The movie “Yishmach Khatani” opens with an unforgettable scene of a Bar Mitzvah celebration in the community synagogue, during which the women’s aid collapses. The synagogue rabbi’s wife is injured during the collapse and falls into a coma, the rabbi focuses on treating her, and the synagogue is closed for renovations. The community, which until then was characterized by optimism and joy of life, is caught up in a double crisis: the destruction of the synagogue and the absence of the rabbi. Into this space strides a young and passionate rabbi with sure steps, gathering around him the men of the community and convincing them that the disaster occurred due to the violation of religious commandments, chief among them modesty. He decides to eliminate the women’s help on the second floor in favor of a side room that will be completely hidden from the men, and he dedicates the money the women collected for the renovation to writing a Torah scroll. However, the women of the community do not give up, unite to act against him, and lead the plot to a happy ending. The film was a crowd favorite, received the highest number of views in Israeli cinema that year, and later became a television series.
In interviews with her, the director Shlomit Nechama said that the film was made under the influence of her memories of her father’s anxiety: “The story in the series is my experience in the face of the power of religion, and the place of women in religion, even as a child, bothered me.” However, her relationship with the women’s aid was ambivalent. On the one hand, she was forced to stand there in a crowd, behind a sealed partition, and felt that “we don’t count”. On the other hand, as she said in an interview with Ricky Rhett in the first source, “There is something beautiful in the idea of the women sitting upstairs. From there they can see everything, exchange glances. Even throwing the candies has something charming, a kind of candy from heaven.”
My friend Prof. Hizki Shoham from Bar-Ilan University reminded me of the movie “Yishmach Khatani” when I asked for his help regarding journalistic reports at the time of the disasters that happened to help women in Europe in the 19th century, which resulted in a large number of deaths and injuries. Like other colleagues I asked, he also admitted that he was not familiar with the cases described, and the only association they brought up in his memory was that of the film. This list is an initial glimpse of a topic that deserves its own comprehensive study.
Like on the Titanic
Women’s aids were built in different ways in different communities, especially during the 17th century. They were mostly built as a second floor in the synagogue, from which the women could pray and see what was happening in the main hall, without being seen by the public. The theological rationale for the separation was essentially gendered, so that the women would not arouse thoughts of sin in the praying men.
The disasters in question, which were described in the Hebrew daily press (mainly “The Siren” and “Hamelitz”), mostly occurred on holidays and festivals, when the crowds in the synagogues were at their peak, and especially on Yom Kippur. Most of the time, the incident started following a panic attack that erupted following a fire, or a false fear of its igniting. Sometimes it was a curtain that caught fire or a kerosene lamp that fell, and since significant parts of the synagogues and their furniture were built of wood, and effective fire extinguishers did not yet exist, the conflagration was greatly accelerated. Knowledge about safety matters was also much poorer than it is today, as was enforcement. The lack of clear instructions regarding the maximum number of people who can safely be in the building, and the crowding during prayers and especially during Yom Kippur, reduced the chances of a safe escape.
Along with these general factors, the unique structure of women’s aid made a decisive contribution to the disasters. From the moment the fire started or a false panic broke out, the women’s chances of getting out of the building safely were lower than the men’s. The location of the women’s aid, on the second floor of the synagogue, made the exit from it slower. The doors for the women’s help were often opened inwards, and the attempt of many women to get out of them at the same time led to the doors being locked in their faces. In addition, the staircase that led to the second floor was narrow and dark, making it difficult to escape quickly and efficiently.
Economic factors also influenced the number of disasters and the identity of the victims: the high cost of required renovations made it difficult for the poor communities to carry them out, and perhaps women’s help received a lower priority. During this period, the number of women praying in the synagogues increased, without this being accompanied by any real thinking regarding the tangible dangers this created for the entire structure and especially for the women’s aid, which was not intended to accommodate so many women in the first place.
