Religious Zionist Singles: Caught Between “Family Values” and “Young Adulthood”

JOURNAL for the SCIENTIFIC STUDY of RELIGION Religious Zionist Singles: Caught Between “Family Values” and “Young Adulthood” ARI ENGELBERG Department of Sociology and Anthropology Hebrew University of Jerusalem In current Religious Zionist society, marriage and family are considered sacred values that stand in opposition to the sexual liberalism that believers associate with secular society. Religious Zionists are encouraged to marry in their early 20s; those who fail to follow this societal script find themselves facing social and religious challenges. This article, based upon ethnographic research and in-depth interviews with RZ singles, examines the contexts of this phenomenon as well as the actual effect of prolonged singlehood upon the religiosity of singles. Singles’ distance from traditional synagogue-based communities and their tendency to form closed networks of friends with other Religious Zionists (RZs), both of which are typical during young adulthood, were found to impact their religiosity. It was also found that many singles consider their religiosity to be flawed. This is explained as resulting from both the drawing force of Western youth culture and from feelings of loneliness and anomy experienced by singles. Their central strategy for dealing with the arising tension is compartmentalization—viewing singlehood as a period during which a moratorium from strict religious observance is acceptable. Keywords: singles, religion, young adulthood, Judaism, religious Zionism. INTRODUCTION In the midst of the evacuation of settlers from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2005, an evacuation that was bitterly opposed by the majority of Israeli Religious Zionist (RZ) Jews and experienced by many of the evacuees as a highly traumatic event, a special prayer gathering was held at the Western Wall. The prayer, led by the chief rabbi of the very same Gaza Strip, was convened in order to pray for the swift marriage of the community’s singles. The unusual timing and the central location of this event demonstrate the extent to which many RZ’s are concerned regarding prolonged singlehood. Among Orthodox Jews (RZs and others), prolonged singlehood is often referred to as a “problem.” This is partially due to the importance of marriage and family in Jewish tradition. However, it seems that present concerns regarding singlehood are compounded by religious Zionism’s focus on the nuclear family as a locus for religious practice, and by its fear of “young adulthood,” a new stage of the lifecycle that has developed in Western societies and is viewed by RZs as encouraging libertine conduct. In order to avoid what they view as the pitfalls of remaining single—excess freedom, “wasting time,” and romantic and sexual experimentation—RZ religious authorities encourage marriage at a young age (Engelberg 2013). This article focuses on the religiosity of singles who fail to fulfill the societal expectation to marry young, remaining single into their late 20s and beyond. These singles find themselves torn between Western youth-culture scripts regarding this stage of the lifecycle and RZ family Acknowledgments: The author wishes to thank Dana Kaplan, Rachel Werczberger, Adam Klin-Oron, Michal Kravel, and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. This research was partially supported by the Jewish Memorial Fund and the Hebrew University’s Cherrick Center. Correspondence should be addressed to Ari Engelberg, Tchernichovsky St. 52a, Jerusalem 9258534, Israel. E-mail: ari.engelberg@mail.huji.ac.il Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (2016) 00(0):1–16  C 2016 The Society for the Scientific Study of Religion 2 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION values. How is the religiosity of singles affected by their divergence from RZ norms regarding the appropriate age for marriage? What are the factors that influence their religious faith and practice? What strategies do they utilize in order to deal with the tensions inherent in their situation? These are the questions that this article will address. The social contexts in which RZ singles operate play a central role in shaping their religious attitudes. This article will focus on two social contexts that impact directly upon singles’ religious attitudes: traditional synagogue-based communities and informal networks of friends. Most singles are not active in communal synagogue life, and thus they are excluded from a central aspect of Jewish religious life. The networks of friends have mixed effects upon religiosity, as will be elaborated below. It will be argued that due to the strong family-religion link in current Jewish Orthodox culture, many RZ singles view their religiosity as blemished and that this leads to feelings of dissonance on their part. Networks of friends provide support for singles but do not absolve the feelings of dissonance. An analysis of the interviews conducted with singles led to the identification of two central factors that to their minds impact negatively upon their religious lives: (1) the attraction of Western youth culture, and (2) feelings of loneliness and anomy. It was found that the singles’ central strategy for dealing with the religious challenges that these factors give rise to is temporal in nature: singlehood is bracketed off from the rest of the lifecycle and viewed as a moratorium during which certain religious indiscretions are viewed as excusable due to extenuating circumstances. RELIGIOUS ZIONISM AND THE “SINGLES PROBLEM” Religious Zionism is the Israeli branch of Modern Orthodoxy, a movement within Judaism that began in 19th-century Europe and believes in the integration of aspects of modern life that do not contradict halacha (Jewish religious law) and Jewish tradition. Compared to its sister movement, diaspora Modern Orthodoxy, Israeli religious Zionism is based more on the integration of religion with nationalism and less on liberal universal values (Fischer 2012; Fishman 1995). The leading role played by RZs in the movement to settle the territories occupied by Israel in the 1967 war serves to underscore this characteristic (Aran 1991; Schwartz 2008). It should be noted, however, that not all RZs are politically right wing, and on the other hand many American Modern Orthodox Jews are also supportive of the settlement movement (Hirschhorn 2015). It can therefore be asserted that the distinctions between American Modern Orthodoxy and Israeli religious Zionism are more of measure than of kind. The similarity between the two societies is especially pronounced with regard to the subject at hand, as singles belonging to both groups exhibit similar modes of sociality and religious dilemmas (see Frances 2008; Rosenfeld 2008). In Israeli society, RZs are often referred to simply as “religious,” as opposed to the ultra-Orthodox Haredim, the traditional, and the secular. Over 20 percent of Israel’s Jewish majority identify as Religious Zionist (Herman et al. 2014). Unlike ultra-Orthodox Israeli Jews (who at least declaratively oppose Zionism and defer mandatory military service to study Torah), RZs, like most Israeli Jews, serve in the military; most then go on to obtain an academic degree and participate in the workforce. They nevertheless maintain separate social frameworks that they consider essential for the religious socialization process. These include a separate religious-public school system, as well as post-high-school-level theological educational institutions, many of which integrate military service with the study of Torah. Most of these institutions, high schools as well as higher education, are gender segregated, so much of RZ socialization occurs separately for men and women. Gender separation is not as strict as it is in ultra-Orthodox circles, but is nonetheless significant, and this affects the courtship process. Dating and marriage norms in RZ society are quite similar to those that were common in Western societies in the 1950s. The unofficial RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES 3 RZ script calls for marriage between the ages of 19 to 23, earlier than is common among uppermiddle-class secular Israelis today. Unlike their ultra-Orthodox counterparts, RZ singles may seek a spouse on their own; they need not be “set up” by parents and marriage brokers in order to go on a date.1 However, RZ dating is more utilitarian and