קול החינוך גליון 121#
יו”ל ע”י ‘ועד הורים’ – בהכוונת גדולי התורה שליט”א
[קול החינוך עוסק במלחמת מדינת ישראל בחינוך יהודי עצמאי.]
* למסירת מידע ומשלוח מסמכים בס”ד 03-691-5752, טלפקס: 6915752@okmail.co.il
Reprinted with permission.
יו”ל ע”י ‘ועד הורים’ – בהכוונת גדולי התורה שליט”א
[קול החינוך עוסק במלחמת מדינת ישראל בחינוך יהודי עצמאי.]
* למסירת מידע ומשלוח מסמכים בס”ד 03-691-5752, טלפקס: 6915752@okmail.co.il
Reprinted with permission.
By L.H. Sanders – Mass Transportation magazine, July 1943
There’s no longer any question whether transit companies should hire women for jobs formerly held by men. The draft and manpower shortage has settled that point. The important things now are to select the most efficient women available and how to use them to the best advantage. Here are eleven helpful tips on the subject from western properties:
1. If you can get them, pick young married women. They have these advantages, according to the reports of western companies: they usually have more of a sense of responsibility than do their unmarried sisters; they’re less likely to be flirtatious; as a rule, they need the work or they wouldn’t be doing it — maybe a sick husband or one who’s in the army; they still have the pep and interest to work hard and to deal with the public efficiently.
2. When you have to use older women, try to get ones who have worked outside the home at some time in their lives. Most transportation companies have found that older women who have never contacted the public, have a hard time adapting themselves, are inclined to be cantankerous and fussy. It’s always well to impress upon older women the importance of friendliness and courtesy.
3. While there are exceptions, of course, to this rule, general experience indicates that “husky” girls — those who are just a little on the heavy side — are likely to be more even-tempered and efficient than their underweight sisters.
4. Retain a physician to give each woman you hire a special physical examination — one covering female conditions. This step not only protects the property against the possibilities of a lawsuit but also reveals whether the employee-to-be has any female weaknesses which would make her mentally or physically unfit for the job. Transit companies that follow this practice report a surprising number of women turned down for nervous disorders.
5. In breaking in women who haven’t previously done outside work, stress at the outset the importance of time — the fact that a minute or two lost here and there makes serious inroads on schedules. Until this point is gotten across, service is likely to be slowed up.
6. Give the female employee in garage or office a definite day-long schedule of duties so that she’ll keep busy without bothering the management for instructions every few minutes. Numerous properties say that women make excellent workers when they have their jobs cut out for them but that they lack initiative in finding work themselves.
7. Whenever possible, let the inside employee change from one job to another at some time during the day. Women are inclined to be nervous and they’re happier with change.
8. Give every girl an adequate number of rest periods during the day. Companies that are already using large numbers of women stress the fact that you have to make some allowances for feminine psychology. A girl has more confidence and consequently is more efficient if she can keep her hair tidied, apply fresh lipstick and wash her hands several times a day.
9. Be tactful in issuing instructions or in making criticisms. Women are often sensitive; they can’t shrug off harsh words the way that men do. Never ridicule a woman — it breaks her spirit and cuts her efficiency.
10. Be reasonably considerate about using strong language around women. Even though a girl’s husband or father may swear vociferously, she’ll grow to dislike a place of business where she hears too much of this.
11. Get enough size variety in operator uniforms that each girl can have a proper fit. This point can’t be stressed too strongly as a means of keeping women happy, according to western properties.
Source: Snopes article.
ובו יתבאר בעזה”י להלכה דין שוק באשה ערוה, מקום השוק, ואופן הכיסוי הראוי לשוק, על פי דברי הגמרא והפוסקים ראשונים ואחרונים
Reprinted with permission.
Will you join us in our mission of making sure all English-speakers have a place to call home in beautiful Beitar Illit B?
Why the Mizrachi/Mafdal/Bayit Yehudi/ Religious Zionists never got anywhere politically.
