Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Judaism
S/O Feminism
Previous  1  2  3  4  Next



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

lilies




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:34 pm
The concept of intellect being preferable to physical labor is not a given. Again, modern times. To Hashem, the farmer working his fields and the surgeon doing surgeries, are equal.
Back to top

amother
Ruby


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:38 pm
lilies wrote:
Why are you saying that an exempt wife is proof of unimportance? Again, modern definition. Who said that it is preferable to be non-exempt?


If Torah and mitzvos are the most important things in the world, then it cannot be preferable to be excluded from them. Anyway, my point is that women are exempted due to their subservience to their husbands and their consequent inability to call their time their own.
Back to top

lilies




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:40 pm
You are defining 'yosar' as too much. That's not the definition in this case. You are also only bringing sources on one side, you need to show what is told to the husband in regards to respecting and honoring his wife.
You are also not refuting any of my points logically, only trying to provide sources (which can be interpreted in 70 ways) to twist things around. Not to mention the anonymous amother posting. I'm sorry, I will not play this game.
Back to top

amother
Apricot


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:42 pm
lilies wrote:
I don't know the actual sources, many others are better versed in those. Please chime in with quotes!
You are stating that the Kohanim get respect and honored. But it's not for their work, it's because they were chosen to be Kohanim. So yes, they get honored. In essence, their work is just work. It isn't menial at all. It happens to be holy. Same for women, our jobs/roles are in essence holy. It is only in modern times, certain aspects that have traditionally been the woman's role have a connotation of menial, when it in fact isn't. All things done in this world with the right intentions are holy. Makes no difference if that's washing dishes, or being a surgeon.
I do not know the Rambam, so I will not comment on that.
Why are you saying that an exempt wife is proof of unimportance? Again, modern definition. Who said that it is preferable to be non-exempt?


To be honest, I believe you're trying to twist the modern definition onto an established past. Right now with feminism opening the eyes of all, we've all been fed platitudes to try to appease us women. That washing dishes is equal to surgical work. Maybe both are important jobs that need to be done, but one is definitely of a higher standard. Collecting garbage is needed for a sanitary life, but it no way is it comparable to a lawyer's job.

Hashem did not create the world to be equal, he created everything in a form of levels, starting with creation - inanimate objects, plants, animals and medaber. That holds true in everything that follows. Even the human body is designed this way, where the brain, heart & lungs are the primary organs & the rest are there to assist. True, they're all important, but life interventions are designed around the primary functions and they're always given the first attention. Similarly in our lives, there are lowly jobs and sought after jobs. There are lowly positions and sought after positions. We can apply a feel-good theme to all this to make everyone feel good, that all jobs & positions are equal. But that essentially is a modern day invention where we try to make everyone feel like winners.
Back to top

amother
Aquamarine


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:50 pm
I am wondering if someone is referencing this thread?
Back to top

amother
Apricot


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:50 pm
lilies wrote:
The concept of intellect being preferable to physical labor is not a given. Again, modern times. To Hashem, the farmer working his fields and the surgeon doing surgeries, are equal.


You're trying to interpret a spiritual viewpoint into a worldly practical conversation. But to answer your point:

To Hashem - each person doing his best in his given position that Hashem placed him into - their efforts & approach are equal to Him. But that doesn't change the fact that the world order that Hashem created has higher & lower positions.

And who is to say that if a person pushes himself above and beyond and uses his skills and talents to rise above, it isn't cherished by Hashem?
Back to top

amother
Ruby


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 7:54 pm
lilies wrote:
You are defining 'yosar' as too much. That's not the definition in this case. You are also only bringing sources on one side, you need to show what is told to the husband in regards to respecting and honoring his wife.
You are also not refuting any of my points logically, only trying to provide sources (which can be interpreted in 70 ways) to twist things around. Not to mention the anonymous amother posting. I'm sorry, I will not play this game.


