I’m a smaller lady, about 5’3″, and, honestly, I think there might be a point at which a penis can be too big. Sex with my husband can be really painful sometimes, especially when we haven’t had sex for awhile (traveling, short-term job in a distant city, etc.) I almost always bleed just a little after having sex maybe the first 5 times after a dry spell. And I also get frequent bladder infections, which my doctor said can be caused by too much sex. Anyway, my question for you is do you have ideas for a smaller lady accommodating a larger man? Are there any resources out there?
-Taking the Meat
Dear TTM,
First of all, a penis can never be “too large.” God made that large penis, so perhaps it just feels too large for you. In order to enjoy this giant, start by ditching whatever sexual script you were fed. This means trying to wipe your sexual psychology clean of any previous influences.
Why? Because women are often taught that sex works only one way, when it can be approached from a number of angles. Many women were taught that only the man should be in charge, or for example, some women just jump on that pole immediately without preparation, and launch right into some serious humpage. A body needs, in many cases, such as yours, to be coaxed and lovingly seduced into receiving the body of another, both physically and emotionally.
Read this article by Scarleteen: Sex Ex For the Real World, “From OW! to WOW! Demystifying Painful Intercourse” first. It will answer ALL your questions.
A few tricks? Start by upping your foreplay. The vagina is just a matrix of musculature that when properly flexed or released can often accommodate a penis of just about any size. Don’t forget, no penis is as wide or long as a human baby, which shoots out the same canal we are speaking of. That being said, sex should NOT feel like giving birth, it should feel good, great in fact.
(See your doctor again? This pain could also be from an STD or another type of vaginal infection.)
SO. If you are able to orgasm, or even if not, engage in some manual five digit action BEFORE he enters you. The more you are turned on the more the muscles will loosen the more lubricant you will produce. Extend this foreplay time for as long as possible, come and come again, and THEN have him enter you, gently, slowly, and coated in either natural or water-based lube. This might hurt.
Note on pain: when we are nervous or scared we tighten our vaginal wall. Click here for information on Vaginismus, the tightening of vaginal walls that yields horrible pain. There are tons of reasons a woman might tighten up before sex. These include: fear of STD’s, fear of pregnancy, fear of rape/roughness/pain, a lack of desire for sex, a lack of trust for her partner and/or a lack of knowledge of how to make sex feel good.
The tighter those muscles upon penile entry, the more excruciating. Our goal for you: painless pleasure. SO, have him enter extremely slowly and then, when inside, have him wait and listen to your cues. Communication is vital. If you feel heard and held, you will be more likely to release those tensed muscles. It might take you a minute to adjust to his size.
Then, take it at your own pace. If you want to be pummeled, get pummeled, but if you need it gentle and slow, take it as such. Talk to your husband before sex, at an innocuous time of day, like over Cheerios, and mention that for now you want to take the reigns. Encourage him to experiment with new sexual sensations, being slowly squeezed by a woman can be as phenomenal as ramming her core. It is a matter of presence and where his focus is located. Click here for more on enhancing male sexual experience.
There are SO many nerve endings involved in sex, and a good man, no matter how rough he likes it, will like it better if his wife does not wake up with a bladder infection because his dick was cramming her organs into oblivion.
Try sitting on top so you can control the depth of entry, as well as speed. Also, explore your psyche. See that you really WANT sex, and aren’t just having it to have it. Look at your sexual mind and determine whether there is fear or anger or a history of abuse causing you to tighten when you could be loosely wrapped around your man.
Ultimately, remember that sex is supposed be NICE FOR YOU. Because you are married, I want this to work. But for some in a new relationship, it might be too much for your body to take him in, and that is ok. If you find yourself lying there while he fucks your brains out as you leave the mental building, this is no good. If you are really enjoying yourself, rough or slow, you will know because you will feel joyful and exuberant, not fearful, loathing and infected.
” title=”www.send-email.org”>www.send-email.org to merissag[at]gmail[dot]com.
Mitchell A. Kamin, president and CEO of Bet Tzedek/House of Justice, announced on Wednesday that his is resigning, effective Sept. 3.
The nonprofit legal services organization, which Kamin has led since 2003, helps more than 10,000 indigent, elderly and disadvantaged people every year.
Kamin, 43, said he will become a partner at a small law firm in Century City—Bird, Marella, Boxer, Wolpert, Nessim, Drooks & Lincenberg—which handles complex business litigation and white-collar criminal defense.
“I’m excited about beginning the next chapter in my career,” Kamin said. “I’ve been with Bet Tzedek more than 7 years, and we’ve accomplished a huge amount during that time. … I am handing the organization off in amazing shape for someone who comes in, and I’m sure they’ll find someone great, with fresh ideas and a huge amount of passion and energy who can take it to an even greater place than it is at now.”
Board member Glenn Sonnenberg said Mitch’s decision was not a complete surprise, but still a blow.
“If this were a small, fledgling non-profit and someone of Mitch’s caliber left, it would vary somewhere between significant turmoil to catastrophe. But Bet Tzedek has been around for 35 years; it has a health board, a healthy staff, a healthy donor base, great events and a great image. It’s certainly a loss, and he has tough shoes to fill, but because the organization is as strong as it is, it’s not a tragedy.”
Sonnenberg said Kamin brought with him a strong balance of skills, from day to day management to envisioning programs that brought new services to more people. Even during the economic crisis of the last few years, Kamin actively expanded, rather than just keeping the organization afloat.
