Someone reffered me to this article because I have a lot to say about the so-called agegap crisis but I would rather focus on something else entirely.
I believe there is a much deeper lesson to be gleaned from the Atlantic article and that is the question of the roles of male and females in a generation where the effect of the klalos of eitz hadaas seem to be dissolving. That is the source of disparity between males and females, as the liberal mentality seees no place for a male mentality in today's society and the males feel threatened by that.
I definitely agree that the dynamic of marriage relationships is changing within the frum world. It is, for one thing, harder for a man to feel useful and valuable if he's not providing for his family. I also agree that our community is affected by the larger trends in general society - and not always in a positive way. And I'm sure that these changes are having an impact on what girls look for in a shidduch.
I guess the big question is: what are we supposed to do about all that?
If it turns out that the age gap theory is wrong, then we'll at least have narrowed down our options.
My point was actually a bit in the opposite direction, that as it becomes less necessary for the man to be a provider it is harder for a man to feel useful and valuable. To me this is actually part of the purpose of Kollel, if implemented correctly. I feel that consciously or subconsciously, this is part of the reason why women desire a learner. They specifically want a husband who is qualitatively different than them and brings something to the marriage that they can't.
Chasidim solve this problem by staying with the old-fashioned mold that a women belongs in the home. For those who are fine with that great but I don't know if if can work for everyone or even most people.
That said, certainly marrying a working boy is always much better than staying unmarried. My point is that I am not comfortable with blanket assertions that "Kollel is not for everyone", because perhaps in a world with little left of the klalos of the eitz hadaas Kollel really should be to some extent for almost everyone, though certainly our yeshivos have a long way to go to prepare everyone for that.
I consider myself a Hirshian too. I spend much time studying his sefarim.
I don't know exactly what you mean that you would personally resist the idea of kollel-for-all being a universal ideal even in theory. Is this on principle?
You probably agree that the purpose of yemos hamashiach is so we can all study in Kollel as the Rambam says. You probably also agree that boys today should learn (for most of the day) for more years than in the old. So it doesn't seem to be a principle issue, but rather a practical one.
I assume by "being a universal ideal" you mean that in your opinion there are still many people for whom this is not appropriate. But the "even in theory" part I don't get.
As I understand it, Hirsch does see engaging with the world and actively building it up as a positive good. All that's part of his בכל דרכיך דעהו program. So I'm not sure the mindset that can sometimes accompany contemporary kollel ideology is a good fit with that. Having said that, I'm sure (hopeful?) that, בימות המשיח, we'll be learning more Torah each day than many "full-timers" do today.
Ok. That's already a complicated personal topic as engaging with the world and actively building it up as a positive good can obviously entail many different things for different people. Rav Hirsch obviously never felt מאי אהני לן רבנן.
One point though, and that is that "the mindset that can sometimes accompany contemporary kollel ideology" can truly be a contradiction to this and in fact it can destroy the very fabric of Kollel life. There is no question that there is a real human need to be accomplishing something and it is very hard to sense a fulfillment of that need without engaging with the world and actively building it up.
But I don't believe that the actual concept of Kollel itself is a contradiction to this.
Fascinating. But does our educational system for boys push kollel any less than for girls? Maybe this has something to do with the well-known OTD gap between boys and girls?
Without thinking it through properly, I would suggest it's possible that boys have a more personal and in-depth relationship with Torah and might feel they have more room for making independent choices. Or perhaps, because learning Torah "full time" can be hard, their relationships can sometimes be complicated enough to drive them away from full-time learning.
Girls, on the other hand, face a binary choice: go for a life of meaning (as presented to them in sem) or give up altogether on serious meaning and dive into materialism. It's much harder to make the "wrong" choice.
But this really does require more thought. And an open public conversation.
I honestly have no idea. Everyone with marriage-aged kids has their own experiences, but the community is just too large and dispersed to have a solid sense of what's happening. Two of my five married sons were working when they were going out and it took them both time (and frustration) before they found shidduchim. But what does that prove?
Now if I could just get 1,000 frum people to take one of the surveys on my j-data site https://thedataproject.net/jdata/ (most of which are currently off-line) then I really think I could make some progress.
Excellent post.
Someone reffered me to this article because I have a lot to say about the so-called agegap crisis but I would rather focus on something else entirely.
