Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“And yet, in just about every election, women are told to go out and vote. Apparently the gedolim don’t agree with you.”
That wasn’t the question I was asked. I understood the question to be should secular society, l’chatchila, allow suffrage. The question wasn’t if there already is suffrage, should women then vote. Two different questions with possibly differing answers.
“what jobs do you think women (or men) should be barred from?”
I think women should be barred from being rebbeim for example. Or secular teachers of adolescent boys. Or men’s room attendants.
I’m talking about the collective practical effect of what the women’s lib/feminist movement has wrought upon society.
Not necessarily. (Do I hear some gasps?)
“Do you believe that a woman should be allowed to vote in secular society?”
No.
“Own land?”
Yes.
“Have equal pay for the same job?”
This is a misnomer. No two jobs and employees are the “same.”
“Have access to the same jobs men have assuming they have the same qualifications?”
Not necessarily. Jobs are frequently ill suited for one gender or the other for many reasons.
“But the notion that there’s a unified corrupt movement that seeks to destroy the traditional family unit is silly.”
Whether it is unified or not at this point is almost secondary. But collectively they most certainly do seek the destruction of the traditional family unit.
When you google “women’s lib” (no quotes) the first entry is the Wikipedia article titled “Feminist movement”, with the article opening as “The feminist movement (also known as the Women’s Movement, Women’s Liberation, or Women’s Lib)…” So I think it is safe to assume this is the standard definition of feminism.
In any event, even the individual actions they pursued such as encouraging family planning and suffrage, were things that many of our gedolim took strong issue with. But the real goal of this corrupt movement, whether admitted or denied, was and is the destruction of the traditional family unit and function. Gender bending and anything to go against traditional society norms.
“That being said, does this run counter to the way the Torah wants a marriage run or not?”
Wolf: Your voluntarily relinquishing your rights, to the best of my understanding, would violate no principle.
As far as the definition of feminism is concerned, it is synonymous with “women’s lib” (the women’s liberation movement.)
For additional understandings of the submissive roles of a wife please see the Meshech Chochma who expresses the idea of her being submissive to her husband, and see also the Ramban, at the end of commentary to 3:16.
Reading some of the comments on this thread, I must sadly conclude that even some of our Torah observant brothers and sisters are more influenced on this issue by the Gloria Steinem’s, Betty Friedan’s, and Bella Abzug’s of the world, than by our Torah HaKedosha and Gedolei Yisroel who are our guiding lights.
I disagree with you, but would like to hear the speculative opinion you offered to share regarding eidus nevertheless.
P.S. I don’t hold you responsible for the entire feminist agenda. 🙂
I am referring to court testimony.
yitay, regarding your speculative answer on multiple wives, a non-speculative approach to the question is that someone can acquire things in multiples, but something can be acquired only by one person. (Hopefully I’m being clear about what I’m trying to say.)
Another question would be why a woman can’t be an eid (witness).
If the AC has more BTU’s than necessary for the room (i.e. a small room with a powerful AC), will that use more energy than necessary?
Or when you set the temperature on a powerful AC, it will use the same amount of energy (i.e. electric power) that an equivalent smaller AC would use?
What about the Mishnah in Horios (13a) that states in regard to returning lost objects one should help a man first?
And how do you explain the halacha that you save a man’s life before a woman’s life?
yitayningwut: How do you explain that al pi Torah a man can have more than one wife, while a woman can only have one husband?
Like someone else said above, communities with shorter dating cycles (i.e. 3 or 4 dates before engagement) tend to have lower divorce rates. Communities where they date for 6 months and even longer, tend to have higher divorce rates than even the communities that are mid-range (i.e. 9-10 dates before engagement.)
So if there is an argument to be made, it is surely that shorter dating tends to work out better.
How can the filter be cleaned without using a vacuum?
What is the optimal temperature to set on the AC for optimal performance/saving money? (I know NYC.gov recommends to “never set thermostats lower than 78 degrees Farenheit.”)
Like his “leniency” on mixed dancing, and his denigration of Gedolei Yisroel, R. Henkin should be dismissed the same way we would someone saying such things about Rava and Abaye. He is far from his saintly grandfather; and aside from the fact that he misrepresents his grandfathers positions, at the very basic level his grandfather was very anti-zionist while this guy IS a zionist.
Right, dancing in the same room WITH NO MECHITZA; he said men and women can dance since the men don’t look. That is just an example of some of his very wacky writings. He also questioned the “permissibility” (his term, I’m not kidding) of calling one of the Gedolei ???? ???? ???? with the suffix zatzal.
These things should tell you that this man is not someone that you want to learn from. You think anybody cares? We look at it the same way as if these rabbis would say the same things about Rava and Abaye. Or Rav Yonason Eyebushitz. When someone says something absurd like that it says something about the one who said it – and it says nothing about the Godol. Really, truly – what these people say doesnt get anyone up in arms. There are plenty of crazy hashkofos out there. (That having been said, to the extent that Kovod HaTorah is violated, we should be upset.)
