On November 20, a tribute concert for Shlomo Artzi, the so-called “Israeli Bruce Springsteen,” was scheduled to take place in Tel Aviv, with the twin purposes of celebrating Artzi’s 70th birthday and raising money for Ezra l’Marpe, a non-profit that helps the sick obtain medical treatment. Yet Ezra l’Marpe’s founder, the ḥaredi rabbi and self-taught medical genius Avraham Elimelech Firer, canceled the concert abruptly after several performers protested over the fact that no female vocalist would be performing. At issue is the halakhic prohibition on men listening to women sing. Ruthie Blum comments:

[W]hen the organizers of the gala honoring Artzi discovered and revealed that no female vocalists would be able to perform, incensed women artists made a stink, and their male counterparts began to announce that they couldn’t possibly appear on stage under such circumstances. You know, out of “solidarity” and in “principle.” Which actually meant that they feared being accused of male chauvinism.

If anything illustrates the danger of viewing individual issues through an inflexible ideological prism, this is it. Firer has proved himself to be a selfless and heroic figure, who has done nothing but use his . . . gifts to help comfort and heal millions of people, without regard to their ethnic, religious, or gender identities.

The sanctity of life is but one of Firer’s religious principles. Another is refraining from listening to women sing. Allowing the latter to cancel out the former not only is intolerant and unjust, but exposes the kind of narrow-mindedness that feminists and fanatical secularists accuse the Ḥaredim of possessing. In this case, it also turned what would have been a blessed happening into an empty auditorium.

Israel’s goals of freeing the hostages and defeating Hamas (the latter necessary to prevent further hostage taking) are to some extent contradictory, since Yahya Sinwar, the ruler of the Gaza Strip, will only turn over hostages in exchange for concessions. But Jacob Nagel remains convinced that Jerusalem should continue to pursue both goals:

Only consistent military pressure on Hamas can lead to the hostages’ release, either through negotiation or military operation. There’s little chance of reaching a deal with Hamas using current approaches, including the latest Egyptian proposal. Israeli concessions would only encourage further pressure from Hamas.

There is no incentive for Hamas to agree to a deal, especially since it believes it can achieve its full objectives without one. Unfortunately, many contribute to this belief, mainly from outside of Israel, but also from within.

Recent months saw Israel mistakenly refraining from entering Rafah for several reasons. Initially, the main [reason was to try] to negotiate a deal with Hamas. However, as it became clear that Hamas was uninterested, and its only goal was to return to its situation before October 7—where Hamas and its leadership control Gaza, Israeli forces are out, and there are no changes in the borders—the deal didn’t mature.