I have noticed, here and elsewhere, a reluctance of yeshivish people to accept themselves as yeshivish. Why is this?

Are they self-hating yeshivishers?

Do they think they are cool, but think that being painted as yeshivish is uncool so they are slow to accept their position?

Something else?

Perhaps they don't like the little box and the stereotypes that come with it.

1. I don't perceive myself as yeshivish based on the circles I am and how many yeshivish people I am surrounded by. An outsider probably can't tell (just like many Americans can't tell the differences between closely located ethnic groups). But as an "insider", I know that I don't fit the definition.
2. I am happy who I am and have no reason to hate myself.
3. No, if I was yeshivish, I would embrace it. However, I do see myself as charedi, and accept that, but I don't fit the criteria of what yeshivish is, even though you made up a new definition that you believe I do fit in (which I very likely may, but your definition is not what I am denying).


(or any labels for that matter, but if we are defining a label, I do generally know where I fit in, even if I prefer to just see Jews as Jews.)

I see. I did not understand that this is your position.

I thought I made that clear. Sorry if I didn't.

To add, I don't believe a "true" yeshivish person by my terms will be easy to find on this site.

i hear the term "frum but with it" thrown around a lot and i assume that it means "yeshivish with benefits" (i.e., internet at home, movies, etc.)
if you just call them yeshivish, then they're insulted that they're no longer in the "with it" crowd. that's my theory.

I have no problem calling myself yeshivishe, assuming you know what I mean.


I still don't get the difference so much. In america, it's called yeshivish and in israel it's called chareidi, while the 'rules' may be a bit different depending on where you live, you know if you're yeshivish in america, you'll probably follow charieidi rules in e"y in my opinion (doesn't that make sense or did you guys just confuse me too much?)

I completely agree. This is what I was getting with my second suggestion in the opening post.

People who are yeshivish have absolutely no problem being referred to as yeshivish. People who are not yeshivish don't like being referred to as yeshivish just as much as a Sephardic Jew wouldn't want others telling him that he is Ashkenazi. He may have no problem with Ashkenazim, he just isn't one.

Very Lucky Guy- You may be the only person in the world who thinks I am yeshivish. Just to address some of the 'requirements for being yeshivish' that you have listed in the past; I never learned in kollel, I watch tv and go to the movies, I listen to non-Jewish music, I don't wear black and white, etc. The fact that you regularly refer to me as being yeshivish makes me think that you arbitrarily attach the label to anyone you perceive as being 'to the right' of you.

When people use the term 'frum but with it' they refer to a who person lives a frum lifestyle (this often means no movies, internet, etc.) but can carry an intelligent conversation and is aware of the world around them.

I've reconsidered my position. I don't think you are. But, I think it's really funny to see people get all bent out of shape when you call them yeshivish and they don't think they are. It's kind of surprising and begs the question why they get so upset about it.

I HATE that term. Frum BUT. No. Frum is frum. Why not frum AND whatever? Otherwise, it's like saying it's exclusive to being frum, and you can't be partially frum.


As I said in the other thread, it just begets much misunderstanding and confusion. I am all for clarity, and if I were to accept being labeled as something I was not I might cast a bad name on those who are truly worthy of the title.

... thats true of any group. When you are in it, you see the minute differences that seems so massive. An outsider sees the overarching themes.

Thereby implying that someone just "frum" cannot carry an intelligent conversation and is unaware of the world around them.

How can you be charedi if you live in the U.S.?


What are your terms? I wonder if I qualify. [Although do I disqualify by virtue of being on this site?]


I think your theory makes a lot of sense. I think people might be averse to being called yeshivish because they don't want to be considered the negative part of yeshivish.

Yes, but all I see here is a lumping of right-wing Orthodoxy == yeshivish. And that's not true. The definitions of no TV, covering hair, black hat, etc is a HUGE spectrum of Jewry, and "yeshivish" is a minute subset. Since few people here have been able to differentiate here, I am explaining that they are looking at the inclusive category without the nuances that subscribe one to the individual subset.


I still don't know who decided charedi means only in Israel, and that there are no charedim in America.


