≡ Menu

Do you find these Charedi dolls offensive?

I’ve been getting some criticism about how I’ve gone all liberal and anti-religious, but really the religious fundamentalists have gone all right wing and crazy – just take a look at this children’s propaganda.

{ 119 comments… add one }
  • Sergeant J May 2, 2012, 11:44 PM

    Umm, who pays the damn billls?

    • Dan May 2, 2012, 11:52 PM

      Liberals pay the bills.

      • A. Nuran May 3, 2012, 9:38 AM

        As always. Conservative States and right wing individuals are on average net consumers of tax dollars and feel entitled to them. Liberal States and individuals are net donors.

        • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 9:42 PM

          You realize that this is based on selective statistics?

          • A. Nuran May 4, 2012, 12:07 AM

            I realize that it’s been calculated a hundred different ways to Sunday and is robust and consistent across different methods of calculation. It’s one of those inconvenient little truths that conservatives hate.

            • Dan May 4, 2012, 11:28 AM

              Just makes you bigger losers.

    • MCr May 3, 2012, 2:26 AM

      Faigy.

    • frum single female May 3, 2012, 3:17 AM

      welfare

    • chanief May 3, 2012, 3:31 PM

      Mommy is off working to pay the bills, that’s why she is not on the box.

  • anon May 2, 2012, 11:44 PM

    but its what hashem wants ass hole! stop exposing them or risk eternity in a beis medrash!!

    • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 10:00 AM

      erm… if serious you might want to seek professional help

  • liz May 3, 2012, 12:03 AM

    Chas vshalom. No female dolls. Disgrace.

  • thinking outloud May 3, 2012, 2:05 AM

    is Faigy the hired help?

    • batsheva May 3, 2012, 10:49 PM

      Clearly.

    • Sergeant J July 20, 2012, 3:20 AM

      “Hired Help” is one word for it…

  • Chuckie D May 3, 2012, 2:14 AM

    Doesnt fit the world we live in today. We can evolve even as othodox Jews we can move away from a life style that worked in the old world. I think this is fear males have of losing control. Maybe I’m liberal and so be it. The poeple behind this image suck.

    • A. Nuran May 3, 2012, 9:40 AM

      Except that this isn’t how it worked in “the old world”. The yeshiva->kollel->the grave lifestyle is a post-WWII “innovation” based on Israel’s deal with the charedim and America’s welfare system. Before that Jews worked like everyone else.

      • Tali May 3, 2012, 5:13 PM

        I hate when I agree with you A Nuran but you are right. This myth was most recently exposed in Strictly kosher reading.

      • oy May 3, 2012, 9:34 PM

        The majority of orthodox jews work now also.

        • A. Nuran May 4, 2012, 12:10 AM

          Of course. What we’re talking about is the lie that “back in the old country” the yeshiva/kollel system was normal. Heck, the idea that most Jews then were Orthodox let alone Charedi is another lie. Most were what we would call secular.

          There were always a few outstanding scholars who spent their lives that way. It was never the norm or even close to it. The various sects which say so are either liars or their victims who have falsified Jewish history.

          • Yochanan May 4, 2012, 9:05 AM

            Depends when in the “old country” (which should really mean Eretz Yisrael, but that’s a different matter).

            In 1800, nearly everyone was Shomer Mitzvot.
            In 1900, not so much.

      • Anonymous May 4, 2012, 7:10 AM

        Most Satmar Chassidim work, and always have. The first Rebbe ruled that a man can only learn in kollel for one to two years after getting married, then he has to work.

  • shoshanna May 3, 2012, 2:15 AM

    Thats not real- I refuse to believe it

  • Risa May 3, 2012, 2:40 AM

    Who is Fagie and Tuli’s mother? Or did Totty find a really tzniusdick way to have kids?

  • Devo K May 3, 2012, 2:59 AM

    The picture is out of context. First of all, it’s from a line of toys called Mitzvah Kinder; they’re modeled after the Fisher Price Little People and they tend to be ultra-Orthodox themed. The set that photo was taken from is from the “Mitzvah Kinder Seforim Room”, which has little sets of seforim, a menorah, a shtender, a ‘Totty’ to learn along with his son. For whatever reason it also features little ‘Faigy’ and the description probably does have her described in a fairly medieval way. But let’s face it… for what other reason would a nice Charedi girl be in her father’s study if not to bring sustenance to the hard-learning menfolk?

