|
|
|
|
|
Forum
-> Fashion and Beauty
amother
Navy
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 6:29 pm
ectomorph wrote: | Really, point out where I've been nasty unnecessarily.
Really, if you claim that a rabbi said that an abortion is no big deal, I have a right to be skeptic al |
You referred to rabbis with whom you disagree as "idiots."
You don't find that disrespectful?
| |
|
Back to top |
0
4
|
amother
Beige
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 6:35 pm
Israeli_C wrote: | I would love more information on ONE respectable ORTHODOX Rabbi who paskens like this. |
Why so judgmental? From someone who hates being judged for her own choices.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
5
|
ectomorph
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 7:18 pm
amother [ Navy ] wrote: | You referred to rabbis with whom you disagree as "idiots."
You don't find that disrespectful? |
I like how you selectively deleted my quote.
In this post, I referred to a rabbi who would say purple socks aww techelet as such.
And you said the rabbi says that an abortion is no big deal. Should I say your rabbi is evil instead?
| |
|
Back to top |
2
2
|
ectomorph
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 7:20 pm
There is a mitzva to mock avoda zara and to mock people who try to lead others to sin.
A rabbi who says "am abortion is no big deal" is leading others to sin (meisis umeidiach).
| |
|
Back to top |
3
1
|
amother
Navy
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 7:22 pm
ectomorph wrote: | Really, point out where I've been nasty unnecessarily.
Really, if you claim that a rabbi said that an abortion is no big deal, I have a right to be skeptic al |
Actually, this thread has nothing whatsoever to do with abortion. It deals with cultural appropriation, which somehow segued to tichels. I said that there are rabbis who hold that the HEAD needs to be covered, not the HAIR, which allows women to have hair coming out from behind their hat or tichel.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
4
|
PinkFridge
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 8:00 pm
ectomorph wrote: | Some imamother posters love to pasken based on random Rabbis, who you'll notice they never name. When called on it, they'll admit that they exaggerated or outright made stuff up. (see the recent abortion thread for an excellent example)
That said, you can find an idiot somewhere who will say that purple socks are what techeles really is. Unless a few rabbonim actually hold by it, it's irrelevant. |
I mentioned what SixOfWands said on another thread. I do not remember who was cited as the posek. Not someone I go by but at least now I know that there is a halachic basis for doing so, and as I mentioned on that other thread, I know a woman who needed that psak to make covering her hair b'chlal doable.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
3
|
ectomorph
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 8:17 pm
PinkFridge wrote: | I mentioned what SixOfWands said on another thread. I do not remember who was cited as the posek. Not someone I go by but at least now I know that there is a halachic basis for doing so, and as I mentioned on that other thread, I know a woman who needed that psak to make covering her hair b'chlal doable. |
My old neighbor held by this psak. But a one time psak does not halacha make.
| |
|
Back to top |
1
2
|
cbsp
|
Mon, May 20 2019, 9:40 pm
ora_43 wrote: | To anyone who doesn't believe cultural appropriation is a real thing: how do you like this statue?
ETA: the link goes to a picture of a statue on the Charles Bridge in Prague, that shows a crucified Christian diety surrounded by words from the kedusha prayer, in Hebrew. The words were added to the statue (around two centuries ago? maybe less) to deliberately humiliate Jews in the city. |
According to this article:
https://jewishweek.timesofisra...../amp/
It was in 1696.
I would not call it cultural appropriation. This was clear provocation and as you wrote, a deliberate attempt to humiliate the Jews. It was fueled by hatred.
Most cases where people are being called out for cultural appropriating days are either clueless (I thought it looked like a cool thing to do, you mean people actually dress like this?)
Or they're doing it as some form of identification or solidarity.
Or it could just be a costume for a dress-up occasion (such as a party or a skit) - nothing malicious is intended, there's no intent to provoke or demean.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
4
|
ora_43
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 1:21 am
cbsp wrote: | I would not call it cultural appropriation. This was clear provocation and as you wrote, a deliberate attempt to humiliate the Jews. It was fueled by hatred. |
Those things aren't mutually exclusive. It was a deliberate attempt to humiliate Jews by using Jewish culture/religion in an offensive way.
Quote: | Most cases where people are being called out for cultural appropriating days are either clueless (I thought it looked like a cool thing to do, you mean people actually dress like this?)
Or they're doing it as some form of identification or solidarity.