I've given a few examples.
I don't know if you qualify, but then again, I think many of the yeshivish differentiation is b'davka resting on the male. It's hard to find that differentiation in women.

Hm. I think I disagree.

So what are some attributes that are specific to yeshivish women that have nothing to do with being right-wing?

Why are we divorcing it from being right-wing?

I disagree, I think Spot's definition is much more accurate.


Then they've got to prove it. If you want to be part of a sect and don't want the bad rap part, you need to prove it. Just talking and saying 'I'm the good part of yeshivish' ain't gonna' cut it in my book.

Because I believe yeshivish is a sub-set of right-wing.
Not all right-wingers are yeshivish.
I identify with being right-wing, but not with yeshivish, which has specific additional characteristics, many of which are seen most strongly on the male half of the population from the examples I can think up.

Who says you necessarily want to be part of a sect? Generally this is a label other people put on you. Why are you talking about proving it?

What are those specific additional characteristics? How would you yourself define "yeshivish"?

I beg everyone to read my posts in this thread and the other one. I have said the same thing over and over and over again trying to explain what I believe fits into the self-identification of yeshivish.

I must be daft. For the sake of us simpletons, could you summarize how you would characterize yeshivish, something you are not, but something others are, and something that has specific characteristics.

You can't be "charedi" and not Yeshivish. Chareidi is even more farfrumpt and to the right than Yeshivish is. It's like claiming to be Chassidish but not Orthodox.....

Yeshivish isn't ALL about the shtick. It is a "level of observance". Maybe you don't like the term, but your terminology is for sure inaccurate.

Learning in Kollel is a very good indication.
No TV
High levels of snyus (socks/stockings all the time, full head coverings)
Black hat
Not wearing casual clothes (jeans T-shirts, etc..)
Sending kids to certain kinds of chinuch.

Ditto.

For the last time:
I can't put my finger on it. It's a certain package that is recognizable when you see a bunch of people lined up.
In my opinion, it's all externals.
Payos behind the ear, speaking in a certain way, the brim of the hat, all things that I don't really pay attention to closely, but when I see someone I can see who they identify with. Maybe even starting chinuch in halacha matters from as young as possible, and no predefined gil chinuch.

Charedi to me means right-wing hashkafos. That includes no TV, gender separated schools, covering hair all the way, Torah learning is seen as high-priority, etc.

Am I really the only one who thinks like this?

I don't see yeshivish as curling the sideburns around their ears. That's frummer than yeshivish.

Ok, so now yeshivish means anyone wearing black and white, and any one who does more than that is "frummer than yeshivish" but doesn't have their own term yet?

What about a typical guy in my husband's yeshiva. Let's say he wears white and black, doesn't own a TV. He may have internet, would watch DVDs at home, and would enjoy a sports game. Because he's in kollel and because he wears white and black he is yeshivish? How does that compare to someone who won't own a computer, wraps his payos behind his ear, only lets his 3 year old daughter wear knee socks or tights, and his talk is full of "pelidike zachim"?

ETA: That's the equivalent of me saying anyone who doesn't wear a velvet yarmulke is modern, and if he wears khaki on shabbos, he is less religious.

He's chinyukt or farfrumpt or greasy

First is yeshivish, I don't know what to label the second guy. But second guy seems more chasidish (maybe a blend of chasidish and yeshivish)
No reason to start cursing at me

I disagree I would label the second guy as Yeshivish and the first as "Yeshivish Modern" or just "Black Hat" But DEFINITELY not "Charedi". The second guy is as charedi as someone outside Israel can get.....

agent, I think your definition of yeshivish is different from most people's here. You're using it in the strict sense, whereas colloquially there's a real tendency to use it for all non-chassidish RWers. Basically, you wear a Borsalino or send your kids to BY or do anything else that makes you "not modern", and you're "yeshivish". So you're (all of you) arguing at cross purposes because you've got different definitions of what yeshivish means. By the colloquial definition, you (agent) are, but by your own definition (which seems to be much more of a hashkafic, Lakewood type definition) you're not.

American yeshivish aren't always chareidi, certainly not by the Israeli definition which is MUCH "shtarker".

