Platonic Relationships
Before I start my topic, I just want to say for the record, that I think Michelle is a very special girl, and I hope she finds her zivug in the near future and raises a Bayis Neeman B’Yisroel. However, there were some very vicious comments made by her and others on her blog that were totally uncalled for. As much as it pains me to do so, since I really enjoyed her blog, she raised many salient points and wrote exceptionally well, I need to remove her link and cease participating on her blog.
Personally, I don’t care if someone wants to call me a girl, boy, or cocker spaniel. But, many girls shared some very personal, intimate matters with me, and if there was some doubt in their mind as to what I am, it could cause them considerable agmas Nefesh. I worked very hard on my blog, and B”h helped out a lot of people , and I don’t appreciate some thoughtless, insensitive jerks trying to sabotage it.
I was always taught that embarrassing someone in public or hurting someone’s feelings is infinitely worse then saying Good Shabbos to a boy , or having relationships with the other gender, platonic or otherwise.
If the seminaries and Yeshivas that those commenters attended didn’t impart that message they failed abysmally. Before you attack, I am not saying that all bf/gf stuff is 100% proper. Obviously, we arent melochim. Im just saying that intentionally hurting someone is far worse.
As for Plutonic Relationships, obviously everyone has to know themselves, and what their real intentions are. If you don’t have basic Yiras Shomayim, all the gedarim and Mechitzas in the world won’t help. It also depends on whether people are mature enough to handle it. Another factor is that when they come from very-repressed backgrounds they cant.
I can honestly say that I have had many close male friends in College, that I was not attracted to at all, based on age, appearance, and culture, but nevertheless were good friends. After marriage, it is clearly a lot easier to maintain such friendships without any improper thoughts whatsoever.
With all due respect, to Lakewwod and places like it, the problem with ultra-Right Wing frum communities is men and women don’t see each other as people. With all the emphasis on gender-segregation by everything imaginable, (there are even separate hours in some supermarkets) , and neighbors not even saying good morning to each other , it just reduces women into sex-objects and degrades them. This was never the intention of the Gedolim of previous generations.
Personally, I don’t care if someone wants to call me a girl, boy, or cocker spaniel. But, many girls shared some very personal, intimate matters with me, and if there was some doubt in their mind as to what I am, it could cause them considerable agmas Nefesh. I worked very hard on my blog, and B”h helped out a lot of people , and I don’t appreciate some thoughtless, insensitive jerks trying to sabotage it.
I was always taught that embarrassing someone in public or hurting someone’s feelings is infinitely worse then saying Good Shabbos to a boy , or having relationships with the other gender, platonic or otherwise.
If the seminaries and Yeshivas that those commenters attended didn’t impart that message they failed abysmally. Before you attack, I am not saying that all bf/gf stuff is 100% proper. Obviously, we arent melochim. Im just saying that intentionally hurting someone is far worse.
As for Plutonic Relationships, obviously everyone has to know themselves, and what their real intentions are. If you don’t have basic Yiras Shomayim, all the gedarim and Mechitzas in the world won’t help. It also depends on whether people are mature enough to handle it. Another factor is that when they come from very-repressed backgrounds they cant.
I can honestly say that I have had many close male friends in College, that I was not attracted to at all, based on age, appearance, and culture, but nevertheless were good friends. After marriage, it is clearly a lot easier to maintain such friendships without any improper thoughts whatsoever.
With all due respect, to Lakewwod and places like it, the problem with ultra-Right Wing frum communities is men and women don’t see each other as people. With all the emphasis on gender-segregation by everything imaginable, (there are even separate hours in some supermarkets) , and neighbors not even saying good morning to each other , it just reduces women into sex-objects and degrades them. This was never the intention of the Gedolim of previous generations.