When Kamin arrived, Bet Tzedek had a budget of $4 million and a staff of 40. It now runs on a $7 million budget with a staff of 70. He tripled Bet Tzedek’s endowment to $4.5 million and set up partnerships with law firms and corporations that yielded $16 million worth of donated legal services last year.
In 2009, Bet Tzedek won the American Bar Association’s highest honor for pro bono work for its Holocaust Survivors Justice Network, a nationwide cadre of 3,600 pro bono lawyers who are handling claims and other services for Holocaust survivors.
In the last few years, Bet Tzedek set up shop in county courthouses and developed a partnership with Jewish Family Service’s SOVA Community Food and Resource Program to provide onsite legal services to clients. Kamin developed or expanded programs handling consumer fraud, landlord-tenant issues and extensive services for seniors and their caregivers, many of which use an interdisciplinary approach involving doctors, social workers and law enforcement.
Kamin said he plans to stay involved with Bet Tzedek and continue doing pro bono work, an important component at his new firm. Several Bet Tzedek board members practice at the firm, commonly known as Bird, Marella, including a past president.
Speaking the day after Kamin’s announcement, Sonnenberg said the board has not yet initiated plans for replacing Kamin. Kamin said Michelle Williams Court, Bet Tzedek’s vice president and general counsel, will serve as interim CEO until a replacement is found.
But Sonnenberg believes Bet Tzedek’s national reputation will attract excellent candidates.
“This organization has legs, and it has strength and is has support,” Sonnenberg said. “I have no doubt we are going to attract a CEO of the same caliber at Mitch … and that person will bring their touch and their personality and perspective that will make us stronger.”
An Obama administration official committed to sustaining a 10-year defense assistance program to Israel, saying that advanced technology is endangering Israel.
Andrew Shapiro, the assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, said in a rare speech on Friday that the Obama administration has since its outset been committed to maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge over its neighbors.
“Ever evolving technology is making it harder for Israel to maintain its security,” Shapiro told the Brookings Institution. He outlined advances in rocket technology available to Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, as well as broader threats from Iran.
“Even in this challenging budgetary time, the administration will honor this 10-year commitment,” he said, referring to an agreement struck by President George W. Bush that guaranteed Israel an average of $3 billion in defense assistance a year for ten years starting in 2007.
Shapiro outlined the manifestations of the qualitative military edge: U.S. sefense assistance to Israel; close cooperation and consultation between the two defense establishments; and an agreement not to sell materials to israel’s neighbors that could mitiagte against Israel’s edge.
The Department of Homeland Security released $19 million to secure non-profits, the vast majority Jewish.
Of 271 institutions named in a list released this week by DHS, 254 are Jewish, including synagogues, schools, community centers and offices.
The funds were released as part of a congressionally mandated program in place since 2005 that targets institutions that are vulnerable to attack.
Security measures funded include “blast proof windows; reinforced doors, locks, gates, and fences; video surveillance; and other equipment and enhancements” as well as training, according to a release by the Jewish Federations of North America, the federations umbrelaa body that lobbies annually for the funding.
“The Nonprofit Security Grant Program is a proven resource that helps supplement the work of local and federal law enforcement to help keep us safe,” William Daroff, JFNA’s Washington director, said in a statement.
Other groups lobbying for the money include two Orthodox umbrella bodies, the Orthodox Union and Agudath Israel of America.
O.U. called the funds “an important tool to help prevent terrorist attacks and protect civilians in case of such attack” and Aguda said “threats and actual incidents of violence against Jewish targets in the United States and around the world point to the particular vulnerability of our community.”
Sen. Barbara Mikuski (D-Md.), who has shepherded the funding through congressional appropriations, said she remained committed to sustaining the program.
“I have fought for these funds in the past, and I will keep fighting to protect institutions that are vital to our communities and the physical, social, spiritual and educational well-being of all Americans,” she said.
Martin Sherman and David Pine debate a crucial question: Is it really possible for there to be a two state solution to the Middle East conflict?
Moderated by Rabbi David Wolpe
Thursday, July 15, 7:30pm at Sinai Temple
Martin Sherman is the 2009-2010 visiting Israeli Schusterman scholar at USC/HUC-JIR and the academic director of the Jerusalem Summit and
David Pine is the West Coast Regional Director of Americans for Peace Now
BIOS MARTIN SHERMAN is currently the visiting Israeli Schusterman Scholar at USC and HUC. He the academic director of the Jerusalem Summit and research fellow in Security Studies Program at Tel Aviv University. He is also a research fellow at the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT).
Dr Sherman holds degrees in Physics and Geology (B.Sc.), Business Administration (MBA) and Political Science (Ph.D.).
He served for seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli intelligence community.
From 1990-91 he held the post of ministerial advisor to the Israeli government, and has testified as an expert before Joint Economic Committee of US Congress in a hearing on economic and security trends in the Middle East.
Dr. Sherman is a long standing director on the boards of several Israeli commercial companies.
His academic publications include two books, The Politics of Water in The Middle East, and Despots, Democrats and the Determinants of International Conflict, (Macmillan) as well as several articles in journals such as the Middle East Quarterly, The Journal of Strategic Studies, The Journal of Intelligence and Counter Intelligence, The Journal of Theoretical Politics, Nations and Nationalism, and Nationalism & Ethnic Politics.
