In Yoreh Deah 4:24:3 he reiterates that a wedding does not require a mechitza since it is not ???? ?????:

http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14679&st=&pgnum=256

???”? ????? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ????? ????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ?”? ???? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ?”? ?? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?”? ??????? ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ?????? ??????? ????? ?? ?? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ?? ??? ????? ??? ?? ?????? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ??’ ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ??? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ????? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ??? ?”? ???? ?? ?????? ?”? ???? ?”? ?? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??????? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ?? ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ???????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ??????

“I should’ve said tempo and phrasing.”

I don’t know anything about that either. I don’t know anything about music or music theory. The only thing I know (and I only know this from empirical investigation) is that any tune can be played starting with any note.

Curiosity:

Allow me to modify your scenario slightly in order to isolate the issue under discussion. We have a guy who learns before Shacharis and after Maariv. The financial situation of the family is such that between Shacharis and Maariv he will not be learning. There are also things that need to be taken care of at home (e.g. taking care of the kids, cooking, cleaning etc.) which will take up the time between Shacharis and Maariv. Now there are two parents in this family and there are two jobs which need to get done during the same period of time (i.e. only one person can do each job) – the job in the workplace and the job in the house. Now let’s say that the husband is better at cooking and cleaning and taking care of children, and the wife is better at making money. Well according to the Fifth Principle of Economics, the productive way to run this household would be for the woman to go out and work and the man take care of the home. Is there anything wrong with this picture?

Furthermore, much of what is conceived of as men’s roles or women’s roles, is based on men in general being more _____ and women in general being more _____. Now everyone knows that in general men are taller than women and have more muscle mass then women. So obviously, if a married couple needed to get something done which involved height or strength, the husband should be the one to do it, right? But what if the wife is taller or stronger? Should it still be the husband’s job to do it simply because in general, men are taller or stronger than women?

Similarly, it may well be that women are generally better at cooking, cleaning, and childrearing, and are more emotional and empathetic and many other things. But that doesn’t mean that any given man can’t be better at those things and have more of those traits than any given woman. So why shouldn’t the husband do the cooking if he’s better at it and enjoys it more?

All this was just to show that there is no such thing as an inherent role. However, there are some exceptions. Some roles are Divinely dictated, e.g. a man has to do Time-Bound Positive Commandments, and some roles are physiologically dictated, e.g. women giving birth (at least for now). But on anything else, why should we create artificial limitations?

Randomex:

You are probably correct about “ingraining”.

I’m not really sure what you are trying to say about “conversified” though I do agree that “necessarily” may not have been a strong enough term, but I didn’t want to cause any fights at that particular moment.

Now I think we are both very confused about the whole sarcasticon reference, so let me just spell it all out. In the thread “Sem and Security”, I was having a debate/discussion with writersoul in which at one point she said that she obviously agrees with me. I responded by saying: “I’m glad I’m so convincing that you would OBVIOUSLY agree with me. (I wish I could properly convey sarcasm in writing. I refuse on principle to use those smiley faces.)” Then the discussion sort of became about emoticons. So when I said over here “insert sarcasticon if desired” it was a reference to the fact that I wouldn’t put emoticons in my writing.

Another issue:

The thought process via which Harry figured out how to access the Resurrection Stone was way way way way way way too contrived.

Whatever it is, it’s enough that the Rabbanan don’t need physical protection and not enough for the laymen to not need physical protection.

The only thing you see from that Gemara is that the Rabbanan don’t need physical protection since their Torah protects them. It seems that the Torah does not protect anyone else. And it also seems that the Rabbanan would be protected even if no physical measures were taken, for otherwise

???? ?? ????? ??????? would not really be true. (Perhaps one could argue that they don’t need protection, but they do need there to be a physical protection in order for their Torah protection not to be miraculous, but then in essence they need the physical protection just as much as the rest of the city, albeit for a different reason.) A possible ramification would be that the Rabbanan should not be allowed to use any of the physical resources.