posted by SemGirl | Sunday, June 18, 2006
91 Comments:
I'm not a BY girl, so for me, talking to boys was never an issue of rebellion. I am not a part of the NCSY scene, but I have friends with guy friends, which occasionally means I hang out with guys. I'm only 17 so the marriage thing has not come into play at all yet, but I would not want to be friends with guys right now because the pressure is too much, and at this point I would rather wait until I start dating, or after seminary. When I read your post, I vaguely remembered Michelle's blog, and when I searched for it, I was shocked to discover it was a blog I occasionally visit, and have aways wholeheartedly enjoyed. When I read the comments on the platonic relationships post, I was shocked, dissapointed, upset, and furious. The fights and insults that go on in the Jewish blog world infuriate me. How a bais yakkov girl could allow such insults to remain on her blog is beyond me. It's not okay to talk to boys, but it's okay to commit the aveira of sinat chinum? I don't knwo if I agree with you that boys and girls, or men and women rather, can remain friends after marriage, but I do agree the boy comment was out of hand. I don't have many comments on my blog, but at this point, I think it's a good thing if people will insist on hurling insults at each other.
I don't really see why you're so mad at Michelle. I looked over her comments and didn't see anything hurtful towards you. Yes, some other commentors on her blog weren't so nice to you, but why take it out on Michelle?
NAH...thank you, you elucidated matters much better than me. Dont know what you look like, but in writing style and command and eloquence of expression you are definitely a "hottie". so its all relative.
JBoy ... You missed the point, Michelle's line about Semgirl/Semboy was very out of line. Jboy, how would you feel if you were emailing or IMing someone for months and completely opened up to them, for the purpose of understanding someone you are dating, engaged, or married to or other sensitive issues.
And then someone tells you, it might be a bochur playing a joke on you. Either you have the doubt in your mind which causes you pain, or you go to the next level and call her up on phone. While this gives you confirmation, it can also be extremely humiliating after you have discussed so many intimate things.
JBL ...."I don't think you got the facts straight. Michelle isn't responsible for the comments that appear on her blog. She didn't write them or even endorse them. Maybe she should delete them, but she'll have to delete dozens because they all mention it, and that's not so practical. "
So how do you interpet this:
Those attacking Semgirl/boy, please keep that to her/his blog. I should be the only one allowed to viciously attack people around here
Bearing in mind the scenario layed out to in my response to Jboy..
I agree with you on this one! No matter what I think of you (or any other bloggers for that matter) I wouldnt resort to embarrassing you in public. If I think you are full of crap, I can simply not read your blog, or take what you say with a grain of salt.
Be well. See you in the supermarket....Oh I won't because it is separate hours. Pathetic!
I hate to see politics. Could everyone just enjoy their own blogs?
It's a shame to have to lose pleasure in blogs because of politics.
for those trying to argue that the gedolim of previous generations did advocate this kind of seperation, take one look at any one of their shailos and teshuvos and it will like, totaly prove you wrong.
the law stops short of alot of things and making it worse alot of people blow halachos way out of perportion. the
"customs" as currently established do exactly what semgirl said they do, and i can testify to this as fact.
we're supposed to keep to the middle way in almost everything, noone ever said that we go to an extreem with seperating boys and girls.
and btw most of those stories you hear about? their either wrong or not representative of the general picture. (again just look at jewish sources and you'll see that plainly)
sem girl, nice statements, and i'm sorry for what happened, i know it hurts, but identifying the person doens't help, remember to avoid the temptation to throw mud around, although it looks like your doing a pretty good job.
Gosh, no time to read all the comments now, so I will have to come back later.
For now, about the first thing, like I don't have to even say anything. The most pathetic people are those who make discussions personal instead of the issues. It just shows that they unable to discuss a simplke issue so they have to resort to personal attacks.
About the platinic issue. I have already commented of FrumGirl's blog and other places. I do not fully agree with Semgirl here. I think there is a middle here. Like not talking to a man or lady is not the way it used to be, as far as I can tell or ever heard or read.
But there is like a HUGE difference between a greeting, an exchange for a specific purpose, which can be totally okay, and a 'relationship'. And I DO think the gedolim have all always said like relationships between genders are wrong. This goes back to medrashim and gemaras. (Sorry, I don't have the specifics, but I surely have seen them). So the extreme of ignoring the oppsite gender (which I really don't think is done anyway too much in Lakewood) is wrong, but relationships? I just don't think so.