He has also published numerous chapters in edited volumes and policy papers on a range of strategic and foreign policy issues. His latest work in this regard is the deals with strategic potential in Israel’s developing ties India – “The India-Israel Imperative” in the Indian National Interest Review.
He acted the Academic Coordinator of the internationally renowned Herzliya Conference in 2001 and 2002.
Dr. Sherman has appeared on numerous occasions on TV and radio both on Israeli and international networks and writes extensively on security political and economic issues in the Israeli national press in both English and Hebrew.
DAVID PINE is West Coast Regional Director of Americans for Peace Now (APN), an organization working to enhance Israel’s security through peace and to support Shalom Achshav, the Israeli Peace Now movement. In that capacity, he organizes community programs and activities that educate and activate the community in support of policies that help promote a comprehensive political settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine.
Mr. Pine is a frequent public speaker and regularly represents the organization to government officials, community and religious groups, to the media, and in schools and on college campuses. He has authored articles and been interviewed for radio and television programs related to Israel and Middle East issues.
For more than twenty years, Mr. Pine has worked in Southern California and Washington, D.C. as a community and political organizer and fundraiser in the Jewish community, and on behalf of several political campaigns. He has lived in Israel for extended stretches of time, and during one period worked as an educator and community worker in a development town, and in an absorption center for Ethiopian immigrants.
Mr. Pine has a double Masters degree in Public Administration from the University of Southern California, and Jewish Communal Service from Hebrew Union College, where he has served on its Field Faculty. He was an under-graduate at the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Mr. Pine lives in the Los Angeles area, is married to Debbie Pine, a Social Worker, and has 3 children (Oren – 14, Alana – 11, Ari – 9).
Samuel Heilman and Menachem Friedman, The Rebbe: The Life and Afterlife of Menachem Mendel Schneerson (Princeton University Press, 2010) pp. 343, $29.95
One should never begin a book review with a confession—and certainly not with two – but in fairness to my readers I must.
In 1990 when discussions of the Rebbe’s role as Messiah were reaching a feverish pitch, I was in the middle of building the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. I remarked to a young colleague who was having great difficulty finishing his doctorate that he should read an earlier work entitled When Prophecy Fails, the influential sociological study of what happens when a prediction that the world was coming to an end by a date certain fails to materialize. Sociologists had read a prediction by a religious leaders that on a certain date in 1956 the world was to going to end and decided to investigate. Their reasoning simple: either the world would end and therefore, they would be present at its end and have no need to write a book doctorate or if the world did not end, they would be present at the moment of acute disappointment and be able to study the dynamics of what happens when prophecy fails.
I told my would-be Ph.D. to become a fly on the wall at 770 Eastern Parkway. If the Rebbe is the Messiah, then he would witness his revelation. And if not – a scenario I deemed far more likely—than he would hear all of the justifications that will be offered to account for the unrealized prediction. My colleague did not follow my advice; it would neither be his first time nor his last. So even vicariously, I could not participate in one of the most interesting stories of late 20th century Jewish life.
When Samuel Heilman and Menachem Friedman, the two most distinguished sociologists of contemporary Orthodox Judaism set out to write this book, I was green with envy They would combine their considerable talents and learning to bear on arguably the most fascinating, perhaps even the most successful, late 20th century Jewish religious leader. Yet I also begin the book with trepidation wondering would they be equal to the task. Could they enter the inner courtyards of Chabad, would they be granted to the access? Would they be able to pierce the mysteries surrounding the Rebbe? Could they dare write history and not hagiography and could they as practicing Orthodox Jews withstand the pressure that such a controversial book would invite? My fears were unfounded. They have done an admirable job.
Heilman and Friedman devote almost half the book to the early life and to Menachem Mendel Schneerson ascent to office. A cousin of the previous Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson married the Rebbe’s younger daughter Chaya Moussia and chose to keep his distance – physical as well as spiritual—from the world of Chabad, living in Germany before the rise of Hitler and in Paris during the 1930 where he studied engineering. He was not to be found in Chabad circles and apart from returning to his father-in-law’s home for Passover and for the High Holidays he was little affiliated with the small Hasidic community either in Berlin or in Paris. Heilman and Friedman measure the distance between where the Schneerson’s dwelled and the Hasidic worlds of Berlin and Paris, both literally to the tenth of a mile and figuratively. His wife wanted little part in the entourage of a Rebbe and would often described herself even in later years as Mrs. Schneerson of President Street, a reference to their private place of residence rather than the now famous capital of Chabad 770 Eastern Parkway. The secular religious divide, which so characterizes our age occurred within the family in the early decades of the previous century. It is interesting to note how tempting was such a choice even for scions of the most famous of Hasdic families.
Menchem Mendel was not expected to succeed his father-in-law. He had chosen a secular rather than a religious path. In retrospect Chabad speaks of his secret missions on behalf of previous Rebbe, stories are told, but they lack specificity but no documentation is offered and while Heilman and Friedman are too polite to say it directly, they remain skeptical.