    • OfftheDwannaB May 3, 2012, 3:38 AM

      So bottom line… it’s exactly what everybody thought it was.

      • Dan May 3, 2012, 5:24 AM

        No, I think that does explain it somewhat.

        It is no longer defining any of them by that role.

        The totty might be a plumber, but this is what he does in his study–he learns.
        The son is not defined as a “learns with totty”–it is just what he does in this room.
        The daughter/wife is no longer defined as a maid–it is just what she does in this room.

        If anything, they really should have left the girl completely out of the set, since what does she have to do with learning? However, the gemara says that women are zoche in learning by helping their husbands and sons learn. So it does make sense to put her in. Because to leave her out would imply that she has no share in torah–while the gemara says that she does have an equal share, and this is how she gets it.

        It is certainly imposing heteronormative gender roles, but it is not nearly the way it looked just from seeing this box.

        • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 5:35 AM

          Great Answer Dan.

          • shoshanna May 3, 2012, 5:49 AM

            Then the house should be stone and set in Talmudic times and not in modern day money where girls and women learn and know how to read and interpret seforim

            • Dan May 3, 2012, 9:15 AM

              You need to get out of your little world. In the big world out here, most of the families who care about learning torah only teach substantive torah to their sons, not their daughters.

              I’m well aware that you frown on that, but, it isn’t in the stone age–it’s the normative position today. You’re the one who apparently has no idea what is going on in the world.

              • SK May 3, 2012, 9:21 AM

                You have kids Dan?

                • Dan May 3, 2012, 9:35 AM

                  What has that to do with anything? Is this the type of thing one can only experience through one’s own children, and not through siblings, nieces, nephews, cousins, friends’ kids, etc.?

                  Is that where you’re going? Brilliant. The one way to always surely convince yourself you’ve won an argument, is to disqualify your opponent from having an opinion.

              • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 10:44 AM

                what are you talking about? In the world I think you are referring to, aren’t women the only ones who actually learn torah at all, since the boys are all taught talmud instead of tanach?

                I learned a ton of chumash, navi, parsha, jewish halacha, etc. at my all girls yeshiva. No gemerah but some mishna…and my charedi cousins also learned a lot of torah. Otherwise why does beis yaacov exist, if not to teach women torah?

                • G*3 May 3, 2012, 10:52 AM

                  > Otherwise why does beis yaacov exist, if not to teach women torah?

                  You know better than that. Sara Schneirers stated purpose was to produce wives for yeshiva bochurim. That is why bais yaakovs exist. Teaching women torah is merely incidental. If there were some better way to teach girls to be good yeshivish bas yisroels, theyd do that instead.

                  • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 10:58 AM

                    well but if the only point is to be good wives, why bother teaching them torah at all? It’s clearly in the curriculum, and charedi jews are paying to send their daughters there (or raising money for it). So to say “most of the families who care about learning torah only teach substantive torah to their sons, not their daughters.” is clearly false, since most of the families who care about learning torah send their daughters to school where they learn substantive torah. Unless the original comment is referring to direct teaching by parents only and saying that paying to send them to jewish school doesn’t count as “teaching”

                    • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 9:40 PM

                      It’s quite disingeuous to give your own obviously untrue distorted semantic interpretation of another poster’s “substantive torah” perception and then to proceed to rip your flawed interpretation of his intention.

                • never frum enough May 3, 2012, 10:59 AM

                  Unfortunately, for reasons I’ll never understand, learning of the written law such as Chumash and Navi is much less respected than the learning of the oral law or Gemara/Talmud. So in many ways letting the girls learn Chumash and Navi, is just throwing us a bone, not giving us something they will necessarily respect us for. My personal opinion is that the religious community places way to much importance on Gemara and too little on the Chumash and get lost in a sea of opinion.

                  • Dan May 3, 2012, 3:49 PM

                    Yes, it is throwing a bone. I hope you enjoyed gnawing on it.

                • Dan May 3, 2012, 3:39 PM

                  “In the world I think you are referring to, arent women the only ones who actually learn torah at all, since the boys are all taught talmud instead of tanach?”

                  Are you trying to make an intelligible point, or do you just want to argue about semantics? You should know what I meant by “learn torah”.

