This came in the mail yesterday and once again I am left scratching my head – the same way I do when I see mailings that include the all male board of directors’ names for my daughter’s all girls high school. Why is it that so many orthodox women’s institutions have all male boards? Is this just a Chicago thing? To me, the mikva should have a primarily all female board – if they have to have a few token men on it, fine. However, to have an all male board of directors with zero female representation? Don’t even pretend that women have any authority whatsoever over this mitzva.
I realize that our mikvaos are used for other purposes besides taharas hamishpacha such as conversions, kalim (pots and utensils), the men’s mikva, and possibly even for taharas for the dead (although I thought that mikva was under the auspices of the chevra kadisha).
Being on an administrative board of directors for the mikva isn’t only about halachic issues, but administrative issues. In fact, being on the board might not involve dealing with halachic issues at all. I assume that there is a separate rabbinical council that advises on overall mikva matters, in addition to each woman having her own individual posek for personal shailas.
Dealing with building repairs, complaints about facilities or staff, scheduling issues, technical glitches with the appointment system, keeping the rooms stocked and finding the cheapest supply vendors, operating hours – these are just a few things I can think of that might be board meeting agenda items. I can also imagine that more sensitive issues might be brought up at these meetings. How to deal with signs of abuse noticed by the mikva ladies? How to handle confessions about marital issues at the mikva? Why does it make sense to have the mikva ladies acting as the eyes and ears for the male board members? Shouldn’t the women who work at the mikva and those women who use the mikva be on the front lines to observe, report, and resolve these types of issues by sitting on the board themselves?
Things operate the same way in some of our local day schools, both those that are mixed and separate sex. Women can’t be on the boards of directors, but they can be members of the PTA. Women provide the volunteer manpower, the smaller fundraising efforts, the day to day hands on work that benefits the school. I’m not denying the essential help the PTA provides, but women don’t have any direct authority in making school decisions the way the male board members do. Women don’t have a vote at the table.
It seems that our mikva association is being run with the same premise – we have the Daughter’s of Israel that runs kallah classes, refresher courses, educational seminars, and fund raising events. However, women have no actual vote in how the mikva is run. Yes, they have input and I’m sure their concerns and suggestions are taken seriously; those concerns might even comprise the main talking points of board meetings. Yet women still have no direct control as to whether their wishes and ideas will be implemented.
Again, being that the mikva has other purposes besides existing for women’s usage, I can understand having male representation on the board of directors. I can also understand that often times the makeup of community boards has more to do with being a large financial supporter of the institution rather than with being a highly involved member. However, the wives of large donors can just as easily represent the family as the husband can. Especially in the case of sitting on a mikva board, as regular users, their input would be more valuable. Maybe it’s just me.