Or it could just be a costume for a dress-up occasion (such as a party or a skit) - nothing malicious is intended, there's no intent to provoke or demean. |
Also not mutually exclusive.
For one thing, even if 99% of "cultural appropriation" claims are nonsense, cultural appropriation could still be a real thing.
For another, people can be genuinely insensitive even when they have good intentions.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
2
|
cbsp
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 6:22 am
ora_43 wrote: |
Those things aren't mutually exclusive. It was a deliberate attempt to humiliate Jews by using Jewish culture/religion in an offensive way.
<snip>
Also not mutually exclusive.
For one thing, even if 99% of "cultural appropriation" claims are nonsense, cultural appropriation could still be a real thing.
For another, people can be genuinely insensitive even when they have good intentions. |
So this is where you lose me. They can't both be considered the same and raise the same level of outrage, especially when the overwhelming majority of cases are not of the horrific variety.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
3
|
yo'ma
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 9:06 am
I think there's a difference between cultural appropriation and religious. This is just my opinion, but when fashion designers bring different cultures into their styles, I think they do it out of respect, but when they take religious artificats while they're probably doing it out of respect, it's disrespectful because it's sacred.
Culture is not sacred, religion is. For example. a yarmulke is fine because it's a culture. Yes, men are supposed to cover their head, but it doesn't make a difference with what and each sect has their own, so that's cultural. A talit is religious, hence, sacred. You can just throw a yarmulke in the garbage, but not a talit as far as I know.
For a different thread, but what's worse in my opinion is Christianity. Talk about religious appropriation. They took our religion, made it theirs, change it and said we're the ones in the wrong. Like I said, for another thread.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
5
|
sushilover
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 9:43 am
ora_43 wrote: | Also not mutually exclusive.
For one thing, even if 99% of "cultural appropriation" claims are nonsense, cultural appropriation could still be a real thing.
For another, people can be genuinely insensitive even when they have good intentions. |
Don't you think intent matters?
| |
|
Back to top |
0
3
|
urban gypsy
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 9:58 am
yo'ma wrote: | I think there's a difference between cultural appropriation and religious. This is just my opinion, but when fashion designers bring different cultures into their styles, I think they do it out of respect, but when they take religious artificats while they're probably doing it out of respect, it's disrespectful because it's sacred. |
I was about to write the exact same thing. I think this is the correct take, but I don't feel that fashion designers necessarily include them out of respect, but rather out of a desire to fetishize and commodify "otherness" in order to be "cool"
However, to certain cultures who don't have a religious dimension, they may feel that certain aspects of their culture as just as "sacred" to them.
See below for a link to an excellent Twitter account that aggregates internet posts from Italians upset about spaghetti:
https://twitter.com/ItalianComments
| |
|
Back to top |
0
1
|
ora_43
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 3:06 pm
cbsp wrote: | So this is where you lose me. They can't both be considered the same and raise the same level of outrage, especially when the overwhelming majority of cases are not of the horrific variety. |
I definitely didn't say "same level of outrage."
Two things can both be in the same general category without being equally bad. Genocide and stereotypical movie portrayals are both racist. Shoplifting and murder are both crimes.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
0
|
ora_43
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 3:10 pm
sushilover wrote: | Don't you think intent matters? |
Matters in what sense?
If you hurt someone, then you hurt them. If I trip backwards and step on someone's toe on accident, it's going to hurt them just as much as if I'd done it on purpose.
But of course it's much easier to make amends for causing pain unintentionally.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
0
|
zaq
|
Tue, May 21 2019, 6:08 pm
What a nice term--cultural appropriation. I call it cultural theft. I "love"--NOT-- the designers who claim their designs are 'inspired by" whichever nation they visited last, when what they mean is "copied from".
I was mortally offended by the scarves that looked like taleisim. Copying secular cultural things--let's say, the traditional Israeli embroidery from the 40s and 50s, which had no religious significance--is bad enough, but secularizing a religious object goes beyond disrespectful to outright sacrilegious.
However, food is a different story. food is an international language. Sharing recipes may just be the secret to world peace.
| |
|
Back to top |
0
0
|
Ruchel
|
Mon, May 27 2019, 8:45 am
I like that I don't worry of it
| |
|
Back to top |
0
0
|
|
Imamother may earn commission when you use our links to make a purchase.
© 2024 Imamother.com - All rights reserved
| |
|
|
|
|
|