As the direct male descendent, the Rebbe’s grandson Shalom Dov Baer [later known as Barry] Ghourary was first in line, but having served his grandfather loyally early in his youth, he wanted no part of the Hasidic mantle and religiously disqualified himself from serving as Rebbe. Only later in life did he lay claim his familial inheritance much to the chagrin of Chabad and his Uncle, the Rebbe, seeking with the support of his mother, the Rebbe’s older daughter, to take possession of his grandfather’s library which he regarded as a familial rather than an institutional legacy. The American Court sustained Chabad’s institutional claims, perhaps not quite understanding that the distinction between personal and institutional property does not apply to charismatic religious leadership where person and institution are joined. In a not dissimilar case, Rev. Moon, who declared himself the Messiah, was found guilty of tax evasion.
Had Menachem Mendel – I mean no disrespect but he was not yet the Rebbe—been a more successful engineer or had the events of World War II not intervened forcing Chabad to relocate to the United States and Yosef Yitzhak Schneerson, then the Rebbe, to flee with key members of his court, the Jewish people would have lost one of its major religious leaders. The escape of the Friediker [previous] Rebbe was implausible but it has been well documented by a secular historian Brian Mark Rigg. The Rebbe [Yosef Yitzhak was rescued from German-occupied Warsaw by order of the head of German intelligence Admiral Canaris, who sent an intelligence officer of Jewish origin to drive him and key members of his entourage to Berlin and from their to his Riga, Lithuania, whose citizenship the Rebbe possessed and on to New York. Chabad Hasidim regard his rescue as miraculous. A secular historian who traced all of the documentation in German and American archives regards it as only a little less so. Menachem Mendel and the Rebbe’s daughter were left behind in Paris. Herculean efforts were made to save Chaya Moussia and her husband who came to the United States in 1941. With his hope for success as an engineer dashed, Menachem Mendel was drawn in to the orbit of Chabad, which was desperately in need of reengineering in the New World. Heilman and Friedman come closer to describing it as a “career move” rather than as a religious response to the Jewish world’s destruction that he had so all pervasive within his world.
Barry’ father, the Rebbe’s faithful son-in-law Shamaryahu Gourary, who was constantly at the Rebbe’s side, was the next logical successor. He had done his duty, paid his dues, served his master faithfully put in his time, he had married the eldest daughter and he had never been at a distance from Chabad. But he was less than charismatic. Perhaps the charisma of office would have in time overshadowed his lack of personal charisma. Heilman and Friedman trace in great detail the ascent of Menachem Mendel Schnnerson to Rebbe and his consolidation of power, during the year after the previous Rebbe’s death. He displayed his religious credentials, his understanding of the unique Torah of Chabad, he waited his time – there was a one year interval between Yosef Yitzhak’s death and Menachem Mendel’s ascent—and he had to assert continuity of mission – a messianic mission that seemed incredible in 1950s. The previous Rebbe, Yosef Yitzhak, had preached of the coming of the Messiah. In moving to assume leadership of Chabad, Menchem Mendel doubled down, he would succeed where his father-in-law had not.
Heilman and Friedman do not shy away from the Messianic claims of Chabad, which they portray neither as peripheral nor as personal idiosyncrasy of the Menachem Mendel but as essential to the teaching of his predecessor and to his own work. The Holocaust served to underscore the Messianic urgency because if it the battle of Gog and Magog, the apocalyptic struggle at the end of days, only then could it be understood and accepted as part of the divine plan for redemption.
The Rebbe had a rival for his Messianic claims, one so deeply attractive to the secular world and one with its own religious legitimation. Zionism was actually returning Jews to the Promised Land, redeeming the Jews and the Land, providing hope and inspiration. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook had described it as the “dawn of redemption,” words incorporated into the prayer for the State of Israel. The authors are most persuasive when they depict the Rebbe skillful use of Zionism for his own religious ends. By meeting with Israeli leaders, who always travelled to Brooklyn, by sending commands for prayer and for fixing mezzuzot, he would lay claim religiously to the victories of 1967 and 1973, for the safety of Israel under attack from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, as his own, religious victories. Generals had not won the war, the Rebbe had. Saddam Hussein had not failed in his attacks on Israel; the Rebbe had protected Israel.
Though he never set foot in Israel, his impact there was significant and he fought vigorously on the “Who is a Jew issue” that threatened and continues to divide world Jewry. We can trace the hardening of the Who is a Jew issue within the Haredi community back to the Rebbe’s staunch leadership.
The most poignant sections of the book are devoted to the Rebbe personal life, his relationship with his wife, perhaps the only one in his inner circle in the years before her death who related to him as a person, not a Rebbe and not as Messiah. They write of the Rebbe’s relationship with his predecessor, his urgent visits to his grave and communion with the dead and of the debilitating stroke that felled him as his disciples would not interrupt him even as he tarried, thus deprived him of the immediate treatment required to overcome a stroke. They fault his medical care: the Messiah Rebbe did not go to the hospital but the hospital came to him until he was beyond treatment. And they see his deteriorating physical condition as invigorating his religious movement, who sought to make manifest his messianic mission before his physical end.
But they give deep respect to the work of the Rebbe’s shulachim [emissaries] – male and female. The Shulachim go to even the most remote places on the globe where Jews are to be found to transform the Jewish world deed by deed, mitzvah by mitzvah. Were Heilman and Freidman to employ business terminology, which they scrupulously avoid, they could have described Chabad as a “name brand” and the emissaries as franchisees, taking root in their territories, providing services for the religiously observant but more importantly hoping to inspire the non-observant to repent. It is a formidable operation, surely, the most effective in the entire Jewish world. Heilman and Freidman do not comment on the role of non-Jews in the world of Chabad, in the theology of the Chabad. They do unmentioned except where they acknowledge the Rebbe’s global significance and empower the mission of Chabad.
