Well, the New York Times headline yesterday looks pretty good: “Compromise Is Proposed On Western Wall Praying.”
Oh fine, you say, now I don’t have to pay any more attention to this.
But yes you do. Because when you read further into Isabel Kershner’s story, you see this, re the “compromise:”
Mr. [Natan] Sharansky’s proposal involves expanding and improving the areas accessible for prayer at the wall to include the southern section…which…would be open for Jews wishing to pray in a less Orthodox, more egalitarian style 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The main prayer section, which is now divided into men’s and women’s sections, would remain the domain of more traditional worshippers.
That’s my bolding there. So this great compromise which will allow women to pray at the wall however they like, wearing whatever they like is condescendingly tantamount to making a nice balcony in your synagogue only for women. And hanging a curtain in the front to make sure that no man can glance up at women while he’s at that so serious, exclusively male business of talking to god.
That is, fundamentalist Judaism still separates men from women, and by this separation, distinguishes women as second class. And Israel is still caving to fundamentalism in their politics.