At the end of her introduction, Fuchs summarizes the definitions that she has been examining across the seven anthologies which she is reviewing: ” ‘Gender’ is understood as an inevitable dichotomy between the sexes, rather than as a historical, social, and cultural institution. ‘Jewish Women’ is understood as a coherent sameness, rather than as a reference which is contingent on historical and cultural context,” (22). The argument she is making is that past attempts at studying “women” or “gender” within the field of Jewish Studies has flattened these terms into something that conveniently fit into their worldview, rather than critically examine them. Gender is seen as the traditional binary of male and female, and Jewish women are represented by white, middle-class wives and mothers. These definitions ignore anything outside of a heteronormative binary and ignore other classes, races, cultures, and roles which Jewish women take part in. Her criticisms are not unfounded, but I don’t quite understand why Fuchs is choosing to introduce her own book by reviewing and critiquing several others. She lays out her argument that a thorough examination of gender and women in Jewish Studies has yet to be done, yet she spends much of her time repeating that fact. To point to an example, on page 13 she writes “This claim to innovation ignores previous anthologies and monographs on ‘women’ and ‘gender’ in various Jewish Studies subdisciplines. This anthology displays not only a lack of awareness of feminist theories of gender and women, but of preceding monographs and anthologies in Jewish Studies.” These sentences are a blatant rewording of one another, making it more difficult than necessary for readers to understand Fuch’s point in introducing her book.
Writing and other content