marriage oriented than is common in secular society; dating usually lasts no longer than a few months, during which time the couple is expected to remain chaste (Engelberg 2011; Shalev, Nehami, and Itzhaky 2012). Over the past decades, the numbers of singles above the age of 25 in RZ society have risen, as has public concern regarding this phenomenon. This concern is portrayed in RZ publications as regarding the singles’ welfare; doubtless this plays a role, but parents and teachers may also be worried that singles are drifting toward a more secular lifestyle. Jewish Orthodox law forbids any sexual contact outside marriage and more generally looks askance at the lifestyle associated with Western youth culture (it is forbidden, e.g., for men and women to dance together). As we shall see, there is a gap between the guidelines proscribed by religious authorities, and the lifestyle of most “older” religious singles. RZ religious authorities, for their part, insist upon the importance of marriage and delegitimize the experience-seeking of young adulthood. The Talmudic passage stating that “any man who has no wife lives without joy, without blessing, and without goodness”2 is a popular quote in their sermons and writings. The moral is clear—as soon as adulthood is reached, any delay of marriage is simply a waste of time that diverts the believer from fulfilling his calling—the establishment of a Jewish home. The more liberal among RZ rabbis emphasize that one may marry at a young age and still earn an education, develop a career, and “attain self-actualization” (see, e.g., Cherlow 2003). The self-actualization these rabbis have in mind refers to finding one’s true love, establishing a home, and developing a career, but clearly not to Western youth-culture values that are commonly pursued by young adults such as romantic and sexual adventures, good times with friends, backpacking trips, or simply enjoying big-city life. RZ rabbis, nonliberal as well as liberal, would seemingly prefer young men and women skip this stage of the lifecycle altogether (Engelberg 2013). Thus, prolonged singlehood has come to be viewed by RZs as a “social problem.” The extent to which this issue troubles RZs may strike the outside observer as quite surprising. The special prayer held at the Western Wall mentioned in the opening of the article is one example of this concern. On a different occasion a special meeting was held in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, called by the “Jewish Home” party (a political party that represents RZs) in order to draw attention and seek solutions for “the singles problem.” This societal concern is not unrelated to the cultural context of prolonged singlehood in Western societies, which shall now be described. THE CULTURAL CONTEXT OF PROLONGED SINGLEHOOD: YOUNG ADULTHOOD IN WESTERN SOCIETIES During my fieldwork, I often ran into married RZs who expressed their wonderment regarding how the “singles problem” suddenly fell upon RZ society. The answer to this question demands some elaboration regarding the transformation of attitudes toward marriage, sexuality, and the lifecycle that have taken place in Western societies over the last decades, and have affected RZ society. The average age of marriage for upper-middle-class youth in Western societies has risen dramatically over the last half a century; this has led to the emergence of a new stage of the 1 They may choose to use the services of matchmakers, but they are not forced to do so; as a result, matchmakers and parents do not wield the same kind of power over singles as they do in ultra-Orthodox society (Lehmann and Siebzehner 2009). 2 Babylonian Talmud, tractate Yebamoth 62b. 4 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION lifecycle situated between adolescence and full adulthood. In the mid-20th century it was common to marry during, or soon after, college. Today, many working-class youth continue to marry in their early 20s, but most upper-middle-class youth prefer to delay marriage, together with the taking on of what were considered in the past to be “adult responsibilities” such as establishing a family and developing a career (Arnett 2006; Cote 2006; du Bois-Reymond 1998; Heath 2004; Smith 2009). Researchers have coined various terms, with overlapping meanings, in order to describe this new stage of the lifecycle: “emerging adulthood” is used to denote young men and women aged 18–29 regardless of their marital status (Arnett 2006; Barry and Abo-Zena 2014; Smith 2009). “Young adulthood” and “late adolescence,” however, as used by researchers (du Bois-Reymond 1998; Heath 2004), seem to be more flexible regarding age and connote a lifestyle that is related to singlehood, and thus are better suited for present purposes. Of these two terms, “young adulthood” is less judgmental, and was therefore preferred. Today, unmarried young adults often rent apartments in downtown areas of large cities where they form close-knit social networks that include members of both sexes. Engaging in big-city life, romantic affairs, and sexual flings, they seek experiences as well as to find their calling (du Bois-Reymond 1998; Heath 2004). These social networks are of great importance to singles. Bellotti suggests that for the Italian singles aged 25–35 she researched, “companionship is useful to diminish the perception of loneliness, as it grants a sense of belonging that coupled people normally obtain from their partner” (2008:328). Another change that occurred in late modernity and impacts RZ singles is, to use Giddens’s (1992) term, “the transformation of intimacy.” Although the belief that marriage should be based on romantic love has long been the norm in Western societies, over the last half-century a second transition has occurred. Today, couples expect more of marriage, and the quality of the emotional and physical intimacy in relationships is of greater importance than it was in the past (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim 1995; Giddens 1992; Jamieson 1998). The processes described above overlap and intertwine. Together they help explain the rising numbers of RZ singles. It is not that religious singles necessarily plan to draw out their single years so that they may partake in the new stage of the lifecycle, but the existence of such an option makes the possibility imaginable (Engelberg 2013). At the same time, the “transformation of intimacy” has heightened expectations regarding relationships, so some RZ singles who were bent on marrying in their early 20s find themselves drifting into older single years due to their inability to find their “soul mate” (Engelberg 2011). Although there is a dearth of research focusing specifically on the religiosity of singles past college age, recently a few works concentrating on the religious life of emerging adults, most of who are in fact single, have been published (Barry and Abo-Zena 2014; Smith 2009). As explained above, the term “emerging adulthood” is used to refer to individuals no older than 29. The wide-scale research conducted by Smith (2009) on the religiousness of emerging adults is even further limited to ages 18–23; however, some of his finding are informative for the present research. He describes the cultural forces acting upon American emerging adults: During the years before settling down for good, very many emerging adults believe that they are supposed to devote themselves to hanging out, partying, and perhaps drinking, doing drugs and hooking up. Little in that encourages strong religious faith and practice. (Smith 2009:280) Smith found emerging adults to be less likely to pray daily and attend services weekly than older adults, but just as likely “to believe in life after death or hold literalistic views of the Bible” (2009:91). Arnett and Arnett Jensen, who studied emerging adults aged 18–29, also found them to be skeptical regarding religious institutions (Arnett and Arnett Jensen 2002), but as Smith points out, “emerging adults are not only less religiously involved than older adults but also tend to be less involved in and committed toward a wider variety of other, non-religious social and institutional connections, associations, and activities” (2009:92). RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES 5 PROLONGED SINGLEHOOD AND RELIGIOSITY As mentioned above, there has been very little research conducted upon religious singles passed the age of 25. It is reasonable to assume that, as is