The thing is that there isn't a good term for the in-betweeners--people who wear a hat on Shabbat, send their kids to BY/yeshiva, but think Touro's just fine and will watch a video. They fit in fine in Monsey, but I can't imagine them in an Israeli-chareidi area.

Frum but X can be used when assessing a person or institutions strengths and weaknesses when X is a negative thing, like a prospective shidduch can be "frum but butt ugly" or a school can be "frum but subpar"...

Or, anti religious people who consider being frum as a negative could say someone is "frum but with it" which means that the person might be dumb enough not to eat spare ribs, but still smart enough to know how to use a phone.

I'm yeshivish.

Israeli chareidim are many things, but as a group I wouldn't necessarily call them "shtarker" than yeshivish Americans. (According to my definition of "shtark" which mainly involves learning, shmiras hamitzvos and yiras shomayim...)

I agree.

First I would not call yeshivish. What if he wears colored shirts when he's not at the yeshiva? Does that all of a sudden change your image of him?
Second I call yeshivish.

I stole that phrase from the original thread. It means wonderous (pele = wonder, like niflaos haborei) things (zach is a thing)

See the thing is that I think most people here are viewing yeshivish as more religious, and I don't. I feel like what turns someone into a yeshivish person isn't any indication on how religious he is, just how he identifies his already ultra-orthodoxy with.
Anyway, I posted definitions in the original thread. The book I am taking it from seems to be more on my side of seeing what yeshivish is -- again, to outsiders, seeing people as yeshivish is liking lumping all Asians together, but I am positive that Asians know how to tell who is Chinese, Japanese, Korean, whatever. I am telling it like I see it -- not all Jews who are anti-TV and think women should not show hair after marriage are yeshivish.

Fascinating. I'm finally beginning to understand this post:
http://www.hashkafah.com/index.php?s=&...st&p=909520

I don't know if I'm one of the people to whom you refer. I assume you would probably call me yeshivish. I don't like to engage on h.com as yeshivish because I cannot speak for people who are yeshivish, most of whom would describe me as MO.

Yeah, that's me. The black sheep. The modernish amongst the yeshivish people. Seriously, I do not see myself as yeshivish. Not trying to deny anything; just trying to explain reality.

ETA: To be honest, my 2.5 year old has picked up some brachos at playgroup. If you ask him what bracha macaroni is, he'll scream "Me-zo-NOT!" Yup, we fit in well, all right

Yes.



They are both yeshivish. There is a range within yeshivish, just as there is a range within Modern Orthodoxy. The second guy is certainly more to the right of the first guy, but that doesn't mean they can't share a label. Don't expect an exact definition - labels are amorphous things.

Is it possible to wear black and white and not watch TV and still not be yeshivish? Sure - if you have some other strong characteristic, like being a religious Zionist (such as the Chardal in Israel) or believe in secular education as inherently meaningful (Rav Aharon Lichtenstein and his phd in English poetry). But someone who wears black and white and doesn't watch TV and learns in kollel - and has no other "mitigating factors" that distinguish him from yeshivish hashkafot - is yeshivish.


Anyone who wears a knit kippa is trying to tell you that they are modern in some sense. Anyone who wears a leather one is trying not to tell you anything. But walk into my shul (a large MO one) someday and count the velvet kippot - you'll find maybe 5% of people wearing them. Walk into my parents shul, and you will find exactly one person wearing a knitted kippa - if I'm home that week. We are not talking about a "chassidish" shul or a "chinyuki" shul but a run of the mill NY shul where most people wear hats, the average family probably has a TV but would rather not talk about it, and the shul belongs to the Aguda. It's not Lakewood, but it's still a yeshivish place.

You keep insisting that insiders get to make that labels, but that's rarely the case - usually labels are externally imposed. If someone keeps all the Amish rules against electricity but insists they are really a Mennonite, well they can call themselves what they want but everyone else will still call them Amish. Mormons insist that they are Christians, even though no other Christians seem to think so - and yet to a non-Christian it is patently obvious that they are Christians. Shia and Sunni Moslems consider themselves to be different religions, but it's obvious to non Moslems that they are variants of the same, just as it's obvious to Jews and Moslems that Catholics and Protestants share a religion, even if the Pope disagrees.

