Yeshiva University and YU Pride Alliance

In an effort to force the hand of Yeshiva University president Rabbi Dr. Ari Berman and the YU administration to grant undergraduate club status to YU Pride Alliance, over 1600 students, alumni and professors from YU’s many schools have signed petitions and statements demanding that YU Pride Alliance be given formal recognition and funding. The signatories range from current students, faculty and alumni to those of decades past, including some people who graduated from YU over half a century ago.

At first glance, the dozens of pages of signatures might appear to be a bit daunting. 1600+ seems like a large number for an institution that most of us consider to be on the smaller side. However, taking a step back, it is clear that these petitions and letters failed miserably, for despite being aggressively circulated for signatures, and despite the petition and its signature link having been featured in very prominent Jerusalem Post, JTA and Times of Israel articles, the actual number of signatories represents a tiny fraction of YU’s student and alumni base. Of YU’s well-over 70,000 alumni (plus several thousand current students in the total YU system, and many thousands of RIETS rabbinic alumni), 1600 is a minuscule and basically insignificant figure. Even should we lower the number of total targeted signatories by taking into account those alumni who have passed away, the final number of those who signed is negligible.

Moreover, when we consider the overwhelming number of YU students and alumni who did not sign the petition, it emerges that the number of those opposed to the petition totally trounces the number of those who signed it. The petition was aggressively promoted and marketed all over the place, yet the clear and astronomical majority of those qualified to sign declined to do so. If anything, the tiny fraction of actual signatories from the aggregate potential and hoped-for number sends the message that the opposition to the YU administration’s stance on the YU Pride Alliance issue is more noise and smoke than reality, and that the numbers overwhelmingly stand solidly behind the YU administration’s position.

This point is particularly punctuated by the profound dearth of Orthodox communal leaders among the signatories. Of the thousands of RIETS musmachim, who lead countless shuls, day schools and organizations, and who probably represent the largest rabbinic grouping in America and throughout the world, there are so few signatories; the number of RIETS musmachim who signed the petition was inconsiderable, and among the tiny list of RIETS signatories, the names of no major rabbinic leaders are to be found. It is clear that the Orthodox community and its leadership are markedly on the side of President Berman and YU and do not stand with YU Pride Alliance in this issue.

Taking a step back further, the entire enterprise of a petition on this matter is perplexing. Although a significant minority of signatories (mostly from YU’s graduate schools and faculty) are not Orthodox Jews or are not Jewish at all, those signatories with Orthodox backgrounds presumably realize that the issue at hand involves paramount Torah principles, such as identification with halachically illicit relations (Giluy Arayos), and Chillul Hashem (Profaning God’s Name). Even if one were to argue that these two principles should not determine the final outcome, all must agree that they are serious factors and considerations. As such, every Orthodox Jew knows (or should know) that guidance on these weighty topics must be sought from preeminent Torah authorities. Precedent for pushing an issue of halachic import by way of populist petition and protest derives from Korach and is totally outside the parameters of accepted Orthodox thought and deed.

Let’s take a step back more and cite the Torah sources regarding this issue:

“And a male shall not lie with another male; it is an abomination.” (Vayikra 18:22)

And a male who lies with another male as with a woman – they have committed an abomination; they shall surely die – their blood is upon them.” (Ibid. 20:13)

(Although the Torah employs the verbiage of “to’eivah”/abomination with regard to various other offenses, such as consuming certain types of forbidden foods and the use of corrupted weights and measures, those sins do not carry the death penalty; recent efforts to downplay the severity of homosexual relations by equating them with lesser acts that are likewise labeled by the Torah as to’eivah are hence off the mark. To’eivah as used in the Torah can refer to physical, spiritual or moral abomination, none of which are equal or necessarily parallel.)

There are plenty of additional sources in classical rabbinic literature regarding the acute offense of homosexual relations (v. Sanhedrin 82a, Chullin 92b, etc.), and the prohibition has been codified in the Yad Ha-Chazakah, Tur, Shulchan Aruch and literally every other halachic code that discusses illicit relations.

