Separate Sidewalks for Men and Women in an Israeli City!
A decision by the municipality of Bnei Brak to separate men and women on the sidewalks of two of its main streets has sparked a political, legal, and media storm across Israel, raising broader questions about the nature of a state that presents itself as a beacon of democracy in the Middle East.
The municipality of Bnei Brak, one of Israel’s most prominent ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) strongholds, has come under intense scrutiny after introducing measures to separate men and women on the sidewalks of two major streets. Critics describe the move as an unprecedented expansion of gender segregation from religious institutions into public space, while supporters argue that it reflects the city’s religious character and serves to regulate pedestrian traffic during heavily attended events.
The unusual measure has reignited broader debates over the nature of the Israeli state and its approach to equality in public spaces. According to its critics, the decision fits into a long history of policies and practices they describe as discriminatory, both toward Palestinians living inside Israel and in the occupied territories, as well as toward other segments of society. They argue that it exposes what they see as a contradiction between Israel’s official democratic narrative and practices based on segregation, discrimination, and exclusion in a country that portrays itself as a democratic model in the region.
Israeli Channel 13 reported that the Bnei Brak municipality has begun implementing arrangements under which one sidewalk will be designated for men and the opposite sidewalk for women along sections of Shlomo HaMelech and Ezra streets, two of the city’s busiest thoroughfares, particularly around wedding halls that attract thousands of attendees during weddings and religious celebrations.
Under the plan, directional signs and barriers will be installed to regulate pedestrian movement and prevent the mixing of men and women as large crowds leave these venues.
The municipality did not claim responsibility for initiating the proposal itself. According to Israeli media reports, it explained that the decision followed a letter issued by the city’s senior rabbis, who called for organizing pedestrian traffic in accordance with the standards of “modesty” observed within the Haredi community. The municipality stated that “the rabbis’ letter speaks for itself,” emphasizing that the measure does not represent a change in municipal policy but rather the implementation of religious guidance. It also clarified that the arrangements would apply only during periods of heavy congestion associated with public events and would not be permanent.
Nevertheless, the announcement triggered widespread criticism throughout Israel. Opposition parties, human rights organizations, and legal experts argued that the measure represents an unprecedented precedent because it applies to public sidewalks and streets open to all citizens rather than religious institutions, schools, or synagogues. Many contend that it contradicts previous rulings by Israel’s Supreme Court prohibiting mandatory gender segregation in public spaces.
The controversy quickly evolved into a political confrontation. Knesset member Vladimir Beliak of the Yesh Atid party called on the government’s legal adviser to intervene immediately to halt implementation of the decision. He argued that separating men and women on public streets “is not merely an internal municipal matter,” but constitutes a violation of Israeli law and the principle of equality. He declared that “Israel will not become Tehran,” a statement widely echoed by Israeli media and adopted by opponents as a symbol warning against the growing influence of religious authorities in public life.
The criticism extended beyond politics. Social activist YaYa Fink, together with former Knesset member Michal Rozin, submitted a petition to the Supreme Court seeking the cancellation of the decision.
The petition argues that sidewalks constitute public property and that the municipality lacks the legal authority to impose arrangements based on gender segregation, even if supported by the wishes of the local majority or religious directives. The petitioners emphasized that the issue “is not only about Bnei Brak, but about the future of public space in Israel.”
Legal experts quoted by the Israeli press believe that the measure has limited prospects of surviving judicial review, given the Supreme Court’s long-established case law declaring compulsory gender segregation in public spaces unlawful.
Commentators recalled the Court’s 2010 ruling concerning Jerusalem’s Mea Shearim neighborhood, which prevented local authorities from enforcing gender segregation on public sidewalks. They also referred to previous rulings that ended the practice of “Mehadrin” buses, where women were required to sit in the rear seats.
Women’s rights organizations and human rights groups argued that Bnei Brak’s decision represents a dangerous extension of gender segregation from closed religious institutions into public streets. They warned that it could encourage other Haredi municipalities to adopt similar measures. They further maintained that using public funds to install signs and barriers separating men and women amounts to gender discrimination and gradually restricts women’s freedom and access to public space.
The newspaper Haaretz emerged as one of the strongest critics of the decision, arguing that it reflects a growing trend toward expanding the application of religious rules within the civil sphere. The newspaper maintained that using municipal resources to enforce gender segregation exceeds the boundaries established by the Supreme Court. It also linked the development to the growing influence of Haredi political parties within Israel’s governing coalition and to the increasingly heated debate over the relationship between religion and the state.
Meanwhile, The Jerusalem Post observed that the decision could make Bnei Brak the first Israeli city to officially implement gender-separated public sidewalks. The newspaper noted that the controversy forms part of broader disputes surrounding military service exemptions for the ultra-Orthodox, religious education, and the role of Jewish religious law in public life.
Yedioth Ahronoth (Ynet), for its part, presented the perspectives of both sides. It reported that the municipality and the city’s rabbis insisted that the objective was not to impose gender segregation on all Israelis but rather to regulate the movement of thousands of wedding guests in a manner consistent with the city’s conservative character. According to the municipality, the arrangements would apply only during peak hours associated with major events rather than throughout the day.
Several rabbis and Haredi activists defended the decision, arguing that the overwhelming majority of Bnei Brak’s residents belong to the ultra-Orthodox community and that separating men and women is an integral part of the city’s way of life rather than a discriminatory practice.
They stressed that the city is well known for its religious character and that visitors are already aware of its prevailing customs. According to them, the purpose is to preserve standards of modesty while preventing overcrowding and physical contact as thousands of people leave event halls simultaneously.
The debate quickly spread across social media platforms, where opponents circulated edited images comparing Bnei Brak’s streets with cities in Iran and Afghanistan, accompanied by hashtags such as “Israel Is Not Iran” and “No to Segregation in the Streets.” They argued that the measure represents a retreat from the principles of equality and democracy.
Conversely, supporters from Haredi circles described the media controversy as greatly exaggerated, insisting that the arrangements amount to nothing more than temporary pedestrian traffic management in a predominantly religious city. They maintained that respecting the local community’s traditions does not imply imposing those norms on the rest of Israel.
According to several Israeli political analysts, the significance of the controversy extends far beyond the sidewalks of Bnei Brak. It has once again brought to the forefront the longstanding conflict between Israel’s ultra-Orthodox community and liberal movements over the appropriate role of religion in public life. While the Haredi community views gender separation as an essential component of its way of life that deserves respect within its municipalities, opponents argue that allowing local authorities to enforce religious arrangements in public streets could undermine the principle of equality upheld by the Supreme Court and constitute a new test of the relationship between civil authority and religious institutions in Israel.