וְכֵן צִוּוּ חֲכָמִים שֶׁיִּהְיֶה אָדָם מְכַבֵּד אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ יוֹתֵר מִגּוּפוֹ וְאוֹהֲבָהּ כְּגוּפוֹ. וְאִם יֵשׁ לוֹ מָמוֹן מַרְבֶּה בְּטוֹבָתָהּ כְּפִי מָמוֹנוֹ. וְלֹא יַטִּיל עָלֶיהָ אֵימָה יְתֵרָה. וְיִהְיֶה דִּבּוּרוֹ עִמָּהּ בְּנַחַת. וְלֹא יִהְיֶה עָצֵב וְלֹא רַגְזָן:

Thus the Sages commanded: A man should honor his wife more than himself and love her as himself. If his money abounds, according to what he can afford. He should not inspire excess fear in her, and he should speak gently with her, and be neither depressed nor hot-tempered.

וְכֵן צִוּוּ עַל הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁתִּהְיֶה מְכַבֶּדֶת אֶת בַּעְלָהּ בְּיוֹתֵר מִדַּאי וְיִהְיֶה עָלֶיהָ מוֹרָא מִמֶּנּוּ וְתַעֲשֶׂה כָּל מַעֲשֶׂיהָ עַל פִּיו. וְיִהְיֶה בְּעֵינֶיהָ כְּמוֹ שַׂר אוֹ מֶלֶךְ. מְהַלֶּכֶת בְּתַאֲוַת לִבּוֹ וּמַרְחֶקֶת כָּל מַה שֶּׁיִּשְׂנָא. וְזֶה דֶּרֶךְ בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הַקְּדוֹשִׁים וְהַטְּהוֹרִים בְּזִוּוּגָן. וּבִדְרָכִים אֵלּוּ יִהְיֶה יִשּׁוּבָן נָאֶה וּמְשֻׁבָּח:

Thus the Sages commanded: A woman should honor her husband too much, and have awe of him, do all of her actions according to his word. He should seem to her like a minister or king, walking in the desires of his heart, and distancing herself from what he hates. This is how holy and pure Jews behave in their marriages. These paths should be their pleasant and praiseworthy lifestyle.

Source: Mishna Torah l’Rambam: Ishus 15:20

I think “yoser midai” is correctly translated as too much (or excessively). How else would you define it?

As you can see from the parallel commandment to the husband, there is no equality here. The man is assumed to be in the position of power and is adjured to treat his subject kindly- a benevolent dictatorship, so to speak. . . He does not have to do what she wants. He just has to be nice to her. The woman, on the other hand, has to “do all of her actions according to his word.” Does that not meet your definition of subservience?

(I post anonymously because I don’t want to be identified by those who are familiar with my views.)
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:09 pm
malki2 wrote:
I think that the origin of the Feminist movement was based on not understanding the particular strengths and unique abilities of women, but rather in terms of women being looked at as the “weaker” s@x. The movement was therefore made to say that anything that a man can do, a woman can do. But there is a mistake in the actual premise. Importance was not given to the main tafkid of a woman, which only she can do and not a man, which is to bring Neshsmos into the world and to build and raise them into people. To answer your question, I think that the Charedi Orthodox position always has been one of respect of the woman’s position in the home as equally important to, but different from, the man’s. So there was never this “inferiority complex” which required the fitting of a round peg into a square hole, which has let to some of the degradation in our society.


I think that the origin of the feminist movement... was based on the fact that men demeaned women, abused and hit women, did not allow them a voice or any power over their own lives, required them to submit to their husbands physically.... to name just a few. Women were required to "obey" their husbands at all times, even if it went against their own thoughts and feelings, they were required to submit to abusive husbands and had no recourse if their husbands beat them daily.... these were some of the actual reasons for the feminist movement.

And that's just how women were treated at home.