Shalom
It looks like I found your blog after alot of water went under the bridge.
I just want to say that you sound like are a yiras shamyim and you have wonderful midos.
I'm impressed.
elisheva, depends on the contexts and it depends on the people.
some people it would be absolutely wrong for, and for some it would be absolutely right for and he'd be called a chossid shotah for not doing it.
and the contexts... i don't think anyone says it's ok to go out of your way to make friendships with the opposite sex dafka for that purpose, but at the same time being friendly and amiable with people whom you work with or study with, (and that necessitates friendship on some level), are perfectly ok.
now with people who are unmarried it's an entirely different issue both in terms of the possibility of marrying the person your becoming friends with and interms of rules and regulations that make things more stringant.
(it really goes both ways with unmarried folk. as long as things are loosely dependent on "hey maybe this person is my beshert, and if not maybe my friends beshert so i should get to know them!" i believe rebbetzin ester jungeries has alot on this subject and she's chassidic if i'm not mistaken... (hungarian chassidic, people who are well known for being over the top anal about this kind of thing))
well written, SG. I dont know what drama went on on Michelles blog but wasnt it closed down a while ago?
It is true about seperation turning us into objects and even dehumanizing us. I was at a yeshiva graduation yesterday and got an up and down from a very yeshivish looking beard wearing older black hatter that was nothing less than sexual harrassment. How dare they be so blatand about it! And I was dressed quite tsniusly.
Disgusting. I am *not* an object!
yes yes yes! no problem with being nice to the other sex but you say that you have tons of boy friends you still keep in touch with and so does your husband something very odd about that
sorry guys but semgirl is a girl i know for sure try swinging at someone else
Semgirl-ultimately--it's up to you. If you choose to delete my blog from your blogroll, that's fine. I will still continue to read and enjoy your blog.
I think what happened on my blog was taken way out of proportion, and if you'd read carefully, you'll note that I did demand the attacking to stop, only I did so in a joking fashion.
If it'll make you happy, I can delete them. They don't do anything for my blog. They don't enhance my piece, or make me think, which is what comments are really meant to do.
It's up to you.
I wish you continued hatzlacha on your blog, and in life, and I will continue to say my piece on your blog, even if you choose not to do so on mine.
This is quite the catty post, (notwithstanding the eyewash at the beginning about how wonderful Michelle really is).
But I think Michelle's reply shows class.
Michelle, Actually, if you notice I did in fact comment on your blog today, and follow all the comments there .
I accept your apology, and ask you mechila if I over-reacted. Once again I'll reiterate I didnt take anything personally. If you or anyone, on or off-line would call me bummy, or not-frum, or fat or stupid or ugly I wouldnt say anything. But I felt this had the potential to hurt many other ppl.
On a positive note, I think you got the most comments since I started following your blog. When I was a little girl, my aunt and my grandmother's favorite show was Murphy Brown. The then vice-president took a swipe at it and you can google and find out what happened.
NAH...this is so weird I read YG's and Michelle's comment and typed my last comment in and whenI hit the submit button your comment appeared, and I sensed what you would say before I saw it.
YY...calm down I dont have tons of bfs, I just dont believe in ladies sitting in one room of my house and men sitting in the other. And when no one is watching the men are looking to hook up in chatrooms.
FG...sorry to hear that, but at least he was only looking at you. I was on the bus going to Monsey several times with the Mehitza and the curtain and someone pinched me.
Kasamba...thank you
Elisheva...I actually agree with you more then you think.. You just have to define relationship. I hope you didnt think I meant a frum lady going out with a bunch of guys for beers and bowling. But saying Rabbi so-and-so and acting like you are afraid someone is going to bite you to someone you had a close friendship with when you were single or to your husband's best friend is so not my scene.
Yeshiva Guy-Thanks :-)
Semgirl-glad it's all cleared up. I get distrubed when people are upset at me. Now I can sleep tonight :-)
Thanks :)
"i never thought i'd say this but I AGREE WITH YESHIVA GUY!!!"
