Monday, July 12, 2010
http://taliashewrote.blogspot.com/2010/07/is-this-future-israeli-jewish-women-are.html
Response to this article:
You seemed to be too confused as to reason why we do the things the way we do them. First of all, all this separation between sexes is not to safeguard women from men only, it works both ways. Yes, indeed there is something called , liberal, conservative or religious. Religion is not either, only politics.
There is nothing rong with woman putting in tefillin in women section and in fact Jewish code of law talks about it and it is perfectly fine for women to do and those who are nesty to these women have wrong interpretation of Torah. There is a big difference between not being obligated or not allowed. And Tefillin in particular WAS VERY CONTROVERSIAL thing to not oblige women to do, why it is, is another story, if it sounds orthodox liberal to you, fine, but that is the way the things are in truth, anyone arguing with this is misguided.
By the same token, Judaism as any classical thought was not mixed in with myth that men and women are same. Only circumstances of 20th ant 21st centuries could bring people to this faulty myth. While women can get the same job as men and just as smart, the only way for women to compete with men for steady employment is to deny themselves their nature of giving birth, which is as same as being ill for nine straight months of almost every year, and then breastfeed the baby and care for it. You know babies don't grow by themselves. You know, they don't grow by themselves and someone has to go hunting and travel for resources, or in more modern times, to constantly compete for continuous employment. Now as feminist, Can you name a creature that does not give birth, or has no breasts, or is not normally sick for nine month almost every year?
Now, that also has to do with the fact that God has this concern as well and only out of humanity divided the obligation between the woman and the scary creature, and even that only something that has to do with classical instinct of a hunter, like commandments that had to do with keeping of track of time, given to men, for example saying Shma only up to certain time, learning or serving in temple. The woman is also obligated to do everything, but not what needs keeping of track of time. Why not? she has more important thing to do - to give birth and bring up future generation, which torah tells us is even better and holier, more difficult thing to do than say shma with minyan in the morning. Now out of thousands of years of human history, feminism is being around since 1960's - for 50 years! A drop in the sea. And how is it p[ossible, by talking as many women into not marrying or having no children, or saying embarrassing things to stay home moms, that somehow it is better to work and do all things as men do because if you don't you somehow degraded or a slave like. While in classical world it was looked upon as higher privilege and as Mrs. Child said that it is upon her that future of our republic stand, for men are mere reflection of their mother's upbringing - I bet they never taught you that in your women study class, am I right?
Take it for what it is - women are same as men and although they smarter then men, but they different. Why smarter, god gave them extra ability to be creative, less destructive then men to bring up those who will pay your retirement benefits to you, and your social security, and medicaid; yeah when you get to be 85 or 90. Women , who act like mothers own the future its a very powerful tool, more powerful then men that reflect it. But only if they act like mothers. If they act like childless CEO's - lets face the bitter truth - Their world will die with them, so how much these men-copying women will achieve if all women will stop giving birth, the ugly and torturous death from lack of people to care for them in their older years.
In conclusion: Are women suppressing men by letting them be like men? I don't think so.
Response to this article:
You seemed to be too confused as to reason why we do the things the way we do them. First of all, all this separation between sexes is not to safeguard women from men only, it works both ways. Yes, indeed there is something called , liberal, conservative or religious. Religion is not either, only politics.
There is nothing rong with woman putting in tefillin in women section and in fact Jewish code of law talks about it and it is perfectly fine for women to do and those who are nesty to these women have wrong interpretation of Torah. There is a big difference between not being obligated or not allowed. And Tefillin in particular WAS VERY CONTROVERSIAL thing to not oblige women to do, why it is, is another story, if it sounds orthodox liberal to you, fine, but that is the way the things are in truth, anyone arguing with this is misguided.
By the same token, Judaism as any classical thought was not mixed in with myth that men and women are same. Only circumstances of 20th ant 21st centuries could bring people to this faulty myth. While women can get the same job as men and just as smart, the only way for women to compete with men for steady employment is to deny themselves their nature of giving birth, which is as same as being ill for nine straight months of almost every year, and then breastfeed the baby and care for it. You know babies don't grow by themselves. You know, they don't grow by themselves and someone has to go hunting and travel for resources, or in more modern times, to constantly compete for continuous employment. Now as feminist, Can you name a creature that does not give birth, or has no breasts, or is not normally sick for nine month almost every year?
Now, that also has to do with the fact that God has this concern as well and only out of humanity divided the obligation between the woman and the scary creature, and even that only something that has to do with classical instinct of a hunter, like commandments that had to do with keeping of track of time, given to men, for example saying Shma only up to certain time, learning or serving in temple. The woman is also obligated to do everything, but not what needs keeping of track of time. Why not? she has more important thing to do - to give birth and bring up future generation, which torah tells us is even better and holier, more difficult thing to do than say shma with minyan in the morning. Now out of thousands of years of human history, feminism is being around since 1960's - for 50 years! A drop in the sea. And how is it p[ossible, by talking as many women into not marrying or having no children, or saying embarrassing things to stay home moms, that somehow it is better to work and do all things as men do because if you don't you somehow degraded or a slave like. While in classical world it was looked upon as higher privilege and as Mrs. Child said that it is upon her that future of our republic stand, for men are mere reflection of their mother's upbringing - I bet they never taught you that in your women study class, am I right?
