated as the artist for “Intermarriage and Interdating: Still the Third Rail?”

Burying the Kafkaesque implications of what being an “intermarriage artist” might entail, I read a piece from my book-in-perpetual-progress, a chapter considering whether it would matter if I intermarried: if my babies would always be Jewish, maybe it paid to expand the dating pool and be more open-minded. (To ruin the ending, I decided intermarriage wasn’t for me, and to this day restrict my dating pool to Jews who are interested in living a traditionally Jewish life.)

In all modesty, I thought the piece was a sensitive, personal consideration of all of the issues involved and hoped it also brought some humor to the table. OK, maybe that wasn’t all that modest. Still, I was pretty sure it was balanced. But even with all the writing and reading I’ve done on the subject, I underestimated just how personally everyone in the room would react. While people were polite, challenging me respectfully and non-confrontationally, afterwards I became aware that some offense had been taken. Some people—themselves intermarried or children of intermarriages—had heard my personal exploration as a condemnation of their (or their parents’) choices. Maybe it was that I said that I found it slightly sad when a Jewish man “marries out”—not for national reasons, like those who believe intermarriage dooms the Jewish people to extinction, but for utterly selfish ones: it means that there’s one less Jewish man in my dating pool.

I want to marry a Jew. Not because I hate non-Jewish people or think they have nothing to offer me in terms of love, personality, humor, advice or life experience, God forbid. But because having a Jewish life is important to me—it’s a lifestyle and perspective that I find personally resonant and think is worth having in the world. Nearly all of my friends are engaged in Jewish work, or are—either formally or informally—affiliated with the Jewish community. Almost every paycheck I receive is from an organization or publication with the word “Jewish” in its name. I pepper my daily speech with Hebrew (which my two-year-old nephew is also learning to speak) and email Israel constantly. How could I commit to a life with someone who didn’t find all of those things compelling and meaningful? And would that person ever feel like he was part of my intensely Jewish world?

As some of my single sisters approach fertility’s danger zone, they consider their own talent: their children will be Jewish, and maybe that’s enough, if not ideal. Some religious authorities advise that these women just marry, even without love for the Jewish bachelor-in-question; they’ll be happier once they have Jewish children. A few, even some of the more affiliated ones, are beginning to drift toward other options.

You may not find intermarriage personally acceptable or nationally responsible. But that doesn’t erase the issue. We no longer live in Anatevka, where running off with non-Jewish Fyedka or (perhaps even worse!) secular liberal activist Perchik results in our parents cutting us off. We all deal with non-Jews, most of whom aren’t Cossacks. And so, intermarriage happens; we need to figure out how to deal with it, artfully and more artistically than I was apparently able to.

But in concentrating energies on re-engaging the intermarried, we also should keep in mind those who haven’t taken that road and are still hoping to find someone of the faith. In five or ten or fifteen years, the theoretically still single thirty- or forty-something may adopt a more inclusive dating policy. And who could blame them? While that question should be rhetorical, we all know that somewhere, someone will.

Esther D. Kustanowitz takes her status as an artist seriously, and now edits in red, green and purple pen. You can email her at jdatersanonymous@gmail.com.

So, You Want to Be a Religious Sex Counselor?

5

JTA reports that Modern Orthodoxy continues its much-needed push toward modernity with the establishment of a new program designed to teach women to become counselors for couples who are getting married. These kallah (bridal) teachers will speak to both men and women and will be recruited by the Jewish Orthodox Feminist Alliance, and co-sponsors of the program are Drisha and Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT).

In addition to learning the relevant marriage laws, participants in the four-day pilot course must be comfortable with the idea of talking about sexual intimacy to groups of both men and women.

This is a great first step. But I can’t help but think that maybe it’s too little, too late. While it’s great for concerned, engaged couples to learn about these laws, shouldn’t there be classes for the “mikvah-curious”? Or a discussion of the anecdotally large number of on-the-books Orthodoxish singles in their 20s or 30s who are not “waiting for marriage” but may want to engage in some of the rituals? Maybe someday, Orthodoxy will establish a real sexual education curriculum, especially in high schools, so that students could know what’s going on with their bodies when the actual changes are occurring. I know it’s a potentially controversial topic, what with the concern over how information might lead to dancing. But what I recall from my “health” or “family purity” classes was a trip to see a mikvah and a lecture on why we shouldn’t engage in interfaith dating when we got to college and “Chris” asked us out to a movie. Actual information about sex? Even within a conveyed expectation of waiting for marriage? Not present. Thank God for television and movies, or none of us would know anything.

The all-expenses-paid workshop will be held March 2-5 in New York. Application forms are available at www.jofa.org and must be submitted by Dec. 31. Please, if you apply and end up going, please feel free to write in with your experiences.