Ah, but you have said it before! On LV's blog. Of course, you were mad again a comment or two later, but that's okay.
Michelle: You're most welcome.
"I was on the bus going to Monsey several times with the Mehitza and the curtain and someone pinched me."
You got pinched through the mechitza on *several* occasions? I'd have a hard time believing it happened even once, but okay, maybe. But several times? Puhleeze!
Ummm. I don't know where to begin. I feel like I've been gone forever, but when I returned to the blogging world (after only a week hiatus), I find most blogs about platonic relationships...
Why is that, I wonder?
Nowadays, in our generation, the yetzer harah to connect to the opposite gender is fierce. Yes, I called it a yetzer harah, because although the desire itself, alone and inherent in (almost) all humans, is neutral, a gift -if you will- from Hashem. But when that gift drives us to contemplate assur behavior, however light or severe, it becomes a yetzer harah.
But really, when is it wrong, and when is it a ma'alah to converse/shmooze/smile/laugh/hang with the opposite gender? It all comes down to -what are the correct borders?
I don't know. But I do know this. Judaism forces us to be introspective, to know who we are, and what we are capable of. Yes, of course, the first step is to find yourself a rav. Ask him -yes, him!- what the exact halachos are. Understand what is assur, mutar, a chumrah, a sensitivity. Then understand yourself. And do your best. Hashem is the kind of teacher to give you an "effort award".
To all bloggers endlessly debating the issue...To all who sneer and mock the people who feel they need to be super stringent...I don't know you. I won't tell you what you're borders are, what you need to do to become spiritually successful. And you don't know me. Saying things like, "you're being unfriendly by not making conversation" or "you're sexist" or "you're being too, too"- anything, is pointless. Do not judge another until you're in their place.
"there you go again always having to get in the last word!"
If only. There is no such thing as the last word in blogland.
"I know if i was pinched on the bus i would've thrown the curtain aside and confronted the jerk."
Of course. That would be the most reasonable reaction. So why didn't SG do that? She's not exactly a shrinking violet you know. Her passive acceptance of the abuse (and several times to boot!) make me suspicious of the story.
Because its embarrassing, thats why! YG - you dont know what its like to be a girl!
"YG - you dont know what its like to be a girl!"
Can't argue with that.
Maybe it was, at that. Which bus did this happen on?
Why are we making such a big deal about a pinch anyway? Maybe it was a platonic pinch. Those are fine, aren't they? I mean, you never pinched your sister?
My God, a one-word post from NAH. Will wonders never cease.
yeshiva guy, you know you really sound disgusting dont you?
theres alot wrong with an unwelcome touch of anykind, and it isn't in the slightest bit funny.
i've actualy had to deal with some of those recently, although with much more benign intentions, it's really emberassing, and your voice stops up and you can't say anything to complain.
notahottie, wow you've got guts.
"yeshiva guy, you know you really sound disgusting dont you?"
No, I actually wasn't aware of that. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
"theres alot wrong with an unwelcome touch of anykind, and it isn't in the slightest bit funny."
No? Then I guess you wouldn't appreciate this:
http://www.maineiac.com/wife/pinch.html
First off, Congrats to SG and Michelle. I love you both!
The comments are getting very funny here. YG I think you are hysterical. And I wonder if everyone missed the point with the 'platonic pinch' line.
SG, I was going to say the same thing you did. I think it boils down to how you define 'relationship'. My father has a friend who is a very chashuv person and has a yeshiva and he talks to me if he is in our house. Very respectfully, but he does. But, I would not ever think I have a 'relationship' with him. I guess i could say i do. So it depends how you term relationship.
But in the way i think of it, like something personal and serious between two people, I just don't think it is possible like no matter about frumkeit or what. It just isn't possible, unless you are not wired the way Hashem made us normally or dulled your wiring somehow.
Shalom
Didn't even realize! That was comment 50!
(Will I ever grow up?)
