In Pearl Reich’s lounge room in Lakewood, New Jersey, is a symbol of her defiance. It is a large, new flat screen television. This thing, according to the beliefs of the ultra-orthodox Jewish Hasidic sect that she has fled, represents evil.

Media dubbed her the Hasidic Hottie. Pic: Craig Ruttle

“They call it a box of ‘tumah’, like a box of impurity,” she says.

Reich, 31, was born in Israel and moved to Brooklyn with her family at the age of 10. Her father was a Hasidic rabbi who started a synagogue in Borough Park, an exclusive Hasidic enclave just over the river from Manhattan.

In this area, the men wear hats and side locks and the women go about totally covered except for their hands and faces. Women may not wear trousers and many wear wigs to cover their shaven heads, because of the belief that natural hair can be sexually arousing.

In the homes of this suburb, there are no televisions or radios. Here, inside the great city of New York, the world is kept away.

“By the time I got married at 18, I’d never heard Celine Dion sing, never seen any movies, no television, no radio,” says Reich.

She has become one of the rare women to not only reject Hasidism, a growing hardline conservative religious movement which she calls a cult, but to shine a light on practices that she says degrade Jewish women.

As a teenager, Reich was studious and assisted her father teaching theology to young students. But she started falling in love with a non-religious Russian boy. Her father intervened.

“He made us break up and arranged a marriage with another rabbi’s son,” she says.

Reich was 18. Sinai Susholz was 27. There was no attraction, but she did not question it. She believed marriage was a holy vessel for the production of children.

“I knew that I had no choice, because I believed everything I had been taught,” she says.

“A girl in our community, at the age of 18, is equivalent emotionally to a 13 year old in another community. We do not have choice. We are told what to do. We parrot everything.

“So my marriage was bad, but all I kept saying was, ‘My parents want this, God wants this,’ and so I can’t go wrong.”

By the age of 24, she’d had four children – a boy and three girls. She worked designing bridal fashion. After her second child was born, she began thinking about a divorce. She had no feelings for her husband and says he felt threatened by her looks.

It never occurred to her to question orthodox lifestyle. She still wore the long skirts, long sleeves and the wig. But she knew something was wrong.

“We had no sexual compatibility,” she says. “Nothing doing.” The families intervened and sent the couple to orthodox counselling.

“They sent us to rabbis,” she says. “It was disgusting. What does a rabbi know about my sexuality? They told me I was being extremely materialistic and dirty by wanting to be satisfied by my husband. I was told I’m a bitch and slut, by rabbis and by him.

“He was an emotional abuser, but I kept blaming myself. We had learned the husband was a reflection of the woman.”

By then, she was living west of Manhattan in Lakewood, home to another large Hasidic community and one of the world’s biggest rabbinical colleges.

After having two more children, she’d had enough. She took out retraining orders for physical abuse. She says her husband believed she was seeing other men. She says she never did. “I was a good wife, I brought in money, I gave him kids, I was beautiful. What more did he want?”

Speaking for Susholz, lawyer Richard Sevrin told News Ltd his client strongly denies any suggestion of physical or emotional abuse. He says while there were police complaints, Reich later voluntarily dismissed them by consent.

“There was no abuse,” Sevrin says. “They were mere allegations.”

Reich took her four children and went back to Brooklyn to live with her parents.

But Reich, still living as a Hasidic woman, was an embarrassment to the community. She says her parents and her husband were strongly opposed her divorce, which she wanted the Jewish Beth din court to grant her.

Her husband refused to divorce her in the Jewish court, and began taking a simultaneous family court action, in the normal US civil courts, for sole custody of the children.

She began a six year battle, which placed her in the bizarre situation of fighting the attempts to remove her children, yet still under demands that she remain married. All of it, she claims, was an attempt to return her to the loveless marriage.

She could not get a normal civil divorce because she had been pressured to sign a document which gave the Beth din court power to arbitrate over her marriage issues.

Last year, something clicked. She went to the Beth din court and told them she did no longer believed in God and did not recognize their authority. They were unable to deal with a non-believer, but were still reluctant to act.

It wasn’t a stunt. Reich says she suddenly just stopped believing, in all religion. She began wearing pants, got a tattoo and did some modelling. “I went to the Museum of Natural History and saw these sculptures and this archeology,” she says. “I was going out of my mind. I’d been told it was all false.”

Reich began to talk to the media (the New York Post called her the “Hasidic Hottie”) and appeared on “Dr Phil”, along with her new boyfriend, who had also left the ultra-orthodox faith. Sevrin, the lawyer, says Susholz refuses to participate in media interviews because he does not want his children exposed.

Reich says Hasidic authorities in Israel were angry with her and elements of New York’s Hasidic leadership and wanted the problem solved.

Three weeks ago, the Beth din granted her divorce (she still, for now, remains legally married under US law) and the child custody matter came to an end a fortnight back. They have joint custody.

Reich says she never tried to countersue her husband for sole custody. “We both gave birth to these kids,” she says. “They’re beautiful and they’re smart. Taking away the kids is no way to work.”