Still, one must wonder about those who change the world, yet seek to remain unchanged by the world they encounter. Even the Red Heifer, the Biblical offering that the Priest sacrificed to purify the impure, contaminated him until evening.
The authors are clear, but without quite saying it that succession in the United States is corporate rather than charismatic. They divide the two competing factions in Chabad not by their belief in whether the Rebbe was – and is – the Messiah but rather in how manifest they should make that claim, whether to proclaim it for all too hear in advertisements in the New York Times and elsewhere or keep it as a whisper campaign lest those who are skeptical of such an assertion actively oppose Chabad. They call this faction of Chabad restrained messianism. David Berger has written of the scandal of contemporary Orthodoxy, which tacitly ignors the messianic claims. And one wonders, if as Chabad learned how to conduct a business in the contemporary world, did they not subconsciously absorb some of the strategies of early Christians when an earlier Jewish Messianic figure failed to complete his mission. Is the strategy for dealing with an incomplete messianic mission something deeply rooted in Judaism or it is something subconsciously absorbed from Christianity. Chabad refuses to speak of the Rebbe in the past; his date of death – the third of Tammuz is regarded as a day of ascent. They pray at his tomb and ask for Divine intercession. Some sing of “our Master and our Teacher, our Rabbi, our Creator the King Messiah.” “Creator” is to say the least theologically problematic.
And what of the future? Chabad are now emissaries without a center. Should the Messiah tarry, it will become more difficult to Chabad to assert its messianic belief convincingly to others and perhaps even to themselves. If the contemporary age religious revival, which usually comes in waves, run its course then one wonders.
Right now the all seeing Rebbe guarantees the franchise’s brand. One wonders about its duration and its relationship over time with the rest of the Jewish people. But Heilman and Friedman tell a powerful story of the most unpredictable and religiously interesting Jewish phenomena of our day. They allow us all to be a fly on the wall.
Samuel Heilman and Menachem Friedman, The Rebbe: The Life and Afterlife of Menachem Mendel Schneerson (Princeton University Press, 2010) pp. 343, $29.95
One should never begin a book review with a confession—and certainly not with two – but in fairness to my readers I must.
In 1990 when discussions of the Rebbe’s role as Messiah were reaching a feverish pitch, I was in the middle of building the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. I remarked to a young colleague who was having great difficulty finishing his doctorate that he should read an earlier work entitled When Prophecy Fails, the influential sociological study of what happens when a prediction that the world was coming to an end by a date certain fails to materialize. Sociologists had read a prediction by a religious leaders that on a certain date in 1956 the world was to going to end and decided to investigate. Their reasoning simple: either the world would end and therefore, they would be present at its end and have no need to write a book doctorate or if the world did not end, they would be present at the moment of acute disappointment and be able to study the dynamics of what happens when prophecy fails.
I told my would-be Ph.D. to become a fly on the wall at 770 Eastern Parkway. If the Rebbe is the Messiah, then he would witness his revelation. And if not – a scenario I deemed far more likely—than he would hear all of the justifications that will be offered to account for the unrealized prediction. My colleague did not follow my advice; it would neither be his first time nor his last. So even vicariously, I could not participate in one of the most interesting stories of late 20th century Jewish life.
When Samuel Heilman and Menachem Friedman, the two most distinguished sociologists of contemporary Orthodox Judaism set out to write this book, I was green with envy They would combine their considerable talents and learning to bear on arguably the most fascinating, perhaps even the most successful, late 20th century Jewish religious leader. Yet I also begin the book with trepidation wondering would they be equal to the task. Could they enter the inner courtyards of Chabad, would they be granted to the access? Would they be able to pierce the mysteries surrounding the Rebbe? Could they dare write history and not hagiography and could they as practicing Orthodox Jews withstand the pressure that such a controversial book would invite? My fears were unfounded. They have done an admirable job.
Heilman and Friedman devote almost half the book to the early life and to Menachem Mendel Schneerson ascent to office. A cousin of the previous Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson married the Rebbe’s younger daughter Chaya Moussia and chose to keep his distance – physical as well as spiritual—from the world of Chabad, living in Germany before the rise of Hitler and in Paris during the 1930 where he studied engineering. He was not to be found in Chabad circles and apart from returning to his father-in-law’s home for Passover and for the High Holidays he was little affiliated with the small Hasidic community either in Berlin or in Paris. Heilman and Friedman measure the distance between where the Schneerson’s dwelled and the Hasidic worlds of Berlin and Paris, both literally to the tenth of a mile and figuratively. His wife wanted little part in the entourage of a Rebbe and would often described herself even in later years as Mrs. Schneerson of President Street, a reference to their private place of residence rather than the now famous capital of Chabad 770 Eastern Parkway. The secular religious divide, which so characterizes our age occurred within the family in the early decades of the previous century. It is interesting to note how tempting was such a choice even for scions of the most famous of Hasdic families.
Menchem Mendel was not expected to succeed his father-in-law. He had chosen a secular rather than a religious path. In retrospect Chabad speaks of his secret missions on behalf of previous Rebbe, stories are told, but they lack specificity but no documentation is offered and while Heilman and Friedman are too polite to say it directly, they remain skeptical.
