ArticlePDF Available

Whence Orthodox Jewish Feminism? Cognitive Dissonance and Religious Change in the United States

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

A large literature on feminist theology and philosophy of religion has explored the various ways in which feminism has reshaped religious thought and practice within different faith traditions. This study uses Festinger’s (1965) cognitive dissonance theory and the 2017 Nishma Research Survey of American Modern Orthodox Jews to examine the effect of tension between feminism and Orthodox Judaism on lay men and women. For 14% of Modern Orthodox Jews, issues related to women or women’s roles are what cause them “the most pain or unhappiness” as Orthodox Jews. The paper examines the sociodemographic characteristics associated with this response and tests whether those who experience this cognitive dissonance are more likely to (1) advocate for changes in the role of women within Orthodox Judaism and/or (2) experience religious doubt. The analysis reveals that these individuals overwhelmingly take a feminist stance on issues related to women’s roles in Orthodox Judaism, and they also manifest more religious doubt. The paper discusses the dual potential of cognitive dissonance to either spur changes in women’s religious roles in traditional religious communities and/or threaten the demographic vitality of those communities.
Content may be subject to copyright.
religions
Article
Whence Orthodox Jewish Feminism? Cognitive
Dissonance and Religious Change in the
United States
Michelle Shain
Cohen Center for Modern Jewish Studies, MS 014, Brandeis University, P.O. Box 549110, Waltham,
MA 02454-9110, USA; mshain@brandeis.edu
Received: 6 September 2018; Accepted: 25 October 2018; Published: 29 October 2018


Abstract:
A large literature on feminist theology and philosophy of religion has explored the various
ways in which feminism has reshaped religious thought and practice within different faith traditions.
This study uses Festinger’s (1965) cognitive dissonance theory and the 2017 Nishma Research Survey
of American Modern Orthodox Jews to examine the effect of tension between feminism and Orthodox
Judaism on lay men and women. For 14% of Modern Orthodox Jews, issues related to women or
women’s roles are what cause them “the most pain or unhappiness” as Orthodox Jews. The paper
examines the sociodemographic characteristics associated with this response and tests whether those
who experience this cognitive dissonance are more likely to (1) advocate for changes in the role
of women within Orthodox Judaism and/or (2) experience religious doubt. The analysis reveals
that these individuals overwhelmingly take a feminist stance on issues related to women’s roles
in Orthodox Judaism, and they also manifest more religious doubt. The paper discusses the dual
potential of cognitive dissonance to either spur changes in women’s religious roles in traditional
religious communities and/or threaten the demographic vitality of those communities.
Keywords: cognitive dissonance; religion; feminism; Jews; Orthodox
1. Introduction
A growing literature on feminist theology and philosophy of religion has documented the ways
in which sexism is being redressed in religious teachings and institutions. This paper focuses on
how lay people confront the tension between feminist and religious commitments. Using the idea
of cognitive dissonance, this study explores how men and women within one conservative religious
tradition—namely, Orthodox Judaism—understand and respond to feminist challenges. Following
existing research, it tests whether Orthodox Jews who experience cognitive dissonance as a result of
their religious and feminist commitments will be more likely to (1) advocate for changes in the role of
women within Orthodox Judaism and/or (2) experience religious doubt.
1.1. Cognitive Dissonance and Religious Change
Cognitive dissonance is the idea that people experience psychological discomfort when
there is inconsistency among their beliefs, or inconsistency between their beliefs and their
actions (
Festinger 1965
). Similarly, self-concept discrepancy theory holds that inconsistency
between an individual’s “actual” versus “ideal” or “ought” selves leads to psychic discomfort
(
Higgins et al. 1985
). In order to relieve this discomfort, people (1) try reduce dissonance by changing
their beliefs, actions or environments and (2) avoid situations and information that accentuate or
increase the dissonance.
Religions 2018,9, 332; doi:10.3390/rel9110332 www.mdpi.com/journal/religions
Religions 2018,9, 332 2 of 18
Cognitive dissonance has been widely used to explain religious change, on the individual and
group levels. Festinger (1956) classic study of a doomsday cult was one of the first to demonstrate
that, when presented with the cognitive dissonance of disconfirmed expectations, individuals often
rationalize and intensify their beliefs rather than abandon them. Subsequent experiments confirmed
this tendency with respect to religious beliefs (Batson 1975;Burris et al. 1997). The idea of cognitive
dissonance has also been used to explain why groups who are marginalized within a given religious
community may change their religious beliefs. For example, lesbian Christians in anti-gay religious
environments may choose to abandon the church or disregard the portions of Scripture that are
disparaging (Mahaffy 1996;Thumma 1991).
1.2. Religion and Feminism
Many scholars have acknowledged a tension between feminism and religion. To varying degrees,
Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Taoism and Confucianism all manifest sexist
teachings and institutions, such as holding that men are spiritually superior to women, giving men
more authority and prestige than women and identifying the divine as male (Gross 1996;
Paludi 2016
).
Beginning in the 1960s, academics, theologians and philosophers of religion started developing
feminist theologies and philosophies of religion to address these inequities (see, e.g.,
Anderson 1998
;
Anderson and Clack 2003
;Jantzen 1999;Parsons 2002). Religious feminist leaders within many
different faith traditions attempted to bring women’s experiences to bear on the interpretation of sacred
texts, liturgical language and ritual, and to increase the presence of women in religious leadership
(Braude 2004;Weaver 1995).
Outside of these elite circles, how does feminist consciousness penetrate and affect the lives
of religious individuals? As (Davidman 2000, p. 524) pointed out, understanding how individuals
reconcile religion and feminism requires knowing “just how it is that feminism comes to be situated
as a force that conservative religious groups must contend with.” Manning (1999) suggested that
education is key: support for feminism is correlated with educational attainment. Other research has
pointed to labor force participation: while unpaid labor in the home finds affirmation and legitimation
from traditional forms of religion, labor force participation exposes women to egalitarian ideas that
can challenge traditional religious beliefs (Schnabel 2016;Woodhead 2008). Empirically, being in the
labor force and having higher earnings are associated with lower levels of religiosity among women
(Pew Research Center 2016;Schnabel 2016).
What type of feminism penetrates and affect the lives of religious individuals? Is it the classical
liberal feminism that was mainstream among US feminists in the 1960s and 1970s, which asserts that
women and men deserve equal opportunity to succeed in the public sphere and seeks to dismantle
systematic, sex-based advantages (Tong and Botts 2017)? Is it a feminism that responds to the critiques
of liberal feminism that arose in the 1980s, one that focuses on women’s differences and recognizes that
multiple forms of oppression, including racism and classism, operate alongside sexism (Collins 1990;
Hooks 1981)? Crenshaw (1989) coined the term “intersectionality” to describe how multiple forms
of oppression reinforce one another, and subsequent feminist scholarship has focused extensively on
diversity among women and their multiple experiences of oppression (Davis 2008). At the same time,
liberal feminist ideas are still widely circulated outside the academy (Kinahan 2004).