Reich has agreed to certain conditions, including that the children attend Hasidic schools and that she remains in Lakewood. Another condition is that she collect her children from school in Hasidic-approved attire and observes the Sabbath when the kids are in her home.

Reich does not like the deal, but says she is exhausted from fighting. She says she has no hate for the Hasidic community. “I’m against the leaders,” she says. “It has evolved into a cult and it was never supposed to be that way.”

She says she has connections to a strong underground of unhappy Hasidics who, she says, only maintain the appearance of piousness so their children are not kicked out of schools and they are not shunned.

“Life is harder now I’m not religious,” she says. “I used to get more monetary support. Religion provides security, yet when you discover your individuality, you can’t go back to that security.

She says arranged the marriages, isolation and the denial of sexuality do not work. “I believe in the Jewish culture and the history. Everything else is bullshit.

“Both the men and women are miserable. And they’re both right. Her femininity has been cut off and his sexual choice has been cut off. How can you survive?”

She says she watches closely as her eldest child, a son aged 10, who wears the side locks, develops views of women as subordinates. She says the most she can do is try to put a lid on it, and encourage him to think about the choices she never had. 

“I think men are born abusive and that women, whatever monkey they came from, they’re better,” she says. “Men need way more work to be better people.”

Oi vey! Comments on this story will close at 8pm AEST

Most commented

107 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Gregg says:

      06:02am | 28/08/12

      Yep, they had a television doco on the Hasidic a year or so back and one weird mob they are and they produce people with very weird views like as in the hottie’s last quote:
      “I think men are born abusive and that women, whatever monkey they came from, they’re better,” she says. “Men need way more work to be better people.”

    • Mik says:

      06:13am | 28/08/12

      She watches and worries about how her son is being influenced - then makes the comment that he is, in effect,” born” an abuser, She is brave because she has escaped culturally sanctioned abuse but she is stupid because she thinks it was borne of a male “need” to abuse - while at the same time recognizing that the sect makes both sexes miserable.
      Abuse is usually a learned behaviour, set by example - cultural or microcultural.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      06:27am | 28/08/12

      Hi Paul,

      We have all heard about how certain religious beliefs systems can truly discriminate towards women, in general.  In the past years I have heard about the ultra Orthodox Jewish Hasidic faith but I wasn’t all that informed since I have never actually met one on a personal basis!  Now I don’t have to wonder why we don’t get to the chance to meet one in our daily lives. 

      Pearl Reich’s story was full of emotion and honesty and it was very easy to relate to on a personal level, because of all the similarities and struggles some women may face because of their religious background only!  This story gave us all an insight to this particular faith in a very interesting way, indeed.

      I also have to say that when we actually take the time to go beyond race and religion, then we also have a chance to see the real person without all the stigmas attached to that particular faith and lifestyle. Even in the world of extreme views and polarizations across the board, at the end of the day what truly matters is the message that ultimately “we just happen to be human beings with very similar needs and wants”. 

      I have personally found Pearl Reich’s story very touching and courageous.  She could be considered to be a role model for other women, if her faith and culture did actually allow her to go back to leading a normal life once again. Kind regards to your editors.

    • Daemon says:

      11:47am | 28/08/12

      Neslihan,

      I enjoy your work. Sometimes it is counter-argumentative, but I find reading it, if I stop and think, you actually quietly clarify things occasionally. Like today.

      After a long time in the blogosphere, I have become adept at rabbiting away at issues raised until I get a bite from someone seeing me as a troll, but it isn’t that. It’s about just stream of consciousness thinking and sometimes I think there is more to be gathered from your posts, rather than just knee-jerk reactions to seeming trolling. I like your work, and I particularly like your finish “regards to your editors”, because in reality, we are “our editors”.

      Punch doesn’t go through and correct and carry on and most things go through, though occasionally something ruffles enough feathers to be removed. You always remind me of a review of a book I read in school and then presented for the class. In a world of derogatory rubbish, which is what much of the blogoshere is about, you are a small, quiet light.

      Thank you

    • OchreBunyip says:

      06:39am | 28/08/12

      ““I think men are born abusive and that women, whatever monkey they came from, they’re better,” Your feminist sisters will be proud of you.

    • marley says:

      08:26am | 28/08/12

      Actually, no.  She’s an example of a woman who has been educated and socialised in an extremely narrow, patriarchal society.  There’s an excuse for her thinking that way.  There’s no excuse for women who’ve grown up in that wider world, seen the opportunities open to them, and developed a more sophisticated understanding, to have such a narrow viewpoint.

    • Adrian says:

      08:55am | 28/08/12

      @OchreBunyip,

      Your feminist sisters will be proud of you

      Wow, check out the compassion on OchreBunyip!

      This woman has been abused by men all her life. Her story is one of great courage - yet all you see in it is an opportunity for a pro forma jab at feminists.

      Pathetic .

    • St. Michael says:

      11:32am | 28/08/12

      “There’s no excuse for women who’ve grown up in that wider world, seen the opportunities open to them, and developed a more sophisticated understanding, to have such a narrow viewpoint.”