Mostly, though, the early feminist movement focused on the fact that women earned half the salary that men did for the exact same work, were not allowed to own property, were not allowed to vote, and basically, again, had no voice in any political or decision making process. Making them, of course, completely dependent on the men in their lives for their daily bread and roof over their head. Were a courageous woman to get up and leave despite society's censure, she would soon find herself homeless and hungry.... women, before feminism, were pretty much stuck to their menfolk, and had zero options to leave if conditions were not great. (The two other options available to women were prostitution and becoming a Nun, in Catholic countries, but that's a different conversation).

So no, there was no mistake in the actual premise of feminism (perhaps the execution of feminism has gone in some interesting directions, but it's a given that things will never work out perfectly). It was based on real and legitimate problems.

As for Chareidi Orthodoxy - I think a different poster mentioned that Judaism has always had more respect for women, and has treated women better, than the people they were often surrounded by. While that's true, it also does not mean that Jewish women were never treated badly or were never put down by their men. There is a saying "viyazoi kristalt zach azoi yidelt zach" - we are never as immune from outside influences as we imagine ourselves to be.

So yes, I think feminism was possibly needed in our own community as well. I'm coming to realize that, and I'm wondering why this reality was never actually acknowledged.
Back to top

amother
Ruby


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:12 pm
Mommyg8 wrote:
I think that the origin of the feminist movement... was based on the fact that men demeaned women, abused and hit women, did not allow them a voice or any power over their own lives, required them to submit to their husbands physically.... to name just a few. Women were required to "obey" their husbands at all times, even if it went against their own thoughts and feelings, they were required to submit to abusive husbands and had no recourse if their husbands beat them daily.... these were some of the actual reasons for the feminist movement.

And that's just how women were treated at home.

Mostly, though, the early feminist movement focused on the fact that women earned half the salary that men did for the exact same work, were not allowed to own property, were not allowed to vote, and basically, again, had no voice in any political or decision making process. Making them, of course, completely dependent on the men in their lives for their daily bread and roof over their head. Were a courageous woman to get up and leave despite society's censure, she would soon find herself homeless and hungry.... women, before feminism, were pretty much stuck to their menfolk, and had zero options to leave if conditions were not great. (The two other options available to women were prostitution and becoming a Nun, in Catholic countries, but that's a different conversation).

So no, there was no mistake in the actual premise of feminism (perhaps the execution of feminism has gone in some interesting directions, but it's a given that things will never work out perfectly). It was based on real and legitimate problems.

As for Chareidi Orthodoxy - I think a different poster mentioned that Judaism has always had more respect for women, and has treated women better, than the people they were often surrounded by. While that's true, it also does not mean that Jewish women were never treated badly or were never put down by their men. There is a saying "viyazoi kristalt zach azoi yidelt zach" - we are never as immune from outside influences as we imagine ourselves to be.

So yes, I think feminism was possibly needed in our own community as well. I'm coming to realize that, and I'm wondering why this reality was never actually acknowledged.


I can’t Like this post enough.
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:14 pm
gingertop wrote:
My theories:

- The frum world went through A LOT of trauma in the end of 19th century, early 20th. One way of dealing with any movements that threatened or would potentially threaten frum life was to become reactionary to those movements.

So the maskilim made a big deal about proper Hebrew and Nach- some yeshivas (especially chassidish, I think) reacted by davka not learning dikduk and Nach.

Feminism made a big deal about women having equal rights- even where the feminists did not have any substantial disagreements with frum life- it became verboten.


-A lot of feminists were arguing against x-tian, conservative hegemony. Attacking religion is something that scares frum people. Attacking religious patriarchy is dangerous for religious patriarchy.

-It seemed untznius. It was in effect untznius. Women marching in the streets, going to college- this is before the days of TTI!- would lead to all sorts of problems, and it did.


Yes. We have an instinctive negative reaction to any "isms" - and feminism fits the bill.

I think also, that in the early days of feminism, it was thought that bringing equality between the s@xes would cause a breakdown of marriages (which is true, it did).

Another also, feminism of the sixties and seventies were not just about equality but also about liberating women s@xually. Which is obviously not something the frum world can be fine with.