A number of ethnographic and interview studies have explored how women, particularly
those in conservative religious communities, understand and respond to gender inequality within
their religious traditions (Beaman 2001;Brasher 1998;Davidman 1991;Ecklund 2003;Griffith 1997;
Hartman Halbertal 2002
;Ingersoll 2003;Kaufman 1991;Manning 1999;Ozorak 1996;
Rose 1987
;
Stacey and Gerard 1990
;Stocks 1998;Zimmerman 2015). Few of these studies articulate how
the research participants or the researcher define feminism. One exception is Manning (1999),
who concluded that Evangelical, conservative Catholic and Orthodox Jewish women understand
feminism as liberal feminism. Other research provides implicit support for this conclusion, as the
women focus on liberal feminist issues of systematic, sex-based discrimination, such as prohibitions
Religions 2018,9, 332 3 of 18
against women being clergy (e.g., Beaman 2001;Stacey and Gerard 1990). Only Zimmerman (2015)
frames her research in terms of intersectionality, arguing that Muslim women’s decision to wear the
hijab is affected by nation, colonialism, sexuality, class, religion, age and ability.1
Regardless of how feminism is defined, empirical findings support the idea that individuals
experience cognitive dissonance in trying to hold both religious and feminist beliefs. Data from the
General Social Survey was used to demonstrate that feminist churchgoers feel less close to God than
non-feminist churchgoers (Steiner-Aeschliman and Mauss 1996). The ethnographic and interview
studies cited above uncovered a wide range of responses to this tension:
Avoiding distress by focusing on other aspects of religious life;
Justifying distinct gender roles as natural and beneficial;
Reframing gendered religious practices as manifestations of women’s empowerment;
Pursuing alternative modes of power within their religious communities, such as women’s
ministry programs, that do not threaten male dominance;
Advocating for religious change, such as women in religious leadership roles and gender-inclusive
language about God; and
Switching to a more liberal religious community or abandoning religion altogether.
While uncovering the range and complexity in how religious women respond to the cognitive
dissonance that stems from competing religious and feminist ideas, these studies also raised several
new questions. How do religious individuals relate to the ideas of liberalfeminism versus intersectional
feminism? How does feminist consciousness penetrate religious communities in the first place?
How strong is the influence of cognitive dissonance on individuals’ likelihood of changing their
religious beliefs? This paper will examine these questions with reference to one conservative US
religious group: Orthodox Jews.
1.3. The Case of Orthodox Jews
This study examines the conflict between feminism and religion among Orthodox Jews. Orthodox
Judaism is, in general, the most conservative of the Jewish religious movements, asserting that Jews
have a divine obligation to follow the laws of the Torah as understood by Jewish rabbinic tradition.
In a contemporary American context, scholars and lay people alike distinguish between “Modern
Orthodox” Jews, who attempt to maintain Jewish law while also engaging with modern, secular
knowledge, and more right-wing Orthodox Jews, who attempt to separate themselves from the secular
world (Fishman 2007). About 10% of all US Jewish adults identify as Orthodox, and about one third of
those identify as Modern Orthodox (Pew Research Center 2013).
Several feminist scholars have laid out the specific conflicts between Orthodox Judaism and
feminism (Greenberg 1981;Hartman 2007;Ross 2004,2000).
2
Men and women are not equal under
Orthodox Jewish law, and only men serve as Jewish legal decisors; furthermore, women have
more limited opportunities to engage in traditional Jewish learning or serve in leadership roles.
One particular aspect of Orthodox Jewish law has become a lightning rod for feminist criticism: the
fact that men must actively grant a divorce, leaving some women as agunot (“chained wives”) if
their husbands disappear or refuse to grant them a divorce (Hacohen 2004). Fishman (1993) (p. 159)
described Orthodox Jewish feminists as “psychologically split at the root” due to the difficulty of
reconciling feminism with an androcentric religious tradition.
Some Orthodox Jewish leaders have responded to feminist critiques with apologetic reasoning
for the existing norms, arguing that gender roles within traditional Judaism reflect innate,
1
Griffith (1997) discusses intersectionality briefly, only to note that mainstream feminists have not responded to the substantive
critiques of religious women in the way they have responded to the substantive critiques of women of color.
2
There is also significant Jewish feminist scholarship outside of Orthodoxy (e.g., Adler 1998;Plaskow 1991), which rests on
different theological assumptions about the nature of revelation and covenant.
Religions 2018,9, 332 4 of 18
biological differences between men and women (Kaufman 1993). At the same time, methods for
minimizing gender inequities have also developed: more flexible interpretations of existing norms,
legal workarounds to subvert sexist practices and rituals centered on the religious experiences of girls
and women. For example, many Orthodox Jewish communities have adopted bat mitzvah ceremonies
for girls and women’s prayer groups (Fishman 1993;Uzan 2016). Orthodox “partnership” prayer
groups wherein women are included more broadly in ritual leadership have appeared across Israel
and North America (Sztokman 2011;Uzan 2016). Women have also entered into Orthodox Jewish
legal discourse through the creation of new positions like yoetzet halakhah, female Jewish legal advisor,
and toenet rabbanit, female rabbinical court advocate (Roness 2013;Shamir et al. 1997). These and other
efforts to maximize meaningful participation and equality for women within Orthodox Judaism have
been highly controversial.
Ross (2000) claimed that, as many Orthodox Jews have adopted mainstream, Western,
gender egalitarian views, the status of women has become the single greatest challenge to the
future of Orthodoxy. There is little systematic data to either support or challenge this assertion.
Two ethnographic studies found that newly Orthodox Jewish women did not identify as feminists,
nor did they challenge gender inequities within Orthodoxy; instead, they lauded Orthodoxy for
honoring women’s roles as wives and mothers, for holding men accountable to women and for
valorizing “feminine” values like nurturance (Davidman 1991;Kaufman 1991). Yet, these two studies
focused exclusively on the subset of Orthodox Jewish women who became Orthodox as adults.
In contrast, (Hartman Halbertal 2002, p. 154) qualitative interview study demonstrated the “genuine
and painful ambivalence or multivalence” of mothers who are both Orthodox Jewish feminists and
religious educators, but these women reflected a religiously educated elite.
Only Fishman (2000)
qualitative interview study captured the attitudes of typical Orthodox women. Some women
articulated that the sharp contrast between their professional advancement and their secondary
roles in the synagogue created “psychic discomfort” or “dissonance,” which sometimes led them to
agitate for change within their communities (Fishman 2000, p. 34).
1.4. Research Questions
The present study begins by examining how Modern Orthodox Jews in the United States who
experience cognitive dissonance as a result of their commitment to Orthodoxy and feminism describe
their experiences. It then identifies the sociodemographic characteristics associated with experiencing
that cognitive dissonance. Unlike previous studies, this study includes women and men, and sex is
included as a predictor in the analysis. This study then asks whether cognitive dissonance is leading
individuals to (1) advocate for changes in the role of women within Orthodox Judaism and/or (2)
reject Orthodox Jewish beliefs. Because this is a quantitative study, it is also possible to estimate the
magnitude of the influence of cognitive dissonance on these two outcomes.
2. Materials and Methods
This study uses data from the 2017 Nishma Research Survey of American Modern Orthodox Jews.
The data and their limitations are described in detail below. The analysis consisted of three phases.
First, responses to open-ended questions were used to identify respondents who were experiencing
cognitive dissonance as a result of their religious and feminist commitments, and logistic regression
was used to determine the sociodemographic characteristics of those respondents. Second, latent
class analysis was used to identify respondents’ stances toward the role of women in Orthodox
Judaism, and this stance was modelled as a function of experiencing cognitive dissonance and other
sociodemographic factors. Third, an index of core Orthodox Jewish beliefs was modelled as a function
of experiencing cognitive dissonance and other sociodemographic factors.