      Exhibit A: the current hard core of the feminist movement—oh, wait.

    • marley says:

      01:19pm | 28/08/12

      @St Michael - yep, I think you got my point.

    • OchreBunyip says:

      05:21pm | 28/08/12

      @Marley, her comment is not *some* men, it is not even *those men I associated with* or *those men of Hasidic religion* but *all men*.

      Men=bad, women = good is getting old.

    • M says:

      07:14am | 28/08/12

      At least she was able to get herself out of it. Whatever her veiws on men, she’s better off.

    • Gregg says:

      08:12am | 28/08/12

      She might even be able to get better still with more time out of it and hopefully can have a greater influence over her children than currently appears to be happening.

    • M says:

      09:02am | 28/08/12

      Cut her some slack mate, just getting out of religion is hard enough. I’m not surprised she has a dim view on men considering the sort of men she grew up with. One can only hope that her views change in time.

    • KH says:

      07:30am | 28/08/12

      For all the misogynists that will come out of the woodwork and have a crack at her comment, given the life she had, you can’t seriously expect her to have any other view of men, now could you.  What a horrible life to grow up in - but this is the life many muslim and even some christian women have too - forced into what can only be described as slavery - but taught it from birth so many never realise they can fight.  What a brave person she must be to walk away - as she points out, there are many who would like to follow her, but fear keeps them where they are. 

      Yet more proof that religions are a carcinogenic sore on the side of all humanity.

    • M says:

      07:44am | 28/08/12

      Yes, I agree with this. It’s unfair to judge her on her views of men because all the men in her life have been abusers or controllers. I would be more surprised if she didn’t have a view like that on men.

    • wakeuppls says:

      07:46am | 28/08/12

      Given the life the average divorced father leads, they could quite easily say women are vindictive greedy vipers. Personally, I’d add the qualifier “average Western woman” to the beginning of that statement for truth. I wonder how they would be perceived then? No doubt far worse than this poor suburbanite sloth does.

      I like your use of “misogynist” as an opener, though. That’s about as stock standard a response as you can ask for from the feminist nut left.

    • TracyH says:

      07:51am | 28/08/12

      Spot on , KH…I hope the men reading this can see why she made that statement. Ask her in ten years, and she will see it was the abusive religion, and that men raised in a free thinking world can be truly wonderful.

    • nihonin says:

      08:00am | 28/08/12

      No point replying is there KH, you’ve already condemned everybody as a misogynist, bit sexist that. Don’t you think.

    • wakeuppls says:

      08:20am | 28/08/12

      Tracy

      Too bad in 10 years her son will be a fully fledged self-hating grown man by the time she MAY change her mind to something slightly more sane.

      In reality these comments constitute child abuse in and of themselves and a responsible family member should be cancelling her custody arrangements.

    • Fiddler says:

      08:30am | 28/08/12

      would the men who are repressed by this religion fare any better?

      It might be patriachal, but it reminds me a little of Indian culture where the father is the head of the household and the wife must do as he says, but the wife/mother rules with an utter iron fist everyone beneath her.

    • marley says:

      08:46am | 28/08/12

      @wakeuppls - “In reality these comments constitute child abuse in and of themselves and a responsible family member should be cancelling her custody arrangements.”

      One could make the counter argument that the dad’s efforts to teach his son that women are subordinates, and must be fully covered at all times, also constitutes child abuse. 

      Let’s face it, both parents are wrong.  Hopefully, in this case, exposed to two wrongs the kid will eventually come up with one right - that men and women need to be seen as equals and judged as individuals.

    • M says:

      09:07am | 28/08/12

      @ wakup, telling kids that if they don’t conform to a certain standard of behaviour they’ll be damned to a firepit for eternity by an angry and vengefull being in the sky is child abuse.

    • KH says:

      09:23am | 28/08/12

      nilhonin, wakeupwhatever - misogyinists are the ones who would seize the last comment as some kind of ‘feminist put down’, instead of a world view created by circumstances that most of us wouldn’t even want to imagine, which is what it is.  A reasonable person would accept that, given the whole story.  Yet here you are, as predicted.

    • John L says:

      10:21am | 28/08/12

      Strange, I didn’t read the last comment as anti-feminist. Remember she was a hard-line Jew and therefore didn’t know about this whole idea of evolution, believing in Adam and Eve exclusively. She might well have been saying that women might come from monkeys but men might not even come from something that high up the chain. I really couldn’t blame her for that sentiment.

    • nihonin says:

      10:27am | 28/08/12

      Lesson learnt KH, never question your authority to make blanket statements regarding your opinion of men or how you believe them to think.

    • wakeuppls says:

      11:34am | 28/08/12

      It is wild accusation on her part that that her son is being brainwashed. So much judgement without any proof.

    • andye says:

      12:50pm | 28/08/12

      @wakeuppls - “Given the life the average divorced father leads, they could quite easily say women are vindictive greedy vipers.”

      Except he wouldnt have the excuse of coming from a completely insular society where he was denied any kind of genuine understanding of the real world.