Yekke2:

I don’t think there is any source that it was confiscated while they were at school. They may have left it (either directly or indirectly) to the next troublemaker(s). But regardless of when it was confiscated, none of them would have any reason to assume that it wasn’t still on the school premises. In fact I think it’s actually a kashya on Lupin. After the first time that Sirius entered the castle, he should have immediately sought the map. A simple summoning charm could have gotten it for him. Which incidentally leads me to my next question: Fred and George’s entire plan of escape in the fifth book relied on summoning their brooms. What would have happened had Umbridge protected the brooms from summoning charms? But perhaps Fred and George had somehow determined that she hadn’t.

Patur Aval Assur – Unknown, but not a mouth instrument. He feels that specifying his instrument would be giving away “too much personal information.”

All I said there was that I was playing an instrument while reading a magazine, that I was playing an instrument while attempting to recite “The Road Not Taken”, and that I was playing an instrument while attempting to mentally recite “The Road Not Taken”. Presumably you are assuming that in order for me to be capable of talking the instrument could not have been a mouth instrument. A fair assumption, but only one out of my three incidents involved talking.

I don’t think it’s so crazy that Harry never noticed Sirius or Peter. First of all, he didn’t exactly use the map very often. And when he was using the map, Sirius may have been out of the maps boundaries. Peter was probably either with Ron or chilling in the dormitory, which are not exactly places that Harry would be wont to look at, and during the periods when he was missing, he may have also been outside the boundaries.

It is interesting though, because Peter and Sirius both knew about the map and Peter for sure knew that Lupin was in Hogwarts, so they may have had some fear of being seen. This in turn may have led them to be careful to whatever extent possible to not be seen on the map.

Gryffindorable Girl:

That would affect at least several years before Harry’s year as well. Remember, Mr. and Mrs, Weasely quickly got married because no one was certain about the future with Voldemort and all. Bill finished Hogwarts before Harry started, so this would certainly apply to anyone who overlapped with Harry.

I will address your four paragraphs, one at a time:

1) You seem to be agreeing that there is nothing wrong with a woman answering halachic questions (assuming she is capable). This accords with some sources which I quoted earlier in this thread. Your objection seems to be that Torah-study necessary to enable a woman to answer these questions is the problem. Now I will grant that men have a chiyuv to learn which women don’t have. But how does that make it an anti-women role? It just means that it is not her primary purpose. But there are many things which are not a woman’s primary purpose, which they can do anyway. And who says that peoples roles have to remain utterly stagnant over the course of thousands of years? Presumably people’s roles have changed somewhat as we moved from a nomadic society to an agricultural society and from an agricultural society to an industrial society. You did not bring up the argument about women inherently being unable to learn (e.g. da’atan kalos, tiflus) so I won’t address that.

2) The objections in this paragraph have nothing to do with what I am discussing. But just for the sake of arguing, your tznius objection does not pertain to being a Rabbi; it is simply an objection to any public role for women (in the presence of men).

3) The people they came out against, had a clear agenda. I am not pushing that agenda. Additionally, I would like to see the reasoning behind the statements. Other than it being simply a policy issue, I have not seen any reason why what I am saying cannot be done.

See also, the Peri Megadim in Seder V’hanhagos Hanishal Im Hashoel B’issur V’hetter ose 10 where he writes: ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??? ???? ?? ????? ???

4) There are a lot of undefined pronouns there.

Curiosity:

We are clearly talking about different things. I am not saying anything about a woman having any position. All I am saying is that I have not yet seen a reason why a woman cannot be certified to answer halachic questions. That’s it.

cozimjewish:

Maybe that will be my next project after the one I am undertaking in my report card thread. But it might be too hard, because in this story, the sources for my ideas were much less direct than in the previous story, so providing citations might no really help. But we shall see.

SayIDidIt:

http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/its-not-a-joke#post-541011

“PAA wow you make me sound sooo ambitious”

You were just trying to save the world.

“yes, I know you were actually making fun of me”

I hope you didn’t take it personally.