Religions 2018,9, 332 5 of 18
2.1. Data
The 2017 Nishma Research Survey of American Modern Orthodox Jews was a project of Nishma
Research, a private research firm specializing in the Jewish community. The survey was sponsored
by the Micah Foundation, a 501(c)(3) charitable organization whose mission is to promote and
enhance Jewish religious and cultural life. The target population for the survey was self-identified
Modern Orthodox Jewish adults living in the United States. Data were collected through a web-based,
opt-in survey. The Rabbinical Council of America, the main professional rabbinical association for
American Modern Orthodox rabbis, distributed the link to the survey to its member rabbis (~1000) and
asked them to share the link with their congregants. The survey was available from 27 June 2017 to 31
August 2017. After eliminating responses from individuals who did not identify as Modern Orthodox
or did not live in the United States, the total number of complete responses was 2688. Response rates
cannot be calculated because neither the size of the target population nor the proportion of the target
population that saw the link is known. Due to the lack of precise, reliable demographic information
on the target population, data were not weighted. The survey instrument is publicly available from
Nishma Research (2017).
There are several limitations to the Nishma survey data. The first relates to the non-independence
of the observations. Because the survey was initially distributed by congregational rabbis, respondents
were clustered within congregations; and because spouses were encouraged to take the survey
separately, some respondents may be clustered within households. Members of the same congregation
or household cannot be identified. All the analytic techniques used here (e.g., logistic regression,
Latent Class Analysis) assume independence of observations. The clustering of observations may bias
the reported p-values.
The second limitation is representativeness. Table 1compares the Nishma survey respondents to
US Modern Orthodox Jewish adults using data from the Pew Research Center (2013) Survey of US
Jews. The estimates from the Pew Research Center survey are imprecise, but it appears that the age and
gender profile of the Nishma survey respondents was roughly consistent with the target population,
as was the proportion raised Orthodox.
3
However, the Nishma survey respondents were more likely
than the target population to be married and to have graduate degrees. In order to address response
bias, analyses will include all these sociodemographic variables as covariates. The relationships
between variables, rather than point estimates, are key to the present analysis.
Other limitations relate to the fact that that the survey was not designed to examine cognitive
dissonance related to the conflict between feminism and Orthodoxy, and the present analysis was
retrofitted to the data. The survey did not contain any items related to secular feminism, precluding
any analysis of how secular feminist beliefs (as opposed to religious beliefs) are influenced by cognitive
dissonance. Furthermore, the study’s target population included only current Modern Orthodox
Jews, meaning that individuals for whom cognitive dissonance related to feminism and Orthodoxy
prompted them to abandon their Modern Orthodox identification are out-of-frame.
3
Only 2% of US Jews are converts to Judaism (Pew Research Center 2013). The Nishma survey did not ask about
conversion, but the vast majority of respondents who began to identify as Orthodox at age 11 or older were likely
raised as non-Orthodox Jews.
Religions 2018,9, 332 6 of 18
Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics of sample.
Item Response N % All US Modern Orthodox
Jewish Adults 1
Sex
Man 1408 52% 55% [45%–64%]
Woman 1280 48% 45% [36%–55%]
Total 2688 100% 100%
Age group
18–34 582 22% 18% [12%–27%]
35–44 484 18% 10% [7%–15%]
45–54 455 17% 27% [18%–38%]
55–64 491 18% 18% [10%–30%]
65+ 676 25% 27% [21%–33%]
Total 2688 100% 100%
Marital status
Not married 563 21% 49% [40%–59%]
Married 2125 79% 51% [41%–61%]
Total 2688 100% 100%
Region
East 1798 67% 60% [49%–71%]
Midwest 115 4% 8% [5%–11%]
South 606 23% 20% [11%–32%]
West 169 6% 12% [5%–26%]
Total 2688 100% 100%
Highest level of education
No college degree 217 8% 35% [26%–45%]
College degree 840 31% 36% [26%–47%]
Graduate/professional degree
1630 61% 29% [22%–37%]
Total 2687 100% 100%
Annual household income
Under $50,000 168 8% 32% [21%–46%]
$50,000–$99,999 413 21% 20% [14%–27%]
$100,000–$199,999 662 33% 27% [20%–36%]
$200,000 or more 763 38% 21% [12%–34%]
Total 2006 100% 100%
Labor force participation
In labor force 1958 73% 61% [51%–71%]
Not in labor force 143 5% 39% [29%–49%]
Student, retired 581 22%
Total 2682 100% 100%
At what stage in life did you begin
to identify yourself as belonging
to the Orthodox community?
Age 10 or younger 1121 42% 44% [34%–55%]
Age 11 or older 1555 58% 56% [45%–66%]
Total 2676 100% 100%
1
Estimates reflect author’s analysis of the Pew Research Center (2013) Survey of US Jews, using the Steinhardt
Social Research Institute’s minor reclassifications of Jewish respondents (Saxe et al. 2014). Brackets show 95%
confidence intervals.
2.2. Identifying Cognitive Dissonance and Its Correlates
The first step in the analysis was to determine which respondents were experiencing cognitive
dissonance as a result of their religious and feminist commitments. Toward the end of the survey,
respondents were told, “Thank you so much for taking this survey. We’re up to the final two questions
dealing with your views on Judaism. These questions are open-ended so please tell us as much as you
like; we would really love to hear a bit more of your key thoughts.” Respondents were then presented
with two open-ended questions:
“First, what gives the most satisfaction, joy or meaning to your life as an Orthodox/Observant Jew?”
“And
. . .
what, if anything, causes you the most pain or unhappiness as an Orthodox/Observant Jew?”
Seventy-four percent of respondents (N = 1989) provided answers to these questions. Respondents
who mentioned any issue relating to women or women’s roles in Orthodoxy as a cause of pain or
unhappiness were coded as experiencing cognitive dissonance as a result of their religious and feminist
commitments.
4
The content of the answers was analyzed to identify the locus of concern as well as
4
A small number of individuals wrote that that an issue relating to women or women’s roles in Orthodoxy was a source
of satisfaction, joy or meaning (N = 17), or that Orthodox feminism itself caused them pain, e.g., “I am so frustrated with
women on the left speaking for all women” (N = 12). These individuals were not coded as experiencing cognitive dissonance.
Religions 2018,9, 332 7 of 18
how respondents understood feminism, whether in a liberal feminist frame or through intersectionality.
Then, in order to understand the sociodemographic characteristics of Modern Orthodox Jews who
experienced cognitive dissonance related to these issues, the binary variable was modelled as a function
of the variables in Table 1.
2.3. Identifying Orthodox Feminist Stance and Its Correlates
The second step in the analysis was to identify the stance toward Orthodox feminism of
individuals in the sample. This was accomplished using Latent Class Analysis (LCA), a type of
measurement model that was developed to identify a latent categorical variable using a set of
observed variables, and then categorize observations into classes using the observed variables
(
Lazarsfeld and Henry 1968
). Many types of observed variables (binary, ordinal, nominal, count,
and continuous) can be used. In this case, 14 survey items related to attitudes toward women’s roles in
Orthodox Judaism were used to identify a latent categorical variable measuring Orthodox feminist
stance (Table 2). Responses were recoded into two or three categories.
Table 2. Observed variables for latent class analysis.
Item Response N %
Women should have the opportunity .. . for expanded
roles in Torah study and scholarship.
Agree (fully, somewhat, a little) 2572 96%
Do not agree, Don’t know 94 4%
Total 2666 100%
Women should have the opportunity .. . for expanded
roles in Torah teaching.
Agree (fully, somewhat, a little) 2541 95%
Do not agree, Don’t know 124 5%
Total 2665 100%
Religious classes for women should be on an intellectual
level generally equal to those offered to men.
Favor 2457 92%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 204 8%
Oppose 11 0%
Total 2672 100%
The shul should offer coed religious classes (e.g., shiurim,
Torah learning).
Favor 2126 80%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 469 18%
Oppose 67 3%
Total 2662 100%
Women should be eligible to give divrei Torah from the shul
bima/pulpit.
Favor 1723 65%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 616 23%
Oppose 318 12%
Total 2657 100%
Women should have the opportunity .. . for expanded
roles in organizational leadership.