      This is a specific case, with very specific and unusual characteristics. Your need to fit that somehow into an anti-feminist men’s right rant just shows how one eyed and selfish you are.

    • Chris L says:

      01:07pm | 28/08/12

      “misogyinists are the ones who would seize the last comment as some kind of ‘feminist put down” - and you seizing on such comments, without knowing the person making them or what they may have gone through themselves, seize the opportunity to call them misogynists.

      I agree she has a valid reason for her dim view of men. Do you?

    • wakeuppls says:

      01:10pm | 28/08/12

      andye

      The fact you think I am attempting to rant about men’s rights is testament to the ignorance, perhaps deliberate, on your part. I am simply showing how the shoe only fits one foot in this kind of case with a logical example of the total and utter failure of logic present in this article, and, as demonstrated with precision by yourself, in the comments.

    • marley says:

      02:26pm | 28/08/12

      @wakeuppls - if you do a little research into Hasidism, you will find that women are indeed considered to be the inferiors of men, have fewer education opportunities, are allowed to work but not to have careers, and are not allowed to play a role in the political or religious leadership of the community.  Those are well known fact, not assumptions.

      So, if the boy is being raised with these beliefs, and he apparently is, then yes,  he damn well is being brainwashed.

    • wakeuppls says:

      07:38am | 28/08/12

      I wonder what her ex-husbands side of the story is. By the look and sound of the entitled princess I’d say it would be somewhat different.

    • KH says:

      09:13am | 28/08/12

      Wow - did you even read the article? 

      Just because someone wants the freedom to decide how their own life should be, and not be forced into a life they don’t want, and aren’t happy in, does not make them an ‘entitled princess’.

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:30am | 28/08/12

      If you knew anything of the Hasidic following, she was far from entitled.

    • wakeuppls says:

      11:37am | 28/08/12

      Is she or is she not now a practicing Hasidic Jew? Have a go at her. The bling and outrageous nail polish tell it all.

    • Carramaena says:

      12:56pm | 28/08/12

      I think it would go something like “I never laid a hand on her, she was nothing but a lazy useless bitch and this is the thanks I get, she leaves me” . Considering that she gave him joint custody without a fight I would hardly say that she was an entitled princess. I think that she simply wants to move on with her life and learn. Does she have a distorted view about men, yes she does, but it is a learned view, maybe she can unlearn it but it will take a lot of time.

    • andye says:

      01:06pm | 28/08/12

      @wakeuppls - “By the look and sound of the entitled princess I’d say it would be somewhat different.”

      Wow. You would think that you would be smart enough to hide that your own insecurities and issues are driving these opinions, but you don’t even do that.

    • marley says:

      03:29pm | 28/08/12

      @wakuppls “Is she or is she not now a practicing Hasidic Jew? “

      Umm, no, she’s not. Perhaps you should read the article.

    • Michael says:

      07:47am | 28/08/12

      All of this backward nonsense is about men and their egos, hence the need to subjugate women and infect every aspect of their existence.

      It is so these men never have to define themselves as one that couldn’t make a house a home, one that was less attractive than another etc etc.

      I always found it odd that religious men seek to control the behaviour and appearance of women because of the potential behaviour of men. We don’t force children to be less of who they are because some people will abuse them, we hold the abusers responsible.

      To me this says that at the moment of seeing this opportunity to take responsibility the men weren’t up to it and placed it in the lap of their women and children.

    • Fiddler says:

      08:33am | 28/08/12

      no, it is a throwback to preventing hypergamy.

      PS, I would love to see an article like this where a woman (in Australia) has broken out of a muslim lifestyle. This sort of behaviour is far more prevalent in the middle eastern societies than an obscure Jewish cult

    • M says:

      09:05am | 28/08/12

      Fiddler, there’s one whose name escapes me atm, but she wrote a book about escaping from Islam. Has death threats against her and all. I’ve been meaning to pick it up actually, but the name of the author and the book escape me.

    • Michael says:

      09:17am | 28/08/12

      What’s the problem with hypergamy? apart from the bit about the ones she won’t marry having to accept her defining them as less than the one she will marry?

    • Fiddler says:

      10:15am | 28/08/12

      oh look at Michael, the self proclaimed Alpha. Hypergamy isn’t about choosing the most suitable mate, it’s about trading up the second things don’t go their way. The thing about marriage is it is about recognising that everyone has their ups and downs, enjoying the ups and being loyal through the downs.

      Hypergamy is about only enjoying the ups and then running when the down times happen. It funnily tends to hurt the women more in the long run, but leave a trail of destruction behind them.

    • LJ Dots says:

      10:26am | 28/08/12

      M - it might be Ayaan Hirsi Ali you are thinking of.

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:33am | 28/08/12

      Think her name is Ali, M.

      It wasn’t that she left the religion is the fact she went around trashing it after she left with the books, speaking tours etc.

      Muslims leave Islam a far bit, I know of a lot. As with most religious parents/families at first they are disappointed etc.

    • M says:

      11:20am | 28/08/12

      LJ Dots, that is exactly who I’m thinking about, ta.