                  • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 7:39 PM

                    Yeah I should, because I did it. And I think you are wrong.

                    • Dan May 3, 2012, 8:48 PM

                      You didn’t learn torah.

                      I learned torah; you dabbled a bit for your bat mitzva.

                      You talking to me about learning, is like a high school freshman talking to a Phd, in any other discipline.

                    • abandoning eden May 5, 2012, 5:15 AM

                      so is me talking to you about learning like you talking to me about heteronormativity then? 😉

                    • Dan May 8, 2012, 8:19 PM

                      No, because I also have highly advanced secular education.

        • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 5:43 AM

          ah of course the only reason a woman would ever be in a study would be to serve a man. Because us women can’t learn that hard complicated talmud, god forbid women know the basis of jewish law!

          Sorta like the way slaves weren’t taught to read because then they might realize that slavery is bullshit.

          • Alter Cocker May 3, 2012, 8:28 AM

            “Sorta like the way slaves werent taught to read because then they might realize that slavery is bullshit.”

            You have to know how to read to realize slavery is bullshit? What does reading have to do with it?

            • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 9:49 AM

              Reading is the key to enlightenment, and always has been. Preventing slaves from reading books, preventing the people from reading the bible, these have long been used as tools of oppression- for if the people don’t read it themselves, they have to take what their leader’s say at face value and can’t question them.

              I honestly think if more women learned talmud we would have a lot more OTDers. Heck one of the reasons I’m an OTDer is because my father forced me to learn gemerah brachot for my mitzvah and then went on to a few other books (and I learned talmud with my dad every shabbas for about 10 years), and once I went into the details of what jews REALLY believe it was impossible to take it seriously. See also: shadim. Lots of stories about shadim.

              • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 9:49 AM

                *for my bat mitzvah that is

              • chanief May 3, 2012, 3:34 PM

                Shhhh or they’ll be planning a book asifa next ;o)

              • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 9:51 PM

                See also Rambam in regards to shadim. In addition nonfamiliarity does not make something untrue.

            • A. Nuran May 4, 2012, 12:14 AM

              The hardest part of enslaving people is getting them to believe in their slavery. That requires cutting off outside sources of information and alternative opinions. Being exposed to these things makes them “uppity” and discontented. That’s why it was a crime in the *spit* South to teach a slave to read. Even the Bible was forbidden. Instead they got politically reliable sermons stressing Christian ideas of submission to authority and their “proper” place in God’s Order.

          • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 9:46 PM

            Your analogy is flawed. Jewish girls are taught to read but less about religion. The slaves were taught religion, not reading. The reason girls are not taught talmud is because similar to you, they allow their emotions to get in the way of logical reasoning.

        • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 5:46 AM

          this goes way beyond “heteronormative” heteronormative just implies that they are a heterosexual couple and nothing about that couple in particular other than the gender of that couple, this is just downright sexist.

          But then so is charedi judaism.

          • Dan May 3, 2012, 9:16 AM

            Sorry, you don’t know what heteronormative means. I forget that only yeshiva guys know how to speak english properly. Look on wikipedia.

            • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 9:46 AM

              Ha! I have a Phd in sociology specializing in gender and the family (among other things), I think I’m going to rely on what I was taught in grad school by the people who invented these words vs. the wrong information on wikipedia. “Heteronormative” refers to assuming hetereosexuality, not traditional gendered roles. In fact if you read that entry on wikipedia, the only sentence that (wrongly) refers to it as gender roles is the very first sentence in the entry.

              • Dan May 3, 2012, 3:46 PM

                Nope, you are still wrong. I looked on multiple websites to confirm. Heteronormativity refers to ways in which gender and sxuality are divided into hierarchical categories.

                One example of that is the notion that heterosxuality is preferred over homosxuality. But, that is only one example. It also refers to the idea that men have been set up as an opposite to women, and occupy different roles.

                To paraphrase Good Will Hunting, you could have gotten a real eduction without even a dollar fifty in late fees at the library. And with a Phd in Sociology, it’s your kids who will be serving my kids french fries on the way to a ski trip.

                • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 7:37 PM

                  are you that same guy who was trying to kiruv people before or something? Do you have something against me?

