93 Comments
User's avatar
Shy Guy's avatar

Kinder Velt Rebbetzin?!?!?!?!?! And two of them?!?!?!?!?! In the same unseparated package as the Rebbe and the Rosh Yeshiva?!?!?!?!?!

Think of the [evil] possibilities!

Personally, I would put the manufacturer and sellers into Cherem. But that's just me.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Oh yeah. I forgot to mention. And then the non-religious take credit for all the "military bravery" of the dati-leumi by not representing the dati-leumi in their action figures!

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

Oh, come on. Any creative parent or child can add a kippa. I remember I was once worried that my rubber duck had no visible ears, so my mother drew (weirdly human) ears with a Sharpie.

And aren't we always hearing how haredi publications can't show women's pictures because some groups don't want it.

These people are taking advance orders before they manufacture the "specialty" dolls, for crying out loud.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Sorry. This comment was a reply in the wrong place.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

So delete it.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

I didn't know I could. But somebody already responded here. So instead of deleting I'll answer her. (And now I know for the future.)

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

1) We didn't have action figures in Europe.

2) There is a limud zechus involved. The stiff plastic packaging prevents the figures from moving. They can't even turn to look at each other.

Expand full comment
ItCouldBeWorse's avatar

Too bad the set doesn't come with some kippah stickers so that kids could have the option to apply them if they want. However, such stickers are sold in the US, so I'm sure you can buy them in Israel. Tzizit would be tougher (but you can assume they're tucked in.) A female soldier in a skirted-uniform would also be nice!

Expand full comment
YL's avatar

A female soldier in a skirted-uniform would also be nice! -- Riiight, because when a chayelet is chasing a terrorist on the battlefield, a skirt helps her run faster

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Tell us you're ignorant without saying it explicitly.

Expand full comment
ItCouldBeWorse's avatar

No, because frum women (like Rabbi Slifkin's daughter) also serve in the IDF, and it would be nice if they were also represented. Not every soldier is on the battlefield, yet they are contributing. For instance, I presume the "... man who is wheelchair-bound in charge of cyber operations" is not on the battlefield, but he is represented nonetheless.

Expand full comment
Gili Houpt's avatar

אם ה' לא ישמור עיר שוא שוקד שומר

The implicit corollary is that when Hashem protects us we still need guards

Expand full comment
Shalom Rosenfeld's avatar

Yes. Necessary, but not sufficient.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

To be fair, while the original pasuk has the meaning you attribute to it, Av HaRachamim was written in memory of victims of the Crusades. (And the person writing it probably thought that "nesher" meant "eagle.")

Expand full comment
Avi Goldstein's avatar

At least the rebbetzin is an actual figure of a woman. Go "figure"!

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

Ok, just to be clear, what's in stock are the basic male soldier and the female soldier with their weapons. If you want to order the other ones, they are still being manufactured and will be delivered in about 4 months. The two original ones can be delivered immediately.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

"Alas, none of them are visibly religious, which is a pity and non-representative."

Yes. So now you see that the non-religious don't like the dati-leumi just as much as they don't like the Charedim. The only reason the non-religious like the dati-leumi in the IDF is this: While the non-religious have lost much of their idealism and many prefer not to battle as much as they used to, the dat-leumi enter battle with a religious fervor; so in the end many more of the dati-leumi die in battle thereby saving the non-religious from the perils or war.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

You're not arguing in good faith, so I'm not really responding to you.

People tend to be stuck with the mindsets they grew up with. It's why Jews around the world still think that the American Jewish community is the most influential among world Jewry, and the largest (neither correct), or why American Jews still think that the Reform and Conservative movements account for most Jews.

And it's why a lot of Israelis haven't caught on that most of the country is not secular.

And why a lot of Israelis don't yet associate "religious" with "IDF" automatically.

But most do. Any movie about the IDF for decades now will always show kippot. Any Israeli movie in general. For some people it may take a bit longer.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

... because movies always portray reality accurately.