As with any Torah transgression, the sin lies in the act and not in the desire; a person who harbors an uncontrollable lust for another of the same gender is not held culpable in any way, just like anyone who has an involuntary desire to violate the Torah in other areas is not liable unless he acts upon that desire. One who instinctually desires that which the Torah forbids and does not act upon his urge is praiseworthy, heroic and righteous.

Taking into account the Torah’s strict stance about our topic, the YU administration’s words are surprisingly quite soft:

The message of Torah on this issue is nuanced, both accepting each individual with love and affirming its timeless prescriptions. While students will of course socialize in gatherings they see fit, forming a new club as requested under the auspices of YU will cloud this nuanced message. (JTA)

We welcome, love and care for all our students, including our LGBTQ students. We place a specific emphasis of importance on supporting our LGBTQ students. There are a number of ways we express this support, including hosting an LGBTQ support group, requiring LGBTQ sensitivity training to all of our rabbis and faculty and presenting public events so that all of our students better understand the experience of being LGBTQ and Orthodox. And, of course, we uphold our strong anti-bullying and anti-discrimination policies. We understand that a number of our LGBTQ students think YU should be doing more for them including establishing a student club. We had been engaged in a constructive dialogue with our students to work on building an even more inclusive campus experience. (YU – FAQS)

YU has been more open and welcoming on this matter than probably anybody expected, and it is thus nothing short of shocking that rather than YU Pride Alliance appreciating Yeshiva University’s open arms and ears, YU Pride Alliance and its supporters resorted to litigation and protest to demand that YU go even further by endorsing and funding YU Pride Alliance as an official Yeshiva undergraduate club. As Rabbi Rodney Weiss writes, those pushing for this endorsement and funding are quite aware of the Torah’s strong objections to an active LGBTQ lifestyle, and they are quite aware as well that YU is a conspicuously Orthodox institution with a rich Torah tradition. To knowingly force YU into this position is a very dishonorable gesture, to put it lightly.

YU Pride Alliance and its supporters claim that they merely seek a venue for personal support. However, the very name of the organization belies this assertion, as it proclaims pride of homosexuality and transgenderism. To think that this has a public place at Yeshiva is patently wrong. (As this article goes to press, YCT appears to be going in the very opposite direction of YU on these issues.)

No amount of mental gymnastics can allow a Torah Jew to endorse YU Pride Alliance. Those who are on the fence about the issue and those who have signed the petition would do well to read Rabbi Steven Pruzansky’s new article, Torahphobia.

In these Yemei Teshuva (Days of Repentance), let us take a step back and realign our minds and hearts with the Torah’s values, casting aside all specious arguments and unsupported justifications for that which is blatantly wrong. If our values are those of secular society, let us not call them Orthodox values and attempt to use the Torah to uphold and bolster that which is its antithesis. If our values are those of the Torah, we must unapologetically affirm them and not endorse the official establishment of a gay pride club under the banner of Yeshiva.

 

 

 

 

You may also like...

55 Responses

  1. Nachum says:

    Back in the 1920’s or so, the Nazis decided to attack Einstein by having a thousand physicists sign an ad in the paper declaring that he was all wrong.

    Einstein simply responded, “If they had been right, it would only have taken one.”

    If it is proper under Jewish belief (afra l’puma) to have a gay club at YU, then, well, it would only take one person to say so. 1,600 makes no difference; religion is not a popularity contest.

    I was especially amused by fellow YU grads who posted this petition by saying they’re “no longer proud to be associated with YU” or some nonsense. Of course, YU has been fighting the gay agenda for *decades*, including when these people were there.