Agree (fully, somewhat, a little) 2573 96%
Do not agree, Don’t know 95 4%
Total 2668 100%
Women should be eligible to be shul president.
Favor 1981 74%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 523 20%
Oppose 160 6%
Total 2664 100%
If Modern Orthodox or Centrist Orthodox women are
given expanded roles in the clergy, how important is it to
you that they also be given some sort of title signifying
their “rabbinic authority”?
Very, Somewhat important 1106 42%
Not too, Not at all important, Don’t know 554 21%
N/A—Do not agree with expanded roles in the clergy 992 37%
Total 2652 100%
Do you regard the following as problems facing your
Jewish community? . . . Agunot (“chained women” who
cannot re-marry)
Serious problem, Somewhat a problem 2353 89%
Not a problem, Not sure 304 11%
Total 2657 100%
The shul should have a mechitzah structure that is
“women-friendly.”
Favor 1940 73%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 605 23%
Oppose 112 4%
Total 2657 100%
Women should be eligible to say Mourner’s Kaddish or
Birkat Gomel out loud, even if no men are saying it.
Favor 1831 69%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 620 23%
Oppose 213 8%
Total 2664 100%
The Torah should pass through the women’s section
before and after Torah reading.
Favor 1236 46%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know 974 37%
Oppose 456 17%
Total 2666 100%
Do you regard the following as problems facing your
Jewish community? . . . Rabbis advocating for increased
women’s roles
Serious problem, Somewhat a problem 573 22%
Not a problem, Not sure 2064 78%
Total 2637 100%
Do you regard the following as problems facing your
Jewish community? . . . Rabbis opposed to increased
women’s roles
Serious problem, Somewhat a problem 1741 66%
Not a problem, Not sure 917 34%
Total 2658 100%
Religions 2018,9, 332 8 of 18
LCA was implemented using a Stata plugin (Lanza et al. 2015). Because LCA requires a decision
regarding the number of latent classes to fit, models with successively larger numbers of classes
were fitted, and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) was used to determine which model to use
(Nylund et al. 2007). As shown in the scree chart of the BIC for each latent class model (Figure 1),
a four-class solution was parsimonious and had good fit-values.
Religions 2018, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 19
Do you regard the following as problems facing
your Jewish community? … Rabbis advocating for
increased women’s roles
573
22%
2064
78%
2637
100%
Do you regard the following as problems facing
your Jewish community? … Rabbis opposed to
increased women’s roles
1741
66%
917
34%
2658
100%
LCA was implemented using a Stata plugin (Lanza et al. 2015). Because LCA requires a decision
regarding the number of latent classes to fit, models with successively larger numbers of classes were
fitted, and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) was used to determine which model to use (see
Nylund et al. 2007). As shown in the scree chart of the BIC for each latent class model (Figure 1), a
four-class solution was parsimonious and had good fit-values.
Figure 1. Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) for latent class models.
Respondents were assigned to a latent class based on posterior probabilities (i.e., maximum-
probability assignment). In order to understand the role cognitive dissonance in Orthodox feminist
stance, latent class was then modelled as a function of the binary cognitive dissonance variable and
the sociodemographic variables in Table 1.
2.4. Identifying Orthodox Jewish Beliefs and Their Correlates
An index of Orthodox Jewish beliefs was created by summing across the five survey items
shown in Table 3. The index was found to be highly reliable (α = 0.90), with a range of 0 to 10 and a
mean of 6.7. In order to understand the role of cognitive dissonance in Orthodox Jewish beliefs, the
index was modelled as a function of the binary cognitive dissonance variable and the
sociodemographic variables in Table 1.
Table 3. Items in index of Orthodox Jewish beliefs.
Item
Response
Value
N
%
Hashem (G-d) created the world
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know
0
269
10%
Tend to believe
1
434
16%
Believe fully
2
1956
74%
Total
2659
100%
Hashem is involved in all of the
world’s day-to-day activities, and
knows and guides the events of my
daily life
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know
0
642
24%
Tend to believe
1
702
26%
Believe fully
2
1314
49%
Total
2658
100%
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know
0
716
27%
2 classes
3 classes
4 classes 5 classes 6 classes 7 classes 8 classes
6200
6400
6600
6800
7000
7200
7400
7600
7800
8000
Bayesian Information Criterion
(BIC)
Figure 1. Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) for latent class models.
Respondents were assigned to a latent class based on posterior probabilities (i.e., maximum-
probability assignment). In order to understand the role cognitive dissonance in Orthodox feminist
stance, latent class was then modelled as a function of the binary cognitive dissonance variable and
the sociodemographic variables in Table 1.
2.4. Identifying Orthodox Jewish Beliefs and Their Correlates
An index of Orthodox Jewish beliefs was created by summing across the five survey items shown
in Table 3. The index was found to be highly reliable (
α
= 0.90), with a range of 0 to 10 and a mean
of 6.7. In order to understand the role of cognitive dissonance in Orthodox Jewish beliefs, the index
was modelled as a function of the binary cognitive dissonance variable and the sociodemographic
variables in Table 1.
Table 3. Items in index of Orthodox Jewish beliefs.
Item Response Value N %
Hashem (G-d) created the world
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know 0 269 10%
Tend to believe 1 434 16%
Believe fully 2 1956 74%
Total 2659 100%
Hashem is involved in all of the world’s day-to-day
activities, and knows and guides the events of my
daily life
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know 0 642 24%
Tend to believe 1 702 26%
Believe fully 2 1314 49%
Total 2658 100%
Hashem loves me and everything that happens to
me is ultimately for the best
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know 0 716 27%
Tend to believe 1 749 28%
Believe fully 2 1193 45%
Total 2658 100%
Hashem gave the written Torah to the Jewish
people, through Moshe, at Mt. Sinai
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know 0 441 17%
Tend to believe 1 535 20%
Believe fully 2 1688 63%
Total 2664 100%
Hashem transmitted all of the oral Torah to Moshe
Have doubts, do not believe, don’t know 0 818 31%
Tend to believe 1 539 20%
Believe fully 2 1308 49%
Total 2665 100%
Religions 2018,9, 332 9 of 18
3. Results
3.1. Cognitive Dissonance
Are US Modern Orthodox Jews experiencing cognitive dissonance as a result of their commitment
to both Orthodoxy and feminism? Fourteen percent of respondents (N = 281) mentioned an issue
relating to women or women’s roles in Orthodoxy as a cause of pain or unhappiness. A few of these
respondents explicitly mentioned the contrast between women’s roles in secular society and women’s
roles in Orthodoxy:
“Being completely sidelined because I’m a woman. Main tasks are cooking for Shabbat and
yom tov [holidays] with no meaningful engagement. I am a working mom and lawyer. But I am
relegated to the kitchen.”
“The inconsistency of women achieving great feats in the secular world but their Jewish experience
kept at a 2nd grade level.”
“The unequal status of men and women—very hard to justify to my daughter as everything is so
equal elsewhere in or lives. Going to lose our youth, who won’t accept it!”
Among the respondents who were coded as experiencing cognitive dissonance, most of their
comments concerned the fact that women’s roles and men’s roles are not equal within Orthodox
Judaism. Issues mentioned by at least 25 respondents, in descending order of frequency, were:
Women being unequal or undervalued in Orthodoxy in general;
Gender inequities in the process of Orthodox Jewish religious divorce;
Women’s exclusion from Orthodox Jewish religious ritual and practice;
Women’s exclusion from Orthodox Jewish communal leadership positions;
Different or worse Jewish learning or teaching opportunities for women and girls, and/or
dismissal of women’s intellectual capacities;
Poor treatment of unmarried women and/or childless women within Orthodox communities.