Moreover, it is likely that, similar to other disasters, the economic context had an additional effect, class in nature: just as in the disaster of the sinking of the Titanic the largest number of victims was among the passengers of the third class, so also in the women’s aid it was noted in some of the disasters that the dead were the “poor” or “the poor” of the community. It is possible that in the better places with the help of the women, which were bought with money, sat women whose economic situation allowed payment for them, while the main crowd was in the places reserved for the common people, and therefore most of the victims were also in this area.
“Commotion and defeat in the night of every vow”
I found the earliest documentation of the disaster with the help of women in the well-known memoirs of Glickel Hamelin, a Jewish businesswoman, who described what happened in the synagogue in Metz, France, on Shavuot 1714 (1714). A loud noise in the synagogue led women to think that the building was collapsing, and as a result she began to experience Panic in trying to get out as quickly as possible:
“The women upstairs in the synagogue hurried and wanted to get down, each one wanted to be the first to save their lives… and since each one longed to get ahead of her neighbor, they mercifully fell on top of each other and caused each other’s death with the soles of their feet… What a terrible situation it was – it is impossible to tell Or write… More than fifty women were lying on the stairs, and they were so mixed with each other as if they were glued with tar on top of each other, and the living with the dead – which distinguishes the living from the dead – were all lying with each other.”
Glickel states in her memoirs that following the incident, which led to the death of six women and the injury of 30, inspections were conducted in the building while searching for even “some crack”, but these did not reveal anything, “and we do not know where this trouble came from and the whole disaster should not be blamed on anything but our crimes” . However, she notes that she struggled with whether she should have written the thing in her book, “because it’s something out of the ordinary.” We thus learn that in the 17th century this kind of disaster was still unusual.
However, in the last third of the 19th century, these events became a tragic routine that claimed the lives of quite a few women. For example, in Germany in 1872, a rumor about a fire led to the death of 20 women, including three girls; In Hungary in 1879 “the floor cracked” and 40 women and children fell with it, of which 20 were killed; And in the city of Zinkov in 1833, a fire started as a result of a falling oil lamp, which caused the death of 40 women. An article published in the newspaper “Hatzifira” in 1899, following a disaster that occurred in the city of Luntschitz and claimed the lives of 32 women, teaches about the large number of these events: “The Hasidah knows her dates and two disasters will keep her in mind when they come year after year: the bloodshed at Passover, and riot and defeat, killing And suffocated and crushed limbs in the churches on the night of every vow.”
Against the blood plots, the writer regretfully states that there is no way to fight; However, he adds and complicates:
“Indeed, even in the face of the disasters in the synagogue, for which we are the only ones to blame, there is no advice and no trickery? Is it short-handed if we have little understanding to remove this staff of wrath from the camp of Israel? Are we really consumed and determined by our people to offer year after year many dead victims to the angel of death? The few victims we offer in rape , because we will add alms offerings to them?”
And indeed, the fact that these were disasters that repeated themselves, in similar structures and at similar times, is puzzling regarding their persistence. When the community began to discuss them, three types of solutions were proposed: one focused on the structure of the synagogue, the second on the human factor, and the third on the gender factor. In relation to the structure, pragmatic solutions were proposed such as arranging wide openings for entry and exit, installing doors with the help of women that open outwards rather than inwards, and expanding the staircases leading to it. The second solution that was proposed placed emphasis on the human component, and as part of it, practices for mass exits from buildings that would facilitate the process in real time were proposed, appointing ushers on the night of each vow to help guide the crowd in experienced events, and clarifying to the worshipers before the prayers begin that if such an event were to occur, they must stand in their place .
“Shocked and scared for Nakala”
However, the number of disasters helped those who fought against the right of women to pray with the help of the women, long before Shlomit Nechama sketched in “Yisham Hatani” the charismatic figure of the rabbi who wants to exclude women from the synagogue. The disasters made it possible to justify the exclusion of women from the synagogue under the pretext of protecting their lives and not limiting their steps. These arguments presented female panic as the focus of the problem, and their exclusion from holiday prayers or increased supervision over them as a solution.