the case with religious Zionism, in other conservative religious societies too, singlehood is considered more of a problem at later ages, so this lack of research presents a lacuna. Two qualitative works that do exist focus on religious singles past college age among Utah Mormons (Darrington, Pirecy, and Niehuis 2005) and Malaysian Muslims (Ibrahim and Hassan 2009). Both studies describe the societal pressures and hardships they endure, but do not address the question of how their religious faith and observance is affected. Darrington, Pirecy, and Niehuis’s article is of special interest; they studied Mormon singles aged 20-29. Similarly to RZs, Mormons view marriage as essential for religious and social progress, a stand that perforce leads to the marginalization of older singles. The researchers found Mormon singles to have been influenced by the more positive attitudes toward singlehood common in current “mainstream U.S. culture,” attitudes that emphasize the relative freedom singles enjoy and the possibilities for personal growth. On the other hand, they come under pressure from family and church to find a partner as quickly as possible, a goal that the singles themselves are committed to as well, while networks of friends provide essential emotional support (Darrington, Pirecy, and Niehuis 2005) The structural situation of Mormon singles, as described by Darrington, Pirecy, and Niehuis is strikingly similar to that of RZ singles. The points of affinity include: singles who wish to marry but have not been able to find “the right person,” social pressure to find a partner and to marry, and friends who provide vital emotional support (Darrington, Pirecy, and Niehuis 2005; Engelberg 2011, 2013; Nahari 2009). The authors, however, do not address the question that is at the center of the current research—how religious singles deal with challenges to their religious faith and observance posed by life outside the safe haven of the religious family. More attention is devoted to the religiosity of singles by El-Amin Naeem (2009), who conducted research on American Muslim singles in their 20s and early 30s. She describes her interviewees as being in a bind, influenced by both American culture and Muslim religious strictures that forbid premarital sex and even dating. Her description of two cultural poles that draw single Muslims in opposing directions has its parallels with RZ singles, as will be discussed below. While the existing literature on religious singles is limited, the link between family and religion has been researched and found to be firm (Pankhurst and Houseknecht 2000). A largescale global survey found “strong family” to be a condition for “strong religion” (Heimdal and Houseknecht 2003). Research focusing on church participation found that marrying and having children impact positively upon participation, and are related to higher levels of religiosity (Arnett and Arnett 2002; Petts 2009; Stolzenberg, Blair-Loy, and Waite 1995; Uecker, Regnerus, and Vaaler 2007; Wilson and Sherkat 1994). Theoreticians describe the relationship between family and religion as reciprocal. Many religious rituals take place within family settings and central religious metaphors are based upon family relations (e.g., “our father in heaven”), whereas religious commandments fortify familial solidarity and hierarchy (e.g., “respect thy father and thy mother”) (Berger 1967; Pankhurst and Houseknecht 2000). This relationship has taken on new dimensions as a result of the religiousconservative versus secular-liberal “culture wars” in which religion has come to be aligned with “family values” (Christiano 2000). The various links between family and religion described in the research literature underscore the difficulties faced by singles’ belonging to a religious society in which family values are a central banner. Qualitative research methods were deemed the most adequate to understand RZ singles, multilayered and nuanced descriptions of the difficulties they face and the strategies they adopt in order to deal with them. 6 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION METHODOLOGY The findings in this article are based upon a multimethod qualitative research conducted on RZ singles. In-depth, semistructured interviews were held with 45 RZ singles: 22 women and 23 men between the ages of 25 and 44. Two of these individuals were no longer single at the time of the interview after having married in their late 30s. Five matchmakers and singles’ workshop leaders were interviewed as well. Interviewees were approached by the researcher at informal singles gatherings. In order to vary the sample, the author participated in events taking place in various locations throughout Israel and appealing to singles of differing levels of religious piety. Some of the interviewees resided in rented apartments in trendy neighborhoods known to be singles haunts, while others lived elsewhere, on their own or with their parents. Demographically, the profile of the interviewees is typical of RZ society: most are professionals and belong to the middle class. A majority is of European descent (Ashkenazi), but a sizable minority hails from North Africa and West Asia (Sephardic/Mizrachi), and some are children of mixed marriages between these two groups. Names of the interviewees were changed and identifying information withheld in order to maintain their anonymity. Other methods of data collection included participant observation and a survey of written materials. Participant observation was carried out at numerous RZ singles events, private as well as public, such as the prayer service described in the opening. A survey was conducted of RZ rabbinical writings and orally delivered teachings on this subject in order to gauge religious authorities’ view of prolonged singlehood. Discussions conducted by singles in online forums were surveyed as well. Most of the data used in the current article, however, are drawn from the in-depth interviews, since these were found to be most useful for gaining an understanding of the inner workings of singles’ religious identity. Grounded theory methods were employed in order to analyze research materials (Charmaz 2003; Glaser and Strauss 1967). Interviews were transcribed, following which central themes relating to the research questions were identified and categorized (Berg 2012; Corbin and Strauss 1990). The interviews were conducted in Hebrew; excerpts appearing here were translated by the author. RZ SOCIETY AND THE SINGLES: FORMAL AND INFORMAL COMMUNITIES Formal Synagogue-Based Communities Much of the religious life of RZs centers around communities, and these communities, as we shall see, are based upon familial participation. Generally speaking, RZ singles attend prayers but do not become members of specific synagogues; rather, they alternate between synagogues and remain both symbolically and physically on the margins of the various communities whose services they attend. Why is this so? Some interviewees laid the blame squarely on the communities, claiming that they do not know how to cope with singles: I think that the religious community prefers married people; it knows how to handle married people. The roles are clearer. The man comes and gets called up to the Torah; the woman helps prepare the kidush [the banquet that is often held after morning prayers on Sabbath] in the synagogue. The roles are clearer. The community doesn’t know what role to assign singles. (Tamar, a thirty year old single woman) Tamar spells out clearly the dynamics of family-based Modern Orthodox synagogue participation, dynamics that exclude nonmarried individuals. Greeley (1989) noted a similar phenomenon in American churches. He claimed that church attendance was based upon family participation, and indeed, as we saw above, this claim has been borne out by further research that found that marriage and the birth of children are correlated with higher levels of church RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES 7 participation (Arnett and Arnett 2002; Petts 2009; Stolzenberg 1995; Uecker, Regnerus, and Vaaler 2007; Wilson and Sherkat 1994). Another interviewee, Leah, actually attempted to participate actively in her parents’ synagogue and had to face what she experienced as assaults by a central member of the community: Nobody makes any really nasty comments other than the neighborhood yenta. She’s a character. When I see her my defenses go up. She escalates from