I believe there is a much deeper lesson to be gleaned from the Atlantic article and that is the question of the roles of male and females in a generation where the effect of the klalos of eitz hadaas seem to be dissolving. That is the source of disparity between males and females, as the liberal mentality seees no place for a male mentality in today's society and the males feel threatened by that.
Do you agree that that is the real issue here?
I definitely agree that the dynamic of marriage relationships is changing within the frum world. It is, for one thing, harder for a man to feel useful and valuable if he's not providing for his family. I also agree that our community is affected by the larger trends in general society - and not always in a positive way. And I'm sure that these changes are having an impact on what girls look for in a shidduch.
I guess the big question is: what are we supposed to do about all that?
If it turns out that the age gap theory is wrong, then we'll at least have narrowed down our options.
Thanks.
My point was actually a bit in the opposite direction, that as it becomes less necessary for the man to be a provider it is harder for a man to feel useful and valuable. To me this is actually part of the purpose of Kollel, if implemented correctly. I feel that consciously or subconsciously, this is part of the reason why women desire a learner. They specifically want a husband who is qualitatively different than them and brings something to the marriage that they can't.
Chasidim solve this problem by staying with the old-fashioned mold that a women belongs in the home. For those who are fine with that great but I don't know if if can work for everyone or even most people.
That said, certainly marrying a working boy is always much better than staying unmarried. My point is that I am not comfortable with blanket assertions that "Kollel is not for everyone", because perhaps in a world with little left of the klalos of the eitz hadaas Kollel really should be to some extent for almost everyone, though certainly our yeshivos have a long way to go to prepare everyone for that.
Very interesting observation. Although, as a Hirschian, I would personally resist the idea of kollel-for-all being a universal ideal even in theory.
I consider myself a Hirshian too. I spend much time studying his sefarim.
I don't know exactly what you mean that you would personally resist the idea of kollel-for-all being a universal ideal even in theory. Is this on principle?
You probably agree that the purpose of yemos hamashiach is so we can all study in Kollel as the Rambam says. You probably also agree that boys today should learn (for most of the day) for more years than in the old. So it doesn't seem to be a principle issue, but rather a practical one.
I assume by "being a universal ideal" you mean that in your opinion there are still many people for whom this is not appropriate. But the "even in theory" part I don't get.
As I understand it, Hirsch does see engaging with the world and actively building it up as a positive good. All that's part of his בכל דרכיך דעהו program. So I'm not sure the mindset that can sometimes accompany contemporary kollel ideology is a good fit with that. Having said that, I'm sure (hopeful?) that, בימות המשיח, we'll be learning more Torah each day than many "full-timers" do today.
Ok. That's already a complicated personal topic as engaging with the world and actively building it up as a positive good can obviously entail many different things for different people. Rav Hirsch obviously never felt מאי אהני לן רבנן.
One point though, and that is that "the mindset that can sometimes accompany contemporary kollel ideology" can truly be a contradiction to this and in fact it can destroy the very fabric of Kollel life. There is no question that there is a real human need to be accomplishing something and it is very hard to sense a fulfillment of that need without engaging with the world and actively building it up.
But I don't believe that the actual concept of Kollel itself is a contradiction to this.
Fascinating. But does our educational system for boys push kollel any less than for girls? Maybe this has something to do with the well-known OTD gap between boys and girls?
Without thinking it through properly, I would suggest it's possible that boys have a more personal and in-depth relationship with Torah and might feel they have more room for making independent choices. Or perhaps, because learning Torah "full time" can be hard, their relationships can sometimes be complicated enough to drive them away from full-time learning.
Girls, on the other hand, face a binary choice: go for a life of meaning (as presented to them in sem) or give up altogether on serious meaning and dive into materialism. It's much harder to make the "wrong" choice.
But this really does require more thought. And an open public conversation.
There is a well known phenomenon where working boys have a hard time getting dates.
But there is also a large number of single boys. What's their problem? They can't find balabatishe girls?
If we had reliable numbers we'd be better positioned to draw useful conclusions.
But you are well integrated into the community and should have your ear to the ground. What do you think?
I honestly have no idea. Everyone with marriage-aged kids has their own experiences, but the community is just too large and dispersed to have a solid sense of what's happening. Two of my five married sons were working when they were going out and it took them both time (and frustration) before they found shidduchim. But what does that prove?
Now if I could just get 1,000 frum people to take one of the surveys on my j-data site https://thedataproject.net/jdata/ (most of which are currently off-line) then I really think I could make some progress.