Excerpt from a recent brilliant article by Moshe Feiglin:
Both Religious Zionism and Haredism are a reaction to Zionism. An attempt to reconcile the inherent contradiction between the Torah of Israel and Zionism. After all, Zionism has “nothing to do with religion” (as the First Zionist Congress determined). Zionism had made it its goal to nationalize the Jewish people and turn it into a modern and sovereign nation, a nation that has no God but only a parliament.
In response, Haredism developed an ideology that views Zionism as a new type of non-Jewish government, sophisticated, and in a sense even more dangerous. Their conclusion was to put up walls and have separate and segregated communities. This is how Haredism was born.
In contrast to Haredism, Religious Zionism identified a spot of holiness in Zionism and tried to join arms with it. Rav Kook went so far as to formulate the necessary synergy within the framework of a very broad and complex coherent ideology.
In practice, however, Religious Zionism failed to bring the Kookian ideology to the ground level of reality and create that synthesis. Zionism, which had nothing to do with religion, and religion (unlike the Torah), that had nothing to do with national sovereignty, remained in contradiction, and Religious Zionism is, therefore, an oxymoron.
Generations of “knitted kippah wearers” grew up within this contradiction between their Zionism and their religiosity. This created an ideological split personality: “Be religious at home and Zionist when you go outside”… Instead of settling the contradiction by developing the ideological foundations formulated by Rav Kook and assuming responsibility for leading Zionism, the knitted kippah wearers developed a naive belief that the process of redemption is deterministic. Secular Zionism is the “donkey of the Messiah” that unwittingly leads us to salvation. Since no ideology had been developed that connected the Torah of Israel to modern sovereign national existence, it was inconceivable to try to challenge Israeli reality with that kind of leadership. Issues such as the proper economic regime, the level of state involvement in the life of the citizen, liberty versus equality, etc. – were of no interest, and weren’t ironed out.
The Six-Day War and its miracles “proved” that there was no need for such leadership. The Creator took the reins, and in total contradiction to the will of the Zionist leaders – including the leaders of Religious Zionism – threw the biblical districts into their arms. The “donkey of the Messiah” found itself stuck, against its will, with the stones of the Kotel…
It was only natural that Religious Zionism was devoid of the relevant ideology. It wouldn’t try to take national responsibility and challenge the Israeli reality with an alternative leadership at this point but instead would make do with safeguarding the existing situation so that there would be no “malfunction” in the process of redemption. That’s how the settlement enterprise began (without which, it’s doubtful if the State of Israel could have continued to exist).
The knitted kippah “split personality” was proven to be effective. It was enough to make do with the settlements, and leave the responsibility for leading the modern return to Zion to the (blind) leaders of Zionism, and rely on the God of history, who would lead them in the right direction. In the end, somehow, everyone would repent and everything would work out according to our dreams…
The Yom Kippur War exposed the loss of Zionist momentum. The frailty of Israeli existence created a deep crisis and once more raised questions of substance. What’s the mission that makes it worth living here under constant existential danger?
Zionist writers and poets (Moshe Shamir, Ephraim Kishon, Naomi Shemer) identified the religious enthusiasm of the new settler generation and saw Sebastia as the continuation of the success of Degania. For them, it was natural that along with the enthusiastic Zionist activity, the responsibility for filling the ranks of national leadership that had lost its vision would also come. Just as graduates of kibbutzim had taken over most national leadership positions at the time, it was only natural that along with the Zionist enthusiasm for settling the liberated parts of the country, the responsibility and aspiration to lead the country would come as well.
When this didn’t happen, when the settlers ran to the hills but left the responsibility for the results and daily existence to the old leadership (which would clean up after them…), the expectation turned into disappointment. The settlers became a nuisance, and to the left, even the object of hatred.
When the “donkey of the Messiah” refused to march in line with the “process of redemption”, the settlers became disgruntled. The image of the angry settler with the Uzi and the winter coat became a stereotype. The processes fed on each other and the polarization deepened.
The Oslo accords brought by the left, and the disengagement brought by the right, threw Religious Zionism’s irrelevance in its face. It hadn’t succeeded in ensuring, through settlement alone, the deterministic existence of the process of redemption. The grip on the lands of the Bible had become fragile and bulldozers destroying neighborhoods and whole communities have become a daily reality.