As the direct male descendent, the Rebbe’s grandson Shalom Dov Baer [later known as Barry] Ghourary was first in line, but having served his grandfather loyally early in his youth, he wanted no part of the Hasidic mantle and religiously disqualified himself from serving as Rebbe. Only later in life did he lay claim his familial inheritance much to the chagrin of Chabad and his Uncle, the Rebbe, seeking with the support of his mother, the Rebbe’s older daughter, to take possession of his grandfather’s library which he regarded as a familial rather than an institutional legacy. The American Court sustained Chabad’s institutional claims, perhaps not quite understanding that the distinction between personal and institutional property does not apply to charismatic religious leadership where person and institution are joined. In a not dissimilar case, Rev. Moon, who declared himself the Messiah, was found guilty of tax evasion.
Had Menachem Mendel – I mean no disrespect but he was not yet the Rebbe—been a more successful engineer or had the events of World War II not intervened forcing Chabad to relocate to the United States and Yosef Yitzhak Schneerson, then the Rebbe, to flee with key members of his court, the Jewish people would have lost one of its major religious leaders. The escape of the Friediker [previous] Rebbe was implausible but it has been well documented by a secular historian Brian Mark Rigg. The Rebbe [Yosef Yitzhak was rescued from German-occupied Warsaw by order of the head of German intelligence Admiral Canaris, who sent an intelligence officer of Jewish origin to drive him and key members of his entourage to Berlin and from their to his Riga, Lithuania, whose citizenship the Rebbe possessed and on to New York. Chabad Hasidim regard his rescue as miraculous. A secular historian who traced all of the documentation in German and American archives regards it as only a little less so. Menachem Mendel and the Rebbe’s daughter were left behind in Paris. Herculean efforts were made to save Chaya Moussia and her husband who came to the United States in 1941. With his hope for success as an engineer dashed, Menachem Mendel was drawn in to the orbit of Chabad, which was desperately in need of reengineering in the New World. Heilman and Friedman come closer to describing it as a “career move” rather than as a religious response to the Jewish world’s destruction that he had so all pervasive within his world.
Barry’ father, the Rebbe’s faithful son-in-law Shamaryahu Gourary, who was constantly at the Rebbe’s side, was the next logical successor. He had done his duty, paid his dues, served his master faithfully put in his time, he had married the eldest daughter and he had never been at a distance from Chabad. But he was less than charismatic. Perhaps the charisma of office would have in time overshadowed his lack of personal charisma. Heilman and Friedman trace in great detail the ascent of Menachem Mendel Schnnerson to Rebbe and his consolidation of power, during the year after the previous Rebbe’s death. He displayed his religious credentials, his understanding of the unique Torah of Chabad, he waited his time – there was a one year interval between Yosef Yitzhak’s death and Menachem Mendel’s ascent—and he had to assert continuity of mission – a messianic mission that seemed incredible in 1950s. The previous Rebbe, Yosef Yitzhak, had preached of the coming of the Messiah. In moving to assume leadership of Chabad, Menchem Mendel doubled down, he would succeed where his father-in-law had not.
Heilman and Friedman do not shy away from the Messianic claims of Chabad, which they portray neither as peripheral nor as personal idiosyncrasy of the Menachem Mendel but as essential to the teaching of his predecessor and to his own work. The Holocaust served to underscore the Messianic urgency because if it the battle of Gog and Magog, the apocalyptic struggle at the end of days, only then could it be understood and accepted as part of the divine plan for redemption.
The Rebbe had a rival for his Messianic claims, one so deeply attractive to the secular world and one with its own religious legitimation. Zionism was actually returning Jews to the Promised Land, redeeming the Jews and the Land, providing hope and inspiration. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook had described it as the “dawn of redemption,” words incorporated into the prayer for the State of Israel. The authors are most persuasive when they depict the Rebbe skillful use of Zionism for his own religious ends. By meeting with Israeli leaders, who always travelled to Brooklyn, by sending commands for prayer and for fixing mezzuzot, he would lay claim religiously to the victories of 1967 and 1973, for the safety of Israel under attack from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, as his own, religious victories. Generals had not won the war, the Rebbe had. Saddam Hussein had not failed in his attacks on Israel; the Rebbe had protected Israel.
Though he never set foot in Israel, his impact there was significant and he fought vigorously on the “Who is a Jew issue” that threatened and continues to divide world Jewry. We can trace the hardening of the Who is a Jew issue within the Haredi community back to the Rebbe’s staunch leadership.
The most poignant sections of the book are devoted to the Rebbe personal life, his relationship with his wife, perhaps the only one in his inner circle in the years before her death who related to him as a person, not a Rebbe and not as Messiah. They write of the Rebbe’s relationship with his predecessor, his urgent visits to his grave and communion with the dead and of the debilitating stroke that felled him as his disciples would not interrupt him even as he tarried, thus deprived him of the immediate treatment required to overcome a stroke. They fault his medical care: the Messiah Rebbe did not go to the hospital but the hospital came to him until he was beyond treatment. And they see his deteriorating physical condition as invigorating his religious movement, who sought to make manifest his messianic mission before his physical end.