In any case, what has your comment to do with what I said. Oh yeah, I forgot - you're not responding to me.

Anyway, you haven't responded to what I wrote and my comment still stands. (And to Chana Siegel: Yes, like everyone else, I agree with myself.)

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

"... because movies always portray reality accurately."

Remove the weasel words "always" and "accurately". You shouldn't negate without explaining what you see in place of the gaping void you left in the wake of your destructive arguments.

While films are (sometimes) fiction, you still have to explain why more recent films portray soldier are religious. (Hint: they're not doing for your personal re-education.) Consider that medieval war films vs. civil war films vs WWII films will portray soldiers differently. Those differences reflect a reality. Simply kvetching "films are fiction" is a facile dishonest response.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Wow, point proven. Your attempt to take a completely unrelated point and turn it into an argument for you proves that you can't be taken in good faith. Or maybe that you learned to "argue" as a yeshiva bucher. Or maybe you have a comprehension problem. Or maybe all three. Go with God.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Nice to see you responding to me. Thank you.

The point I was trying to make is that using the content of movies as proof for what happens in real life makes it really hard to take the discussion seriously because it is by definition detached from reality.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

I was using the movie to show something opposite to my point. All those years in yeshiva really paid off for you.

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

"it is by definition detached from reality."

Which definition of movie would imply a detachment from reality that would make it "really hard to take the discussion seriously"? Maybe you only watched cartoons.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Oh yeah. I forgot to mention. And then the non-religious take credit for all the "military bravery" of the dati-leumi by not representing the dati-leumi in their action figures!

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

Paranoia

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

When a Charedi makes one such (relatively benign) observation about the irreligious, it's paranoia. When a dati-leumi or secular person makes much worse and more scathing comments about Charedim, it's just the truth.

Typical antisemitism.

Expand full comment
Natan Slifkin's avatar

you're not making an observation, you're making a speculation.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

I understand that. And my point is that when a Charedi makes it about a dati-leumi or a secular person it's called exactly that - speculation. But when a secular or dati-leumi or you make it about a Charedi, you call it the truth.

As I said: typical antisemitism.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Aren't you clever. If I could pat your head I would.

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

" And my point is that when a Charedi makes it"

No, your point (or rather speculative paranoid claim) was that the non-religious are taking credit for the bravery and sacrifice of the religious.

At least initially your point wasn't about you.

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

"When a Charedi makes one such (relatively benign) observation about the irreligious, it's paranoia. "

No. When anybody makes an observation without observing, it's speculation. When the implication is to cast aspersions and evil intent, it's paranoia. It doesn't have to be Charedim.

"relatively benign"

Don't be silly. Strike out the ambiguous word and replace it with "sufficiently". But if your observation was benign, than why did you make it? It certainly did sound like you were critiquing the non-religious. If it was benign why did you need an exclamation point?

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Relatively Benign.

Benign because I wasn't accusing anyone of actively harming others, just taking undue credit.

"Relatively" because it is still uncomplimentary.

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

"Benign because I wasn't accusing anyone of actively harming others, just taking undue credit."

Not benign on anybody's standard. Your standard may be lower. Either way, the accusation is unfounded and paranoid.

Expand full comment
ItCouldBeWorse's avatar

"So now you see that the non-religious don't like the dati-leumi just as much as they don't like the Charedim." Do you understand how capitalism works? Companies make products that they think will sell. The market for these toys is probably higher among the less observant because more of them serve. If the company thinks there is a strong market among the dati, they will manufacture the toys.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Yes. And in capitalism, the market works on supply and demand. And it seems that there's no demand amongst the larger population of secular consumers for dati-leumi action figures, so what I said still stands.

Long live Achdus!

(<sarcasm> Just need to get those Charedim on board! </sarcasm>)

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

Another thing which exposes the lie behind the חברת הלומדים and the supposedly prophetic wisdom of their leadership. A society made up of only scholars and scribes is doomed to a marginal existence at best, slaughter at worst.