Recent studies will of course paint a different picture. Thus, gender-focused studies will indicate the impact of different educational practices on boys and girls. The girls who grew up cooped up in the house and didn’t do any physical activity except for housework, were more comfortable being scared, and their ability to escape in distress situations was less compared to boys of their age. The chances of men who were on the first floor to get out alive were greater than the women’s, even when the men tried to go up to the women’s aid and help them get out. From studies conducted in recent years against the background of the increase in the number of civilian mass disasters, it appears that panic is not a major factor, and the main emphasis is on regulation and its enforcement, before and during the event.
Indeed, the claim that the hysterical behavior of women was a major factor in these disasters was consistent with the gendered worldview in the 19th century, and therefore took root. An article published in HaTsifar in 1899 explained the causes of the disaster as follows:
“The source of the calamities on Yom Kippur is, for the most part, the help of the women… the women are frivolous and nervous, shaken and afraid of a disaster. It is enough for one light syllable, for a sudden call, to terrorize them as they are in one herd, to beat them with whimsy and scorn, and here they run like mad, pushed together And they block the way for their own souls and they themselves plague the doors, and knock down to the ground and trample and suffocate her bad wife… The trampled were a stop and an obstacle for the rest of the fleeing ones, and that’s how the tumult went and the defeat grew stronger, and not even one thought to look behind her and return to the empty help.”
Therefore, those who saw the women as the source of the problem, saw the solution focused on them as a solution, and among other things, they proposed placing suns that would help in taking control of riots when necessary with the help of the women, “and not let the agitated women run like crazy and evil animals”. Also regarding the limitation of the number of seats in the synagogues, it was suggested to be especially careful with the help of the women for both structural and gender reasons, “which since it is very high and many stairs lead to it is very dangerous, and especially since women are by nature vulnerable to such disasters”.
“Let our wives build a house”
Following the same fire in 1883 in the city of Zinkov, the Zefira newspaper published: “And how beautiful is the regulation that used to be put in place in some congregations to fence in favor of the women who do not come to the synagogue on the night of Yom Kippur, may they institute such a rule in all congregations in Israel.” In 1899, another article in the same newspaper claimed that the best solution is to prevent women from entering synagogues on holiday eves, and not only for the purpose of preventing disasters:
“Indeed, the trick chosen is to prevent women from going through the prayer on the night of their vows (and the same is the case on all the nights of the holidays). I remember that for many years this custom was practiced in the Great Hall in Warsaw, after the Holocaust that was there on the night of the Calling of the Magellan, and several women died in a strange way. . And if now the strip is allowed and the doors of the hall are open at night for women as well… our rabbis and philanthropists will issue an order to close the women’s aid at night. Let our women build a house, pray for it in private, and let their resources be doubled: the dormitories and the children will not be left desolate, without a watchful eye, and thieves will not be able to find them since the houses are desolate and abandoned, And the angel of death will not swing a scythe in the synagogue to march to the pit to slaughter many, many souls, increase the obituary in Israel and turn Yom Kippur into a day of heavy mourning.”
This conduct, of placing the blame for the occurrence of disasters on the women themselves, was repeated after the disaster that happened in Miron in 1911, in which 12 people were killed. The weekly “HaModi” published in Poltava laid the blame on the women and the break-ins practiced among the new settlers who frequented the Rashvi festivities:
“The young men and the virgins, decorated with excessive brazenness, gathered on the roof, and since the lighting was done, the virgins began to sing their songs. At that moment, a very big stormy wind came and in an instant the stone railing broke and the people started falling together with the stones on the people standing below.”
The solution that was established was a ban on women entering the mountain, but it did not last long: this was either thanks to Ada Fishman-Maimon (sister of Rabbi Yehuda Fishman-Maimon, later the first minister of religion of the State of Israel), who insisted on going up the mountain with two of her friends, or because The ultra-orthodox men soon realized that arriving at the mountain without women meant continuing to care for their children even after the Halakah ceremony, and preferred to avoid it.
The post What caused a series of disasters in the women’s aid? appeared first on first source.