What do you mean, why am I putting words in someone's mouth? Did I claim that she *said* she didn't respond. I simply made an assumption as to what happened, but no claim as to what she said. You're the one who needs "reading comprehension," dummy.
"YG I think you are hysterical."
Thank you Elisheva.
Now there's a girl with good taste in men.
T Wishes….welcome back havent heard from you in a while …I totally agree with you. However , its worth mentioning that you are old enough to have the judgement and you obviously live in a more out-of-townish normal community.
Lots …..Since you brought up Lita, the flip side is a story my husband told me about the Chofetz Chaim. Once the Lubliner Rov, came to the Chofetz chaim for Shabbos, and asked if the women could eat in another room. The Chofetz Chaim answered that he was welcome to eat in a separate room, but the family all eats together.
Limey…actually it was the Mall, but I’m happy you enjoy the blog so much you still remember Yossi.. I didn’t even remember him until you reminded me.
HNC…exactly..For example, I heard on a tape that Reb Ruderman would refused to officiate at a wedding where there was a Mechitza by the Chuppa..
Special..so happy to see you are back.. Once again, black and white issurim apply to everyone, customs only apply to those communities that have them. For example, Litvish women who don’t wear seamed stockings or hats on their Sheitl are not “wrong”, if their Poskim do not require that.
Okee…..Judgement does play a major role here like all other areas of halacha. Everyone needs to know where they are holding and what their real intentions are. ‘V Yiraisa M’Elokecha..
YG….actually, the second time I gave someone a swift kick in the ankle, hope I got the right guy. If that was you, Yeshivaguy, it was a platonic kick.. You know the kind your younger, Chutzpadik brother needs like every day..Elisheva, you know what I’m talking about..
"If that was you, Yeshivaguy, it was a platonic kick.. "
I remember it well. It was precisely the sort of kick Plato himself would have administered had he been pinched on the Monsey bus. The very Form of Kick.
Unfortunately, men pretty much always view women as sex objects. If she's attractive.
talking only leads to misbehavior if you have no scruples, yiras shemayim, derech eretz, morals, or really any depth of character at all.
for the rest of us, our rabbis of old specified what leads to it: Being alone together, Touching each other.
our rabbis really meant to draw the absolute line there. (not that it's good for women and men to go to a bar together or similar issues, but this is obvious to anyone who still has the seichel g-d gave them.)
i'm somehow thinking of the rules about pas yisroel which where instituted lest a jewish boy go to a private home to buy bread, fall in love with the daughter who bakes it, and marry her... it's kinda hard to fall in love if you don't talk at all so obviously talking is permited otherwise they wouldn't have had to make that rule.)
oh and btw, boys only think that way because we let them and even tell them that's the way they should think. (or maybe i'm wrong, but i believe this very firmly)
"our rabbis really meant to draw the absolute line there. (not that it's good for women and men to go to a bar together or similar issues, but this is obvious to anyone who still has the seichel g-d gave them.)"
You're contradicting yourself. First you say that yichud and negiah are the only things that are forbidden, then you say that going to a bar is a problem too. Why? B/c that's just plain seichel. Well, once "seichel" becomes the determining factor, it becomes entirely subjective. Other people might have a different, more stringent, view of what constitutes "seichel" in these matters.
Besides, Chazal did not draw the line at yichud and negiah. Histaklus is assur as well, as is shemias kol, as is anything that brings a person to think erotic thoughts.
histaklus first of is not simply looking at them, or seeing them, it is an intent gaze and nothing else. furthermore the context of that halacha clearly tell you why the look is being performed for it to be prohibited. (and incase you know nothing about hebrew idioms it clearly hints that your looking at "her little finger" as if you where looking at a certain other part of her anatomy, aka, sexualy)
that's first.
shmias kol is not halachicaly an absolute. (it is halachicaly permissible to listen to holy words from their mouths like them singing zemiros or singing their prayers)
and btw very very few things inherently bring a person to think errotic thoughts.
while technicaly permited men and women going to a bar together is simply stupid.
the point here is that in many ways these issues are subjective but it can easily be taken to far, and if the result is to objectify women and reduce them to sex objects it's really not advisable.