As for it being untznius to go to college - women were going to college long before Betty Friedan wrote her "Feminine Mystique". It was just that most women went to college to get their "Mrs.", instead of getting their "Bachelor's" and would drop out when they found "Mr. Right".
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:27 pm
amother [ Apricot ] wrote:
Because it threatened the foundation of a Jewish home. A jewish home was defined as the husband being the ba Habayis, and the wife being subservient to him (or we can rephrase that to what we're taught - that the women is there to help and guide him). Either way, if a man and woman were to be considered equal, then a husband and wife are considered equal, and that would undermine the traditional setup of a Jewish home.


But don't all contemporary sources declare that women ARE equal to men in every way, just different? So I don't think this is correct.

I remember reading an article written in the 1960's by a Rav, who was wondering if feminism would lead to a mass divorce crisis; since women would be able to support themselves, they would leave their husbands en masse. Another article I read, stated that feminism would lead to a lot of single women who would choose career over marriage.

So now, being that we are here 60 years later, I'm wondering, were they right? Did feminism lead to a higher divorce rate? Is it the reason for our continually escalating shidduch crisis, of single young women who have not found their bashert?

Or were these fears unfounded?


Last edited by Mommyg8 on Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:30 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:29 pm
lilies wrote:
The concept of intellect being preferable to physical labor is not a given. Again, modern times. To Hashem, the farmer working his fields and the surgeon doing surgeries, are equal.


Cool

It's a given.
Back to top

Mommyg8




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:30 pm
amother [ Ruby ] wrote:
I can’t Like this post enough.


Thank you!
Back to top

amother
Orchid


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:31 pm
amother [ Ruby ] wrote:
וְכֵן צִוּוּ עַל הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁתִּהְיֶה מְכַבֶּדֶת אֶת בַּעְלָהּ בְּיוֹתֵר מִדַּאי וְיִהְיֶה עָלֶיהָ מוֹרָא מִמֶּנּוּ וְתַעֲשֶׂה כָּל מַעֲשֶׂיהָ עַל פִּיו. וְיִהְיֶה בְּעֵינֶיהָ כְּמוֹ שַׂר אוֹ מֶלֶךְ. מְהַלֶּכֶת בְּתַאֲוַת לִבּוֹ וּמַרְחֶקֶת כָּל מַה שֶּׁיִּשְׂנָא. וְזֶה דֶּרֶךְ בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הַקְּדוֹשִׁים וְהַטְּהוֹרִים בְּזִוּוּגָן. וּבִדְרָכִים אֵלּוּ יִהְיֶה יִשּׁוּבָן נָאֶה וּמְשֻׁבָּח:

Thus the Sages commanded: A woman should honor her husband too much, and have awe of him, do all of her actions according to his word. He should seem to her like a minister or king, walking in the desires of his heart, and distancing herself from what he hates. This is how holy and pure Jews behave in their marriages. These paths should be their pleasant and praiseworthy lifestyle.

Source: Mishna Torah l’Rambam: Ishus 15:20


You left out the part that the Rambam says he can force her to do what he says, including beating her...
Back to top

amother
Ruby


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:44 pm
Mommyg8 wrote:
But don't all contemporary sources declare that women ARE equal to men in every way, just different? So I don't think this is correct.

I remember reading an article written in the 1960's by a Rav, who was wondering if feminism would lead to a mass divorce crisis; since women would be able to support themselves, they would leave their husbands en masse. Another article I read, stated that feminism would lead to a lot of single women who would choose career over marriage.

So now, being that we are here 60 years later, I'm wondering, were they right? Did feminism lead to a higher divorce rate? Is it the reason for our continually escalating shidduch crisis, of single young women who have not found their bashert?

Or were these fears unfounded?


I think that feminism did lead to a higher divorce rate, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Thanks to feminism, women are now able to support themselves and have the ability to leave unhappy and/or abusive marriages, in which they might the have stayed before, for lack of alternatives. The lower divorce rate of years ago is not proof of better marriages. It just means that people put up with a lot more, because they had no choice.