Take it for what it is - women are same as men and although they smarter then men, but they different. Why smarter, god gave them extra ability to be creative, less destructive then men to bring up those who will pay your retirement benefits to you, and your social security, and medicaid; yeah when you get to be 85 or 90. Women , who act like mothers own the future its a very powerful tool, more powerful then men that reflect it. But only if they act like mothers. If they act like childless CEO's - lets face the bitter truth - Their world will die with them, so how much these men-copying women will achieve if all women will stop giving birth, the ugly and torturous death from lack of people to care for them in their older years.
In conclusion: Are women suppressing men by letting them be like men? I don't think so.
Regarding 2nd article in CrownHeights.info about:http://www.crownheights.info/index.php?itemid=27390
Op-Ed: Fretting Over Inevitabilities
http://www.crownheights.info/index.php?itemid=27561&pending=1#pending
It looks like the author is attacking Lubavitch the way it is meant to be. I would not be surprised if his real name would be Mendelson. This article is full of hate and I bet that he thinks of himself as the most compassionate. Just look at the way he is referring to real Lubavitchers that live in the way that Rebbe wanted - Zealots. And it is my suspicion, though not for sure, he probably means to call Rebbe a Zealot Ringleader. Was not he the one that indicated the standards himself?
And why create a beast out of Lubavitch? If some of this "Basil crowd" wants to leave Chabad, why not? Yes, may be "...'tis time to part" as was once said by T. Paine in 1774.
The separation between moderns orthodox and real Lubavitchers does not have to be unpleasant. Just don't wed real chasidishe crowd with modern, build another yeshiva or sunday school for them, and yes it works too. I know many Litvishe people and few poilishe chasidishe people who have friends and relatives in modern orthodox communities and they are not hostile to one another. So did that ever occurred to this hate monger who authored this slanderous article?
Now, the question is is this what Lubavitch would OK? Indeed, yes. The first Zealot Ringleader of Chabad stock the word Emes into his letter Kotanty (it will come up in Chitas on 6 of av this year, hey does he do Chitas too?) If he would not "stick" this word there, the Ringleader would have 50,000 more zealots in his ring, however, He wanted real zealots, not the fake ones.
One more problem, is this like causing same kind of machlokes as Korach? No, not if it is done in pleasant and peaceful way. And please don't threaten us with money. Or give us hate advice to threaten or be unpleasant to those modern people - it could only be said by some one like You the hate monger zealot, since you wrote it in state of hate, there is only hate that comes out of your article and not much else.
Finally, you think that Lubavitch would be separated for the first time? Read your history and you'll see that After 3rd Ringleader was dead, most of rich and smart ran to other chasidishe rings and only a part stayed with the fourth Maharash, that is. So? Did we die out? You know what else is apparent? I am not preaching hate here for 'zealots' or open minded modern people. I am just saying that it is time for us not to force anyone to leave the place, but to realize our differences and move on as we should, so modern people, stand up for yourselves and declare what you are, but don't hate monger, yes both you and the zealots. And declare the fact - we are different but we can peacefully coexist just like in Boro Park or Flatbush, modern with chasidishe, litvishe, yeshivishe or whatever is out there - together as one nation under God indivisible.
Good Night.
Op-Ed: Fretting Over Inevitabilities
http://www.crownheights.info/index.php?itemid=27561&pending=1#pendingIt looks like the author is attacking Lubavitch the way it is meant to be. I would not be surprised if his real name would be Mendelson. This article is full of hate and I bet that he thinks of himself as the most compassionate. Just look at the way he is referring to real Lubavitchers that live in the way that Rebbe wanted - Zealots. And it is my suspicion, though not for sure, he probably means to call Rebbe a Zealot Ringleader. Was not he the one that indicated the standards himself?
And why create a beast out of Lubavitch? If some of this "Basil crowd" wants to leave Chabad, why not? Yes, may be "...'tis time to part" as was once said by T. Paine in 1774.
The separation between moderns orthodox and real Lubavitchers does not have to be unpleasant. Just don't wed real chasidishe crowd with modern, build another yeshiva or sunday school for them, and yes it works too. I know many Litvishe people and few poilishe chasidishe people who have friends and relatives in modern orthodox communities and they are not hostile to one another. So did that ever occurred to this hate monger who authored this slanderous article?
Now, the question is is this what Lubavitch would OK? Indeed, yes. The first Zealot Ringleader of Chabad stock the word Emes into his letter Kotanty (it will come up in Chitas on 6 of av this year, hey does he do Chitas too?) If he would not "stick" this word there, the Ringleader would have 50,000 more zealots in his ring, however, He wanted real zealots, not the fake ones.
One more problem, is this like causing same kind of machlokes as Korach? No, not if it is done in pleasant and peaceful way. And please don't threaten us with money. Or give us hate advice to threaten or be unpleasant to those modern people - it could only be said by some one like You the hate monger zealot, since you wrote it in state of hate, there is only hate that comes out of your article and not much else.
Finally, you think that Lubavitch would be separated for the first time? Read your history and you'll see that After 3rd Ringleader was dead, most of rich and smart ran to other chasidishe rings and only a part stayed with the fourth Maharash, that is. So? Did we die out? You know what else is apparent? I am not preaching hate here for 'zealots' or open minded modern people. I am just saying that it is time for us not to force anyone to leave the place, but to realize our differences and move on as we should, so modern people, stand up for yourselves and declare what you are, but don't hate monger, yes both you and the zealots. And declare the fact - we are different but we can peacefully coexist just like in Boro Park or Flatbush, modern with chasidishe, litvishe, yeshivishe or whatever is out there - together as one nation under God indivisible.
Good Night.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