(especialy when your grounds for objecting lie directly within the realm of self control for all but the worst people, your not being holy, your being a chassid shoteh in this case)
"histaklus first of is not simply looking at them, or seeing them, it is an intent gaze and nothing else."
Did I say otherwise? My point was that the issurim go beyond negiah and yichud, contrary to what you stated above.
"shmias kol is not halachicaly an absolute. (it is halachicaly permissible to listen to holy words from their mouths like them singing zemiros or singing their prayers)"
Again, irrelevant to my point, which was that the issurim go beyong negiah and yichud, contrary to your previous statement. (Although I would like to see a source for your contention regarding "holy words," if you can provide one. I think you made it up.)
"and btw very very few things inherently bring a person to think errotic thoughts."
Nonsense.
"especialy when your grounds for objecting lie directly within the realm of self control for all but the worst people,"
What are you talking about? The Gemara teaches some of these laws with respect to the Tannaim themselves, who are surely not "the worst people." See Avodah Zarah 20a-b.
(See there also for further instances of seemingly innocuous acts forbidden b/c they lead to erotic thought.)
And by the way, your contention that histaklus refers only to a deliberate gaze for sexual pleasure is not at all universally accepted. There are many who hold that even a casual glance is forbidden. There is much discussion among the poskim on this very point. If you're really interested, I can provide with sources for further iyun.
you can't cite perkei avos as halacha because it isn't, or at least not in the sense that the rest of the perkei avos is halacha.
perkei avos is by definition going above and beyond the letter of the law.
and the difference between the laws your mentioning and yichud and negia is the others are much more personal restriction while yichud and negia are actual restrictions on how you can mingle.
and no i didn't make it up about the holy words thing, i heard it from very reliable and trustworthy sources.
correction: not rest of perkei avos is halacha, should be rest of mishnah is halacha.
oh and aditionaly many rabbis darshan that mishna perkei avos to be refering specificaly to errotic banter.
interesting that rav moshe says that. thanks for mentioning it, i'm really going to have to think about it.
(although it does leave me in rather an even worse possition than before.)
"although it does leave me in rather an even worse possition than before."
Your position can't really get much worse, considering that you're making halachic pronouncements without ever having learned the sugya. Instead of saying over things you heard from who-knows-who, why don't you just sit down with a Gemara Avodah Zarah, and go through the sugya in 20a-b, with all the meforshim, and then you'll be ready to discuss the issue.
yeshiva guy you missed the point entirely.
but then one would expect that from someone who thinks that after you talk to a girl for a few weeks your likely to sleep with her.
actualy after thinking about it, maybe i just shouldn't even try it because well, as was put by someone in the last post here i'm just to plan emotional to take a gemorah properly and maybe i should sit with insperational fluff. Perhaps insperational fluff would motivate me like i need to be who i need to be, and i should totaly ignore the entire intelectual side of things, good night.
"yeshiva guy you missed the point entirely."
Yeah, it just flew right by me.
"but then one would expect that from someone who thinks that after you talk to a girl for a few weeks your likely to sleep with her."
Whatever.
YG... I was enjoying the shiur.. But 'whatever', Im sure that a Talmid Chochom of your calibre can come up with a better response.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
SG: I appreciate the compliment (even if undeserved), and I do have a better response, but I wasn't in the mood of dealing with silly, baseless mischaracterizations of my position, so I "whatevered." But if you're really interested, I'll post a more l'maaseh'dike answer.
sorry yg, i thought you had made blackhatisfakes assertion...
sorry. still holds though.
and btw, we're not allowed to quote a rabbi for supporting a ruling if we don't share his hashkafa, so it really doesn't matter which rabbis say it's not allowed as long as their not your rabbis.
(like the poskim frequently say: one should not rebuke them because they have whom to rely on)
g-d is not limited by our paltry concepts of right or wrong or there can't be two contradictory right answers. in truth, they're all right! (these and these are the words of the living g-d!)
hnc, I don't know what you're talking about, as usual. Maybe you're responding to someone else's comment again.