telling me, in the middle of synagogue services, that I need to straighten out my teeth to telling me that if I don’t marry soon all the good guys will be gone. . . . She doesn’t know how much damage she’s done, she gives voice to my guilt feelings, she puts them into words. . . . This is a woman who has many mitzvoth to her merit, she is very wise and very active [in the synagogue]. Leah feels obliged to mention this woman’s merits and her central standing within the community alongside the critique implied by the title yenta. The yenta’s comments to Leah, which are not countered by other synagogue members, may be expressing a communal voice that is uneasy regarding the presence of older singles in a family-based community. Leah’s aspiration to be part of an established community is unusual. Most singles were wary of the commitment required by community membership and the stability that it implies, and seemed quite happy to remain unaffiliated as long as they remain single, as described by Sharon, a 30-year-old single man: I pray in this synagogue and that synagogue and sometimes in other synagogues, that’s it. In a way I don’t really want to be part of a community now. There is something very comfortable in this nomadic state that requires no commitments. [Nobody cares] if you come, if you don’t come, how you come, what you do, what you don’t do. I’m living my own life. Sharon is comfortable with the lack of commitment that his singlehood allows him, even in the religious sphere in which “commitment” is a central metaphor. This is a prime example of how attitudes characteristic of “young adulthood” as described by du Bois-Reymond (1998) and Heath (2004)are played out in the religious arena. As Arnett and Arnett Jensen put it, “emerging adults are skeptical regarding religious institutions” (2002:462), a description that seems to fit Sharon perfectly. Sharon is “living [his] own life” not only by cruising pubs (as he describes elsewhere in the interview) but by cruising synagogues as well. Nevertheless, it is clear to him that all this will change once he is married. When I marry I suppose that I will have to manufacture some kind of membership in some kind of community, [but] right now it doesn’t suit me. I’m comfortable not having to account to anyone. . . . I assume that I will join this when I’m part of it. Sharon assumes that he will join a community when he becomes part of it, but what exactly is “it?” “It” refers to being back “on track”: following the RZ norm of marrying and forming a family. It is clear to him that being a community member goes hand in hand with establishing a family. So singles’ lack of participation in synagogue prayer services and established community life would seem to be a result of the convergence of the wariness of synagogue members regarding unmarried individuals who challenge family values and norms, and of the singles’ interest in remaining adrift and detached from established and respectable forms of belonging. Those who suffer from this most are individuals like Leah who wish to participate despite being single. Informal Social Networks RZ singles owe much of their public visibility to the networks of singles. These networks concentrate in certain neighborhoods located in Jerusalem and in greater Tel Aviv. Neighborhoods 8 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION that contain many such networks came to be known as bitzot3 (singular bitza). Most singles living in these bitzot share rented apartments just like their secular young adult counterparts in Israel and abroad (Heath 2004), but unlike those counterparts, their apartments are almost always single sex. Nevertheless, there is much fraternizing between the sexes, and for many religious singles this is the central drawing force of these networks. Not all RZ singles live in the bitza,4 but it is the social center, drawing singles living elsewhere to participate in activities. It is where RZ singlehood, as a social phenomenon, takes place: Shabbat prayer services at certain synagogues draw large crowds of singles and a “social scene” forms when the services are over. The central social events in the bitza are the Shabbat meals. These meals are an important part of the Shabbat experience of Orthodox families; in the bitza, Shabbat meals are hosted by singles who invite friends of both sexes. Other weekday activities in the bitza are similar to those common among secular singles as well: going out to movies, parties, cafés, etc. RZ singles form strong bonds with their single friends, just as their secular counterparts do (Bellotti 2008; Heath 2004). Some interviewees even described their bitza friends as being “like family.” The bitza seems to have a bilateral impact upon the religious lives of singles. On the one hand it plays a supporting role by creating a religious environment in which singles can more easily maintain a religious lifestyle. Joint Shabbat meals are a prime example of this function. As mentioned above, festive meals are a central feature of the Orthodox Shabbat experience. So much so that although Jewish law does not stipulate that these meals need be partaken in company, the prospect of dining alone on Shabbat is daunting to many RZs. Gili, a divorced RZ woman in her early 30s, summarized this well: Religion is about family, Shabbat is family! . . . Shabbat is about being with someone close, doesn’t have to be family, but someone close. The thing is you grow up [with this attitude] and all of a sudden you find yourself alone, you don’t understand how the Shabbat can be observed [under these circumstances]. How can you? You can’t! The dissonance is so severe that you realize that something must be wrong with you. Gili is a learned woman who spends time studying Torah, and attends prayer services regularly and yet even for her religion is first and foremost “about family,” a link that is expressed especially on Shabbat and holidays. Singles living on their own often find themselves alone on Shabbat; the bitza provides a solution for this problem. At the same time, the bitza is viewed by many RZs as encouraging libertine sexual behavior and a “Western” secular lifestyle and thus drawing singles away from observance and religious identity. Gila is in her late 30s and married recently after long years of singlehood. In the interview she described how, years earlier, due to the influence of the high school in which she studied and the religious youth movement in which she participated, she became “very religious.” Elaborating on the meaning of “very religious” Gila explained that she wore only skirts (and not slacks/pants), swam only on “separate beaches” (in Israel there are beaches that have designated days for women and men who wish to bathe separately5 ), was strict on keeping kosher, and prayed three times a day. All of this changed gradually as she became integrated into singles society during her late 20s and early 30s. This is how she explained the transformation: 3 Literally, “swamp.” The term “social swamp” is used in modern Hebrew to denote social scenes in which participants know each other, meet regularly in altering settings, and gossip is rife. 4 A survey carried out for Yashfeh, an RZ matchmaking organization, found that only around 20percent of religious singles actually reside in bitzot (Klein 2014). 