In general, respondents did not identify other forms of oppression that might operate alongside
sexism. Only in the case of the poor treatment of unmarried and childless women did respondents take
an implicitly intersectional approach, noting how the disadvantages of being unmarried or childless
are compounded for women. Only women mentioned this issue, describing it this way:
“Without family, most observance is very isolated. There is virtually no inclusion of older, female
singles, while single men get invited to meals and set up regularly.”
“I am not married so I don’t feel the connection to the shul as much as if I were. Men attend
minyan, get the most information and education so sometimes I feel estranged and it makes me
a little sad.”
“Women still have second-class status; single women, third-class status.”
What are the characteristics of Modern Orthodox Jews who are experiencing cognitive dissonance?
Table 4shows the results of a logistic regression model of experiencing cognitive dissonance on
sociodemographic characteristics, including sex. Holding other factors constant, women were more
likely than men to experience cognitive dissonance as a result of conflicting religious and feminist
commitments. According to the model, the average probability of experiencing cognitive dissonance
as a result of conflicting religious and feminist commitments was 22% for women and 7% for men.
Additionally, holding other factors constant, respondents with graduate degrees were more
likely than those with lower levels of educational attainment to experience cognitive dissonance,
and respondents ages 65 and older were less likely than younger respondents to experience cognitive
dissonance. Marital status, geographic region, household income, labor force participation and whether
the respondent belonged to the Orthodox community in childhood were not independently related to
experiencing cognitive dissonance.
Religions 2018,9, 332 10 of 18
Table 4.
Logistic regression of experiencing cognitive dissonance on sociodemographic characteristics (coef.).
Sex (omitted: man) Woman 1.37 ***
Age (omitted: 35–44)
18–34 0.36
45–54 0.03
55–64 0.30
65+ 1.11 **
Marital status (omitted: not married) Married 0.14
Region (omitted: East)
Midwest 0.17
South 0.23
West 0.45
Highest level of education (omitted: college degree) No college degree 0.47
Graduate/professional degree 0.37 *
Annual household income (omitted:
$100,000–$199,999)
Under $50,000 0.21
$50,000–$99,999 0.09
$200,000 or more 0.30
Labor force participation (omitted: in labor force) Not in labor force 0.27
Student, retired 0.19
At what stage in life did you begin to identify
yourself as belonging to the Orthodox community?
(omitted: age 11 or older)
Age 10 or younger 0.16
*** p< 0.001, ** p< 0.01, * p< 0.05.
3.2. Orthodox Feminist Stance
What is the relationship between cognitive dissonance stemming from commitment to both
Orthodoxy and feminism, and beliefs about the role of women within Orthodox Judaism? Using LCA,
the analysis identified four distinct “classes” or stances toward Orthodox feminism. The results of the
LCA are shown in Table 5: the class probability parameters specify the relative prevalence (size) of each
class, and the item parameters indicate the probability of an individual in that class to endorse the item.
The class names “strong feminist,” “cautious feminist,” “unbothered” and “oppositional” were chosen
by the author. A narrative description of each class follows Table 5.
Religions 2018,9, 332 11 of 18
Table 5. Latent class model parameters.
Item Response Strong Feminist Cautious Feminist Unbothered Oppositional
Class probability parameters
n/a n/a 41% 31% 20% 8%
Item parameters
Women should have the opportunity .. . for expanded roles in Torah study and
scholarship.
Agree (fully, somewhat, a little) 100% 99% 98% 64%
Do not agree, Don’t know 0% 1% 2% 36%
Women should have the opportunity .. . for expanded roles in Torah teaching. Agree (fully, somewhat, a little) 100% 98% 99% 53%
Do not agree, Don’t know 0% 2% 1% 47%
Religious classes for women should be on an intellectual level generally equal to
those offered to men.
Favor 100% 96% 83% 60%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
0% 4% 17% 36%
Oppose 0% 0% 0% 5%
The shul should offer coed religious classes (e.g., shiurim, Torah learning).
Favor 96% 84% 56% 39%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
4% 16% 41% 41%
Oppose 0% 0% 4% 20%
Women should be eligible to give divrei Torah from the shul bima / pulpit.
Favor 99% 68% 12% 3%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
1% 31% 58% 24%
Oppose 0% 2% 29% 72%
Women should have the opportunity .. . for expanded roles in organizational
leadership.
Agree (fully, somewhat, a little) 100% 99% 99% 61%
Do not agree, Don’t know 0% 1% 1% 39%
Women should be eligible to be shul president.
Favor 99% 85% 32% 10%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
1% 14% 57% 47%
Oppose 0% 1% 11% 42%
If Modern Orthodox or Centrist Orthodox women are given expanded roles in the
clergy, how important is it to you that they also be given some sort of title
signifying their “rabbinic authority”?
Very, Somewhat important 82% 23% 3% 0%
Not too, Not at all important, Don’t know 14% 38% 15% 2%
n/a - Do not agree with expanded roles in the clergy 4% 38% 82% 98%
Do you regard the following as problems facing your Jewish community? . ..
Agunot (“chained women” who cannot re-marry)
Serious problem, Somewhat a problem 94% 86% 85% 81%
Not a problem, Not sure 6% 14% 15% 19%
The shul should have a mechitzah structure that is “women-friendly.”
Favor 98% 74% 39% 25%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
2% 25% 53% 48%
Oppose 0% 1% 8% 27%
Women should be eligible to say Mourner’s Kaddish or Birkat Gomel out loud,
even if no men are saying it.
Favor 98% 72% 23% 16%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
2% 26% 60% 35%
Oppose 0% 2% 17% 49%
The Torah should pass through the women’s section before and after Torah
reading.
Favor 82% 32% 10% 7%
Neutral, Defer to rabbis, Don’t know or not applicable
18% 57% 47% 24%
Oppose 0% 10% 42% 69%
Do you regard the following as problems facing your Jewish community? . ..
Rabbis advocating for increased women’s roles
Serious problem, Somewhat a problem 12% 16% 40% 50%
Not a problem, Not sure 88% 84% 60% 50%
Do you regard the following as problems facing your Jewish community? . ..
Rabbis opposed to increased women’s roles
Serious problem, Somewhat a problem 88% 62% 42% 16%
Not a problem, Not sure 12% 38% 58% 84%
Religions 2018,9, 332 12 of 18
The “strong feminist” class (41% of respondents) demonstrated near-universal support for
expanded roles for women in Torah study and teaching, including co-ed religious classes
and women teaching from the pulpit. The class also demonstrated near-universal support
for expanded roles for women in organizational leadership, including as synagogue presidents
and as titled clergy, and for women’s inclusion across several diverse areas of Jewish ritual life.
Individuals in the strong feminist class had an 88% probability of saying that rabbis opposed to
increased women’s roles pose problems for their Jewish community.
The “cautious feminist” class (31% of respondents) also demonstrated near-universal support
for expanded roles for women in Torah study and teaching, although individuals in this class
had only a 68% probability of supporting women teaching from the pulpit. This class also
demonstrated near-universal support for expanded roles for women in organizational leadership
in general, although their views on women as clergy were mixed. In general, this class was
likely to be favorable or neutral toward women’s inclusion in other areas of Jewish ritual life.
These individuals had a 62% probability of saying that rabbis opposed to increased women’s roles
pose problems for their Jewish community.
The “unbothered” class (20% of respondents) demonstrated near-universal support for expanded
roles for women in Torah study and teaching in general, but not necessarily for co-ed religious
classes or for women teaching from the pulpit. The class also supported expanded roles for
women in organizational leadership in general, but were unlikely to favor women as synagogue
presidents or clergy. Individuals in this class were likely to be neutral or unsure about women’s
inclusion in other areas of Jewish ritual life, and they were about equally likely to see rabbis
opposed to and advocating for increased women’s roles as problems for their Jewish community.