      Why do they leave simon?

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      01:42pm | 28/08/12

      Same as Christians I’d say. They don’t believed in the message, see no point of it in a modern western society or their parents were to hardline.

    • Michael says:

      02:28pm | 28/08/12

      We both know i didn’t claim to be that at all Fiddler, i don’t view the end of a relationship the same way as you do i suppose.

      Anyone can leave a marriage, the idea that it is a chasing trade-ups is subjective so is the idea of what hurts or helps women in the long run, how do you know from a woman’s point of view what is working out in the longrun and what isn’t?

    • M says:

      04:03pm | 28/08/12

      It’s good to see that even adherants Islam can see religion for what it is.

    • Joan says:

      08:10am | 28/08/12

      Big deal a woman as an adult doesn’t embrace parental religious ideals. Nothing new, confict through divorce nothing new there either.  Through work I meet Hasidic families and they seem no more miserable than other families in community. - generally they have more children so sex is not dead. A mum who thinks getting a tattoo is some sort of greater intelligence is a joke. and makes less sense than wearing wig. and clothing to cover body. The woman just embraces other type of bullshit- starts with her tattoo.

    • fml says:

      08:32am | 28/08/12

      Her tattoo is a sign of defiance, that she has left the teachings of the church and will in most part be a memory of the way she was treated. You are being entirely too harsh.

    • Markus says:

      09:01am | 28/08/12

      “generally they have more children so sex is not dead”
      Yep, they have four kids, so logic would suggest they had sex at least four times in their six years together.
      There’s just no pleasing some women!

    • Joan says:

      10:04am | 28/08/12

      Markus: So you reckon bulls eye achieved with each sperm shot. - laugh at that one- what`s your aim like ?- successful pregnancy with each shot.

    • Joan says:

      10:07am | 28/08/12

      Motherhood has greater obligations than expression of personal childish defiance via tattoo and blue nail polish.

    • M says:

      10:33am | 28/08/12

      Been to a westfield lately, joan?

    • DS says:

      11:26am | 28/08/12

      Fml, church is a Christian term. She didn’t leave any church.

    • John L says:

      11:59am | 28/08/12

      And her skills as a mother are detracted by having a tattoo? Are you saying all women who have a tattoo shouldn’t be mothers? Are you Joan? Are you a nun Joan? Do you wear anything that isn’t grey? Do you brush your hair in the morning? Do you choose anything for yourself to suit yourself? Or are you completely subservient to someone else? Tell us Joan, I get the feeling that if you cannot even grant a women the right to alter herself to suit herself then your opinion belongs with the Hasidics.

    • fml says:

      02:23pm | 28/08/12

      DS,

      Synagogue. I hope that has made you a little bit happier on the inside.

    • DS says:

      03:47pm | 28/08/12

      I’m neither happy nor unhappy. I just find it extraordinary that you would be ignorant about something so basic. You do realize that Judaism is a different religion to Christianity?

    • Shep says:

      08:13am | 28/08/12

      This poor woman has been completely indoctrinated, basically institutionalized and is most likely recovering from/living with Stockholm Syndrome.  Yet she’s managed to break mostly free, especially since she must share her children with a cult she has escaped from.

      And we expect her to be like us immediately and with no experience of average western society and further question her feelings of men as abusers and her ability to express herself in terms that we’re comfortable with. 

      We really have become so complacent with our freedoms and our expectation that everyone has, or with a little willpower and determination can easily get.  Is seems that religion continues, more than any other trigger, including poverty (which is often a circumstance of religious zealotry) to be the sole determinant of freedom, especially for women.

      It explains very simply our own fear of outsiders and differences and how they impact on our established society when they try to control or change it from within.

    • sir ronald bradnam says:

      08:15am | 28/08/12

      All religions are cults, all try to control the followers lives and what they should believe in, especially the women and children.This one is a little more extreme than most but no different in 98% of their beliefs than all other sky fairy organisations. Great to see more brain wasshed people starting to think for themselves.

    • youdy beaudy says:

      08:31am | 28/08/12

      It just goes to show that religions can get away with just about everything. I don’t see what any of their weirdo practices and beliefs have to do with a God.

      Move all these beliefs away from the so called sanctification of religions that are endorsed by the state also and what you find is Mental illness of huge proportions. Yes, the truth is that hard core religionists are Mentally deranged and should be locked up. Now, that’s what should be happening, but religions are protected by law and allowed to proceed with their mumbo jumbo.

      The non religious ordinary person would be put in a court and locked in an institution for the same things, but religion somehow is allowed to do these things to people. I admire the lady for telling them to shove it and get out before they ruined her life further but they will now work on ruining the lives of her kids.

      God save us from religions and their mates the politicians. They are the cause and have been the cause of all the dirty tricks that have been perpetuated on mankind. They should close them down but unfortunately they can’t so the bullshit will continue. And they think they are connected somehow to a God. No God worth his salt would have anything to do with it. So the pretending will go on but fortunately not for many of us but for them. Shame really. Aren’t we lucky not having to put up with that rubbish each day.? They need to get a grip on reality. What a waste of life it all is.!

