Who says above knee osur

Toi: Halacha is Halacha. I’m glad you follow it.

Choppy, correct, but that is exactly the problem. If you don’t know the Halacha, then how will you ever convince anyone to be Tzanuah?

GAW: No, Rabbeinu Yonah actually holds that. Then again, he holds that even eyes are Ervah because they are praised in Shir Hashirim. Suffice it to say I think no one holds like the Rabbeinu Yonah.

Source?

In addition, based on the Gemaros in Brachos, it would seem that (if that is what Rabbanu Yona says) that he is correct (besides that the Amoraim on the Gemorah disagree. I would like to think that the Amoraim on the Daf had a reason).

mdd: Why did you feel the need to write about YU when you disagree with someone’s view on tznius?

GAW: It should be in the Talmidei Rabbeinu Yonah on the Rif on that Daf in Brachos, if I recall correctly.

IN the meantime, it (to the best of my knowledge) doesn’t say in any of the Halachic seforim (or course Hashkaficly it is nice, as MDD points out, but we are dealing with Halacha) that a woman must dress in a manner that doesn’t cause histaklus by a man.

I am looking forward to being corrected.

Al pi halacha (not just hashkafa), a woman is prohibited to dress in a manner that will cause Hirhurim.

1: That is different than what MDD said. I could probably source that.

2: Source in Halacha?

mdd – Please, I don’t need you to tell me what to do. First of all, it’s not a daas yachid.* Second, it makes no difference if it would be, because I hold this is a davar pashut, and last time I checked numbers don’t determine Halacha. We are having a Halachic discussion and I am giving my honest opinion that I am confident about. Oh and FYI I’m in BMG. Not that I have something against YU.

*For example, the Chazon Ish (OC 16) was metzaded like the Aruch HaShulchan, R’ Moshe (Igros 1:42) relied on him, as does R’ Ovadia (Yabia Omer 6:13) and many others.

Yittai, they said it concerning ervah minhagis — hair of a married woman, not about wearing mini-skirts and low-cut dresses.

And any red-bloodied man will tell you that one does get used to and becomes unaffectable by the ladies dressed in the abovementioned fashion.

Your shittos sound like the YU, not like the BMG.

Oh please, yitayningwut. What’s your point about mentioning being in BMG, when we all know your hashkofos (if not halachas) are the polar opposite from BMG. Whether your reliance on the extreme kulos of Rabbi Abadi (I know his former affiliations too) that the Yeshiva communities doesn’t even come close to using, whether on eating foods without a hashgacha based on reading the ingredient list or the myriad of other issues you’ve often mentioned here where you take a very liberal view of things.

Toi, The Aruch HaShulchan bemoans the fact that never-married girls do not cover their hair and Rav Ovadia says thst they should when davening and making berachot just as men do (really one should ask why the minhag is not lie him).

yitay – PLEASE be moichel me! I didn’t mean you were the yelling type at all. I meant it tongue in cheek because it felt like pure deja vu from that thread about the girl who saw someone buy a “non-kosher” candy bar at 7-11 and you said she may be relying on the ingredients. Truth is, on his way out his kids asked for the gum and he said he couldn’t give it to them until he found out if it was kosher. I only meant to bring back good memories of an old thread 🙂

Just last night I was told off for saying that one has to wash for a “mezonot” roll. The person claimed that I was “poseling” people who don’t wash and say “mezonot”

Gavra: “Twisted”? It it the human nature of men to notice when a woman is dressed as such. It isn’t twisted. Hence women’s obligation not to dress as such.

Gavra: “Twisted”? It it the human nature of men to notice when a woman is dressed as such. It isn’t twisted. Hence women’s obligation not to dress as such.

Only if they are dressed “as such”. As the old (untrue) statement goes:

“Just because I am dressed like a Wh-re (Zona), doesn’t mean you can treat me as one”. It just isn’t true, not in the Jewish, work or outside world.

However, there is a chasm of difference between dressing like a Zona and “obligated to be dressed tzniusdic so as not to cause men to stumble as far as hirhurim( and histaklus) are concerned”. One can dress “normal” and still not make the Meah Shearim/Beitar crowd happy, and even cause hirhurim by many men if they see her. Such a woman is not Mechuyav to dress in a Burka or Goth so that men won’t look at her as a woman (as opposed to a Goth).

Is Ittisa considering brandishing the area from the knee to the torso?

GAW: See T’shuvos B’nei Banim Chelek 1 (maybe 2?) who is M’chalek between the two.

PAA- Firstly, one can say that your [hashkafic] source is focused on when the intent is to dress up for the men (similar to yeshaya hanavi above).

Secondly, I’m having a hard time understanding the kal vachomer. Is it from the issur of men to look at clothes to the issur of a woman dressing up for men? If so, one can only make such a k”v if the intent of the woman is to attract. Otherwise the burden would be on the man just like it is with the clothes. Even as such the k’v is difficult as for a man to have hihurim is clearly the primary issue.

Why does everyone assume that everyone else gets to choose what to wear?

“Pants are inherently a Beged Ish”

“My Rosh Yeshiva told me that years ago, the first women who wore pants were not allowed to because it’s a beged ish. Now, however, there are pants made specifically for women, and it is normal for women to wear them.”

WADR, they are both wrong. Trousers have been worn by both men and women for thousands of years. They went out of style for women in Christian Europe, but not in the Islamic Middle East, so the absolute ban on women wearing trousers is a clearly goyish influence from the Christians.

Trousers came back into style for American women on the frontier in the 19th century, wearing men’s pants for outdoor work and for riding horses. Levi’s finally produced a model of blue jeans for women in the 1930s and they became an immediate hit. Today the overwhelming majority of Jewish and non-Jewish women in free countries wear trousers at least part of the time.

Meanwhile, to this day, modest Muslim women wear trousers (often with a long tunic covering the top of their trousers).

Charliehall, a MO professor, telling us about foreign influences!?! The problems with pants are that they cause hirhurim and are inapproptriate (look Pesochim 3B (I think)).

pants are that they cause hirhurim

That is an assumption which Rav Vosner (who allows snowpants) disagrees with.

“Charliehall, a MO professor, telling us about foreign influences”

Busted!! 😉

This does show, however, that the charedi world is also subject to foreign influence.

DY- No one is saying hashkafa is unimportant. The orchos tzadikim is an important sefer and everything in it should be taken seriously when one is working on one’s self. When one is dictating dress codes to others, however, one is required to prove one’s position from a halachic source. And, obviously, the burden is on the dictator.

The obvious issue with the kv: men looking at “tzivonim” has both a kal and chamur aspect. Kal – clothing vs. women. Chamur – man looking vs. woman dressing.

I have been hearing the term to “Jew” someone is to “trick” them into something “

My understanding of the term is that it means to finagle/bargain them down financially. Because everyone knows how cheap the Jews are. Clearly. I once saw a People’s Court, when Judge Wapner was still alive, and the plaintiff foolishly used that term when talking about the defendant(not Jewish) who tried to get him to lower his price on whatever it was that was in dispute. The Judge immediately gave him mussar about the offensiveness of the term, adding that it would nevertheless not influence his decision that this had been said by the plaintiff, but he wanted him to know that it was unacceptable to ever use such a term. And the plaintiff apologized.

He lost the case anyway.