                  Listen, there are no specific “heteronormative gender roles” to impose as you seemed to imply in your original statement, and even if there were (we would call those “traditional” gender roles even though they aren’t that traditional either, in agricultural ties both women and men worked alongside each other on the farm, women specialized in animals and men in plowing) they would not include serving husbands and children while they learned and the women didn’t learn anything. That goes far beyond normal “gender roles” in today’s society.

                  Regardless, heteronormativity refers to a system in which there is any distinction between men and women and this distinction is hierarchical as you said. There are no specific “heteronormative roles” as you implied in your original statement, it refers to having a system in which there are any roles at all…it doesn’t dictate what those roles have to be.

                  Anyway it’s silly to harp on this point anyway. But you’re wrong. 🙂 Also I have a full time well paying job as a sociology prof, but thanks for your concern and ad hominem attacks 🙂

                  • Dan May 3, 2012, 8:50 PM

                    You’re welcome. Anytime.

                    And I have no interest in being mekarev anyone. When I find something good, I don’t share it. You can all go to H-ll for all I care.

              • oy May 3, 2012, 9:32 PM

                Your call to your authority as a Phd is meaningless as long as you hide behind a pseudonym.

                • abandoning eden May 5, 2012, 5:13 AM

                  several people here know my real name/credentials (including Heshy) and I would have “come out” with my real name years ago on my actual blog, but a certain psychopath who has been regularly stalking my blog for years (Jewish Failospher) is known for calling up/stalking people’s houses, parents and workplaces for being an OTD blogger (when they reveal their real name) and trying to get them in trouble with their parents/bosses/whatever. Since my office address and home address are easily findable on the internet if you know my real name, I feel for personal safety reasons I have to still be semi-anonymous. However almost any other OTD blogger knows who I am IRL and can vouch for me… 🙂

            • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 9:51 AM

              hmm it seems my post was eaten by that website. Short version: I have a phd in sociology specializing in gender and the family, I write encyclopedia entries on this stuff for actual real encyclopedias, and the first repentance on the wikipedia entry is wrong. Look at the rest of the entry which doesn’t mention gender roles at all.

        • Alter Cocker May 3, 2012, 8:27 AM

          spot on, Dan

        • Autonomouse May 4, 2012, 4:05 AM

          In which case, surely Faigy’s role should be “Helps Totty and Tuli study”, rather than “Serves Totty and Tuli”?

          (Unless, of course, the box means exactly what Hesh, et al. says it means…)

    • Philo May 3, 2012, 6:34 AM

      “The picture is out of context.”

      I agree. They’re just not seeing it in context. In context, this isn’t demeaning to women or girls. To understand the context, you must understand that Hashem created women and girls to serve their husbands, fathers, and male children. Men are meant to learn Torah and women, who don’t have the sechel to learn can gain olam haba by toiling in servitude to their men. Also, we men are insecure in our manhood because we don’t work, so the more we demean women, the better we feel about ourselves, and then we can pretend to learn more Torah!

      Now, isn’t it so much better when seen in context?

      • Just sayin July 26, 2012, 12:33 PM

        Cute, no seichel…Hashem created everyone to serve Him, which sometimes means each other. Good try, you forgot about the way you felt when your wife gave birth and perhaps you did pray annd maybe get her some water. 🙂

  • shoshanna May 3, 2012, 3:22 AM

    Who is the manufacturer?

  • shoshanna May 3, 2012, 5:27 AM

    Well then the set should have been created in Talmudic times.

    • A. Nuran May 3, 2012, 7:42 AM

      Except that in Talmudic times the men would have been out working.

      • chanief May 3, 2012, 3:35 PM

        Teehee

  • Liora May 3, 2012, 5:49 AM

    ohhhh joy my girls get to look forward to growing up, serving men while they learn and we all live off the kindness of others… joy joy, officially I am off the derech now… stupid dolls pushed me over the edge!

    • hry May 3, 2012, 11:33 AM

      It’s not that scary. Enjoy freedom.

      • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 12:37 PM

        enjoy your alcohol, drugs, rape, suicide.

        • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 12:41 PM

          Yes my dear, you’ve come a long way baby!

        • T July 19, 2012, 10:49 PM

          Is that comment meant to say that alcohol, drugs, rape and suicide don’t occur in the frum world?

