Dr. Krasteva first addressed the rift that developed between feminist professors in the west and the east after the fall of communism in Eastern Europe. Immediately after the Berlin Wall collapsed, western professors were extremely enthusiastic and had high expectations about the possibilities for women’s studies in the east. They were soon disappointed, however, when their feminist ideas were met with great hostility and as a result affected only a limited area of the academy. On the other side of the equation, eastern professors were unhappy with the patronizing attitudes of western feminists who felt they needed to ‘teach’ women in the east about women’s issues. Both eastern and western women were frustrated in their hopes of forging a new relationship based on feminist ideas because, to a large extent, each group of women had different goals and aspirations for women’s studies. Dr. Krasteva further attributes this rift to the fact that western women had, and still have for the most part, little or no understanding of the realities of Eastern European women’s lives.

There is a tremendous lack of knowledge of Eastern European countries in the West. Bulgaria was a part of the Russian Empire from 1878 until 945. Since then it has had an extremely difficult time establishing a cohesive national identity. Bulgarians spend much of their time trying to redeem the tarnished image of the mysterious, exotic, and frightening ‘other’ that appears in many western works. Outsiders perceive Bulgarians as

In addition to the need for a national identity, women are also struggling to form a strong female identity in Bulgaria. It is impossible to work for women’s rights if there is no sense of solidarity among the women. Women in post-Communist Bulgaria are often faced with extreme poverty and many would rather leave and get a husband in the west than stay and fight for women’s rights in these circumstances at home in the east. There is an absence of grass roots organizing for women’s rights in Bulgaria simply because there are too many other concerns that need to be addressed first. In light of that, it is clear that western women need to be sensitive to the specific needs and goals of Eastern European women in future collaborations.

Dr. Krasteva advocates fostering a growth of Women’s Studies programs in the east with a new partnership between professors in the east and the west. Because there is no equivalent term in Bulgarian, she has worked her way toward women's studies through the American Studies and English Departments. She started by focusing on women’s issues in her courses in an effort to generate interest in the feminism. She then consulted several syllabi of women’s studies courses in west while developing courses and in 1992 introduced the first women’s studies course, which focused on the cultural construction of gender. In addition, the Bulgarian Association of University Women became a part of the International Association of University Women in 1989. Its main goals include an effort to promote research on the social position of women in contemporary Bulgarian society and a desire to establish international contacts with similar organizations and pursue common goals. Although women’s studies as a field of study faces much opposition, Dr. Krasteva is confident that with the help of this emerging dialogue between the east and the west, she and other interested professors will be more successful in the future.

Reinharz opened her lecture by situating herself with respect to her subject matter. She is a Jewish woman born in 1946, one year after the end of the Holocaust. Her parents were two of the only ten percent of Jews who were not found and deported to concentration camps while hiding in Holland during World War II. She moved to the US as a child and has always experienced her Jewishness as a "pleasant difference" and a source of pride.

After situating herself, Professor Reinharz gave some basic demographic information on the Jewish population in the world today. Currently, 45% of world Jewry lives in the United States; 35% lives in Israel; the rest are scattered in tiny communities in other areas. In addition to its high concentration in only two countries, the global Jewish population is shrinking due to a birth rate below the replacement level, the delayed age of marriage of young people today, a low marriage rate, higher divorce rates, and more intermarriages. (Because Judaism is passed down through the mother, a Jewish man marrying a gentile woman will not have children who are automatically Jewish.) These factors make the world Jewish community a "fragile minority" with "tenuous interconnections."

She then gave a quick synopsis of the current position of women in the three main branches of Judaism. There are, Reinharz said, two basic views of change in Judaism: one branch tends to see change as destructive, and the others are more committed to it. Orthodox Jews, who fall into the former category and still allow no female rabbis, have generally accepted

The other two branches of Judaism are committed to change, albeit in different forms and in differing intensities. Conservative Judaism, according to Reinharz, has removed much of the misogyny from its rituals. Furthermore, the autonomy of its congregations has allowed women access to equal education and the ability to read from the Torah. Reform Judaism has been the site of the most change. Reform Jewish women are allowed to be rabbis and cantors, and sexual equality is accepted much more broadly than in any other branch of Judaism. Reinharz did, however, emphasize that there are splits in all branches of the religion; no one group has internal consensus on any of these issues.

Professor Reinharz raised many questions in her talk, most of them issues that have been brought up by Jewish women and Jewish feminists who are questioning the gender assumptions of Judaism. She left the audience to ponder these unanswered questions. Among them were the following: Is Judaism an inherently patriarchal religion? Is God male or gender-free? Can feminists be Jewish? Do feminists have to change Judaism? Does the gendered nature of the Hebrew language make non-gendered thought impossible? If Hebrew is changed, does that make it a non-Jewish language? How much change can Jews undergo and still maintain their identity?

Must the legal rules of Judaism always favor men? Is it possible or desirable to extend the obligations faced by Jewish men to Jewish women? Is Judaism a family-based religion? If so, does one have to be married and have children to be a "good Jew"? What does this mean for intermarriage? Is the structure of Jewish organizations such that it always favors men or people with money? How can the activities of these organizations move towards being inclusive and spiritually enriching instead of focused on fundraising?

While Professor Reinharz's lecture offered many more questions than answers, it was a solid basis for the opening up of dialogue about the state of Judaism in the world at the turn of the twenty-first century.