  2. Steven Brizel says:

    Rabbi Gordimer as always hits the nail on the head and makes us realize that far too many of the signatories on the petition who are graduates of YC and SCW are unfortunately either in deep denial or deep ignorance as to the Torah prohibitions and what happens when a demand for acceptance segues into a demand to be treated as “normal” .I really can’t take very seriously the views of such signatories as the head of a major union who is a CSL graduate but whose stances on remote education and brainwashing children with Marxist propaganda on such mantras as CRT gender fluidity and climate deserve a separate post in its own right

    YU should be applauded for its willingness to litigate this case at the highest levels but anyone who has learned The Masectos of Seder Nashim even on a superficial level will realize and conclude that Chazal rejected both all of the hedonism of the Greco Roman world and the monasticism and celibacy of the Christian world and emphasized that the union of a man and woman raising a family was the means of imparting and transmitting Torah values to a world in deep need of the same Any other stance is at best apologetics and RL rooted in denial of the views of Chazal For those interested in the views of RYBS see the Machzor Mesoras HARav on the Krias HaTorah for Mincha of YK

  3. lacosta says:

    It would be important to pick thru and out the 1600 , especially looking at the ‘rabbis’. the inability to recognize so-called Open Orthodoxy , and move it actively outside the machaneh, has led to this growing militant homophilia in the MOyoung , who are light in both their doxy and praxy . An apt replacement for the heterodoxic Conservative movement , and likely to end up in the same place— if they don’t manage to take much of MO down with them…

    • Steven Brizel says:

      Anyone who hasa been commenting here will recognize many of the usual suspects in that regard

  4. Steven Brizel says:

    For those interested see the letter to the editor that begin on Page 1https://view.flipdocs.com/?ID=10010717_883808

  5. Alan says:

    The Rabbi doth protest too much.

    R. Gordimer notes that there are “only” 1,700 signatures opposing YU’s decision on the Pride Alliance.

    What does that the fact there are zero signatures on a mass letter supporting the decision tell us? It tells me that YU alumni know very well that there is pervasive homophobia on the part of some roshei yeshiva and that they do not want to publicly associated with a position YU has taken of which they are deeply embarrassed.

    • Steven Brizel says:

      Tolerance of deviant lifestyles should never be confused with or segued into acceptance of the same as tolerance of the same as normal We should be proud of what Chazal stood for with respect to marriage and reject the woke call that the same is homophobic as well as any notion that drag shows and grooming which are clearly elements of “pride” in this context have any place RL on the same campus where Seder Nashim is taught

    • Steven Brizel says:

      Any YC or SCW alumnus who signed either is in gross denial or gross ignorance of the Torah prohibitions involved

    • William l Gewirtz says:

      zeh le’chud, ve’zeh le’chud. No one doubts that positions taken in the past by a number of RY, perhaps still held, were proven incorrect and perhaps homophobic. No one doubts their current influence. All that said, the current position of YU is what is under discussion. It is clearly not homophobic and a position that deserves support.

      what is not helpful, is a discussion of the level of various sins.

      • mycroft says:

        All that said, the current position of YU is what is under discussion. It is clearly not homophobic .

        If one does not give facilities for homosexuals to get together the same way, they give facilities for any other group a it treats homosexuals in a manner “showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people” which is the definition of homophobic. https://www.bing.com/search?q=homophobic+definition&cvid=b556cd0c26274686946567cba975453a&aqs=edge.3.0j69i57j0l7.7041j0j1&pglt=43&FORM=ANNTA1&PC=LCTS
        Certainly, the Torah does not treat homosexual practices as being proper and a dislike for homosexuals’ behavior. A Yeshiva certainly can be homophobic-under American law a secular college can’t be homophobic.

      • William l Gewirtz says:

        mycroft, as has sadly become typical, you choose to characterize what is not homophobic as if it were. read your quoted definition more carefully. Not extending a privilege does not make you homophobic. YU would also does not allow a heterosexual club. both are not in the spirit of its ideals

  6. Reader says:

    Once again, Rav Gordimer שליט”א is spot on. Like his Biblical namesake, he knows how to relate to people who engage in inappropriate behavior. Our forefather Avraham was the pillar of Chesed (loving kindness), but at the same time, nevertheless, separated himself decisively from his nephew Lot and the deeply corrupt society he chose to live among. He didn’t let himself get played by them, didn’t fall for their spurious propaganda. Compassion is not a blank check for recognition and acceptance of licentiousness.

    Keep it up Rabbi, you make your namesake proud.