          • sergeant J July 20, 2012, 3:23 AM

            It doesn’t count if der rebbeh of der shteibel is in on it….

  • shoshanna May 3, 2012, 5:50 AM

    Liora-
    You are going to let the morons behind a toy decide your religious faith?

  • Aden May 3, 2012, 6:36 AM

    Liora these dolls should inspire you to change things, to show the world women CAN LEARN TORAH TOO! and should be a part of the study room. I agree there is a context to this, but men can serve the food as well, and girls can learn with their fathers. women are doctors, lawyers, and every other job out their, why would you teach your children they are not capable, or wanted, to learn holiest texts and our heritage? to own their judaism in every aspect

    • Just sayin July 26, 2012, 12:37 PM

      I think Liora was joking..she must read and if the idea of her girls being pigeonholed, she, G-d willing will help them out.

  • AztecQueen2000 May 3, 2012, 6:59 AM

    This particular set has been in stores for over a year. You’re a little behind the times. (Incidentally, this is the only Mitzvah Kinder set I DIDN’T buy for my kids–I couldn’t get past the blatant sexism.)

    • Autonomouse May 4, 2012, 4:11 AM

      However, it’s like the rest of the UO system: support of even a part subsidizes the whole, including the worst parts.

      It’s not like they’re going to drop that particular set, is it?

  • AztecQueen2000 May 3, 2012, 7:16 AM

    This set has been in stores for over a year now. You’re a little late to the party. (Incidentally, this is the only set I DIDN’T get for my kids–because of the implications!)

  • Kayla May 3, 2012, 7:21 AM

    Before you jump to too many conclusions… check out some other sets in the series, like the “Mitzvah Kinder Shul Playset”:
    http://www.amazon.com/Mitzvah-Kinder-30798-Shul-Playset/dp/B003IPPOP0/ref=pd_sim_sbs_t_3

    (Clearly, a must-have for those interested in purchasing the set featured in the blog post, which is the “Mitzvah Kinder Shul Expansion Set: Seforim Room.”)

    Sure, the men’s section is twice as large as the men’s section. BUT — it comes with four Mitzvah Kinder Figures and the same number of tallitot (or, more accurately in this context, tallises). Since at least one of the Mitzvah Kinder Figures is a woman, the manufacturer is clearly encouraging children to break haredi halachic gender norms and accept tallit-wearing women in shul!

    P.S. Hilariously, some other toy family sets in the series have “Litvish” and “Hasidic” flavors, so that you never have to worry about giving your kids the wrong examples 🙂

    • Kayla May 3, 2012, 7:24 AM

      (Typo correction: Sure, the mens section is twice as large as the womens section. )

  • Chaim May 3, 2012, 8:16 AM

    Is she wearing a wig? Does the set come with different hairstyles for wigs.

  • Sara May 3, 2012, 8:37 AM

    At least they got the tenses correct. Nothing worse than hearing people saying “servicing” when they should say “serving”.

    • A. Nuran May 4, 2012, 12:17 AM

      Servicing is part of the package. But only Totty. And you don’t learn about that until chosson/kallah class.

  • Freedski May 3, 2012, 8:57 AM

    I once knew a cat named Tuli, the only indoor cat in Tel Aviv.

  • JDE May 3, 2012, 9:03 AM

    On the other hand, they appear to be open to alternative lifestyles:
    http://www.golds.com.au/p-2055-mitzvah-kinder-zaidy-and-bubby.aspx

  • never frum enough May 3, 2012, 9:10 AM

    Does the kitchen set come with a sefer for the mother to use to teach her kids to read the aleph beis, because you all know the learning Tatty does with the son on Shabbos is nothing compared to the Torah he learns with his mother all week!

  • SK May 3, 2012, 9:37 AM

    I actually just wanted to know if you treated your daughters as servants. Or as intelligent human beings.

  • SK May 3, 2012, 9:41 AM

    Because its easy to dismiss ‘people’ or ‘women’ and ‘girls’ less so actual people you know and respect.

    • never frum enough May 3, 2012, 9:52 AM

      You might want to look back at the posts, Dan never said he supports this philosophy, but that you should be aware that it is the reality. He doesn’t need to have children to notice what is going on around him.

  • SK May 3, 2012, 10:01 AM

    All the girls schools I know teach Torah and my girls know more than I ever did. I live in Israel though. But in general I disagree, I think most Jews value their daughters and their minds. The above is appalling.

  • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 10:34 AM

    am I the only one who noticed that Tuli is wearing a blue shirt and therefore is clearly OTD?

    • G*3 May 3, 2012, 10:57 AM

      Nah. Hes probably meant to be a little kid. If hes still wearing blue shirts when hes in high school, THEN hes OTD (or at least a kid at risk).

  • J. May 3, 2012, 12:15 PM

    “Umm, who pays the damn billls?” Umm, Faigy (or Feigy, as my people put it) could, if she wasn’t so damn busy serving everyone else.

  • Rebecca May 3, 2012, 12:24 PM

    I don’t understand the problem with women studying Torah or Tanakh. Christian children start learning it when they are in pre-school and women are EXPECTED to read and study Tanakh for the rest of their life. They are also taught to “properly submit” to their man, meaning show him respect as the head of the household, not be his slave/servant. What could possibly make a Jewish man afraid of his woman knowing G-d’s Word? If I was “On the Derech”, this cultural ideology would send me “Off the Derech” fast. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. And if you want to eat, WORK! Poverty and ignorance is not a blessing to a nation.

  • Rebecca Rubin May 3, 2012, 12:57 PM

    You guys are all sick in the head. This has nothing to do with Jews. Who serves the thanksgiving and kratzmech dinners to the table?

    • abandoning eden May 3, 2012, 3:14 PM

      in my house, my husband. In his parent’s house, my father in law.

      Not every family is stuck in the 1950s. Out here in the real world we had a couple of feminist movements so we wouldn’t have to be! 🙂

      • Dan May 3, 2012, 3:56 PM

        And I’m so proud of you. I am sure you are happy now that you are liberated and not frum. That is probably why you read frum websites.

    • Neal May 3, 2012, 3:50 PM

      no one serves anyone. the food is just brought out

  • Tirtza May 3, 2012, 3:11 PM

    I went and looked at my kid’s mitzvah kinder dolls after reading all of this. I think the box is showing the same as my kid’s sephorim room expansion pack. But looking at the other sets we have including the chanukah set, the shabbos set and cousins, the girl is always holding food to serve someone and the boys are holding seforim, a torah or dreidel. I’m not so liberal but even I am a little annoyed by this. My daughters do more then just help in the kitchen. Out of a dozen or so mitzvah kinder dolls the only girl doll not holding food to serve has hands that connect to a stroller. The mothers are a bit more varied, but most are wearing aprons, but I can like with that, that’s probably how my kids see me anyway. if you’ve been in a secular toystore these days you know there are worse ways to depict women.

    • Dan May 3, 2012, 4:01 PM

      Good points, tirtza.

      1. Agreed, I haven’t seen these dolls, but if they are truly reducing women to just serving the men, I would take them away from my kids and throw them out.
      I would depict women as raising a family, transferring values to the children, trying to improve her own relationship with G-d, trying to improve her character.

      2. Good point about the secular dolls. On the whole, I’d rather my daughter grow up thinking her purpose is to SERVE men, than thinking her purpose is to SERVICE men.

  • Aden May 3, 2012, 4:15 PM

    Dan it is deeply disturbing and painful that the only choices for a Jewish girl in this day and age is to SERVE men or be SERVICED by men- why are those even the choices anymore?? And I was very moved by the mother who noticed every girl doll is serving food or pushing a stroller- as she pointed out she is not liberal and perhaps education or learning Torah for women is not important to her- but these girl dolls can be portrayed as davening, giving charity, visiting the sick, lighting candles- hundreds of ways they can connect to God and their fellow human beings without serving food- I am very passionate about education in general and learning Torah in particular but that is not even the issue- it is that women need to choose between two roles – secular sexy Barbie or Jewish servitude Faigy

    • Dan May 4, 2012, 11:32 AM

      That would be disturbing. Fortunately, that hasn’t been my experience in the chareidi world, so I’m not too concerned about that.

      (As I’ve said many times, I have plenty to criticize about the chareidi world. I just like to come here and make fun of you all for criticizing the wrong things, because you don’t have a clue.

      • Just sayin July 26, 2012, 12:45 PM

        I love it when someone thinks he is the only one who knows something, has any experience and could actually be right without him being totally wrong.

  • shoshana May 3, 2012, 4:43 PM

    I’m ShoshaNa with one ‘n’.

    I don’t understand the issue here at all. These are “mitzva kinder” sets who as I assume try to teach children how to be a mitzva boy or girl. So they show a boy patiently learning with his father and a girl bringing food and give children the message that these are mitzvot, not ordinary activities, but something special. And even such a mundane deeds have a meaning.

    Tell me please, where is the message in this toy that girls can’t go to college and become lawyers or doctors? Do you seriously think that bringing food to your family member irreversibly stunts your personal development? If so I feel very sorry for you and even more sorry for your family members.

    I will tell you a well-known secret. Children don’t learn from toys, they learn through role models. If the child sees mother as a slave to her husband, not having her own opinions, subdued and abused then no amount of ‘liberal’ toys will reverse the damage. Conversely seeing mother as her own person, capable and strong will not be destroyed even if you give the kid only ‘fundamentalist’ toys.

    Personally I find your comments very offensive for people who serve other professionally as waiters, cooks, maids or babysitters. Are you so prejudiced and narrow-minded to think that they are worse kind of people???

    • Tirtza May 3, 2012, 7:59 PM

      Shoshana- True point that children learn the most from their daily interactions with their parents. My husband does not treat me and my daughters like we are here to serve him and therefore that is not the message they receive. And we show our daughters we value their learning when we take interest in their schoolwork and encourage their studies. That said. there are definitely gender roles and I don’t see anything wrong with that as long as everyone is respected and valued.

  • Aden May 3, 2012, 7:17 PM

    Why in this day and age must the choice be between teaching your jewish daughter to SERVE men or SERVICE men? Tirtza’s message was powerful- why is every girl mentchee in every setting doing the same thing- serving food? Shoshana also makes a good point- these are mitzva kinder- mitzva children- and yet Faigy only knows how to do one mitzva? If you are not liberal and do not care about education or women learning Torah- that is fine- that is not even the issue here- its that there are so many mitzvot she could be doing- giving tzedaka, lighting candles, davening…why is her one mode of action “to serve” Why is there such polarity- the choice being secular sexy Barbie or Jewish serving Faigy? Where is middle ground?

  • Ars May 3, 2012, 7:20 PM

    Why in this day and age must the choice be between teaching your jewish daughter to SERVE men or SERVICE men? Tirtza’s message was powerful- why is every girl mentchee in every setting doing the same thing- serving food? Shoshana also makes a good point- these are mitzva kinder- mitzva children- and yet Faigy only knows how to do one mitzva? If you are not liberal and do not care about education or women learning Torah- that is fine- that is not even the issue here- its that there are so many mitzvot she could be doing- giving tzedaka, lighting candles, davening…why is her one mode of action “to serve” Why is there such polarity- the choice being secular sexy Barbie or Jewish serving Faigy? Where is middle ground?

  • Anonymous May 3, 2012, 9:30 PM

    I went on the derech after I saw the Bratz doll collectin that portrays girls as sluts. Just presenting the flipside.

  • Meir May 3, 2012, 11:17 PM

    Absolutely offensive. Why isn’t the girl one’s face blurred?

    • Tirtza May 4, 2012, 7:46 AM

      This made me giggle!

      Reading this blog and comments brings out my most conservative, most liberal and most goofy sides! All at once!

  • Dave May 3, 2012, 11:40 PM

    Am I f*#king crazy, or did I not learn that Jewish girls have been raised literate (in Torah and secular education) for hundreds if not thousands of yrs. while non-Jewish girls in the rest of the world have not (until recent ages).

  • anon May 4, 2012, 12:55 PM

    Its not crazy that’s how a traditional Jewish family is like it or not. Right wing= right way

  • OR May 6, 2012, 7:43 AM

    “I had somewhat more to say upon this part of the subject but the post is just going, which forces me in great haste to conclude, Sir,…” ( Jonathan Swift, “Mechanical operation of the spirit”)
    http://storyambient.blogspot.com/

  • spacedout BT June 9, 2012, 10:00 PM

    I’d be happier if someone could come up with figurines that resemble the family in the original 1950’s Maxwell House Hagada. Sometimes I wish I could live there. Do you feel like we do?

  • Anonymous June 10, 2012, 6:43 AM

Leave a Comment