    • fml says:

      08:34am | 28/08/12

      “She could not get a normal civil divorce because she had been pressured to sign a document which gave the Beth din court power to arbitrate over her marriage issues.”

      This is the problem, the law should never allow religious organisations legal power over individuals. America, the land you can sign away your freedom.

    • M says:

      09:09am | 28/08/12

      I agree, we have seperation of church and state for a reason.

      That said, you can sign away your freedom here too.

    • marley says:

      09:27am | 28/08/12

      @fml - I think this article is quite confused on the issue of Jewish vs civil marriage and divorce. 

      As I understand it, Jewish marriages are valid in law in the same way that Anglican or Catholic marriages are - because the rabbi or minister or priest is acting as an agent of the state, and the marriage is therefore both civil and religious. 

      Divorce is different. Orthodox Jews who want to divorce under Jewish religious law need a “get” issued by the Beth Din, and that appears to be what this woman wanted.  But a Jewish divorce is not valid in civil law and the woman still needs to go through the civil process.

      In other words, the Beth Din only has power over this woman if she wants to divorce and remarry within the faith.  There is no way it can stop her from getting a secular divorce, regardless of what she thinks she signed.  She wouldn’t be able to remarry within the faith (but then neither can a divorced Catholic).  But the Beth Din doesn’t have the authority to issue a civil divorce;  only the state has that authority.

    • fml says:

      09:41am | 28/08/12

      Marley,

      Interesting why the article said that she gave arbitration to the church. First question I would ask is would I be able to sign a pre nuptial agreement with the church, hence if anything happens take away half their goods.

      Anyway, I do not think it is clear if she wanted it, I do not see why she couldn’t just get a civil divorce? She obviously wanted out, unless she gave the church the right to negotiate with her husband on her behalf.

      M,

      Agreed, If someone is pressurised or silly enough to sign such an agreement there should be a clause to change their mind afterwards, the church should not have the power, it should be solely in the hands of the individual.

    • M says:

      10:12am | 28/08/12

      To the best of my knowledge, no such clause exists without sevre financial penalty over here.

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:37am | 28/08/12

      Marely is right. Sharia has the same thing, the two religions are very similar.

    • marley says:

      01:25pm | 28/08/12

      @fml - I had a quick look at the American Beth Din site.  They recommend couples sign a pre-nup which includes conditions about mutual obligations in the event the couple wants to split.  I suspect that’s what she signed, and that’s why she went through the Beth Din for her religious divorce - but she could have got a civil divorce without any of that nonsense.  The faith wouldn’t have recognized her divorce, but the state would have, which is all that really matters if you’ve lost your faith, or so I’d have thought.

      I think this woman is both very naive and very poorly educated in the ways of the world.  That she still tries to comply with religious rules that mean nothing to her is mind-boggling.

    • fml says:

      02:02pm | 28/08/12

      Thanks for that Marley,

      I guess I do not understand it. My guess is that she is afraid of some form of celestial retribution and still wanted to get permission from the church. Either way I do wonder how much legal weight the prenup carries.

    • marley says:

      04:14pm | 28/08/12

      @fml - did a bit more research on this.  The Beth Din’s pre-nup was basically designed to ensure that if a marriage breaks up, the husband issues a “get” and the wife accepts it, so that both are free to marry again with in the faith.  The agreement gives the Beth Din the right to arbitrate.

      The pre-nup may, but doesn’t have to, also include financial and custody provisions. It is perfectly acceptable to have a secular pre-nup for both of the latter.  If the Beth Din prenup does have financial and custody provisions, it is considered binding in the same way a secular prenup would be.

      But, again, it has no impact on whether the couple can get a civil divorce.

      Depending on what kind of pre-nup she signed, Ms Reich may have felt she had to go through the Beth Din for custody.  She definitely didn’t have to go through them for a divorce, though.  So I’m still a bit confused about why as a non-believer she handed so much power to a religious body.  I guess she’s still more than slightly indoctrinated.

    • Terry2 says:

      08:36am | 28/08/12

      It seems to go on in every religion, to a greater or lesser extent; it’s all about power. Just the other day the Anglicans struggled to justify their belief in the woman “submitting” in marriage; they were not very convincing.
      In my view religions will only ever achieve plausibility when they recognise that women are equals and should share in the perks of priesthood etc equally with women. But I suspect that when that day comes, men will drop religion in favour of some other form of misogyny.

    • andre says:

      08:46am | 28/08/12

      Darwinists postulated inferiority of women ever since they got a grip over universities. According to their myth women are inferior because they had to stay home and take care of the kids which allegedly does not stimulate the brain growth,  while men were hunting, eating red meat and thus helping the evolution of their brains upwards and that is why they are superior.
      Inferiority of women today is expressed in lower salaries for instance.
      Hasidic sect of Judaism and Judaism as a whole are what Christ was calling man’s teaching,  not God’s teaching.

    • M says:

      09:49am | 28/08/12

      Evolution skipped you, didn’t it mate?