    • mycroft says:

      homophobic as if it were. read your quoted definition more carefully. Not extending a privilege does not make you homophobic.

      A club is not a privilege they approve Republican, Democratic and see lists on YU website of clubs anything that people want to get together, not giving what you call a privilege which is given to others is homophobic.
      If the US were to give a tax credit to all citizens except those who are Jewish that would be antisemitic. One would not say not extending a privilege of a tax credit is not antisemitic.
      Has there been an application to have a heterosexual club before this. Obviously, now someone will getb the idea to apply for a heterosexual club to establish a record that they turn down just social groups
      What discriminatory ideals against protected classes can a secular university practice because “not in the spiurit of its ideals”

  7. Reb Yid says:

    Unfortunately for the author of this post, he neglects to mention the salient point: the institution where he works is chartered as a secular institution.

    It was done so in order to accept government funding which keeps his institution afloat. In so doing it must adhere to anti-discrimination laws, which YU is clearly violating.

    • Steven Brizel says:

      That is the error that the court made that SCOTUS will address and at least four members thereof saw as a valid constitutional issue – Reliance upon the words of the charter as opposed to the facts on the ground elevates form over substance in a massive manner

      • Reb Yid says:

        In this country we have the separation of church and state.

        YU cannot have its cake and eat it, too.

      • mycroft says:

        A Yeshiva has no business supporting groups that advocate behavior against the Torah. A secular university can’t discriminate because of religion. YU made the decision when I was there to change the charter to secular. What they should do is make the college part of RIETS-, separate the secular grad schools and sue NYS for money they give other colleges, lose that then sue Fed go to Supremes and maybe win. YUs purpose should be running a place for Torah and maybe some colleges, grad schools related to Judaism ,Rabbanus and Chinuch. Changing ones affiliation to secular for half century and receiving money as secular is not Glatt Yosher if one is a religious institution.

    • Steven Brizel says:

      Who says that in the world of constitutional values that free exercise of religion is subordinate to equal protection under the law

      • Reb Yid says:

        We are absolutely free in this country to set up our own religious institutions. This is a right which should not be taken for granted.

        But my tax dollars should not be going to support these enterprises, at least in terms of their religious dimensions.

      • mycroft says:

        A Yeshiva has no business supporting groups that advocate behavior against the Torah. A secular university can’t discriminate because of religion. YU made the decision when I was there to change the charter to secular. What they should do is make the college part of RIETS-, separate the secular grad schools and sue NYS for money they give other colleges, lose that then sue Fed go to Supremes and maybe win. YUs purpose should be running a place for Torah and maybe some colleges, grad schools related to Judaism ,Rabbanus and Chinuch. Changing ones affiliation to secular for half century and receiving money as secular is not Glatt Yosher if one is a religious institution.

      • mycroft says:

        exercise does not mean government pays for religion

      • mycroft says:

        my tax dollars should not be going to support these enterprises, at least in terms of their religious dimensions.

        Why are Jewish Orthodox organizations so interested in getting tax dollars they aren’t even worried about Jews being forced through their tax dollars to help spread Avodah Zarah.

  8. Schmerel says:

    Even in a totally secular context it is difficult not to side with Yeshiva University. They aren’t banning gay students. They are asking not to be required to allow school facilities to be used for promoting such behavior. Why shouldn’t they have that right? Say you had a secular college with a frat group that spends all night smoking, drinking and other such behavior, wouldn’t they be able to treat them the same way YU wants to treat gay clubs? Why do gays deserve such supreme rights that marginalize everyone else? To the degree that they can force the internal decisions of how to run an organization that they do not own?

    • Reb Yid says:

      Gay Pride clubs do not exist for the purpose of LGBTQ+ students engaging in intercourse.

      They are rather places where members of this community as well as their straight allies can simply meet in a safe space. To socialize and promote programs that promote a greater awareness of challenges that this community faces, the rights that they fight for to be treated as equals, and more tolerance and understanding in the broader community.