On the other hand, women have not abandoned marriages en masse. Women are perfectly willing to get married and are happy to remain in marriages, in which they are well treated and/or treated as partners and equals.
Back to top

amother
Ruby


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:54 pm
amother [ Orchid ] wrote:
You left out the part that the Rambam says he can force her to do what he says, including beating her...


That’s not completely accurate. What it says is that If a woman refuses to fulfill any of her household duties, she is forced - even with a stick. It appears to be limited to the specific duties of a wife, and is unclear if it is the husband or the Bais Din/community who will do the forcing . . .
Back to top

amother
Aquamarine


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 8:56 pm
I, for example, fell behind in Daf Yomi (about 20 days now) over YT & other things going on.

DH suggested I start Brachos anyhow and do one page of Brachos & one page of Niddah each day.

For myself I know that would be way too confusing. I am just doing my best to do 1 1/2 to 2 pages daily & hope to catch up eventually.

Were I a submissive Isha Keshaira I would take his advice (though it's really only a suggestion). Then again, were I more submissive I would not be learning Gemara at all.
Back to top

amother
Linen


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 9:01 pm
Mommyg8 wrote:
As for Chareidi Orthodoxy - I think a different poster mentioned that Judaism has always had more respect for women, and has treated women better, than the people they were often surrounded by.


True, allowing a woman to "accept" a marriage proposal and setting kesuba obligations on a husband as well as the Bnos Tzlafchad story show much more respect for women than other nations. However, that's all a far cry from female ownership and inheritance as well as being counted as a witness. I'm not speaking of bringing korbanos and the entire concept of nidda. Feminism made it ok to ask about these inequalities and created the need for the modernized explanations we hear today. Just read all the "just as important, different role" and "we are all important to Hashem" posts here. The explanations for tznius fall into the same category.

I for one am grateful for feminism. I'm even happy being a traditional JPF orthodox because I can vote, I have a great education and a career that puts me on equal economic footing with dh. I believe in Hashem and He chose to make me a woman. He has His reasons. Even though I know my "place" in the home under Jewish Law, it's quite tongue in cheek in our house. That's because I'm not married to a chauvinist or misogynist. My husband sees me as an equal, but neither of us engage in the wordplay and pretend Jewish Law does.
Sorry, anonymous because I'd rather my neighbors and my kids teachers not know my feelings on this.

Edit: Mommyg8 thanks for not being disingenuous.

Also, I HOPE feminism created a higher divorce rate. I PRAY it created generations of women who level the financial field and reward men with good, respectful marriages instead of being bullied into being subservient. I feel for the women today STILL stuck with bad relationships or abusive ones because they arent economically independent. That is another way modernity will affect Jewish homes. I hope it makes changes to how our sons learn to look at, treat and respect the women in their lives. (Edited for sense)
Back to top

amother
Apricot


 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 11:03 pm
lilies wrote:
That is borderline apikorsus.
Torah does not follow suit on anything. Everything in this world follows the Torah.
As far as serving a king, are women not serving Hashem? Scratching Head

Do you believe in the Torah?


You've misread my post, or perhaps I didn't express it too clearly. What I meant to say was that in MY comparison of patriarchal behavior in different elements of society, the Torah follows suit in also expressing a patriarchal society. Not that it came first, second or last in creation. Just that in my comparison, I first compared other historical elements, and then I compared it against the ultimate truth - and even there the Torah follows the suit of my comparison - the Torah also express a patriarchal society.

As for serving a king - where did I say that women are not serving Hashem? Scratching Head
Back to top

Zehava




 
 
    
 

Post Sun, Jan 05 2020, 11:15 pm
amother [ Ruby ] wrote:
That’s not completely accurate. What it says is that If a woman refuses to fulfill any of her household duties, she is forced - even with a stick. It appears to be limited to the specific duties of a wife, and is unclear if it is the husband or the Bais Din/community who will do the forcing . . .

Oh how sweet...
Back to top
Page 2 of 4 Previous  1  2  3  4  Next Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Judaism