5 Orthodox religious authorities forbid “mixed swimming” because most swimsuits are not considered modest dress. Nevertheless, many RZ families do bathe on “mixed beaches,” but this practice is frowned upon and avoided by more devout RZs. RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES 9 When I was part of a more strictly religious society, I too was more strictly religious. When the society around me became less religious, and we began going to parties and dancing, stuff like that, it was very easy to step into that place. The influence of singles society is apparent in her narrative. Elsewhere in the interview she described how when she served in the military she was the only religious soldier in her unit. At that time, she viewed herself as representing religious society, and was therefore adamant about maintaining high religious standards. Her move toward more liberal standards at a later age was enabled precisely because she was part of the religious singles social scene, the bitza. She was surrounded by friends who were all adopting laxer standards than they were accustomed to when studying in religious educational frameworks, so she could follow suit without endangering her RZ identity. These are the aspects of life in the bitza that have gained publicity and have led rabbinical authority figures as well as more conservative singles to be critical of life in the bitza. Mostly, rabbis who write about singles tend to simply ignore the bitza despite its importance for singles. However, they had a harder time ignoring the successful TV drama series Srugim depicting life in the bitza that screened on Israeli TV a few years ago. Most rabbinical responses to this series were negative. One prominent and more extreme RZ rabbi even ruled that it is forbidden to watch it. These critiques, stemming from a conservative religious viewpoint, fail to recognize how the bitza helps preserve religion by providing a place for singles to celebrate the Shabbat when they are away from their parents’ home as well as by simply raising social boundaries between secular and religious singles. Religious Struggles Almost all interviewees considered their singlehood a liability with regard to their religious faith and observance. It is this factor that distinguishes their experiences from those of their secular counterparts. In interviewees’ narratives two central factors stand out as having a negative impact upon their religiosity: the temptations of Western youth culture, which to their mind undermine strict religious observance, and the emotional difficulties that are caused by the loneliness that, despite singles social networks, goes hand-in-hand with life as a religious single. The Drawing Force of Western Young Adulthood Some interviewees made explicit references to Western youth-culture images to which they were attracted and hoped to realize. Yoni, who married in his late 30s, described how when he moved to the bitza he had “a great fantasy that now I am going to find a close group of friends to hang out with like in TV series and movies.” Comparing herself to her college roommate, who was desperate to find a husband and marry as soon as she could, Tamar described how she looked forward to experiencing a few years of singlehood after graduating: “I will live in a rented apartment with a roommate, work, make a career for myself, travel, meet lots of new people, have exciting romances and maybe meet that one great love.” Tamar’s image of singlehood as a separate stage of the lifecycle with unique attributes and goals corresponds to attitudes prevalent among many young adults towards this stage of the lifecycle, as described above (Arnett 2006; du Bois-Reymond 1998; Heath 2004). In other interviews, references to Western cultural narratives were more circumspect, but nevertheless played a role. This was especially apparent when interviewees discussed sex. Schachter (2002) describes how upholding Orthodox religious strictures forbidding any premarital sexual contact is especially difficult for RZ university students who are exposed to Israeli secular society 10 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION in which premarital sex is considered normative. RZ singles maintain an ongoing dialogue with competing secular standards regarding what is considered normal and not normal, healthy and unhealthy sexual behavior, as is apparent in Yoni’s narrative: I have a friend who was very troubled each time he got called up to reserve duty with secular guys; he worried that they would make fun of him for being a virgin, because among them it’s considered a bad thing. On the other hand, in religious society it’s supposed to be a value: you should be proud that you maintained your purity. That’s the intersection, that’s the point. In which society will you say it quietly? In which society will you say it aloud? What would you like to say? What can you afford to say? What compromise do you make? I don’t sleep [with a woman] but I do kiss and hug, these are things that we don’t talk about, but they’re very much there. Not all interviewees accorded sex the same level of importance, but sexuality did keep on coming up in the interviews as a hotspot for tension in singles lives.6 Interestingly, when sex came up in interviews, it did not usually stand on its own but rather as a point on a continuum on the one side of which stands ideal religious observance, as lived out in yeshivas and midrashoth,7 and on the opposite pole is an image of secular Western youth culture. This is apparent in the narrative of Gila, the woman quoted above who claimed to have been swayed by her friends in the bitza to adopt more liberal religious standards: Slowly, slowly, slowly things become less important. You’re drawn to what’s going on around you because it fun. It’s fun going to a party. You sleep with someone because you love him; you feel that you should express your love. Of course it doesn’t begin with that. It begins with the peripheral things, the first touch, and the first kiss, that was very meaningful. You continue on because you believe that this is the correct path and you feel comfortable there. I didn’t have a guilty conscious about dancing with men, I didn’t feel bad about that, maybe because it was something I really loved doing. I did have a hard time in the beginning with the touching.8 That was a very dramatic phase, I almost broke down. I remember after kissing for the first time five years ago, I cried all night. How could this be? How could this have happened to me? It was so difficult. For Gila, having sexual relations is the final step along a continuum that included going to a party, mixed bathing (mentioned in her first quote), and kissing her boyfriend. These are all acts that have socio-religious significance and mark her trail from the strict observance she had been taught in high school and adhered to in her younger years toward laxer observance. This voyage is at times easy and at other times difficult; she is influenced by her social surroundings but also guided by her inner compass. Loneliness, Anomie, and Observance Although sexuality was clearly the most significant field in which singles felt they were sinning, another issue that came up in the interviews was skipping prayers. Many of the men admitted to missing some of the three mandatory daily prayers, or praying on their own, instead of with a quorum of 10 men as required by halacha and as they had done while studying in 6 Nahari (2008) also pointed to the centrality of this issue for the RZ single women she interviewed, and it was at the center of Schachter’s research of RZ students’ attitudes (Schachter 2002). 7 RZ post-high-school-level theological institutions for women. 8 Gila uses the term “touching” to describe her first physical contact with men that was of an erotic nature. The dictum to refrain from touching a member of the opposite sex (issur negiaa) probably influenced her terminology, as it did that of other interviewees. RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES 11 yeshiva.9 Tamir links skipping prayers to a general lack of energy that he understands as related to prolonged singlehood. I figure that if I had a wife and a regular schedule, and I would have reached a state of calm and stability (menucha unachala) in this matter, then I would be praying three times a day. This is something that I am not doing now, and not because I don’t want to. I simply don’t have the energy to invest in it. Tamir associates singlehood with a lack of regularity and steadiness. Lack of stability is indeed characteristic of the phase of young adulthood as described by researchers. Tamir seems to suffer from this disposition, but he experiences it as beyond his control. He uses the expression drawn from Bible menucha unachala10 to describe what he expects to achieve once he marries. Literally translated “rest and an estate/inheritance,” in modern Hebrew the expression menucha unachala refers to ending one’s travails and reaching a state of calm and stability. From Tamir’s standpoint, had he been in his correct estate (i.e., married) he would have been able to worship God as he was meant to; however, because things have gone terribly wrong, he simply does not have the strength to worship as he should. Elsewhere in his interview, he spoke of his hope and expectation to return to righteous observance after he marries. Another transgression that was mentioned in the narratives of only a few interviewees was watching television on Friday night. It is forbidden for Orthodox Jews to use electricity on the Sabbath, and