      • Steven Brizel says:

        Take a look at Libs of Tik Tok-where there are numerous links to grooming brainwashing and drag shows.. Look at the numerous links sent by Christopher Rufo on this issue Ypu can’t fool all the people all of the time.

      • Steven Brizel says:

        No student in any Yeshiva should ever be taught that Yaakov has two Dads Abbas or Totties or two Immas or MommiesNd/ or that the same is desirable or normal for any Torah committed family

    • mycroft says:

      Can a secular college, give facilities to white culture groups without giving to an Asian group. No
      Why have clubs anyway with university money. Stop giving clubs money, charge that amount less in tuition and get out of the business. Avoid probl;ems-forget LGBT -say a Jewish club wants to invite a JTS/HUC teacher, a Yeshiva would say no good. On what basis can a secular school say x permitted, y not permitted.

  9. Reb Yid says:

    Engaging in these awful stereotypes and overgeneralizations is exactly what these very same posters fight against, tooth and nail, when the subjects are Hasidim or Orthodox Jews.

    • Steven Brizel says:

      This is the reality in addition to the junk science known as gender fluidity as opposed to any supposed stereotype that the LGBT movement seeks to impose as normal with zero room for dissent in public schools all over the US.

    • Steve Brizel says:

      The facts on the ground as to what is happening in public schools and so called pride parades do not lie

    • Steven Brizel says:

      The peition combines the worst excesses of identity politics with denial and or ignorance of many Torah prohibitions. One would not be incorrect in calling it an example of “critical Judaism” theory like CRT, agender theory and climate theory

  10. Arevim says:

    With all the respect in the world, before even engaging on the subject matter, I believe that if the author and commenters would stop using some of the following terms, the discussion would be be much more productive:

    Lifestyle, Marxist, woke, CRT, grooming, drag shows and so on…

    These terms just muddle the discussion without getting to the bottom of the issues. They tend to be be hot button keywords used throughout social media accounts (such as libs of tik tok) to inflame the public and do not address the real issues we are facing here.

    Naming LGBT people Marxist, groomers, woke is not only inaccurate, but demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of the experiences LGBT people go through. As Reb Yid wrote, this is overgeneralization and stereotyping. Being LGBT cannot be framed simply as sex deviancy, drag queens or equated to a desire to eat a bacon cheeseburger. This is extremely unfair.

    The same way, many frum Jews must feel outraged, misrepresented and misunderstood by the recent NYT article, please take that into consideration before writing about LGBT people.

    LGBT issues not only involve sex. The human experience relates, to affection , identity, self esteem, family, community and sexuality as well. Let’s frame this very important discussion under those premises and let’s find the Torah way to deal with this extremely complex dilemma, with empathy and compassion.

    • Steven Brizel says:

      Your narrative does not conform to the facts on the ground No one is oppressing the LGBT world What we see are demands by the LGBT world that said lifestyle be accepted as normal with no dissent as to grooming drag shows and brainwashing of children and especially viewed as normal in the Torah world where that lifestyle cannot be reconciled with many Torah prohibitions and what the Torah commands as to marriage between a man and woman via Chupah VKiddushin as the means of bringing much needed Kedusha into this world

    • Steven Brizel says:

      If the shoe fits you wear it

      Don’t attempt to mislead the readers here as to what is happening in public schools and displayed in so called pride parades all over the US and by claiming that the LGBT lifestyle can be reconciled with the Torah. No rebbe should ever be forced to undergo undergo any kind of sensitivity training because he believes in the values of the Torah with respect marriage between men and women and states that the Torah prohibits any other type of relationship and Chazal rejected both Greco Roman hedonism and celibacy

    • Steven Brizel says:

      As long as the LGBT movement remains on record abolishing any laws prohibiting pedofiila and glorified the same the issue of grooming by the LGBT world cannot be wished away as if it is irrelevant.BPedofilua is a cardinal belief in that world and attempting to lain that you can have some sort of mental or emotional Chinese wall as an LGBT person in the Orthodox world cannot be tolerated As we know about teachers who were grooming students in the MO world and who were thankfully terminated when their employers were confronted with evidence of the same

  11. Tal Benschar says:

    Some here have noted the fact that YU is a secular institution and takes public funds. Neither eliminate its right to have a point of view and refuse to give official sanction to those whose view is different.