The “oppositional” class (8% of respondents) was more likely than not to support expanded
roles for women in Torah study, teaching and organizational leadership in general, but this
support was far from universal. In particular, individuals in this class were very likely to oppose
women teaching from the pulpit or serving as clergy. They were generally neutral about or
opposed to women’s inclusion in other areas of Jewish ritual life, and they had an 84% likelihood
of thinking that rabbis opposed to increased women’s roles did not pose a problem to their
Jewish communities.
After respondents were assigned to the latent class to which they had the greatest probability
of belonging, a multinomial logistic regression model of Orthodox feminist stance on experiencing
cognitive dissonance and sociodemographic characteristics was run. Results are shown in Table 6.
Holding other factors constant, respondents who experienced cognitive dissonance were more likely
to have a strong or cautious Orthodox feminist stance. Even holding the experience of cognitive
dissonance constant, women were more likely than men to have a strong or cautious Orthodox
feminist stance.
Additionally, holding other factors constant, respondents from the West were more likely than
those from the East to have a strong feminist stance, and those from the South were least likely;
those with advanced degrees were more likely to have a strong or cautious feminist stance, while those
without college degrees were more likely to have an oppositional stance; those with the lowest
annual household incomes were more likely to have an oppositional stance; and those who were
raised Orthodox were less likely to have a strong feminist stance. Age, marital status and labor force
participation were not independently related to Orthodox feminist stance.
Religions 2018,9, 332 13 of 18
Table 6.
Multinomial logistic regression of Orthodox feminist stance on experiencing cognitive
dissonance and sociodemographic characteristics (coef.).
Item Response Strong Feminist Cautious Feminist Oppositional
Experiencing cognitive dissonance (omitted: no) Yes 2.03 *** 0.95 * 0.23
Sex (omitted: man) Woman 0.38 * 0.38 * 0.40
Age (omitted: 35–44)
18–34 0.35 0.03 0.13
45–54 0.08 0.27 0.19
55–64 0.01 0.31 0.18
65+ 0.27 0.29 0.57
Marital status (omitted: not married) Married 0.15 0.18 0.37
Region (omitted: East)
Midwest 0.06 0.23 0.54
South 0.43 * 0.1 0.15
West 0.75 * 0.26 0.11
Highest level of education (omitted:
college degree)
No college degree 0.5 0.13 0.94 *
Graduate/professional degree
0.66 *** 0.37* 0.12
Annual household income (omitted:
$100,000–$199,999)
Under $50,000 0.00 0.17 0.79
$50,000–$99,999 0.08 0.05 0.05
$200,000 or more 0.10 0.19 0.23
Labor force participation (omitted: in labor force) Not in labor force 0.17 0.03 0.01
Student, retired 0.13 0.04 0.56
At what stage in life did you begin to identify
yourself as belonging to the Orthodox community?
(omitted: age 11 or older)
Age 10 or younger 0.32 * 0.15 0.03
*** p< 0.001, ** p< 0.01, * p< 0.05, Base outcome: unbothered.
Recall that in this data set, 14% of respondents were coded as experiencing cognitive dissonance
as a result of the conflict between their religious and feminist commitments, and 41% were in the
“strong feminist” class. Using the model shown in Table 6, it is possible to predict changes in Orthodox
feminist stance were the proportion of the population experiencing cognitive dissonance to increase.
If all respondents were to experience cognitive dissonance, the proportion in the “strong feminist” class
would increase to 71%. Thus, the experience of cognitive dissonance is associated with substantial
commitment to Orthodox feminism, including support for women as titled clergy.
3.3. Orthodox Jewish Beliefs
What is the relationship between cognitive dissonance stemming from a commitment to both
Orthodoxy and feminism, and Orthodox Jewish beliefs? The index of Orthodox Jewish beliefs was
modelled as a function of the binary cognitive dissonance variable and the sociodemographic variables
in Table 1. Results are shown in Table 7.
Holding other factors constant, respondents who experienced cognitive dissonance had lower
scores on the belief index. Other factors that were independently, negatively related to the belief index
were: being younger than 35, living in the West as opposed to the East, having an advanced degree
and being a student or retired. Factors that were independently, positively related to the belief index
were: earning less than the typical household income and being raised Orthodox. Sex and marital
status were not independently related to the belief index.
Again, recall that in this data set, 15% of respondents were coded as experiencing cognitive
dissonance as a result of the conflict between their religious and feminist commitments, and the
mean score on the belief index was 6.9. According to the model shown in Table 7, if all respondents
experienced cognitive dissonance, the mean index score would be 4.7—a 32% decrease. Thus,
the experience of cognitive dissonance is associated with substantial religious doubt.
Religions 2018,9, 332 14 of 18
Table 7.
Linear regression of Orthodox Jewish belief index on experiencing cognitive dissonance and
sociodemographic characteristics (coef.).
Experiencing Cognitive Dissonance (Omitted: No) Yes 2.14 ***
Sex (omitted: man) Woman 0.09
Age (omitted: 35–44)
18–34 0.57 *
45–54 0.06
55–64 0.17
65+ 0.38
Marital status (omitted: not married) Married 0.20
Region (omitted: East)
Midwest 0.74
South 0.31
West 1.19 **
Highest level of education (omitted: college degree) No college degree 0.96 **
Graduate/professional degree 0.56 **
Annual household income (omitted: $100,000–$199,999)
Under $50,000 0.76 *
$50,000–$99,999 0.68 **
$200,000 or more 0.05
Labor force participation (omitted: in labor force) Not in labor force 0.03
Student, retired 0.76 **
At what stage in life did you begin to identify yourself as belonging
to the Orthodox community? (omitted: age 11 or older) Age 10 or younger 0.52 **
*** p< 0.001, ** p< 0.01, * p< 0.05.
4. Discussion
This study explores three critical questions related to how religious individuals confront
the tension between feminist and religious commitments. First, how do religious individuals
understand feminism as it relates to their religious lives? Second, how does feminist consciousness
penetrate religious communities? Third, what is the impact of cognitive dissonance on individuals’
religious beliefs?
This study provides evidence of widespread cognitive dissonance among US Modern Orthodox
Jews due to the tension between feminism and Orthodox Judaism. A non-trivial proportion of the
population—14% of the study’s respondents—reported that issues relating to women or women’s roles
in Orthodoxy cause them the most pain or unhappiness as Orthodox Jews. Most of the respondents’
concerns revolved around what they perceived as unjust sex-based discrimination, such as women’s
disadvantageous position in Orthodox Jewish divorce. This focus on discrimination and unequal
opportunity mirrors the concerns of classical liberal feminism in the 1960s and 1970s, at the beginning
of the second-wave feminist movement.
How does feminist consciousness enter the Orthodox Jewish community? This study addressed
this question by looking for independent relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and
experiencing cognitive dissonance related to the conflict between feminism and Orthodoxy. First,
although women were more likely than men to experience cognitive dissonance, men also experienced
it: holding other factors constant, the average probability of experiencing cognitive dissonance was 22%
for women and 7% for men. Second, in line with Manning (1999) and Fishman (2000), this study showed
a strong, independent correlation between having a graduate degree and experiencing cognitive
dissonance, whereas labor force participation was not independently related to experiencing cognitive
dissonance. It is possible that university study, rather than labor force participation, exposes individuals
to egalitarian ideas that challenge traditional religious beliefs. It is also possible that only certain
segments of the labor force—those that require advanced degrees—expose individuals to such ideas.