Sorry about SA EH 69:8. It then must have been another part of SA EH 69, I think. I can’t look it up at the moment, but if you have time you might want to glance around that siman.
yitayningwut: I humbly suggest you read the aforementioned (a few comments back) S”A, poskim I cited. i.e. Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 240:14; Pischei Teshuva Yoreh Deah 240:12, Shu”t Rav Akiva Eiger Siman 68, Shu”t Noda B’Yehuda Mahadura Tinyana Even HaEzer Siman 45 and Chazon Ish Even HaEzer Siman 47 Dibur Hamaschil HaTel, Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 240:17 and commentary of the Shach. And Chayei Adam Klal 67:17 and footnote to Sefer Chareidim.
Regarding the husband being the captain of the family and the wife assistant captain see Shulchan Aruch EH 69:8.
WADR, I think its fair not to consider the reliability of unnamed rabbis. Its too easy to make unsubstantiated claims. Also, for all anyone knows it might be someone like the R. Yehuda Henkin from Israel who published a teshuva that’s okay with mixed dancing “since the men don’t look anyways.”
yitayningwut: You seem to be overlooking that while a wife’s obligation to her husband take precedence over her obligations to her parents, the husband’s obligations to his parents come before his wife. I also cited many other sources.
The halacha is one is obligated to listen to the their father and mother (Kibud Av V’Eim). The halacha is also that once a women gets married she must listen to her husband ahead of her parents. (See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 240:17 and commentary of the Shach. And Chayei Adam Klal 67:17 and footnote to Sefer Chareidim ibid. where he deals with this at length.) The husband must listen to his parents, even when it conflicts with his wife.
Married women are still obligated in Kibuv Av V’Aim, but they do not have to take the time to constantly do things for their parents, unless their husband allows it, since they are obligated to their husbands.
Also, a child (where the parents are not divorced) must listen to his father ahead of his mother, for the reason that his mother herself must listen to his father. If the parents are divorced, then the father loses his precedence since the mother is no longer his wife and is no longer obligated to him.
(See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah Siman 240:14; Pischei Teshuva Yoreh Deah 240:12, Shu”t Rav Akiva Eiger Siman 68, Shu”t Noda B’Yehuda Mahadura Tinyana Even HaEzer Siman 45 and Chazon Ish Even HaEzer Siman 47 Dibur Hamaschil HaTel.)
yitayningwut: “It could be that chazal never said that the woman must wash her husbands feet, they just said she has to do whatever is normal for a woman to do for her husband. The reason they said she has to wash his feet is simply a translation of that rule into the language of their day and age. In other words, washing the husband’s feet is the application, not the law.”
<hereorthere asked: “So doing what is normal in society is part of the rule of obeying the husband in this case?”>
yitayningwut: “I don’t know, it’s a good question.”
First you’re trying to explain it is a general rule, then when asked if its a general rule, you answer you don’t know???
Also, no one denies that the halacha of obeying ones husband (“???”) is a general halacha, aside from specifics.
I said “equal say” is at odds with the Torah, in the context of the earlier discussion. Compromise and discussion is very much in line with the Torah. But that doesn’t mean equal say, when the Torah specifically specifies who has more say. Compromise and discussion ? equal say.
Why are you so hooked up on “force”? Technically a husband can take his wife to beis din — IF he wants to excersize that right – he doesn’t have to excersize it — to enforce his rights. Beis Din does the “enforcing”. (I think Rambam says even with a stick if necessary.) But I can’t imagine things even coming to that with people who are Torah loving. It is talking about a moredes.
Oh c’mon wolfishmusing, don’t use that fig leaf. Don’t put words in my mouth. We love following halacha, plain and simple. We’re not looking for “heterim” and cop-outs. And “working things out through discussion and compromise” IS EXACTLY what we do. Yet the questions you asked required no compromise or even discussion as we are on the exact same page. But when things come up, discussion and compromise are exactly how we work things out. There is no “pulling ranks”, so please don’t try to put down our Torah and halachic loving family with such put-downs.
Edit to answer your second post:
I don’t even understand the question. We both love doing what halacha wants. I can’t imagine either one of us “not wanting to do those things” or anythings halacha specifies.
wolfishmusings
Force? G-d forbid! My wife does it WILLINGLY and HAPPILY. Just like I don’t have to “force” her to keep Shabbos, I don’t have to even ask her to do the things mentioned.
Yes, she does it on her own initiative. So the answers to your questions are yes, yes, and yes. (Without any compulsion.)
Yes, I know we’ve been in golus so long you and some others may find it astounding that *gasp* some people still keep our halachas as brought down in the meforshim. But believe you me, I am far from lonely here. Welcome to the Torah world!
I’m sorry I don’t have the sources at my fingertips at the moment, but I do recall that halacha makes a general statement that a wife is obligated to obey her husband’s wishes. Again I don’t recall off-hand if the exact terms are obligated and obey (I believe that they are though), but that is the general gist in halacha.
Doesn’t the Gemorah say that a husband “acquires” a wife?