    Suppose a group of YU students decided to form a “Liberate Palestine” club, dedicated to the proposition that the Palesitinians were robbed of their homeland by Zionism, that the State of Israel should be boycotted and dismantled, and anyone who cannot trace their ancestors to prior to 1880 should be deported to whatever country will take them.

    Does anyone seriously think that YU is within its First Amendment rights to deny such a club official recognition? As a lawyer, let me tell you, it clearly is.

    The same applies here, regardless of whether YU is a secular or religious institution. The club stands for and promotes positions and viewpoints that YU disagrees with, strongly. YU need not lend its name to that. It really is that simple, and shame on the NY courts for not recognizing that.

    • mycroft says:

      Some here have noted the fact that YU is a secular institution and takes public funds. Neither eliminate its right to have a point of view and refuse to give official sanction to those whose view is different.

      A secular institution /business does not have the right to discriminate by certain categories. View of owner can be different but has to treat protected classes equally. True for racer/religion sex. Sex now includes sexual preference.

      • Nachum says:

        You do know that YU does not admit women to some schools and does not admit men to others, right?

      • Tal Benschar says:

        Which is why YU could not refuse to admit a student based on sexual orientation. That is not the issue here, however. YU is being asked to give its imprimatur to ideas it strongly disagrees with.

        YU could not refuse to admit a Palestinian on the grounds of his national origina or religion. But it does not have to recognize a Liberate Palestine club of the type I posited.

  12. Steven Brizel says:

    R Efrem Shapiro explains why YU should stand on the side of Torah and against the views of the Pride Alliance
    https://yucommentator.org/2022/09/letter-to-the-editor-a-message-for-yu/ and Ben Shapiro
    https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/the-ben-shapiro-show Why Men and Women are Unhappy- sets forth the havoc caused by the sexual revolution, including the LGBT movement and the advocates of gender fluidity

  13. Steven Brizel says:

    Separation of church and state ever has meant an absolute wall That is a judicial gloss that is not supported by any of the historical evidence as to the drafting of the Bill of Rights It is only a bar to a state religion such as the Church of England and is not a prohibition to anything if a religious nature in public grounds or of public support for religious institutions or as a club to strangle free exercise of religion

    • mycroft says:

      Whether Supremes would have mandated that same aid be given to religious schools as secular schools irrelevant to me. I’m interested in honesty of Jewish institutions; they could change charter to religious institution and then do what they want religiously. Certainly, a good chance that current supreme court would agree with a lawsuit that they/d be entitled to same aid. Then would not have LGBT problem or less remembered a few years ago where some students wanted a Shabbos minyan that RY disagreed with. YU Admin gave them space in YU not in RIETS space.
      A Yeshiva must act honestly and be clean beinei elokim veadam.

    • Nachum says:

      The esteemed faculty write:

      “Students should know that this threat to YU’s reputation is real.”

      Reputation in the eyes of who? There are reputations and there are reputations.

      You want unity? Great. Why can’t the gays compromise instead?

    • mycroft says:

      Some here have noted the fact that YU is a secular institution and takes public funds. Neither eliminate its right to have a point of view and refuse to give official sanction to those whose view is different.

      A secular institution /business does not have the right to discriminate by certain categories. View of owner can be different but has to treat protected classes equally. True for racer/religion sex. Sex now includes sexual preference.

    • Robert Lebovits says:

      Hmmm…
      Standing in the academic community or being faithful to Torah and all it calls us to do to be Ovdei Hashem.
      Is this really a debatable question?