“Looking for the Perfect…Shul”

1

What are you looking for?

People have called the 20s-40s generation spoiled, that we always expect things to be tailored to our needs. But this quest for something better and more personalized doesn’t come from a sense of entitlement; it comes from a central repository of independent spirit and innovation. We live like technology, not in ever-fixed marks, but in desktops and lifestyles that can be customized hourly, down to the last icon. If we need something that doesn’t exist, we take our acquired skills, purchase a domain name and invent it on our own. If we don’t have the skills, we comb our networks for the people who do, or for the places that can teach them to us.

It’s revolution, not with ‘60s-style sit-ins and student takeovers of campus administration buildings, but with modular movement, creativity and gumption. It’s a declaration of independence not from spirituality, prayer, tradition or community, but from the structures that restrict more personal connections with those ideas. It’s a search for community intimacy, aided by Google.
The S3K/Hadar study indicates that 45 percent of the rabbi-led emergent communities and an astounding 81 percent of independent minyanim consist of people under 40. Two-thirds of the members of such communities are female. And while the oft-cited National Jewish Population Study of 2000-2001 indicated that 68 percent of synagogue members are married, the percentage is much lower in emergent communities: in independent minyanim, it’s 51 percent; in rabbi-led emergent communities, 64 percent; and in alternative emergent communities, 27 percent.

What might the amateur singles anthropologist unscientifically glean from this survey and these numbers? That people under 40 are looking for something smaller, a way to discern the substance from all of the other stimuli in their lives? That women are more likely to commit to community intimacy than men? That after singles “play the field” with other synagogues and multiple memberships, they reach a point when it’s time to settle down? That today’s synagogues may not be as “under-40-friendly” as they might imagine they are?

Read the whole article here.

Online Semi-Exclusive: “The Intermarriage Artist”

21

I recently came back from a conference where I unintentionally ruffled a few intermarried feathers when I read a piece about why I’ve decided to only date Jews.

How are we supposed to approach the concept of intermarriage? Can we even discuss it without someone getting offended? And if I choose to limit myself to dating only Jews, will people who make a different choice ever understand that my choice isn’t necessarily a condemnation of their marital decisions? And does anyone understand my reference to this piece’s Kafkaesque title?

For the answers to these and other questions, or more accurately, more questions, check out “The Intermarriage Artist,” my newest Jewish Week column.

Flaws Overwhelm as Jewish Singles Flounder

19

People who follow this blog or my column and reactions to both already know that I have an issue with people who are too picky (even though there are others who think that I myself, as representative of all Upper West Side singles, am too picky, which is another conversation).

But I wanted to share this letter that went to the Jewish Press from a lonely, 37-year-old religious single woman who wants to get married, but found herself dating a man she describes as “a nerd” to whom she “can’t relate romantically.”

There’s more to it that that. Reading it will reveal some of the problems that many of us have noticed about the (let’s call it “moderately observant”) Jewish singles world: shadchanim (matchmakers) who operate through what they’d consider “tough love” but which hurts singles tremendously by criticizing personal appearance; men who date but are reluctant to commit; a posse of friends that becomes family and may in fact hinder progress toward finding a partner; the power problem when a woman’s profession makes a man feel threatened; the challenge of looking at a person in totality as opposed to just on a superficial level; the specter of a previous relationship tainting future romantic expectations; a ticking biological clock; an acknowledgment of one’s own flaws and perhaps a hesitation to accept the flaws of others; whether religious shidduchim operate on a different level than those that aren’t Orthodox; communal pressure both in the US and in Israel to have children to increase Jewish demographics, etc…enough to fuel years of singles columns in multiple newspapers.

This letter, however, is not the only such letter that column has received. In fact, it was written in response to a similar letter, also printed by the Jewish Press and written by a 36 year old woman who was faced with a choice: marry someone you don’t love but have children or stay single and childless forever. (Because those are apparently the only two choices.)

(more…)

Rabbi Funds JDate for His Synagogue’s Singles

7

The Jewish “establishment,” and let’s include in that term rabbis, synagogues, Jewish institutions and local and national Jewish leaders as well as academics, has been involved in what feels like a verbal full-court press lately, urging Jewish singles to marry each other. But what they haven’t provided yet is a financial incentive, in acknowledgment of the high cost of Jewish dating. Well, until now.

As USA Today reports, Rabbi Donald Weber, rabbi of a Marlboro, NJ Reform congregation, has put his money where his matches are, or rather, where he hopes they will be:

Six weeks ago, in his Yom Kippur sermon at Temple Rodeph Torah, Weber offered to personally pay for six-month memberships to JDate, the popular Jewish online dating service, for any singles in the congregation who asked. JDate charges $149 for a six-month membership, and so far, nine people have taken the rabbi up on his offer. He and his wife, Shira Stern, initially pledged $1,000 but just donated a second $1,000 as more people came forward.