But they give deep respect to the work of the Rebbe’s shulachim [emissaries] – male and female. The Shulachim go to even the most remote places on the globe where Jews are to be found to transform the Jewish world deed by deed, mitzvah by mitzvah. Were Heilman and Freidman to employ business terminology, which they scrupulously avoid, they could have described Chabad as a “name brand” and the emissaries as franchisees, taking root in their territories, providing services for the religiously observant but more importantly hoping to inspire the non-observant to repent. It is a formidable operation, surely, the most effective in the entire Jewish world. Heilman and Freidman do not comment on the role of non-Jews in the world of Chabad, in the theology of the Chabad. They do unmentioned except where they acknowledge the Rebbe’s global significance and empower the mission of Chabad.
Still, one must wonder about those who change the world, yet seek to remain unchanged by the world they encounter. Even the Red Heifer, the Biblical offering that the Priest sacrificed to purify the impure, contaminated him until evening.
The authors are clear, but without quite saying it that succession in the United States is corporate rather than charismatic. They divide the two competing factions in Chabad not by their belief in whether the Rebbe was – and is – the Messiah but rather in how manifest they should make that claim, whether to proclaim it for all too hear in advertisements in the New York Times and elsewhere or keep it as a whisper campaign lest those who are skeptical of such an assertion actively oppose Chabad. They call this faction of Chabad restrained messianism. David Berger has written of the scandal of contemporary Orthodoxy, which tacitly ignors the messianic claims. And one wonders, if as Chabad learned how to conduct a business in the contemporary world, did they not subconsciously absorb some of the strategies of early Christians when an earlier Jewish Messianic figure failed to complete his mission. Is the strategy for dealing with an incomplete messianic mission something deeply rooted in Judaism or it is something subconsciously absorbed from Christianity. Chabad refuses to speak of the Rebbe in the past; his date of death – the third of Tammuz is regarded as a day of ascent. They pray at his tomb and ask for Divine intercession. Some sing of “our Master and our Teacher, our Rabbi, our Creator the King Messiah.” “Creator” is to say the least theologically problematic.
And what of the future? Chabad are now emissaries without a center. Should the Messiah tarry, it will become more difficult to Chabad to assert its messianic belief convincingly to others and perhaps even to themselves. If the contemporary age religious revival, which usually comes in waves, run its course then one wonders.
Right now the all seeing Rebbe guarantees the franchise’s brand. One wonders about its duration and its relationship over time with the rest of the Jewish people. But Heilman and Friedman tell a powerful story of the most unpredictable and religiously interesting Jewish phenomena of our day. They allow us all to be a fly on the wall at one of the most interesting time in Jewish history/
Obesity is an increasingly prevalent problem in developed countries, and a safe and effective medication for weight loss is eagerly sought. Most weight loss medications have been plagued by serious side effects.
Fenfluramine, a medication used with phentermine in the popular “fen-phen” combination in the 1990s, was found to cause serious heart valve abnormalities and was withdrawn from the market. The two prescription medications currently available are only modestly effective and each suffers from side effects that limit its use. Sibutramine (Meridia) can elevate blood pressure and increase the risk of stroke and heart attack. Orlistat (by prescription as Xenical, or over the counter as Alli) causes greasy stools and diarrhea. These side effects make further weight gain seem like an appealing alternative.
A study in this week’s New England Journal of Medicine raises hopes for a new, safer weight loss medicine. The study randomized over 3,000 overweight and obese patients to lorcaserin and to placebo for one year. Importantly, all patients received ongoing counseling regarding diet and exercise. Patients were instructed to engage in 30 minutes of moderate exercise daily and were taught to eat a diet containing 600 calories below their daily energy requirements.
At the end of the first year the group on lorcaserin lost an average of 13 lb, while the placebo group lost an average of 5 lb. In the second year of the study, the patients on placebo for the first year continued receiving placebo. The patients on lorcaserin during the first year were again randomized to receive lorcaserin or placebo the second year. The patients who received lorcaserin the second year maintained the weight loss achieved during the first year, while the patients who received lorcaserin the first year and placebo the second year regained weight until their weight matched the group that was always on placebo.
Most tantalizing, however, was the safety profile. Side effects were few, and tolerable. Headache, dizziness and nausea were most common. Since lorcaserin is in the same family as fenfluramine (though designed specifically to avoid the valvular side effect) the patients were monitored for valvular abnormalities. The lorcaserin group did not develop valve problems any more frequently than in the placebo group.
The additional weight loss in the lorcaserin was not dramatic, suggesting that lorcaserin is no more effective (or maybe a little less effective) than sibutramine and orlistat. But this preliminary study suggests that it is much safer than the existing alternatives. If larger studies replicate this result, it may be a reasonable addition to diet and exercise.
I’m all for hyperbole, but trying to draw a connection between Barack Obama and evil incarnate, Adolf Hitler, is quite absurd.
In May, anti-war protesters in San Francisco held up the above posters. Then the northern Iowa Tea Party put up a billboard that depicted Obama with the word “Change” below and “Democrat Socialism” above. On his left was Lenin and on his right Hitler. “Radical Leaders Prey on the Fearful and Naive,” the billboard proclaimed.
Now it’s been taken down, reflected on by Tea Party members as a poor decision. Uh, duh.
After the billboard drew sharp criticism by other state and national tea party leaders, members of the local group sought the change.
North Iowa Tea Party co-founder Bob Johnson said he and other leaders agreed with critics that the image of Obama between Hitler and Lenin was offensive. He said the images overwhelmed the intended message of anti-socialism.
“They are absolutely right in their criticism because the image of Hitler just totally wiped everything else and it misrepresents the tea party movement,” Johnson said. “They were right from the standpoint that the image was not a positive reflection on the tea people.”