      • mycroft says:

        No but one can be honest and be chartered as a freligious institution if on e is goping to use the Torah rather than American equality rules as ones guide

    • mycroft says:

      Unlike the letter of the 1600 which had very few but a few leading musmachim of RIETS-aee eg the person who translated while the Rav was alive and consulting with him Ish Halacha and the other who edited a leading volume of the Ravs letters. The link you listed is essentially proof of why a divorce is necessary between a Yeshiva and a general university that follows ideals of kechol hagoyim-even if Kosher food is available.
      Having a general university that follows ideals of general academe-why. I remember Cardozo used to have a bright Prof Marci Hamilton, but her positions were constantly against those that religious organizations.
      What will be lost by a divorce, essentially nothing.YU kept Belfer building when they dropped their Grad School of Math and Science. They used the property for some administrative functions which enabled to have lower cost real estate. No matter what even top leadership having enjoying the idea they are head of a major university rather than concentrating on a much smaller budget but crucial for Yahadus a place of Torah and producing teachers/Rabbis etc.

  14. mycroft says:

    Unlike the letter of the 1600 which had very few but a few leading musmachim of RIETS-aee eg the person who translated while the Rav was alive and consulting with him Ish Halacha and the other who edited a leading volume of the Ravs letters. The link you listed is essentially proof of why a divorce is necessary between a Yeshiva and a general university that follows ideals of kechol hagoyim-even if Kosher food is available.
    Having a general university that follows ideals of general academe-why. I remember Cardozo used to have a bright Prof Marci Hamilton, but her positions were constantly against those that religious organizations.
    What will be lost by a divorce, essentially nothing.YU kept Belfer building when they dropped their Grad School of Math and Science. They used the property for some administrative functions which enabled to have lower cost real estate. No matter what even top leadership having enjoying the idea they are head of a major university rather than concentrating on a much smaller budget but crucial for Yahadus a place of Torah and producing teachers/Rabbis etc.

  15. mycroft says:

    You do know that YU does not admit women to some schools and does not admit men to others, right?

    Even secular schools like MIT currently have an all female dorm “The dorms could today be classified as Brutalist in design. The two concrete and glass towers front Memorial Drive and are connected by a low-rise community space. The buildings are used today as all-female dorms housing upward of 255 students.”
    https://www.cambridgeday.com/2021/12/27/first-mit-dorm-for-women-was-far-from-campus-in-the-home-of-a-grad-who-also-provided-shuttles/

    • Nachum says:

      That’s a dorm. Come on.

      • Mycroft says:

        They give options for all female dorm-they have had coed dorms for half a century.
        Re womens colleges from Wikipedia
        With several Supreme Court cases in the 1950s on the appellate court level determining that public single-sex universities violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, many women’s colleges have decided to accept males. Following a peak of 281 women’s colleges in the 1960s, the number of such schools has decreased dramatically.[2] Two of the Seven Sister colleges made transitions during and after the 1960s. The first, Radcliffe College, merged with Harvard University. Beginning in 1963, students at Radcliffe received Harvard diplomas signed by the presidents of Radcliffe and Harvard and joint commencement exercises began in 1970. The same year, several Harvard and Radcliffe dormitories began swapping students experimentally and in 1972 full co-residence was instituted. The departments of athletics of both schools merged shortly thereafter. In 1977, Harvard and Radcliffe signed an agreement that put undergraduate women entirely in Harvard College. In 1999 Radcliffe College was dissolved and Harvard University assumed full responsibility over the affairs of female undergraduates. Radcliffe is now the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study in Women’s Studies at Harvard University.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_colleges_in_the_United_States
        Of course, in reality education was certainly combined with Harvard’s by the early 1940s-exams would say Harvard University, syllabi, vast majority of courses were joint with Harvard. Phys Ed typically separate but most were simply Harvard courses that Radcliffe students took

  16. Steven Brizel says:

    This is what “gay pride” and the :LGBT movements suppports all over the UShttps://www.dailywire.com/news/pro-trans-group-behind-virginia-school-walkout-plans-to-rehome-gay-kids-who-hate-their-parents

  17. Shmuel Gorenstein says:

    When YU “askanim” of the time decided to charter themselves as “secular, non-sectarian…,) they were warned by wise men that the end of it is not going to be good. But of course, they knew better. Well, the whole of the problem being discussed here stems from that very choice they made. If you lie down with dogs, you get up with gays.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This