I received an email today from someone asking if I would speak out about a recent case that’s been burning up the blogosphere about a former agunah who received a “getless get.” Tamar Epstein made headlines a few years back by being one of the first women to use social media to attract attention about her recalcitrant husband to shame him into giving her a get.
ORA and a few other prominent rabbanim took on her cause and eventually declared her to be a free woman. Conflicting reports ensued, first an announcement by ORA that Epstein had received her get, and then other reports that she hadn’t. The matter eventually slid off the media radar, and Ms. Epstein resumed life outside of the headlines until recently. Apparently, Ms. Epstein recently remarried, and the whole controversy over whether or not she was in fact, free to do so, has erupted. Certain rabbinic leaders in the haredi world have declared her marriage to be adulterous and any future children from the relationship to be mamzerim.
The argument, as so many arguments regarding women in the Jewish world do, has shifted away from the woman at the center of the controversy, and become focused on the warring rabbinic leaders who hold different opinions on whether or not she should have been allowed to remarry.
This extends to what I think was the initial problem in this case – instead of considering the opinion of the woman who was trapped in an untenable and loveless (on her part) marriage, the only opinions considered were those of her ex-husband who didn’t want the divorce, and the rabbis on her beis din, who didn’t feel there were grounds to force the divorce. If Tamar Epstein had been granted the get she sought out initially, there wouldn’t have been any halachic contortions and loopholes needed, it would have been a straightforward ending to a marriage that wasn’t working – because if a marriage isn’t working for one partner, it really isn’t working for both.
I have heard that her reasons for wanting the divorce weren’t “divorce-worthy.” Say what? Only the partners in the marriage can determine what they can and can’t live with, no one else. I have heard time and time again, that it’s a good thing that Hashem made it so that women aren’t the ones who can give a get, because otherwise they would constantly be divorcing their husbands. That isn’t the best endorsement of Jewish husbands nor a wife’s marital satisfaction expectancy, is it? I know, I know, it’s supposed to be a jab about women’s emotional inconstancy, but at a deeper level, isn’t it about male insecurity?
There is no doubt that men controlling get giving is a way of keeping women in unhappy marriages. Women like Ms. Epstein, who are honest about the fact that they just can’t live with their husband’s idiosyncrasies, or that there simply is no communication, emotional connection, or meeting of the minds must worry that their appeal for a get will be refused. Simply being in an empty and loveless marriage doesn’t seem to be enough for many rabbis to require a husband to give a get. It seems that nothing short of a man whaling on his wife’s face with a closed fist on a regular basis is enough for some rabbis to force a recalcitrant husband to grant his wife a divorce.
This might be an unpopular supposition, but I have heard some men bitterly reflect that while they were married their wives were constantly praising what good fathers and people they were, but the minute divorce proceedings began they were painted as abusers of both their wives and children. For those men, my guess is that they and their ex-wives live in certain communities beholden to local rabbinic courts where unless there are allegations of physical or severe verbal and emotional abuse, the court won’t force an unwilling husband to give a get. Therefore, since lack of fulfillment, loneliness, and general unhappiness with the marriage isn’t considered valid grounds for divorce, allegations of abuse are brought up as a means of escape.
In no way am I saying that all marital abuse allegations brought up in divorce cases are false, but I am saying that in a court system run by men who mainly seek to keep Jewish marriages together, and the notion of breaking up over boredom, loneliness, or general lack of fulfillment being thought of as frivolous and insufficient grounds for release – in some cases desperate times might call for desperate measures. At the very least, exaggerations of personality quirks, social awkwardness, anxiety issues, or any other undesirable trait in their husband might be over emphasized because that is the only way for a woman to gain her freedom in a system that doesn’t seem to feel that “love,” that dirty little four letter word, is a requirement for marriage.
Sure, it might be a 21st century secular notion, the idea that a couple should love each other before the marriage even takes place. In many orthodox circles, that idea is downright filthy. In more modern orthodox segments, love is only appropriate and possible after marriage, and in some right wing segments, it’s never appropriate even after marriage. Therefore, in some circles, a woman bringing up lack of love as a cause for divorce will be laughed out of the courtroom. Maybe the husband will be told to buy her a trinket, or compliment her food more often, or make sure not to skip the Friday night mitzvah.
Not being in love isn’t cause for divorce, so Ms. Epstein and other women like her don’t stand a chance of having rabbis support their request for a get. Until women’s feelings are taken seriously, and until their desires and wishes are paramount in determining whether or not they wish to stay in a marriage, we can look forward to other controversial solutions and endorsements being sought (most likely at no small financial expense) toward obtaining freedom.