Every Brooklyn girl tells her shadchan that she's "not the typical Brooklyn girl." Every single one.

I mentioned on the other thread that it's harder for me to define MO than it is to define yeshivish, because as an insider I have trouble seeing the big picture of what unites Modern Orthodoxy rather than the smaller details that subgroups disagree over. To a yeshivish person, the idea that there are subgroups of "modern" might be a surprise, but he'd probably have an easier time recognizing the unique characteristics that make someone modern than I would, because to me these things aren't characteristics of a group I can observe - they are just "normal". And to a non frum Jew, we are all just Orthodox - not because we define ourselves as such, but because we share some characteristic that outsiders can recognize. Sometimes to be able to see that something looks like a duck and walks like a duck, you need a perspective that isn't that of another duck at all, so that you can generalize and fit a label rather than getting bogged down in tiny differences.

ok, I wasn't sure what the right word was here... anyway, Israelis are much more something

Because you have defined yeshivish as
1. peyot behind the ear
2. speaking a certain way
3. something to do with a hat brim
4. some diyuk about chinuch age
so according to your definition, you don't see yourself as meeting the criteria.

Like grend said in the other thread, there is spectrum of yeshivish and one guy may be farther down that spectrum, but that doesn't mean the first guy isn't yeshvish.

As for the bolded part, yeah it kind of does mean that. Not having a TV for hashkafic reasons is a pretty big factor in being yeshivish.

Then half the frum world is yeshivish?!
You all are saying right wing is yeshivish!!!
That means that someone who wears black and white while he is in yeshiva (even if outside the walls he doesn't), because he doesn't own a TV, is by definition yeshivish. That's absurd. Even if he goes to secular entertainment, watches movies on his computer (instead of the television), etc you consider him yeshivish because he dresses the part sometimes and is in a yeshiva. I think he's closer to some of the "modern orthodox" -- except for the hours he's wearing the white and black (or gray pants, actually) -- then the real yeshivish crowd where no one would ever think of bringing a DVD into their home.

Grend, my point about the yarmulka was judging religious level based on it. Someone yeshivish is not necessarily "frummer" than someone who is not. He just manifests his religiosity in specific manners, but is careful with the same halachos the regular "American charedim" are. Saying someone is "frummer than yeshivish" is meaningless; the way someone talks or wears his hat does not make him any frummer, just like the type of yarmulka a yid chooses to wear doesn't make him any less or more frum.

i think a lot of people are saying that it's not only the exterior that makes someone yeshivish. it's not only the brim of the hat, the payos, or the white shirts. it's ALSO that they don't watch tv, don't do anything co-ed, women fully cover hair, women never wear pants, men learning instead of working, etc.
it's a way of life, not necessarily just what they look like. even if a yeshivish guy occasionally wears a blue shirt, it doesn't change his hashkafah.

your example of the chinese is really funny because you're saying you have to be in it to notice the differences that "outsiders" don't notice; which means you agree you're in that world/mindset.

to me, yeshivish means learning in yeshiva instead of working with everything that comes around it: dressing the part (white, black, tzitzis hanging out, black hat), talking the talk (yeshivishisms), and doing everything that's accepted by the community (no co-ed, covering hair, etc).

No, you're still missing my point.
I think many, many Jews are right-wing, what I would call charedi, but people here claim there can never be such a thing in chutz la'aretz. The hashkafos are what make one charedi. Yeshivish is beyond that -- taking the charedi hashkafos and tacking on a lot of externality. Someone in the charedi spectrum may find it easier to differentiate between what I and all the others in my charedi and yeshivish circles call yeshivish vs. not yeshivish, but right-wing all the same. Someone not on that spectrum lumps them all together.
A Chinese person can differentiate between a Japanese and Korean, just by being Asian, even if he himself is not one of the two. Many, many Americans find it hard as an outsider to Eastern life to differentiate (I think there is a test circulating the web, and the results are not looking too high for westerners).

I think it's so funny that I am the only one on this board thinking like this (except maybe Flickster?) because this is something it took me a few years to realize, and now that I see it, it is clear that this is the common view among the yeshiva world.