    • fml says:

      10:34am | 28/08/12

      So if a woman earns more than you does that mean that you are inferior to her? Or do you get to pick and choose?

    • St. Michael says:

      11:43am | 28/08/12

      Oh, boy ... where do we start ... Jesus was a Jew, andre.  And if you want to go by Christ’s teachings, he said quite explicitly that he was there to fulfil the religious law - all of it - not make one jot of it pass away.

    • Chris L says:

      01:29pm | 28/08/12

      Yeah, it all started with that passage in Origin Of The Species where Darwin wrote “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord, For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior”... or am I thinking of Ephesians?

    • James1 says:

      01:39pm | 28/08/12

      “Darwinists postulated inferiority of women ever since they got a grip over universities.”

      All that tells me is that you have never been anywhere near a university, and that neither have you come into contact with anything that was produced in or by a university.

    • TChong says:

      09:11am | 28/08/12

      ALL devout of all religions deserve the opportunity to test their faith , by being encouraged to have an early 1:1 with their chosen deity.
      It seems that there is more than 1 mid east religion that has trouble with extremists hijacking a faith to spread their bigottry and attempts to control others.
      The ONLY difference is one group of nutters says “salaam”, the other group of nutters says “shalom”.
      ( and note, I condemn extremists of ALL religion, equally)

    • Robinoz says:

      09:22am | 28/08/12

      Humankind’s attachment to religious nonsense always amazes me. I hadn’t heard of this branch of Judaism, but it’s obviously just another of a long line or religions designed by men to be servants of our human interests.

      When will people realise that science now answers most of the questions posed by religion and move on to a better, more fulfilling future?

    • chuck says:

      09:24am | 28/08/12

      Why would ultra orthodox jews want to go to the US anyway? What happened to “next year Jerusalem”?

    • St. Michael says:

      11:39am | 28/08/12

      That’s a big theological question which has been stirring in the Jewish community since before Israel was born.  Essentially, it comes down to two views: one, that Judaism should create Zion, God’s city, on Earth; the other, that Judaism has to wait for the Messiah to give Zion to them.  It’s the background of the story in Chaim Potok’s “The Chosen”.  Just because you’re a Zionist doesn’t mean you’re ultra-orthodox.  It’s more complex than that.

    • Arnold Layne says:

      09:39am | 28/08/12

      Good for her, she should have the opportunity to choose the life she lives.  Everything except for hearing Celine Dion singing of course, the hardliners did her a favour there.

    • keithf says:

      09:43am | 28/08/12

      I am Jewish, and i have heard many versions of this story from insiders. I am currently not religious, but once was. I am sorry to say that i have come to the realization that not only is miss Reich totally wrong, but i think she is clinically crazy. 1. The way she described religious Jewish people, is far from the truth. 2. i was told by a family member, that she WAS attracted to her ex. 3. I study psychology, and throughout my study’s, i decided that a person who can so blatantly bad mouth her people, i don’t care how much problems she had, she has problems. To believe her story, although it may be true to a certain extent, would be a huge error.

    • fml says:

      10:23am | 28/08/12

      If she wants to be with her ex and not her husband, neither the church nor her husband have the right to keep her there against her will.

    • Hanzel says:

      10:35am | 28/08/12

      Agree, these stories are often exaggerated for political purpose…to make religious people look bad so that the atheists can gather more support and slither into power.

    • Pete says:

      11:43am | 28/08/12

      “slither”? Athiests will get into power the same way as religiois people (they are voted in) or do religious people also slither in?

    • At work says:

      12:54pm | 28/08/12

      Oh keithf… so many errors.
      1. She’s not talking about general religious Jewish people. She’s talking about Hasidic Jews- it’s like comparing everyday Christians to the Vatican.
      2. “I was told by a family member” is gossip. This gossip is pushing a rumour that she may have been attracted to her husband. How in any deity’s name would this rumour be substantiated? Did they get into her knickers to test the moisture rate when he was around? Or did people assume she liked him because she was a good wife to him (as she stated she was).
      3. Psych 101 does not count as being well versed in Psychology. If it did, you would not be definitive in your judgement of people. You would say things like: “In my professional opinion”. Sidebar: There is no such illness as “clinically crazy”. A trained psychologist would know this.

      Also: *studies, *many problems, Capital I.

    • Hanzel says:

      01:04pm | 28/08/12

      @ Pete,

      If you were to put a penny inside a jar for every negative story about religion, and took one out for every positive story about religion….you’ll be left with a jar full of pennies

      Slither - To slip and slide, as on a loose or uneven surface. The uneven surface is the media’s coverage of religion.

    • Pete says:

      01:34pm | 28/08/12

      “ Hanzel says: 01:04pm | 28/08/12
      @ Pete,

      If you were to put a penny inside a jar for every negative story about religion, and took one out for every positive story about religion….you’ll be left with a jar full of pennies”

      And that has to do with athiests taking power?

      “Slither - To slip and slide, as on a loose or uneven surface.”