watching television is thought to spoil the special Shabbat atmosphere.11 Sabbath meals are festive and include singing, sometimes a short sermon by one of the guests, and, of course, much talk. They seem to have become a symbolic nexus of family and religion in current Orthodox culture. As we saw above, Sabbath meals play a central role in singles’ social networks as well; these networks provide an alternative, and at times even preferred, venue for Sabbath meals for singles. But what happens to singles who are not invited? Such a situation was described by Meirav, who went on to explain that she resorts to watching television on Friday nights when she is left on her own, out of what she considers to be a lack of choice. Meirav is a 40-year-old single religious woman who decided to have a baby on her own using donor sperm after giving up on finding an appropriate spouse. After having the child, she was unable to host Shabbat meals for economic reasons and got fewer invitations as well, so she often found herself alone with her baby on Friday nights. It’s important to me; it’s beautiful in my eyes [the religious Shabbat]. I don’t want to drive on Shabbat, I drive all week, Shabbat I rest, on Shabbat I’m with what there is. So I turn on the television because I am unable to provide the sanctity of Shabbat on my own. Given the choice, television or a Shabbat dinner table with people and laughter and Shabbat songs, I’ll take the Shabbat table! Even if what’s on TV is Mischak Machur, which is my favorite program, the Shabbat table wins big time. Meirav is not so much tempted by the television as she feels rejected by her own society. She feels unable to uphold the sanctity of the Sabbath precisely because Shabbat has come to be viewed by Orthodox individuals as inherently family and community oriented. The factors that come together to create the feeling of holiness simply don’t seem to work for Meirav; when she is on her own, the magic doesn’t happen. 9 Women are not required to pray in a quorum of 10, and are not required to pray three times a day. 10 Deuteronomy12 11 Appliances verse 9. can be preprogrammed to turn on and off; this is done regularly in Orthodox homes, but not for televisions. In Israel it would be forbidden to do so since secular Jews desecrate the Sabbath to broadcast television programming, and it is forbidden to draw enjoyment from the sins of others. In the diaspora, the reasons are more complex—having also to do with “the spirit of the Sabbath”—but the bottom line is that Orthodox families do not watch television on Shabbat. 12 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION Singlehood as a Religious Moratorium Analysis of the interview material led to the identification of a common strategy employed by interviewees in dealing with the tensions between their Orthodox religious faith and lifestyle as singles. They continue to believe in RZ family values and in the necessity of observing halachah; however, they view themselves as having strayed from the path.12 They hope to marry, and thus get on back on board, eventually. Meanwhile, they excuse themselves, at least partially, from the observance of commandments that do not fit their current lifestyle. Yoni, who married in his late 30s, described in the interview his attempts to return to full observance after he married: Today I am kind of searching for myself all over again. You leave yeshiva like an etrog that was just taken out of the box.13 You’re raised on . . . the older students and rabbis are your role models, it’s the [value of the] Shabbat table that you draw in, and the Jewish home . . . and very high halachic standards. And [following that] after many years of singlehood and very difficult internal struggles against the evil impulse you begin to compromise and you make all kinds of excuses for yourself, and you allow yourself some slack, touching and [missing] prayers and all kinds of things, and parties. And after that, when you marry you say, hey wait a minute, how can I renew what I had in yeshiva? I can’t go back to yeshiva and on the other hand I’m no longer single. Interviewer: The change that you experienced as a single, was it only with regard to your behavior or also to your worldview? Yoni: In the beginning I saw my behavior as bediavad [ex post facto14 ]. I never turned it into an ideology, but I was definitely lenient with myself. I viewed myself as being in the status of annus [compelled to sin]. There are different statuses in halacha: patur [exempt], shogeg [one who sins unintentionally] I felt that I am annus, what can be expected of me? Yoni’s list of transgressions includes the ubiquitous negiaa (“touching”), as well as skipping prayers and attending dance parties. He describes his efforts to overcome the evil impulse but still views himself as lackadaisical in his observance as a single. Interestingly, he chooses the halachic term annus to describe his situation; this term is used in Jewish legal literature to refer to situations in which an individual is forced by an external power to sin (e.g., a married woman who is being raped), and therefore holds no blame. Yoni describes himself as annus by the evil impulse. Religious authorities would consider this a misuse of the term since the evil impulse is thought of as an internal force that one must overcome and not an external power. His choice to use this term points to what he experienced when still single as the overbearing temptations of sexuality, and more generally Western youth culture. Yoni’s attitude can be contrasted with that of Shai, a 40-year-old single man who was one of a minority of interviewees who continued to observe strictures forbidding any physical contact with members of the opposite sex. I can’t judge anybody for what they do; I know the situation all too well based on what my friends tell me. I have no criticism of anybody my age that somehow was less stringent sexually or religiously. I understand what he’s going through; I have no criticism of him. The fact that I am strong does not mean that I demand of everybody to be strong. There may be other things in which he was successful and I was not. 12 Straying from the path, or “going off the derech,” is a common metaphor used by the Orthodox to describe those who leave Orthodoxy. 13 Etrog is the citron fruit used for ritual purposes during the tabernacles holiday. The expression “an etrog in a box” is used by Yoni to illustrate how he felt shiny, new, and pure when leaving the yeshiva, not yet tarnished by the exigencies of daily life as a single. 14 In the Talmudic context, ex post facto refers to situations in which one’s religious observance must be modified due to external circumstances. RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES 13 For Shai what is at hand is a struggle of the will. He is magnanimous toward his fellow singles who have failed and insists that he is not judging them, but he clearly would not accept Yoni’s position that he is annus (forced to sin). In answer to my question about whether his religious philosophy was transformed together with his lax religious behavior, Yoni stated that he never “turned it into an ideology,” meaning that he continues to adhere to the religious philosophy he was taught in yeshiva. While still single he considered himself a sinner, albeit not too much of a sinner. Now that he is married his religious moratorium is over, and yet he cannot quite vision himself returning to his previous cloistered yeshiva lifestyle. This theme of singlehood as a period of lax religious observance that is to be repaired after marriage came up in Tamar’s narrative as well. Like Meirav, she too found observing Shabbat on her own to be too depressing and turned to television for solace: It happened to me once that I stayed alone, and it was so horrible to be alone on Shabbat in the apartment that I turned on the television. You understand? And I didn’t have any guilt feelings. I told myself “if my social, familial or communal situation has brought me to this that I need to spend a whole Shabbat alone, I can watch television and feel OK with it.” The thing is that I do believe in God, I always have. . . . Many times I was very alone, and I didn’t feel his guiding hand. It’s like I felt some kind of hester15 so it’s not that I believe in him less than I did. For Tamar as for Meirav, it was loneliness rather than the attraction of Western youth culture that posed a challenge to her religiosity. She