An autonomous society needs effective warriors who remain whole human beings, just as it needs health professionals, skilled workmen, engineers, and scientists. The Litvish haredi leaders in Israel seem to lack the vision or skills to lead anything but yeshivas and kashrut organizations.

It reminds me of a cartoon, "If everyone grew up to be what they wanted to be at age 5". A cityscape filled with nothing but ballerinas, cowboys, firemen, and singers.

Expand full comment
David Ilan's avatar

You forgot Astronauts…

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

You're responding to my sarcastic side-comment? You missed the whole point. Let me make it clearer.

Even without the Charedim there is no achdus. It's a sham. In general, the irreligious don't like the dati-leumi as much as they don't like Charedim. It's just that the irreligious know how to get the dati-leumi to do their bidding and then just throw them a bone so the dati-leumi think that they're all on the same team and that there is reciprocity. But in general, one goal of the irreligious is to keep the state secular and to keep/make as many people in it as possible secular.

Expand full comment
Rachel A Listener's avatar

“An autonomous society needs effective warriors”—perhaps the fear is the numbers: eg., Gideon: from a citizenry of millions, and volunteers of hundreds of thousands, he, at the direction of H”S, reduced his forces to 300. The majority were not needed.

Expand full comment
A. Nuran's avatar

It really, really doesn't. Adam Smith and Karl Marx both said capitalists try like heck to eliminate competition, fix prices, and screw everyone so they can become monopoly rentiers. They were right

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

Not sure what your point is. But if you have time to explain I"d be interested to hear.

Expand full comment
A. Nuran's avatar

Mostly me being a somewhat terrified former economist watching the land I was born in sink into fascism and economic disaster 😞 But the point is still relevant. A Free Market is one which is free from manipulation and monopoly/cartels. The marketplace of ideas like the one of goods and services is choked by the power of a few people who own everything.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

If you were an economist, you wouldn't throw around the term "fascism" so lightly. Or cite Marx, I suppose.

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

I hear. But any of those monopolizers must cater to the demand before they get big enough to monopolize and do whatever they want (unless of course they have some other road to power such as some government positioning etc.).

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

Speculation

Expand full comment
Gdalya's avatar

When a Charedi makes such an observation about the irreligious or dati-leumi, it's speculation. When a dati-leumi or secular person makes such or worse observations about Charedim, it's just the truth.

Typical antisemitism.

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

"makes such an observation"

No observation was made. One must observe to make an observation.

"When a dati-leumi or secular person makes such or worse observations"

What a dati-leumi or secular person does are actions independent of the point you made. Nothing they say or do has any effect of the veracity of your statement. As such, bring them up is irrelevant at best, and a dishonest smoke-screen at worst.

You have not provided the slightest evidence or justification for your statement.

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

I ordered two for my grandsons, who love heroes of all types. They haven't arrived, and it's been uh, months now.

Expand full comment
Yehudah P.'s avatar

"However, considering that such people would never dream of walking through Jenin or living on the border alongside Hezbollah without an actual IDF soldier watching over them"

There was a case recently (January 2023--notably before October 7th) where Neturei Karta guys actually went to Jenin and met with Islamic Jihad leaders!

https://www.timesofisrael.com/anti-zionist-haredi-sect-members-visit-jenin-meet-terror-linked-palestinians/

Some Palestinians thought about kidnapping them--but they probably reconsidered after thinking that Israel wouldn't exactly be so keen on releasing terrorists from jail to ransom off Neturei Karta guys.

Expand full comment
A. Nuran's avatar

This is treason during war and should be treated as such

Expand full comment
Yehudah P.'s avatar

Their visit was before October 7th. But it's still treasonous, since they're openly supporting people who want Israel destroyed, and glorify killing Jews.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Dec 10
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Gili Houpt's avatar

Not exactly: they use water and electricity, drive on roads, benefit from garbage collection. And of course they're defended by the IDF!