Johnson said Hitler images are usually not allowed at North Iowa Tea Party gatherings.
Usually not allowed—that’s an odd qualification.
This isn’t a First Amendment issue. It’s a PR nightmare. If you’re the Tea Party, you want to appear to be as mainstream as possible. This billboard wreaked of LaRouchees.
The recent news that Mel Gibson is no longer a client of William Morris Endeavor should come as no surprise. Many news and entertainment programs, including NBC’s “Today Show,” pegged the delisting to Gibson’s recent domestic assault allegations and tabloid leak of surreptitious tapes of racist rants he allegedly made, all arising from his custody dispute with his baby-mama Oksana Grigorieva.
But Gibson was already on borrowed time at the agency. In 2006, following his Malibu arrest and anti-Semitic rant, Ari Emanuel, then at Endeavor, writing in the Huffington Post, called on all Hollywood to shun Gibson. Gibson’s great defender was his longtime agent Ed Limato, then at ICM, who famously threw a drink in the face of Page Six’s Richard Johnson for comments about Gibson at a Vanity Fair Oscar party. Subsequently, Limato moved his operations from ICM to William Morris, and when William Morris and Endeavor merged last year, Emanuel and Limato found themselves having to make a cold peace.
A few weeks ago, Limato died. Then the other shoe dropped. Regarding Gibson, no one could call Emanuel a hypocrite. For his part, Gibson’s self-destructive self-immolation has cost him his marriage, much of his fortune, his standing in Hollywood and – depending on what happens next – could lead to criminal prosecution for domestic violence.
Which begs the question: Are the travails of Mel Gibson a fitting comeuppance, a vindication of those who saw something noxious in Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ,” a Shakespearean tragedy where character is destiny, or, perhaps in and of itself, proof that God exists? Or some combination of the above?
Rewinding through Gibson’s oeuvre and focusing on “Braveheart,” “The Man Without a Face” and then “The Passion,” the consistent theme appears to be that violence and harsh confrontation beget redemption.
Gibson entered the fray with his “The Passion of the Christ.” I would argue that each generation gets the version of Christ it deserves. So, if “The Greatest Story Ever Told” was made for the post-World War II “Greatest Generation,” “Godspell” for the ’60s flower children, and “Jesus Christ Superstar” for the “me” decade 1970s, then “The Passion of the Christ” embodies a rift in American culture, a moment when war and existential threats seemed everyday experiences. When Gibson told us he was being true to the Gospels in making his movie, he was not wrong. But it was his specific choices from among the versions that reflected Gibson’s own soul and character.
The enormous success of the film is history now, but it’s almost hard to remember the time when Jews questioning Gibson’s “Passion” were made to seem as if they were asking for a revisionist Jewish version of the New Testament. Indeed, even Gibson’s Jewish publicist, Alan Nierob, defended him.
At one point, Gibson claimed he was going to make a film about the Maccabees, which some took as a form of atonement, but which, to me, carried an implied threat – of exposing an ugly side to Jewish heroism. For most children, the Maccabees are the heroes of the Chanukah saga, but in a Gibson world of violence and martyrdom, the Judean fighters might seem closer to the Taliban, fighting against the corrupting Hellenism of their time by murdering fellow Jews.
Then, in 2006, after being arrested for driving while intoxicated, Gibson made his comments about the Jews causing all the world’s wars. Privately, it seemed a confirmation of Gibson’s darkest thoughts, but publicly many excused Gibson’s rant as a drunkard’s heat-seeking attempt to provoke with the most offensive comment possible. Gibson slipped back under the radar.
What has complicated the discussion about Gibson was that most American Jews of recent vintage spend a good deal of time hearing about anti-Semitism (and donating money to fight it), but few actually have experienced it.
I have met several Holocaust deniers and, strangely enough, I met most of them in Jerusalem – during the course of covering the Demjanjuk war crimes trial. They were always ruddy, Middle America types or English academic types. All very friendly. What they had in common was that they saw themselves as men (and they were all men) of principle committed to finding the truth. Their quibbles were obsessive: If one fact was wrong, then that proved that all the facts of the Holocaust had been false or exaggerated.
Gibson, too, seems to alternate between Mel the Gregarious and Mel the Scary, a man seeking things his way and a man out of control – with anger and self-righteousness fueling a bigotry he won’t acknowledge.
For several years, Gibson seemed a time bomb waiting to explode. There was the church he funded in Malibu that didn’t accept Vatican II, and then the rumors that he had a girlfriend, followed by denials, then his wife filing for divorce, and the announcement that not only did Gibson have a girlfriend, but she was pregnant with what would be Gibson’s eighth child.
Did Gibson think being famous, being wealthy, put him in control? I’m sure he was warned. But an affair and a child with a much younger woman? What did he think would happen?
Which brings me back to my original question: What can we say about Gibson? There is no question that he alone is the engine of his current problems. It is also clear that his bigotry and sexism are part of his vile arsenal, and he can no longer deny the taint on his character. In the days and weeks to come, we may hear explanations for Gibson’s behavior or promises of treatment of one kind or another. He may go on to make other movies, self-financed or even studio distributed (and they could even be good), but no one will ever look at him the same way again. Gibson may pray for things to work out or for forgiveness from family, friends and colleagues; and others may pray for him. But I won’t be one of them.