affecting possible future shiddukhim or employment possibilities. Another relates this phenomenon to the fact that this second generation—unlike many of the mothers—has benefited from extended periods of intensive higher Jewish learning (see note 3*, supra). On the one hand, these daughters are dissatisfied with what they view as the incompleteness and inauthenticity of the women’s prayer service; on the other, they are substantially more attracted to advanced Torah scholarship, which they value as more permanent and genuine. Put simply, they aspire to being talmidot hakhamim and perhaps even poskot someday, rather than hazzaniyyot. In addition, generally speaking, the more women become involved in Torah study and scholarship, the more at peace they are with Jewish tradition as it stands; see the comments of Lauren Granite and Tamar Ross, supra, note 3*. We note in this regard that R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik verbalized on many occasions his belief that—public policy issues aside—the women’s energies were being misdirected in their battle for prayer groups. These intellectual and spiritual energies could be more properly, profitably and permanently invested in Torah scholarship (conversations with R. Baruch Lanner, R. Binyomin Walfish and R. Charles Weinberg). Indeed, the Rav actively supported women’s involvement in all areas of Torah study, and he himself inaugurated the Talmud program at Stern College for Women on October 11, 1977.
286.Resp. Seridei Eish, III, sec. 105—this responsum is dated 1951. See also ibid., II, sec. 52. The issue under discussion was the right of women to vote and be elected for government. On this topic, see at length, “Leah Shakdiel vs. The Minister of Religious Affairs et al,” (1988), 42 (ii) Piskei Din 221, pp. 247-270. Regarding R. Weinberg’s position, see p. 260.