Expand full comment
David Ilan's avatar

You forgot healthcare.

Expand full comment
A. Nuran's avatar

They are still traitors and should be exiled, imprisoned, or worse

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Of course they do.

Expand full comment
שרון רענן's avatar

I am just happy to see that there were actually 2 women in the charedi package... luckily, they were very modestly dressed. :-)

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

I'm trying to figure out which is married to which.

Expand full comment
A. Nuran's avatar

I think the two female ones got married in Cyprus

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

Neither. You'll have to buy the other $et to complete the happy marriages.

Collect 'em all!

Expand full comment
David Ilan's avatar

Are there any female soldiers? Or are charedim ahead of the curve this time..??

Expand full comment
Natan Slifkin's avatar

Yes there are female soldiers in the range.

Expand full comment
Yekutiel Weiss's avatar

When will there be cheirum dolls showing Dati Leumi dolls in cheirum and the Rabbonim who put them in cheirum?!!

Expand full comment
Yaakov's avatar

The av ha'rachamim usage shows the opposite of your point! Though the pshat is that it refers to physical strength, clearly we are not praising the martyrs for their physical strength. Av ha'rachamim shows that its appropriate to compare spiritual fortitude to physical strength.

There are plenty of arguments that can be made against equating "milchamto shel torah" with actual milchama. However, the usage in av ha'rachamim actually support equating spiritual battles with physical ones!

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Av HaRachamim was written in memory of victims of the Crusades, where the Jews didn't exactly fight back. Assuming that you would prefer that you and your loved ones lived, then of course physical prowess is called for, as indeed David did when he said the original verse.

It goes without saying that charedim believe this too. There is, for example, a permanent IDF post outside of Beitar Illit. They *could* ask the IDF to withdraw. They of course never have.

Expand full comment
David Fass's avatar

Cool. It's blatant indoctrination, but whatever. We all do it. It's human. I'm sure the North Korean children and everyone else also have their toy soldiers. And there's nothing more American than making an easy buck off people's patriotism, so who am I to criticise? At some point you grow up and realize that maybe not everything that soldiers do in war is so awesome. Or you don't.

Expand full comment
Natan Slifkin's avatar

At some point you realize that although war is horrible, many wars are necessary in order to not, y'know, be massacred, and we need to motivate people to serve.

Expand full comment
David Fass's avatar

Every country glorifies its soldiers, totalitarian countries usually more so than democracies. As long as you recognize it for what it is. You are "motivating" six-year olds, which like I said is basically indoctrination, and maybe that's fine. I played with soldiers as a kid too. But I don't think it's "just a toy".

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

Maria Montessori said that "Play is children's work", and kids need to learn to process many emotions and situations, not all of which are pleasant. The purpose of "war toys" is not to teach violence, but rather to express emotions of fear and anger within a safe context.

Dennis Prager points out that little boys forbidden toy guns often make "guns" out of bread or sticks. Why? "To shoot the bad people." And there are always far too many "bad people" in our children's world, no matter how much we protect them. The "back stories" of this company's chayalim are admirably varied and positive. And yes, it would be great to add a foundation of Torah to their narratives as well.

Expand full comment
David Ilan's avatar

No kids don’t always make guns to shoot bad people. Ever played cops and robbers, or cowboys and Indians. Some kids like to play the bad guys with guns as well.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

The people who created GI Joe in the 1980's were Vietnam veterans. They knew full well what it was about.

Expand full comment
Mick Moses's avatar

GI Joe predates the 80s by 2 decades.

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

I'm older than you, and I remember GI Joe from the 70's, if not the '60s. Both Joe and Barbie create unhealthily perceptions of human orthopedics, that's for sure. 🤣🤣

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Right, that's the original GI Joe, the 12-inch ones, started in 1964 and ended in 1976. I was talking about the four-inch line, started in 1982.