insists that her belief is staunch, but the God she believes in can be negotiated with. Tamar’s somewhat unconventional attitude toward God is in tune with changes in religious attitudes over the last decades that have been documented by researchers. It can be described as a transition from “God as king” to “God as buddy” image (Luhrmann 2004; Wuthnow 1996:239). What I would like to focus on here is Tamar’s attitude toward singlehood as a moratorium of sorts during which religious observance need not be upheld to the same degree as is expected of married couples. In Israeli society the desecration of the Sabbath by the use of electricity, which is forbidden by Orthodox law, alongside certain other religious commandments, impacts upon one’s social identity; it is something religious people simply do not do (Cohen 2004). If it became publicly known that Tamar watched television on the Sabbath, she would no longer be considered “religious” by many Orthodox people, and religious men might not want to date her. So it is clear to Tamar that once she is married, she will not watch television on the Sabbath. I know that as soon as I get married and have children I will be responsible for them, for their religious education. I won’t confuse them by sending them to a religious school and turning on the television on Shabbat. I wouldn’t do that to them, that would be irresponsible. Tamar, like the other singles quoted above, views her transgression as related to her ongoing singlehood and her social positioning that is a result of this status, and she therefore considers her behavior in this realm to be temporary. It will change when her marital status changes. The emphasis in Tamar’s narrative is on her feeling that she has been abandoned by religious society and possibly even by God, while in the quote above from Yoni’s interview, sexual and other temptations are underscored. However, elsewhere in his interview he too refers to the loneliness he experienced while still single and to his jealousy of married friends. So more often than not, both factors play a role in shaping singles’ religious observance and lifestyle, and in both cases viewing singlehood as a moratorium is a strategy that is commonly employed. 15 Hester panim is a Jewish theological concept that refers to a situation in which God “hides his face,” meaning that he chooses to turn a blind eye to the sufferings of the faithful. 14 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION CONCLUSION Fundamentalist societies, such as ultra-Orthodox Judaism, are able to resist many of the challenges rising from changing attitudes towards sexuality, intimacy, and gender relations in late modernity by forming social enclaves and maintaining strict control of dating and marriage. Modern Orthodoxy, on the other hand, ditched traditional arranged marriage decades ago in favor of more freedom for youth and “love marriages.” This combination of modernity and Orthodoxy worked well for previous generations of RZs, but finds itself challenged in late modern times as growing numbers of men and women fail to follow the societal expectation to marry in their early 20s. Outside the safe haven of the religious family, singles have more exposure to secular culture and lifestyles that diverge from religious teachings and worldviews. This places them in a vulnerable position. They are not rebels; most believe in RZ family values and would like to find a spouse and establish a kosher Jewish family, though some of them do wish to live out Western youth-culture scripts regarding young adulthood as well. It would seem that RZ society must now choose between maintaining its conservative ideology and lifestyle by continuing to marginalize members who have not established families or to adopt a more inclusive attitude that might compromise the ideological integrity of the group and its self-image as the upholder of traditional family values. This article focused on the effects of prolonged singlehood upon the religiosity of RZ singles. It is my assertion that this issue should be understood in the context of the changes that have taken place in gender relations, intimacy, and expectations regarding the lifecycle in late-modernity and the Orthodox reaction to these changes. These wider cultural forces influence singles directly, but also through various social structures, especially formal synagogue-based communities that play a central role in RZ society and informal networks of friends that are typical of young adult societies. Regarding formal communities, quantitative research projects have repeatedly found that singles, of different faiths, participate less in religious services and communal life (Arnett and Arnett 2002; Petts 2009; Stolzenberg et al. 1995; Uecker, Regnerus, and Vaaler 2007; Wilson and Sherkat 1994). This work has found that both sides of the equation—synagogue communities and singles—contribute to this outcome. RZ synagogue communities favor familial participation and thus marginalize singles, and the singles, for their part, are reluctant to take on commitments of any sort, including synagogue membership, an attitude that, as we saw, is typical of young adulthood (Arnett and Arnett 2002; du Bois-Reymond 1998; Whitney and Ebstyne King 2014). The informal networks were found to have a dual effect upon the religiosity of singles. Paradoxically, religious friends sometimes draw singles away from strict observance. Religious singles may not feel that their religious identity is threatened by participating in activities that Orthodox Jews associate with secular youth culture, such as dance parties, as long as they are among other RZ singles. On the other hand, these networks have a preservative effect; based as they are upon reciprocal hosting of Shabbat meals, they provide a religious environment for singles living away from their families and construct effective barriers between observant and secular singles social scenes. Rabbis and religious authorities, as well as more strictly observant singles, who disparage singles networks focus on the sexual transgressions that occur within them or blame them for creating too much of a comfortable environment for singles, thus supposedly discouraging marriage, and not upon the aforementioned preservative aspects. RZ singles experience their religiosity as compromised by two central factors that are a result of their ongoing singlehood: the attraction of secular youth-culture lifestyle and their feelings of loneliness and anomy. Taken together, these factors lead many singles to experience their religiosity as flawed. The RZ establishment’s solution to this problem is simply to encourage marriage, but this only serves to intensify the feeling among those who remain single that they are in a religious no man’s land. The singles’ central strategy for dealing with this situation is temporal compartmentalization. Naeem claims that American Muslim singles deal with the 15 RELIGIOUS ZIONIST SINGLES tension between the demands of Islam, as they understand it, and American mainstream attitudes toward singlehood, by leading double lives: “at the masjid, they perform the ‘good Muslim’ identity, and in the non-Muslim spaces, they perform the ‘regular American’ identity” (Naeem 2009:141–142). RZ singles prefer to bracket off this stage of life for which there exists no religious script, viewing it as a moratorium of sorts during which their religious failures are more excusable; they plan to get back on track as soon as they marry. Similarly to RZs, research conducted on singles of other faiths describes singles as caught between mainstream and sectarian religious values and scripts regarding family and singlehood (Darrington, Pirecy, and Niehuis 2005; Naeem 2009; Wulf et al. 1984), and this is, of course, true regarding American Modern Orthodox singles as well, whose lifestyle and religious struggles are nearly identical to those of their Israeli RZ brethren (Frances 2008; Rosenfeld 2008). Emerging adulthood has already been referred to in the research literature as a period during which religious individuals tend to take a moratorium from religious participation (Barry and AboZena 2014; Whitney and Ebstyne King 2014). However, the use of this term in the present article is more far reaching; it references the manner in which RZ singles view singlehood as a period during which they are on a moratorium from strict observance of certain commandments and more generally from the RZ script for coming of age. They compartmentalize periods of the lifecycle in order to deal with the tension between conflicting cultural scripts and systems of meaning. Emerging adulthood has also been described as a period of spiritual growth and meaning making (Barry and Abo-Zena 2014); indeed, religious beliefs remain important for RZ singles, but the difficulties they face after graduating post-high-school-level theological institutions and colleges as independent singles in a “family values,” marriage-oriented religious society encumber and add much emotional stress to this putative growth process. REFERENCES Aran, G. 1991. Jewish Zionist fundamentalism: The bloc of the faithful in Israel (Gush Emunim). In Fundamentalisms observed, dited by Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby, pp. 265–344. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Arnett, Jeffrey J. 2006. Emerging adulthood: Understanding the new way of coming of age. In Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century, edited by Jeffery J. Arnett and Jennifer L. Tanner, pp. 3–19. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Arnett, Jeffrey J. and Lene Arnett Jensen. 2002. A congregation of one: Individualized religious beliefs among emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research 17(5):451–67. Barry, Carolyn McNamara and Mona M. Abo-Zena. 2014. Emerging adults’ religious and spiritual development. In Emerging adults’ religiousness and spirituality, edited by Carolyn McNamara Barry and Mona M. Abo-Zena, pp. 21–38. New York: Oxford University Press. Beck, Ulrich and Elisabeth Beck-Gernsheim. 1995. The normal chaos of love. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Bellotti, Lisa. 2008. What are friends for? Elective communities of single people. Social Networks 30(4):318–29. Berg, Bruce L. 2012. Qualitative research methods: For the social sciences. Boston, MA: Pearson. Berger, Peter L. 1967. The sacred canopy: Elements of a sociological theory of religion. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Charmaz, Kathy. 2003. Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In Inside interviewing: New lenses new concerns, edited by James A. Holstein and Jaber F. Gubrium, pp. 311–30. London: Sage. Cherlow, Yuval. 2003. The private domain. Petach Tikvah, Israel: Yashivat Hahesder Petach Tikvah. Christiano, Kevin J. 2000. Religion and the family in modern American culture. In Family, religion, and social change in diverse societies, edited by Sharon K. Houseknecht and Jerry G. Pankhurst, pp. 43–78. New York: Oxford University Press. Cohen, Asher. 2004. The knitted kippah and what is beneath it: Plural identities in religious Zionism. Akdamot 15(1):9–30. Corbin, Juliet and Anselm Strauss. 1990. Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology 13(1):3–21. Cote, James E. 2006. Emerging adulthood as an institutionalized moratorium. In Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century, edited by Jeffrey J. Arnett and Jennifer L. Tanner, pp. 85–116. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Darrington, Jana, Kathleen W. Pirecy, and Sylvia Niehuis. 2005. The social and cultural construction of singlehood among young, single Mormons. Qualitative Report 10(4):639–61. 16 JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION du Bois-Reymond, Michelle. 1998. I don’t want to commit myself yet: Young people’s life concepts. Journal of Youth Studies 1(1):63–79. El-Amin Naeem, Zarinah. 2009. Jihad of the soul: Singlehood and the search for love in Muslim America. Detroit: Niyah Press. Engelberg, Ari. 2011. Seeking a “pure relationship?” Israeli religious Zionist singles looking for love and marriage. Religion 41(3):431–48. ———. 2013. Israeli religious Zionist singles in late modern society. Israeli Studies Review 28(2):1–17. Fischer, Shlomo. 2012. Fundamentalist or romantic nationalist? Israeli modern Orthodoxy. In Dynamic belonging: Contemporary Jewish collective identities, edited by Harvey E. Goldberg, Steven M. Cohen and Ezra Kopelowitz, pp. 91–111. New York: Berghahn Books. Fishman, Aryei. 1995. Modern Orthodox Judaism: A study in ambivalence. Social Compass 42(1):89–95. Frances, Yaakov. 2008. A qualitative study of sexual-religious conflict in single Orthodox Jewish men. PhD diss., City University of New York. Giddens, Anthony. 1992. The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love, and eroticism in modern societies. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory. New York: Aldine. Greeley, Andrew. 1989. Religious change in America. New York: Cambridge University Press. Heath, Sue. 2004. Peer-shared households, quasi-communes and neo-tribes. Current Sociology 52(2):161–79. Heimdal, Kristen R. and Sharon K. Houseknecht. 2003. Does a strong institution of religion require a strong family institution? Comparative Sociology 2(4):631–66. Herman, Tamar, Gilead Be’eri, Ela Heller, Chanan Cohen, Yuval Lebel, Chanan Mozes, and Kalman Newman. 2014. Religious? National! The national religious camp in Israel. Report handed in to the Israel Democracy Institute. Hirschhorn, Sara Yael. 2012. City on a hilltop: The participation of Jewish-American immigrants within the Israeli settler movement, 1967–1987. PhD Diss., University of Chicago. Ibrahim, Rozita and Zahara Hassan. 2009. Understanding singlehood from the experiences of never-married Malay Muslim women in Malaysia: Some preliminary findings. European Journal of Social Sciences 8(3):395–405. Jamieson, Lynn. 1998. Intimacy: Personal relationships in modern societies. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Klein, Zvika. 2014. Less than 20 percent of singles have religious matchmakers. NRG. Available at http://www.nrg. co.il/online/11/ART2/600/371.html. Lehmann, David and Batia Siebzehner. 2009. Power, boundaries and institutions: Marriage in ultra-Orthodox Judaism. European Journal of Sociology 50(2):273–308. Luhrmann, Tanya M. 2004. Metakinesis: How God becomes intimate in contemporary U.S. Christianity. American Anthropologist 106(3):518–28. Nahari, Gali. 2008. Now I am bein hazmanim: The religious identity of unmarried religious women. M.A. thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Pankhurst, Jerry G. and Susan K. Houseknecht. 2000. Introduction: The religion-family linkage and social change—A neglected area of study. In Family, religion, and social change in diverse societies, edited by Susan K. Houseknecht and Jerry G. Pankhurst, pp. 1–40. New York: Oxford University Press. Petts, Richard J. 2009. Trajectories of religious participation from adolescence to young adulthood. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 48(3):552–71. Rosenfeld, Jennie. 2008. Talmudic re-readings: Toward a modern Orthodox sexual ethic. PhD diss., City University of New York. Schachter, Elli P. 2002. Identity constraints: The perceived structural requirements of a “good” identity. Human Development 45(6):416–33. Schwartz, Dov. 2008. Religious Zionism: History and ideology. Brighton, MA: Academic Studies Press. Shalev, Ofra, Baum Nehami, and Haya Itzhaky. 2012. Mate selection and marriage decision in bicultural society: Modern Orthodox society in Israel. Marriage and Family Review 48(2):210–26. Smith, Christian. 2009. Souls in transition: The religious and spiritual lives of emerging adults. New York: Oxford University Press. Stolzenberg, Ross M., Mary Blair-Loy, and Linda J. Waite. 1995. Religious participation in early adulthood: Age and family life cycle effects on church membership. American Sociological Review 60(1):84–103. Uecker, Jeremy E., Mark D. Regnerus, and Margaret E. Vaaler. 2007. Losing my religion: The social sources of religious decline in early adulthood. Social Forces 85(4):1667–92. Whitney, William B. and Pamela Ebstyne King. 2014. Religious congregations and communities. In Emerging adults’ religiousness and spirituality: Meaning-making in an age of transition, edited by Carolyn McNamara Barry and Mona M. Abo-Zena, pp. 133–51. New York: Oxford University Press. Wilson, John and Darren E. Sherkat. 1994. Returning to the fold. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 33(2):148–61. Wulf, Jean, David Prentice, Dona Hansum, Archie Ferrar, and Bernard Spilka. 1984. Religiosity and sexual attitudes and behavior among evangelical Christian singles. Review of Religious Research 119–31. Wuthnow, Robert. 1996. Sharing the journey: Support groups and America’s new quest for community. New York: Free Press.