it's all in how you say it
Feb. 25th, 2003 10:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioA fellow congregant called and asked me to be on the steering committee (read: board) of the sisterhood.
What I thought: Having a sisterhood (and brotherhood) is anathema to an egalitarian congregation. If we say that men and women don't have assigned roles, why on earth would I want to help perpetrate an organization that tries to go backwards by (re-)assigning those roles? It's not like our sisterhood and brotherhood are trying to move past conventional gender roles -- the women handle babysitting during services and serve cookies and coffee afterwards, and the men hold barbeques and talks by investment bankers. Feh! I want none of it! And not just because babysitting and serving coffee aren't my thing! There's a higher principle here. How can I help you see this?
What I said: I'm flattered, but no.
What I thought: Having a sisterhood (and brotherhood) is anathema to an egalitarian congregation. If we say that men and women don't have assigned roles, why on earth would I want to help perpetrate an organization that tries to go backwards by (re-)assigning those roles? It's not like our sisterhood and brotherhood are trying to move past conventional gender roles -- the women handle babysitting during services and serve cookies and coffee afterwards, and the men hold barbeques and talks by investment bankers. Feh! I want none of it! And not just because babysitting and serving coffee aren't my thing! There's a higher principle here. How can I help you see this?
What I said: I'm flattered, but no.
or... you could work to change it...
(Seth (http://www.livejournal.com/users/sethcohen/) and Karen (http://www.livejournal.com/users/ksnell/) are also members there.)
So... after less than a year of being members I was asked onto at least two board-level committees (that I can remember). Then I was asked to assume the Men's Club role. (I guess I'd made it quite clear that I wasn't just along for the ride at this synagogue. I was going to be active and I was going to make myself known. That must come from my desire to make whatever I invest my time in live up to its potential.) They called the role "President" but I call it "Chairman" for at least two reasons:
1. I wasn't elected, and
2. As an unelected one-man operation, it's more like a committee chair than a President of some organization.
Anyway... I accepted the position because I figured I could do it, but most importantly, I knew that with the reigns in my own hands I could buck trends. I told "the powers that be" that I wasn't going to make the Men's Club another venue for siphoning cash from its members, I wasn't going to force it to work if the demographics didn't warrant it, and I was going to recommend it be shut down and its assets distributed if good programming wasn't enough to keep people (men) interested and involved. And, oh yeah, except for some events that are just more fun or appropriate, socially, to do with guys (like a Steaks, Cigars, and Scotch dinner, and Lady's Night Out In-shul Babysitting) my programming was going to be egalitarian.
They were fine with all of my conditions.
Our synagogue is blessed with tons of programming considering that we're barely more than 500 families. One of the things the Men's Club had become and seemed to still be was a home for orphaned projects. What it seemed the synagogue needed was a Programs Coordinator and not a Men's Club for that. And the situation implied that it might be necessary to hire such a person full time as a synagogue employee to do all that.
What I'm learning from this experience, you may be able to use: that being involved is the only way to change anything and, perhaps more importantly, that even in egalitarian congregations there can be a role for a group that is just for men or just for women. There are differences in the genders and often these groups are the only social outlets for many members of the congregation. In fact, in many congregations, there are people who involve themselves in sisterhood/brotherhood/Men's Club, who otherwise don't get involved in anything else and this is often such persons' identification with the congregation. They don't even come to services except for the High Holidays, and usually only for 3 days of them.
While the demographics of our synagogue doesn't seem to be supporting a Men's Club, I don't begrudge that we have a sisterhood. It might be the only Jewish identification some people have.
Re: or... you could work to change it...
Date: 2003-02-28 09:40 am (UTC)What was the state of the men's club when they asked you to lead it? Did your changes represent nudges in a different direction, wholesale change, invention out of whole cloth (e.g. the group was inactive), or what?
Oh, and I don't have a problem with men-only or women-only gatherings -- it's only when jobs, opportunities, or scut work become exclusively owned by one of those groups that I have a problem. And this problem is in the context of an egalitarian congregation; I would never walk into a non-egal place and try to cross gender lines, for instance.
(By the way, if you need an LJ code, let me know. I've got plenty.)
Re: or... you could work to change it...
Although my changes bucked tradition, they didn't smack up against anything or anyONE that stopped me from implementing them. No charter or by-laws for example that told me what rules I needed to follow.
The only static I'm getting are from people who prefer "phone tree" vs. email for getting information. I told those types that I didn't have the resources to implement a phone tree. This one person replied by saying, "... well then I guess I now know who you want in your group and who you want to leave out." Oh well... I can't net everyone.
But back to the subject at hand. The synagogue had come to expect about $1000 in income from the Men's Club each year. Plus they expected us to buy Bar/Bat Mitzvah gifts. Each year since I've taken over, the office calls to ask me whether we're in a position to buy the gifts. One thing I told the board when I took over (and asked for $500 in a seed grant) was that until we had a steady membership and could be self-sustaining I would not commit to paying for anything that wasn't directly funding Men's Club events. They were OK with that.
In fairness, many of the board members and its leaders are business owners and management types. They know what it's like to run a business. Furthermore, the current and recent Presidents have been in their 40's and 50's and are a bit more "hip" than their 70 and 80 y.o. elders.
There's a national "federation" of Men's Clubs. When i first took over, two of the local muckety-mucks came to talk to me about the advantages of being part of their association. But I wasn't impressed with them. I found too few of their programs to be unique to Men, and I found their "value proposition" to be far too mired in 1950's thinking.
So the bottom line is that I am able to exploit the convergence of several factors in my favor.
My hope is to bring the Men's Club down for a soft landing and pay out our bank account to other programs. One such program is the "Israel Affairs" program which I started with another member last year in the wake of 9-11-01 and the terrorist events in Israel. We dedicated most of 5762's programming to terrorism, hasbara, and related discussion of current events. It was officially part of the Men's Club for the first year and is now on its own.
One thing I'd like to point out before I close is that I don't take well to the "that's the way we've always done it" excuse. Such cop-outs are a rocket sled into the cement wall of failure. If I'm part of any group, they'd better accept that I'm going to stir things up or they'd better not have me on the committee. And for the most part, they already know that about me which is why they asked me to be there anyway.
Thanks for the LJ code offer. I'm not yet into Blogging and if I were, I'm not sure I'd use LJ to do it. I'd probably make it part of my professional self than my personal self. You're generous to offer, and hope I can take you up on it should I change my mind.
Re: or... you could work to change it...
Date: 2003-02-28 09:46 am (UTC)What's with that, anyway? We have the same sort of situation -- the brotherhood and sisterhood make annual contributions to the synagogue, and hold fund-raising activities throughout the year to support that. But we're all the same congregants! So the synagogue asks me for money, and the sisterhood asks me for money, and the endowment campaign asks me for money, and various other special interests ask me for money, all of which ends up in the synagogue coffers. Are there really people who give more money if it's carved up that way? I don't; I decide how much the synagogue is getting this year, and I usually just pay it directly, and I don't do the secondary fund drives. And I don't see myself as shirking some sort of obligation to the sisterhood; it's that I already gave at the office, so to speak.
(I guess I'm not the only one who thinks like this, because last year we kicked off an endowment campaign and this year the number of "above and beyond" dues contributions went down. What surprises me is that this surprised some other board members.)
Fundraising models are one of the hardest things for me to understand about synagogue life...