Either way, the high prevalence of advanced degrees among Modern Orthodox Jews suggests that
issues relating to women or women’s roles may also be a source of pain for a sizeable number of others,
albeit not the most acute source of pain.
Finally, contrary to prior research (Davidman 1991;Kaufman 1991), this analysis found that
Modern Orthodox Jews who became Orthodox after childhood were no less likely to experience
Religions 2018,9, 332 15 of 18
cognitive dissonance vis-à-vis Orthodoxy and feminism than those who grew up Orthodox. In other
words, not all newly Orthodox women have adopted traditional Orthodox beliefs about gender.
The classic responses to cognitive dissonance would be (1) trying reduce dissonance by changing
beliefs, actions or environments and (2) avoiding situations and information that accentuate or increase
the dissonance (Festinger 1965). Because the data set included only Jews whose current identification
was Modern Orthodox, this study could not assess the impact of cognitive dissonance on leaving
Orthodoxy altogether. However, it did examine the relationship between cognitive dissonance and
deviations from traditional Orthodox beliefs.
Experiencing cognitive dissonance was strongly correlated with the “strong feminist” stance,
which included near-universal support for expanding roles for women in learning, teaching,
organizational leadership and ritual. Experiencing cognitive dissonance also had a strong, negative
correlation with Orthodox Jewish beliefs in general. Individuals who experienced women’s roles
in Orthodox Judaism as a primary source of pain were less likely to believe in fundamental tenants
of Orthodoxy, including that God gave both the written and oral Torah to Moses on Mt. Sinai.
Taken together, these findings suggest that not only do Modern Orthodox Jews experience cognitive
dissonance related to the conflict between feminism and Orthodoxy, but this dissonance actually
propels change in religious beliefs.
Secular education was also independently associated with both Orthodox feminist beliefs and
Orthodox Jewish beliefs in general, over and above its association with experiencing cognitive
dissonance. Those with advanced degrees were more likely to have a “strong feminist” stance and
a lower score on the Orthodox Jewish belief index. Those without college degrees were more likely to
have an “oppositional” stance, with a 72% likelihood of opposing women teaching from the pulpit
and a 98% likelihood of opposing women serving as clergy, and a higher score on the Orthodox Jewish
belief index.
The strong correlations between higher education, cognitive dissonance, Orthodox feminist beliefs
and Orthodox Jewish beliefs in general point to a key area for future research. What specific beliefs
about feminism do Orthodox Jews encounter during higher education, and how do they both adopt and
criticize these beliefs? The data set used in this study did not include information about how Modern
Orthodox Jews think about feminism in general, outside of a religious context. Such information
would be valuable in understanding the nature of the cognitive dissonance that is driving change
in Orthodox Judaism, as well as to understand what is unique in how Orthodox Jews understand
feminism, specific to their positions in the world.
This study does delve deeply into how Modern Orthodox Jews think about the role of women
within Orthodoxy. The findings suggest the dual potential of cognitive dissonance related to feminism
and religion. On the one hand, cognitive dissonance may inspire individuals change their religious
beliefs and practices in a way that redresses sexism within religious traditions. On the other hand,
cognitive dissonance may also threaten the demographic vitality of religious communities insofar as
they fail to provide individuals with a mechanism to relieve their psychic discomfort.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments:
Mark Baker at Nishma Research provided access to the 2017 Nishma Research Survey of
American Modern Orthodox Jews. A public use data set is available from the Berman Jewish Databank.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
Adler, Rachel. 1998. Engendering Judaism: An Inclusive Theology and Ethics. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.
Anderson, Pamela Sue, and Beverley Clack, eds. 2003. Feminist Philosophy of Religion: Critical Readings. London:
Routledge.
Anderson, Pamela Sue. 1998. A Feminist Philosophy of Religion: The Rationality and Myths of Religious Belief. Oxford
and Malden: Blackwell.
Religions 2018,9, 332 16 of 18
Batson, C. Daniel. 1975. Rational Processing or Rationalization?: The Effect of Discontinuing Information on
a Stated Religious Belief. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32: 176–84. [CrossRef]
Beaman, Lori G. 2001. Molly Mormons, Mormon Feminists and Moderates: Religious Diversity and the Latter
Day Saints Church. Sociology of Religion 62: 65–86. [CrossRef]
Brasher, Brenda E. 1998. Godly Women: Fundamentalism and Female Power. New Brunswick: Rutgers University
Press.
Braude, Ann. 2004. Transforming the Faiths of our Fathers: Women Who Changed American Religion. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Burris, Christopher T., Eddie Harmon-Jones, and W. Ryan Tarpley. 1997. “By Faith Alone”: Religious Agitation
and Cognitive Dissonance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 19: 17–31.
Collins, Patricia Hill. 1990. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment.
New York: Routledge.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1989. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of
Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum 14:
538–54.
Davidman, Lynn. 1991. Tradition in a Rootless World: Women Turn to Orthodox Judaism. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Davidman, Lynn. 2000. Review of the book God Gave Us the Right, by C. Manning. Contemporary Sociology 29:
523–24. [CrossRef]
Davis, Kathy. 2008. Intersectionality as Buzzword: A Sociology of Science Perspective on What Makes a Feminist
Theory Successful. Feminist Theory 9: 67–85. [CrossRef]
Ecklund, Elaine Howard. 2003. Catholic Women Negotiate Feminism: A Research Note. Sociology of Religion 64:
515–24. [CrossRef]
Festinger, Leon. 1956. When Prophecy Fails. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Festinger, Leon. 1965. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Fishman, Sylvia Barack. 1993. A Breath of Life: Feminism in the American Jewish Community. New York: Free Press.
Fishman, Sylvia Barack. 2000. Changing Minds: Feminism in Contemporary Orthodox Jewish Life. New York: American
Jewish Committee.
Fishman, Sylvia Barack. 2007. The Way into the Varieties of Jewishness. Woodstock: Jewish Lights Publishing.
Greenberg, Blu. 1981. On Women and Judaism: A View from Tradition. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of
America.
Griffith, R. Marie. 1997. God’s Daughters: Evangelical Women and the Power of Submission. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Gross, Rita M. 1996. Feminism and Religion: An Introduction. Boston: Beacon Press.
Hacohen, Aviad. 2004. Tears of the Oppressed: An Examination of the Agunah Problem: Background and Halakhic Sources.
Edited by Blu Greenberg, Menachem Elon and Emanuel Rackman. Jersey City: Ktav Pub.
Hartman Halbertal, Tova. 2002. Appropriately Subversive: Modern Mothers in Traditional Religions. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Hartman, Tova. 2007. Feminism Encounters Traditional Judaism: Resistance and Accommodation. Hanover: Brandeis
University Press.
Higgins, E. Tory, Ruth Klein, and Timothy Strauman. 1985. Self-Concept Discrepancy Theory: A Psychological
Model for Distinguishing among Different Aspects of Depression and Anxiety. Social Cognition 3: 51–76.
[CrossRef]
Hooks, Bell. 1981. Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism. Boston: South End Press.
Ingersoll, Julie. 2003. Evangelical Christian Women War Stories in the Gender Battles. New York: New York University
Press.
Jantzen, Grace. 1999. Becoming Divine: Towards a Feminist Philosophy of Religion. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Kaufman, Debra R. 1991. Rachel’s Daughters: Newly Orthodox Jewish Women. New Brunswick: Rutgers University
Press.
Kaufman, Michael. 1993. The Woman in Jewish Law and Tradition. Northvale: J. Aronson.
Religions 2018,9, 332 17 of 18
Kinahan, Anne-Marie. 2004. Women Who Run from the Wolves: Feminist Critique as Post-Feminism. In Feminisms
and Womanisms: A Women’s Studies Reader. Edited by Althea Prince, Susan Silva-Wayne and Christian Vernon.