Apart from my initial reaction (“$149??”) over the skyrocketing price of JDate membership, I was extremely impressed by this gesture, which indicates a commitment to the prospect of encouraging Jewish marriage that other Jewish leaders have not yet offered. Sure, occasionally Michael Steinhardt offers to pay for someone’s honeymoon if they meet at an event he’s involved with, but that rewards the outcome instead of constituting an investment in the process.

“We need you to look at Jewish people when you’re dating,” Weber said on Yom Kippur. “There aren’t a lot of us around. … You’re going to have to look in specific places. Number one? JDate. No joke. Half the weddings I’m doing now are people that met on JDate.”
Weber, rabbi at Rodeph Torah for 24 years, told the single Jews in the pews that the survival of American Judaism in its current form depends on their decisions. “Do we believe that it’s important enough that it must go on, that we make a difference in the world? That if there are no Jews in the world that the world will be poorer than it is now? If we believe that, then we’re going to need to do some things about it,” he said.

Also interesting was the fact that Weber’s synagogue is Reform, a denomination within which many intermarried couples have found a home. Having just spoken at the PLP ThinkTank at a session about intermarriage, I know first-hand what a touchy subject this can be; even the encouragement to intra-marry can be perceived as a condemnation of those who didn’t. Saying–as I did at the PLP session–“I want to marry a Jew,” can be heard in a different context than the intended one.

Still, for those who believe it is important for them to marry other Jews, this kind of incentive program is extremely encouraging. Rabbis aren’t major investors in Jewish causes financially because they can’t afford to be. But this small commitment of funds can make a difference to the singles in his community, and should be a lesson to people who produce studies that attempt to scare us into dating co-religionists instead of encouraging us within a positive framework.

Sex Fails to Sell at Harvard Hillel

8

The Harvard Crimson reported that a recent Hillel event about sexuality, titled “Jewbilation” and featuring a Jeopardy! style quiz show on facts related to Judaism and sexuality, brought only two more bodies in attendance than a minyan would have.

The trivia game addressed a variety of Jewish idiosyncrasies, from famous Jewish director Woody Allen’s views on sex­ to the need to immerse oneself in the mikvah, a purifying bath, after touching a lizard. “That’s not a euphemism—actually a lizard,” [Harvard Hillel’s Conservative Minyan’s rabbinic advisor Ethan] Linden said. Game-show questions were divided into three categories: “Distance Learning,” “Different Strokes for Different Folks,” and “I ‘Know’ You, Biblical relations.”

What does this lack of interest mean? Are Jews at Harvard too busy studying or did the subject of Jewish approaches to sex strip the subject of any interest? And which one of these is “worse for the Jews”? And does it matter, now that the birth rate among Israeli Jewish women is rising?

A Fish Out of Water: Evolution’s Solution to the Singles Crisis?

7

If you’re single, and you’ve ever been interested in someone whose lifestyle is very different from your own–which in the Jewish world usually means religiously–you’ve likely heard the phrase, “A bird may love a fish, but where will they build a house?” Or maybe you’re a fan of classic Broadway and know that “fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly.” Well, what if those assumptions were not true?

Now , according to the Daily Mail, nature weighs in on “religious” difference affecting living arrangements, with the mangrove killfish. This violently named fish spends several months of every year out of the water and living inside trees.

Hidden away inside rotten branches and trunks, the remarkable creatures
temporarily alter their biological makeup so they can breathe air. Biologists studying the killifish say they astonished it can cope for so long out of its natural habitat.

These changes are only temporary, altering to permit the fish to live in the tree for a while; at some point, the fish reverses its composition and returns to the water. This fish is more adaptable than most single people.

Forget the creepiness of a fish that can haul itself onto dry land and find shelter in a tree; this was an exciting discovery. If fish can live in trees, then maybe there can be compromise when it comes to religious differences? To carry through the metaphor, will there be a point at which “a fish” and “a bird” could conceivably build “a house” together? Is this nature’s pro-intermarriage polemic?

Not so fast…

Apparently, the killfish was previously best known for one other bizarre quirk: they are the only known vertebrate (animal with a backbone) to reproduce without the need for a mate.

Killifish can develop both female and male sexual organs, and fertilise
their eggs while they are still in the body, laying tiny embryos into
the water.

This is nature’s irony: that the most adaptable of species are too independent to require companionship. Is such a species to be pitied, or is there a lesson to be learned?

[crossposted to MyUrbanKvetch]

 

Go to Top