Bewigged: Bothered and Bewildered

Many Orthodox Jews believe that a married Jewish woman must cover at least part of her hair. Many Orthodox married women fulfill that "requirement" (some accept this as a requirement, some don't) by wearing wigs. On the other hand, here are four reasons why some choose not to wear a wig:

(a) The Sefardi rabbinate, if I understand correctly, has forbidden the use of wigs as head-coverings for married women;

(b) Wigs are often uncomfortable;

(c) They cost a fortune!;

(d) They get so much negative press among many of us non-Orthodox Jews.

So why do so many (mostly Ashkenazi) Orthodox married women wear wigs/sheitlach, rather than other forms of kisuyei rosh (head-coverings)?

Being some semblance of a good Jew, I'll answer a question with a question. :)

What do all of these have in common?

(a) An Orthodox Jewish man's kippah/yarmulkeh/skullcap

(b) A religious Muslim woman's headscarf

(c) A religious Muslim man's head-covering (keffiyah, Bukharian-style head-covering, kippah-style head-covering, etc.)

(d) The turban wore by men of the Sikh religion

The answer to the second question holds the key to the first question: All of these head-coverings are identifiable as religious and/or ethnic garments even by persons of other religions and/or ethnic groups.

That's why you're not allowed to wear a hat in court, but you are allowed to wear a kippah (to the best of my knowledge).

A hat is not always identifiable to persons of other religions or ethnic groups as a religious symbol. Perhaps one could have gotten away with wearing a hat to work fifty years ago, when the wearing of hats by women was common, but now, it often seems out of place in a secular setting. In fact, in one office in which I worked many years ago, the wearing of any head-covering was forbidden, unless it was for religious reasons. So how does a woman prove to her boss that she wears a head-covering for religious reasons when the head-covering that she wears is not identiably a religious garment?

A scarf or snood is even worse--not only is it not always identifiable to persons of other religions or ethnic groups as a religious symbol, but, in addition, it's considered too informal to be worn in many professional settings.

Ironically enough, some reasons why women wear sheitlach come from opposite ends of the spectrum:

(a) In some circles, a sheitel is considered the most modest hair covering because (aside from a "fall," a partial wig that can expose the front of the real hair), a sheitel generally covers every last strand of hair.

(b) On the other hand, sheitlach are sometimes considered halachic (Jewish law) "cheats," in that they allow a woman to maintain a certain level of vanity while still being officially modest. Some rabbis have actually encouraged the wearing of sheitlach on precisely these grounds: Women who would normally not consent to hide their hair will do so if they can wear someone else's hair instead.

I've always considered the wearing of a sheitel to be hypocritical: I've never seen any point in covering one's own hair with other hair--either a woman covers her hair or she doesn't. It's not so much that I've changed my mind on that score--it's just that, reality being what it is in the Galut/Diaspora, I've developed a certain amount of sympathy for women who either don't wish to be conspicuous for a reason that's incomprehensible to 99% of the population or who, professionally-speaking, literally can't afford to be that conspicuous.