Toronto: Women’s Press, pp. 119–30.
Lanza, Stephanie T., John J. Dziak, Liying Huang, Aaron T. Wagner, and Linda M. Collins. 2015. LCA Stata Plugin
Users’ Guide (Version 1.2). University Park: The Methodology Center, Penn State.
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Neil W. Henry. 1968. Latent Structure Analysis. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.
Mahaffy, Kimberly A. 1996. Cognitive Dissonance and Its Resolution: A Study of Lesbian Christians. Journal for
the Scientific Study of Religion 35: 392–402. [CrossRef]
Manning, Christel. 1999. God Gave Us the Right: Conservative Catholic, Evangelical Protestant, and Orthodox Jewish
Women Grapple with Feminism. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Nishma Research. 2017. The Nishma Research Profile of American Modern Orthodox Jews. Available online:
http://nishmaresearch.com/ (accessed on 26 October 2018).
Nylund, Karen L., Tihomir Asparouhov, and Bengt O. Muthén. 2007. Deciding on the Number of Classes in
Latent Class Analysis and Growth Mixture Modeling: A Monte Carlo Simulation Study. Structural Equation
Modeling 14: 535–69. [CrossRef]
Ozorak, Elizabeth Weiss. 1996. The Power, but not the Glory: How Women Empower Themselves through
Religion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35: 17–29. [CrossRef]
Paludi, Michele Antoinette. 2016. Feminism and Religion: How Faiths View Women and Their Rights. Santa Barbara:
Praeger. An Imprint of ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Parsons, Susan Frank. 2002. The Cambridge Companion to Feminist Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Pew Research Center. 2013. A Portrait of Jewish Americans: Findings from a Pew Research Center Survey of U.S. Jews.
Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
Pew Research Center. 2016. The Gender Gap in Religion around the World. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
Plaskow, Judith. 1991. Standing again at Sinai: Judaism from a Feminist Perspective. San Francisco:
HarperSanFrancisco.
Roness, Michal. 2013. The Yoetzet Halakhah: Avoiding Conflict While Instituting Change. In Gender, Religion, &
Family law: Theorizing Conflicts between Women’s Rights and Cultural Tradition. Edited by Lisa Fishbayn Joffe
and Sylvia Neil. Hanover: Brandeis University Press.
Rose, Susan D. 1987. Women Warriors: The Negotiation of Gender in a Charismatic Community. Sociological
Analysis 48: 245–58. [CrossRef]
Ross, Tamar. 2000. Modern Orthodoxy and the challenge of feminism. Studies in Contemporary Jewry 16: 3–38.
Ross, Tamar. 2004. Expanding the Palace of Torah: Orthodoxy and Feminism. Hanover: Brandeis University Press.
Saxe, Leonard, Theodore Sasson, and Janet Krasner Aronson. 2014. Pew’s portrait of American Jewry:
A reassessment of the assimilation narrative. In American Jewish Year Book 2014. Edited by Arnold Dashefsky
and Ira Sheskin. New York: Springer International Publishing, pp. 71–81.
Schnabel, Landon. 2016. The Gender Pray Gap: Wage Labor and the Religiosity of High-Earning Women and
Men. Gender & Society 30: 643–69.
Shamir, Ronen, Michal Shitrai, and Nelly Elias. 1997. Religion, feminism, and professionalism: The case and cause
of women Rabbinical Advocates. Megamot 38: 313–48.
Stacey, Judith, and Susan Elizabeth Gerard. 1990. ‘We Are Not Doormats’: The Influence of Feminism on
Contemporary Evangelicals in the United States. In Uncertain Terms: Negotiating Gender in American Culture.
Edited by Faye Ginsburg and Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing. Boston: Beacon Press, pp. 98–117.
Steiner-Aeschliman, Sherrie, and Armand L. Mauss. 1996. The Impact of Feminism and Religious Involvement on
Sentiment toward God. Review of Religious Research 37: 248–59. [CrossRef]
Stocks, Janet. 1998. To Stay or Leave? Organizational Legitimacy in the Struggle for Change among Evangelical
Feminists. In Contemporary American Religion: An Ethnographic Reader. Edited by Penny Edgell Becker and
Nancy L. Eiesland. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press, pp. 99–119.
Sztokman, Elana Maryles. 2011. The Men’s Section Orthodox Jewish Men in an Egalitarian World. Hanover: Brandeis
University Press.
Thumma, Scott. 1991. Negotiating a religious identity: the case of the gay Evangelical. Sociological Analysis 52:
333–47. [CrossRef]
Religions 2018,9, 332 18 of 18
Tong, Rosemarie, and Tina Fernandes Botts. 2017. Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction. London:
Westview Press.
Uzan, Elad. 2016. From Social Norm to Legal Claim: How American Orthodox Feminism Changed Orthodoxy in
Israel. Modern Judaism 36: 144–62. [CrossRef]
Weaver, Mary Jo. 1995. New Catholic Women: A Contemporary Challenge to Traditional Religious Authority. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Woodhead, Linda. 2008. Gendering Secularization Theory. Social Compass 55: 187–93. [CrossRef]
Zimmerman, Danielle Dunand. 2015. Young Arab Muslim Women’s Agency Challenging Western Feminism.
Affilia 30: 145–57. [CrossRef]
©
2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
... The theory of cognitive dissonance posits that inconsistency between beliefs or behaviors creates an aversive motivational state which can be reduced by changing one of the dissonant elements or adding new ones (Jeong et al., 2019). Cognitive dissonance has been widely used to explain religious change on the individual and group levels (Shain, 2018;Meladze and Brown, 2015). The transition to college is an element in the academic pathway of youth, and learners experience major developmental changes in several spheres, including school, social life, and family life. ...
Article
Full-text available
Although the asynchronous modality of online learning has gained popularity, little is known about its success among the Orthodox Jewish population. This qualitative research action research involved 10 semi-structured interviews conducted with students at a secular and non-sectarian university. Participants were all Orthodox Jewish males and all current students in an Orthodox Jewish learning environment (yeshiva) and simultaneously at an asynchronous secular learning environment. The following four themes were identified from the 10 participants: (1) flexibility of academic schedule, (2) more time for separate Jewish studies in a yeshiva setting, (3) time for outside friends, and (4) independence. Benefits of asynchronous learning supports outside learning activities and development of analytical skills. Challenges incorporating more personal interactions among students and instructors require further consideration.
Chapter
Series Blurb: Oxford Readings in Feminism provide accessible, one-volume guides to the very best in contemporary feminist thinking, assessing its impact and importance in key areas of study. Collected together by scholars of outstanding reputation in their field, the articles chosen represent the most important work on feminist issues, and concise, lively introductions to each volume crystallize the main line of debate in the field. Is there too much gender in politics, too much stereotyping of female and male? Or is there too little gender, too little attention to differences between women and men? Should feminists be challenging male dominance by opening up politics to women? Or is 'women' a fictitious entity that fails to address differences by class or race? Is equality best served by denying differences between the sexes? Or best promoted by stressing the special needs of women? The essays in Feminism and RPolitics answer these questions in a variety of ways, but all see feminism as transforming the way we think about and act in politics. Spanning issues of citizenship and political representation, the ambiguities of identity politics, and the problems in legislating for sexual equality, the readings provide an exciting overview of recent developments. This outstanding collection will be essential reading for any feminist who has doubted the importance of political studies, and any student of politics who has doubted the relevance of feminism.
Book
A critical introduction to the major traditions of feminist theory, now with new considerations of existential feminism and a conclusion reflecting on the future of feminist theory.