Trying my best- From Wiktionary:
Hebrew
Etymology
From Proto-Semitic *ba?l-
Noun
??? (ba`al) m (plural indefinite form ?????, singular construct form ???)
1. Husband.
2. Owner.
I then suppose, based on that argument, calling the Jews the “chosen nation” is bigoted.
Count me as another bigot.
Rav Miller calls the husband “captain” and the wife “first mate”.
Another passage from “Awake My Glory”:
1105. Before marriage it is imperative to ascertain the young woman’s attitude toward feminism and “women’s rights” and careerism. It is out of the question to build a Jewish home, or any home whatsoever, if the prospective wife has been tainted with these anti-natural and anti-social preachings. The woman’s career and happiness are in her home: absolutely and entirely. Her husband, her children and her home are the expressions of her personality and her Free Will, and they are her chief forms of serving G-d. The modern orthodox “Rebbetzin” with a college degree and a job in secular professions is a misfit even in a non-Jewish home. The ideas of revolt against a husband’s authority and the unrealistic dream of equal leadership in the family, lead only to unhappiness and failure, and very frequently to divorce. A Beth Jacob girl should be wed soon after or before graduation. Every day after she leaves the Beth Jacob marks another step away from idealism, for the street and the office and the secular school have an unfailing effect which increases from day to day. It is never a simple matter to achieve harmony in the home; effort and wisdom and fear of G-d are required. But with the additional burden of feminism, all problems become aggravated; and like all the unnatural and anti-social affectations of the libertarians this leads only to failure and unhappiness.
See Igros Moshe, Orach Chaim 4:49, for Rav Moshe’s strident opposition to feminism. Someone also mentioned Rav Miller above; this is the actual passage from “Awake My Glory”:
1095. There cannot be two kings. The marriage relationship is two-fold. 1) The wife is submissive. This is not only Jewish but natural. There can be no harmony when there are two commanders. Without this indispensable condition, the home is disordered. “Arrogance is unbecoming a woman” – Megillah 14B. For a man it is not an ornament, but for a woman it is as if she wore a mustache. 2) The second, but equally essential foundation: a man must always demonstrate respect for his wife. This is “the way of Jewish men that… honor and support their wives in truth” as stated in the Jewish marriage contract. “He honors her more than his own body” – Yevamos 62B, Bava Metzia 59A. He is the captain, but she is the First Mate whose counsel is respected. She cannot be made a doormat, she need not beg for money, she deserves some assistance in the house chores, and the husband sides with her against his kin. He must express frequent appreciation and give words of encouragement, and he should remember his wife from time to time with gifts, big or little. Husband and wife should always say “Please” and “Thank You” and never forget to be always polite to each other.
“Both the Rambam and the Shulchan Aruch at the places you quoted merely list tasks that the wife should perform for her husband.”
Not should. *Must.*
See all the mekoros I referred to.
“I challenge that notion.”
You don’t challange me. You challenge the Torah. See Shulchan Aruch (EH 80:15, DH u’Mah she’Chosav Yir’eh); the Rema; Rambam perek 21, halacha 7; Rambam 21:10; Rosh (5:31).
“She has her strengths and I have mine.”
That’s another way of saying what I earlier said. Men have their strengths and women have theirs.
“we both have equal say in how things in the household are run.”
That’s at odds with the way the Torah dictates a marriage is to be run.
“No, my wife and I not equals. But we *are* equal partners in our marriage.”
That *really* clarifies matters. You’re not equals but you are equal partners.
Let me sleep on that one. 🙂
I also wholeheartedly say mazal77 got it right.
“specifically a partnership of equals.”
Apples aren’t “equal” to oranges, and husband’s aren’t “equal” to wives.
If she wears the pants in the house, yes.
“why should they be exclusively female domains?”
Men and women have different roles and functions in life. Some things in life are primarily (or exclusively) male functions, whilst others are primarily (or exclusively) female.
Re: the discussion of Vashti, Mordechai HaTzaddik when asked by Achashveros for his recommendation what to do about Vashti’s refusal to appear before him, Mordechai declined answering (he told Achashveros that this question should be presented to the royal advisors) since Mordechai was afraid if he recommended that Vashti be let off the hook he would be blamed for future insubordination by wives. (And if he recommended execution, he would be blamed when Achasheveros started missing Vashti.)
Facing Israel would pose the same shaila as say French Jewish soldiers facing hostile Spanish Jewish soldiers on the front line. (Except in regards to Israel it would be more pronounced and obvious that you are facing a fellow Jew.)
telegrok
Without discussing any single situation, sometimes the teshuva to the shaila is to take whatever measures necessary to avoid being a warrior. Our people did so when drafted to the Czar’s Army — despite being Russian citizens — and for whatever reason it can be the proper approach for an American Torah Yid to receive the teshuva to not become a warrior.
My father’s friend got off from the Draft Board by pretending to barely speak English. Ich learning to be ah Rabbi. Ken the Army use ah Rabbi? I vould like to serve the Yiddishe soldiers!
There are various avenues to pursue for this goal. High cholesterol being one of them. When they catch on to one, there are still a dozen others.