      I know what slither means. However I doubt if you do. Just so you know, nobody slithers into power.

      “The uneven surface is the media’s coverage of religion.”

      Nonsense.

    • Chris L says:

      02:18pm | 28/08/12

      @Hanzel - Are you saying there are negative stories that aren’t true or that they may be true but shouldn’t be published anyway?

      If you’re saying the negative stories aren’t true, would you be so kind as to furnish us with some examples please?

    • Hanzel says:

      04:37pm | 28/08/12

      No Chris L, obviously they should be published. But so should stories like the one with the anti-Christian activist who shot up the Family Research Centre in the USA - the story that, like one hand clapping, apparently can’t be heard.

    • Jane says:

      05:21pm | 28/08/12

      Hanzel, when you talk about religious people, do you mean all religions, or just Christianity?

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:44am | 28/08/12

      It should be interesting.

      I watched the Muslim version on ABC a month or so ago now, be good to see how the Hasidic one compares.

    • Hanzel says:

      10:16am | 28/08/12

      Don’t make her out to be a hero, she has destroyed her children’s upbringing because of her impulse control issues…she has the problem not the Hasidic community.

      How many more lives need to be damaged in the name of secularism? Atleast you can leave religion, but the atheists love to legislate so when they take over y’all ain’t going nowhere…..tick tock.

    • marley says:

      01:27pm | 28/08/12

      One could equally ask, how many more lives, like this woman’s, need to be damaged in the name of religion?

    • June says:

      10:17am | 28/08/12

      Sounds just like the neocatechumenal way - a messed up catholic cult even present in Australia.

    • JJ says:

      10:41am | 28/08/12

      I’m sorry but I have to ask: If her ex was physically and emotionally abusive, why on earth is she allowing him equal custody of her children?

    • Jane says:

      11:45am | 28/08/12

      She probably didn’t have any choice. It wasn’t as if she ‘allowed’ him to do anything.

    • Stephen says:

      11:18am | 28/08/12

      Am I missing something? What is the relevance to our society and culture? Is Punch desperate for space fillers? News slow this week?

    • Bee says:

      01:23pm | 28/08/12

      “Am I missing something?

      Empathy? Curiosity about other cultures? Something else to do with your time?

    • marley says:

      02:29pm | 28/08/12

      Hmm.  Well, personally, I can see parallels here with Muslims and Sharia law, with some of the extreme Christian sects, and with Scientologists.  And of course we do have orthodox Jews in Australia, including Hasidim.  But you’re right, nothing to see here.

    • Anzhela Zlotnik says:

      11:24am | 28/08/12

      Not all Orthodox force their children to marry without love.  There are Modern Orthodox who own tv and listen to radios and wear pants, and believe in God and keep Shabbath. Orthodox religion is not a cult. It is not the religion, its the people on top that make it difficult for others. So let’s stop all these finger pointing and have peace. If we can’t make peace with each other, how can we get along with others. Shalom!

    • NilTime says:

      02:53pm | 28/08/12

      Very interesting article, especially as I just finished reading a book written by another young woman who has renounced her Hasidic upbringing.

      “Unorthodox - the rejection of my Hasidic roots” by Deborah Feldman.  She also grew up in the same area that Pear Reich did - and despite the quality of the writing being variable, I found it to be a compelling book to read.

    • Read the Bible says:

      03:21pm | 28/08/12

      Like it or not all of our “western” or Abrahamic religions - Judaism, Christianity & Islam regard all females as nothing more than men’s chattels. They are regarded as Second Class. The Bible, the Torah the Koran all say it. In Judaism, except in the very new & modern sects which allow for Female rabbis, the women are not permitted to mingle with the men in the main body of their Synagogues but are hidden behind screens often upstairs.
      In Islam the same rules apply.
      The Men in both religions control everything. They make the decisions.
      In Christianity, even if the biggest sect (Roman Catholicism) doesn’t allow women to become priests or hold higher positions, they do, at least, allow men & women to attend their services together &, horor or horrors, allow wives & husbands, sweet-hearts & children to sit together!
      But just as in Judaism & Islam it is the Men who make all the decisions. It is the men who control everything.
      Check out the Bible etc. nowhere will you find any reference where women are anything but men’s property, chattels, servants. They are subject to the whim of all males.
      There is, if memory serves, one part where if a man dies his wife is required to marry her late husband’s brother. No choice! Even if she can’t stand him she is required to marry him which raises the question of Polygamy. If a man is married & then is required to take on his dead brother’s wife as well the Bible etc. are obviously in favour of Polygamy.
      The Men are allowed multiple wives!
      The Women are not allowed multiple husbands!
      Everything is For, Of & By Men.
      Women have no say.
      I am surprised that there are so many intelligent, healthy Females who are still prepared to go along with this sexist nonsense.

    • Tom says:

      04:59pm | 28/08/12

      So one woman had a bad experience in an orthodox Jewish marriage. Then she took it to the papers. Wow. That in no way invalidates the thousands of happy orthodox Jewish marriages. If she would not have been an orthodox jew this whole story would not even rate a mention.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter