Uncategorized
A new documentary challenges stereotypes about Orthodox Jewish women — and their wigs
Many among the secular, including me, grew up believing the sheitel, the ritual wig worn by married Orthodox and Hasidic women, was not intended to be attractive. Quite the contrary: Its purpose was largely to make sure the women were undesirable and thus of no interest to men on the street, or worse, in the synagogue.
Yet even this admittedly reductive spin was awash in assumptions about men’s sexuality, the patriarchal dynamic between men and women in general and within marriage in particular.
Sheitel: Beauty in the Hidden, an insightful documentary, takes a deep dive into this complex topic. It explores the unexpectedly wide-ranging cultural, religious and deeply personal significance of hair covering among Orthodox and Hasidic women — from Miami to Jerusalem; from New York to Los Angeles; from Toronto and Montreal to, of all places, Halifax, Nova Scotia, director Lynda Medjuck-Suissa’s home base. (Her first film, Camp Kadimah—The Story of Our Lives, examined the history and ongoing impact of a well-known Canadian Jewish summer day camp.)
In Sheitel, her sophomore effort, she reveals how wigs, scarves and other hair coverings serve not only as symbols of faith and tradition, but also political identity and female empowerment. The movie confronts widespread misconceptions and stereotypes — including my own parochial thoughts on the subject — and also offers a rare look into the global wig industry.
The opening sets the historical tone with shots of the cobble-stoned, winding and congested streets of ancient Jerusalem, filled with many large families headed by sheitel-sporting women, and men in long black coats and payos, or curled sidelocks. Later, we’re in Borough Park, Brooklyn with its store fronts boasting signs in Yiddish. But modernity is present too, including scenes in the uber-contemporary, slick high-rises of Miami with its bustling ultra-religious communities.
This vivid documentary interweaves segments of women being fitted for wigs and interviews featuring dozens of Jewish wives. Some are sitting alongside their husbands, who offer their opinions as well. The stores and salons presented are lined with wigs in various shades and styles and textures. Women are seated on salon stools as hair dressers color, and highlight and trim the wigs they’ve purchased, an arduous, detailed and time- consuming process.
Some women are having a fine time as they consider the fashion possibilities and are fussed over. Others, especially the brides to be, are apprehensive. Nobody claims that wearing these head coverings is comfortable. But all are committed to the practice.
Donning an uncomfortable wig reflects a higher calling than creature comforts, one woman explained.
On the flip side, the wigs don’t require much work once they’ve been fitted, though periodically they need to be brought in for shampoos and touch-ups. The women are encouraged to have more than one wig, and one woman slyly noted that she has so many wigs and accompanying personas that her husband thinks he’s married to many, many women.
What emerges right off the bat, and is reiterated throughout, is that today sheitels are designed to be attractive, although there is an aesthetic range, mostly depending on cost, from the least expensive to the most pricey. (The wigs start around $1,500 and go over $10,000.) The craftsmanship involved, but even more important the materials used — synthetic hairs, fully natural strands or a mix — determine the expense and appearance.
The particular kind of head covering a woman wears depends on the traditions of her religious community — some wear only wigs, others sports wigs and hats, and still others don hair-covering head scarves. But equally important, and in some cases more so, it’s the woman’s individual tastes that define the look. Every woman interviewed maintained their sense of autonomy and agency. They are not subjugated by anyone. They choose to wear the sheitel.
The women interviewed include, among many others, influencers, podcasters, businesswomen, a champion marathon runner and New York State Supreme Court Justice Ruchie Freier, whom I profiled in 2018. Wife and mother of six, she was the first Hasidic woman judge in America, if not the world. Everyone interviewed in the film, representing a cross-section of Jewish Orthodoxy, is highly articulate.
Judge Freier stressed that the sheitel is part of a much larger picture that celebrates modesty, arguing that modesty does not exclude beauty. “But it’s a way for women to not use their bodies to affect the world,” she says.
The subtext is the assumption that a man cannot see a woman’s uncovered head because he’d be so aroused he’d be unable to control his sexual impulses and not able to focus on important things like prayer.
But not all of the women shared this idea. Sarah Guigue, a New Jersey-based influencer whose Instagram followers tops 60,000, said that she, herself, found that thought “toxic” and could not accept it.
“I believe the Torah is divine and that idea is not divine,” Guigue said. Her own signature wig, matching her cheerful outspoken style, is long, straight hair crowned by a large, brimmed hat.
(The film does not address, and I wish it did, the question of why unmarried women are not required to cover their heads, though their hair is often tied back as an expression of modesty.)
Contrary to my initial assumptions, a thematic motif in Sheitel is that beauty and godliness are interconnected: that God wants you to be the best you can be, and that includes physical attractiveness. Nothing in the Torah, the Rabbis concurred, says that a woman, even a married woman, shouldn’t be attractive.
(In fact, there’s nothing in the Torah that dictates that a married woman must cover her head, though it’s arguably a gray area; more than one of the women cited a section in the Talmud that references an unholy woman, possibly an adulteress, removing her wig — implying, by contrast, that a holy woman wears one.)
Indeed, far from feeling unattractive, several women talked about feeling a heightened sexuality while wearing the sheitel, feeling a thrill inherent in that which is hidden. The sheitel represents a woman’s bond with God and her husband. When she removes her wig in the bedroom and exposes her real live hair — while the wig, by contrast, is dead hair — it is a manifestation of intimacy with her husband that she shares with nobody else.
One interviewee likened the devout married Jewish woman to a thermos bottle: “Cool on the outside, hot on the inside.”
The women also talked about a mystical, not easily articulated, connection to God they feel when they wear their sheitels. Some noted that to don a sheitel is to perform a mitzvah that, in turn, will generate blessings for themselves and their families. They are sanctified.
One American-born secular woman, who had lived the life of a party gal, said she was overwhelmed with a sense of peace when she transitioned to Orthodoxy and became what is known as a Baalat Teshuva. She said she had never felt such a strong sense of identity, community and belonging as when she sported a sheitel.
Choosing to be an outlier, part of an insular world symbolized by, among other things, covering one’s head, is also a political statement that is tied in with survival, one woman implied. “It’s a way to make sure we don’t disappear,” she said.
The informative film also touches on the evolution of the sheitel.
Emma Tarlo, an emeritus professor of anthropology at Goldsmiths, University of London, talked about the significance of hair coverings throughout history and across cultural divides, which she explored in her latest book, Entanglements: The Secret Lives of Hair.
“In Europe during the Middle Ages Christian women covered their hair,” she said in Sheitel. “But it wasn’t until the 16th and 17th centuries that women started covering their hair with wigs. Wigs were worn by royalty, and so they were associated with high status and high fashion. Jewish women wanted to participate in it and the Rabbis didn’t like it. They felt it was too gentile, to which the Jewish women said: ‘But we’re covering our hair.’ So right from the outset, there has been a conflict between religion and fashion.”
Later, at the turn of the 20th century as Jewish immigrants flocked to America, the sheitel was increasingly viewed as a symbol of old world poverty and superstition. Many women tossed theirs overboard to celebrate their new found liberation and assimilation into a new land. (See Joan Micklin Silver’s wonderful 1975 narrative film, Hester Street.)
In the 60s and 70s the sheitel enjoyed a renewed cachet thanks in part to the burgeoning wig industry that found a large fashionista market, among both Jews and gentiles. Enter the iconic Lubavitcher rebbe, Menacham Mendel Schneerson, who took advantage of the trend to promote sheitels, a tenet he was adamant about.
Perhaps the most lovely, yet oddly unsettling, anecdote about the power of a sheitel came from Amanda Spiro, a once-secular Jewish woman from Montreal, who started wearing a wig while undergoing chemotherapy for cancer.
She “grew fascinated by the Haredi women who chose to wear it, finding beauty from within,” she said.
It was a transforming realization. After Spiro completed her treatment, she removed her wig as her own hair grew back, knowing she “wanted the experience of taking it off and then putting it back on as a true Jewish woman.”
And she did. Now she is Orthodox, married and a mother of three children, as well as 10 years cancer-free.
“I never thought I could have children,” Spiro said.
Is it a divinely sanctioned miracle? Is there a connection between the trajectory of her life and her donning the sheitel? It’s a feel-good coda. I’d like to believe it.
The film Sheitel will be at the Manhattan JCC on the UWS on May 11. For more listings check out the website.
The post A new documentary challenges stereotypes about Orthodox Jewish women — and their wigs appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Mamdani touts ‘Babies not Bombs’ messaging after flexing political muscle in the New York primaries
(New York Jewish Week) — New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani celebrated the victories of the progressive candidates he endorsed in New York’s Democratic primaries describing their success as a “shift in the balance of power.”
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, the morning after the primaries, Mamdani touted the triumphs as a shift in the balance of power between “working people” and “special interests.”
Mamdani-endorsed candidates Brad Lander, Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez won Democratic nominations for Congress. During the press conference, the mayor repeatedly highlighted their calls to restrict U.S. military aid to Israel and redirect federal funding to domestic priorities.
Following Mamdani’s election night sweep in New York, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that “America the Beautiful will NEVER be a Communist Country!!!”
The victories offered an early demonstration of Mamdani’s political influence beyond City Hall, as several Democratic Socialist candidates he backed, including Chevalier, defeated established Democratic incumbents in their districts.
“The working person is struggling in our city to afford basic needs,” Mamdani said, adding that Avila Chevalier’s oft-repeated slogan of investing in “Babies not Bombs,” is “the kind of conscience, the kind of clarity, the kind of conviction that has been missing in our politics for far too long.”
Mamdani responded to the president’s post on Wednesday, telling a reporter who asked whether his goal is to make America a “socialist” country that his “goal is to make America a place that every American can afford.”
When asked about federal policies that could be affected by Mamdani’s endorsed candidates, the mayor cited Valdez’s support for “foreign policy that understands human rights for all” and Lander’s commitment to co-sponsoring the Block the Bombs Act, which prohibits the sale of certain U.S.-made offensive weapons to Israel.
Mamdani also dismissed a question about whether he was concerned about how the victories would play out in November as Democrats try to win back the House.
“Every time the fight for working people takes a step forward, you will hear Republicans say that this is actually going to jeopardize the existence of that very fight,” he said.
When asked whether the election of Chevalier, who has faced scrutiny for past social media posts attacking Democrats and her appearance at an Oct. 8, 2023, pro-Palestinian rally in Times Square, could “complicate campaigns for Democrats as a whole,” Mamdani replied “No.”
“[Chevalier] often speaks about a politics of life. She speaks about ‘Babies not bombs,’” Mamdani continued. “What could be a better example of what the people of the district want to see versus what the people of the district have been forced to experience, which is tens of billions of dollars being spent at a national level to bomb children overseas, while children in our own districts are struggling.”
The post Mamdani touts ‘Babies not Bombs’ messaging after flexing political muscle in the New York primaries appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Jewish anti-Zionist David Orkin defeats incumbent in NY Assembly primary
(New York Jewish Week) — David Orkin, a Jewish anti-Zionist attorney and democratic socialist, defeated incumbent New York State Assemblymember Jenifer Rajkumar in Tuesday’s Democratic primary. Orkin won State Assembly District 38, which includes parts of Queens.
Orkin, an immigrant workers’ rights attorney and union organizer, received 58.8% of the vote, while Rajkumar, who has represented the district since 2021 and is the first South Asian woman ever elected to office in the state, received 40.9%. The district covers a swath of Queens, including parts of Ridgewood, Glendale, Ozone Park, Woodhaven and Richmond Hill.
“Pro-Palestine candidates are sweeping in NYC tonight,” Jewish Voice for Peace Action wrote in a post on Instagram celebrating Orkin’s win Tuesday. “Palestine was on the ballot — and won. David will be a champion for Palestinian freedom in Albany.”
The post from JVP Action echoed a message Orkin had highlighted throughout his campaign.
“It’s so incredibly meaningful to me to be running this race as an anti-Zionist Jew, to be one of the few anti-Zionist Jewish voices that is in an elected seat in the state government,” Orkin said in an Instagram reel posted by Jewish Voice for Peace Action earlier this month.
He added that, if elected, he would be able to go in front of the state legislature and assert that “criticizing Israel for genocide, demanding an end to the occupation, demanding an end to funding war abroad is not antisemitic.”
Orkin’s victory came amid a strong night for democratic socialist candidates across New York City, including left-wing congressional candidates Brad Lander, Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez, who also defeated establishment-backed opponents in their primaries.
While Orkin was not endorsed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, whose winning endorsements of Lander, Chevalier and Valdez signaled a pro-Palestinian lurch for the party in the city with the world’s largest Jewish population outside of Israel. Nonetheless, his victory elevated a self-described anti-Zionist to the ranks of New York’s elected officials at a time when debates over Israel have become increasingly prominent within Democratic politics.
While Israel-related issues were not listed on Orkin’s platform, which centered on affordability and immigration, he repeatedly expressed his support for a “free Palestine” and attacked Rajkumar’s record of support for the Jewish state during his campaign.
“In the past several years my opponent AM Rajkumar has walked in the Israel day parade but has said NOTHING against the war in Gaza, occupation of Palestine, or Islamophobic attacks faced by the people of New York,” Orkin wrote in a May post on X.
Rajkumar, who was a close political ally of former New York City Mayor Eric Adams, in her campaign platform vowed to combat antisemitism.
After establishing a Jewish Voice for Peace chapter in Tucson, Arizona, in 2014, Orkin remained involved in pro-Palestinian activism as a member of the anti-Zionist activist group.
“I’ve been involved in the Jewish Palestine Solidarity Movement for 12, 13 years,” Orkin told Democratic Left last month. “I’ve dedicated part [of my] life to making sure that Jewish people are creating religious spaces outside of Zionism, and to making more space for Palestinian organizing to have an impact.”
On the campaign trail, Orkin received a host of endorsements from prominent progressive groups and lawmakers, including Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, JVP Action and NYC Democratic Socialists for America.
Rajkumar was endorsed by ActJew, the new nonprofit focused on combatting antisemitism, as well as the Queens Jewish Alliance and Assemblymembers Sam Berger, Kalman Yeger and Chuck Lavine.
Orkin received over $290,000 in campaign contributions for the election cycle, including over $156,000 from the office of the state comptroller, while Rajkumar received over $270,000, including $9,000 from health care executive Daniel Lowy.
“I have dedicated my life fighting for immigrants and workers, I am proud to have earned their support in this election, and I look forward to spending the rest of my life winning the beautiful and joyous lives we deserve,” Orkin said in a statement, according to QNS.
The post Jewish anti-Zionist David Orkin defeats incumbent in NY Assembly primary appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Half of Americans think the U.S. is ‘too supportive’ of Israel
(JTA) — A new survey found that 48% of American voters think the United States is “too supportive” of Israel, the highest since the pollster started asking the question in 2017.
The survey published Wednesday by Quinnipiac University also found that 60% of respondents reported that military intervention in Iran was “not worth it” as opposed to 34% of voters who said it was “worth it.”
The number of respondents who think the U.S. support of Israel is about right is 38%, while just 7% think the U.S. is not supportive enough of Israel, the poll found.
Broken down by party, 66% of Democrats think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, while 9% think it is not supportive enough and 18% think U.S. support for Israel is about right.
Among Republicans, 20% think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, 69% think American support for Israel is “about right,” and 6% think the U.S. is not supportive enough.
Among independent voters, 55% think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel, 34% think U.S. support for Israel is about right, and 7% think the U.S. is not supportive enough.
The poll data were released one day after three Democrats critical of Israel swept their House primary races in New York City, and in races around the country even some reliably pro-Israel Democratic candidates distanced themselves from the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC.
A survey last year by Gallup found dwindling support for Israel among Democrats, as well as waning support among Republicans.
Still the party divide was also in sharp evidence in the latest poll. In responses to the question about whether the Iran war was “worth it”, Democrats disfavored military action in Iran at 93% and independents at 66%, while 75% of Republicans surveyed thought it was “worth it.”
Given a list of 10 issues and asked which, if any, they considered priorities in their decision-making process in the election for the U.S. House of Representatives, 41% of voters cited the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, above AI data centers (38%) and Donald Trump (38%). The high cost of living (70%) and health care (59%) topped the list.
The Quinnipiac poll was conducted from June 18 to 22, and includes responses from 1,165 self-identified registered voters.
The margin of error is 3.4 percentage points.
Among those surveyed, 48% said they had an unfavorable view of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Twenty percent said they had a favorable opinion, and 30% “haven’t heard enough” about him.
“Netanyahu gets poor marks from American voters as their appetite for supporting Israel wanes, with the share of voters who think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel hitting a new high,” Quinnipiac polling analyst Tim Malloy wrote in the report.
Voters were also asked about their views on the June 17 memorandum of understanding with Iran, which begins a 60-day negotiation period that does not outline an end to Iran’s nuclear program.
“After months of diplomatic fits and starts, global economic repercussions and a broad loss of life in the region, a majority of voters make their feelings clear: the Iran war was a bad idea,” Malloy wrote.
Voters who are either not confident or “not so confident” that the deal will succeed numbered 59%, and 61% think it is either likely or very likely that Iran will develop nuclear weapons.
The post Half of Americans think the U.S. is ‘too supportive’ of Israel appeared first on The Forward.