Netflix has a series on the history of toys and in their GI Joe episode they interview the man who ran the comic, Larry Hama, a Vietnam veteran, and while he's talking you can see him thinking of the war, and it suddenly hits you what lay behind the toys.

But pace Mr. Fass, we can see war as a serious matter while not also thinking of it as evil.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Your insinuation that the government is behind this is of course nonsense: If they were, these figures would not be so expensive. (Or, conversely, they would be of much less quality, government being government.) This is an entirely private endeavor.

GI Joe was introduced in the 1960's, the heady days when even Democratic presidents were World War II veterans and believed in a robust national defense. It remained popular throughout the Vietnam War, a war with broad popular support (and one begun by two liberal heroes and ended by one of their enemies, ironically). It was only when the hippies took over after Watergate that GI Joe was discontinued, and it came back only after Reagan was elected. Throughout, popular culture followed politics, it did not drive it. Same here.

But let's assume that your snark is correct. I'm going to assume you don't live in Israel, because you committed the howler up there of saying "nothing more American" when these figures are entirely an Israeli creation and R' Slifkin is not American at all. (Then again, you wrote "criticise," so who knows what you are.) So what? Yes, the Israeli government gets involved in propaganda. Every year there is an official Yom HaAtzamaut song which is howling propaganda, and no one minds, and the songs are beautiful. You need a little bucking up of patriotism if you live in a small country under constant attack.

(And it's not just Israel. Have you ever heard of the Ad Council, in the US? Look up its history one day. And then look to all the ways American popular entertainment butters up to causes *it* believes in. That such causes are dangerous social movements rather than patriotic self-defense does not make the propaganda better.)

Only an idiot would think that *everything* soldiers do (or, better, everything about the army) is awesome. Soldiers themselves would be the first to tell you this. "An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints/Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints." But a lot of what they do is awesome. What soldiers- many of them still in their teens- did in the Civil War, or in World War II, was awesome. And what the IDF does is awesome. And your supercilious sniggering at those of us who appreciate these things is not nearly as "grown up" as you think it is. In fact, it's downright childish.

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

Kipling was quite right about some things. And modern society needs to find more productive ways to channel aggressive behavior, especially, but not exclusively that of young males.

If haredi society did a better job of that, there wouldn't be so many riots or destruction of public property, let alone so much obesity and poor physical fitness.

Expand full comment
David Fass's avatar

As I said, every culture indoctrinates its children. Propaganda is everywhere. Recognizing it for what it is is the best we can do. I don't think I ever insinuated "the government is behind this." Not all propaganda comes from the government. In a democracy, that may not even be the major source.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

I suppose you could go back and edit your attack on soldiers in general from your post. Along with your cynical tone. But you've doubled down.

Expand full comment
Ephraim's avatar

" At some point you grow up and realize that maybe not everything that soldiers do in war is so awesome."

And I'm sure there are creepy kids (and adults) who do un-awesome things with their toy soldiers.

You should relax, it's only a toy - not a sociology thesis.

Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

Play is children's work, and toys are very important, not only to their happiness, but to their physical, intellectual, and psychological development.

The fact that we used to throw GI Joe out of a second-story window while holding a string tied to one limb in order to see how his joints got twisted around was probably related to boredom and a perverse sense of humor than any violent tendencies or war mongering. None of us have been convicted of violent crimes, most of us have jobs, and no desire to throw real human beings out of windows.

Expand full comment
Sara Schwartz's avatar

Love these! Buying some Chanukah gifts now.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Dec 10
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Chana Siegel's avatar

No, but they say he speaks 5 languages and is proficient in several different kinds of martial arts.

Expand full comment
Nachum's avatar

Well, most Ethiopian Israel kids have two from birth, and I have Ethiopian family who have uncannily good English. Learn Arabic in the army and you have one left.

Expand full comment