SG: I wrote a long, detailed comment responding to the earlier point, but when I pressed "publish," blogger lost my comment. I just don't have the energy right now to do it all again. Sorry.
YG....I'll tell you what I tell everyone. That happened to me several times and I learned to always compose long comments in Word and cut and paste over, so its saved.
Yes, or just to highlight the comment before pressing publish, right-click and copy, and then, if it's lost, you just right-click and paste. Each time I lose a comment, I resolve to do this in future, but these resolutions generally go the way of all good resolutions.
Im really late, but youae one of those girls that dont understand that guys are dogs. Of course I dont mean that we are bad people, just that guys have it extra hard NOT to think about having a relatonship or looking at women improperly. Im sure many guys will jump on me now but its true. These gedarim are needed. As for platonic, in almost all cases one party has an attraction, so Sem even though u werent attracted thy were. That is not platonic. Its a two way street.
you know the talmud states then the yeitzer of a woman (regarding things like this) is much more powerfull than the yeitzer of a man? Furthermore current scientific studies are starting to prove this point.
if they can do it, so can you.
(on the other hand with a bigger yeitzer hara their yeitzer tov is bigger to counterbalance it so...)
however your yeitzer does counter balance it so any acting like a dog is your own fault and not the fault of being a guy. (and worse yet the western culture in which we, R"L, have been immersed encourages this lack of accountability.) many boys may act that way but it's their own fault and sin.
i've seen the other though i can't remember where from.
(and besides there are many contradictory statements in the talmud, it is hardly homogonous in it's oppinions)
Men need wine to ease their desire. 'Nuff said
i'll also say she's deffinitely a girl. (slightly boyish [gosh hope it doesn't offend you semgirl] but unquestionably a girl.)
Eishes: Its great hearing from you again, where have you been hiding. How are things going by you.
HNC: Slightly boyish, thats funny considering you are one of my favorite "girlfriends" . I hope your wife will appreciate your feminine qualities.
Moe: Great tshirts, but in Lakewood, women arent allowed to wear shirts with writing on them, that call attention to themselves.
not respecting their idea that boys and girls shouldn't even be on the same sidewalks isn't the same as being antireligious.
religion is fine and good, but not when it's used as a spade to dig.
(try as you might you will NEVER EVER find a code or teshuva that endorses that kind of crazyness)
brief correction:
you will never find one made before the shoah, and theres a reason for it
With all due respect to Truth, and my dear friend Eshet, was Reb Moshe anti-religious, when he was virulently against Mehitzas by a Kiddush or Bar Mitzva. He said that if that would be necessary you would also need a Mehitza on every sidewalk.
What about Reb Ruderman who refused to be Mesader Kidushin by a Chupa that a Mehitza, which he felt was wrong because it wasnt like thatin Lita..
your being extremely vauge limey, where is said halacha?
or is it one about simchas bais hashoeva which really doesn't support the contention at all, because at simchas bais hashoeva the people where by in large quite drunk, and therefore there is reason to be concerned about it, while in general people walk around stone cold sober and don't have the same issues? (in addition to the degree of levity present at the simchah that is not normaly present)
(sorry i usualy more study shulchan aruch harav, not mishnah berurah)
if it's the same as i'm finding here (funny that it should be the last one there) that (if i understant right) is that you shouldn't have the boys and girls at the same table on yom tov, it seems pretty clear it's because theres an assumption that they will be drunk, and it's totaly special to the regalim, hence why it's mentioned there (and not in a more obvious place, and it should be obvious why having drunk boys and girls around each other is a bad idea)
as i said thinking jew and limey, i haven't seen it because i don't study much mishnah berurah. i replied from memory regarding something i'd heard from someone else (which i may have remembered not at all or incompletely)
now if you will please tell me where in the "end" of hilchos yom tov this is, i would very much like to look it up thank you very much. I did ask for you to tell me where it is.
(i've been looking for something to support these additudes for an extremely long time, as of up till now in the sources i have available i have not found it, so please hold your critcism untill you've actualy told me where to find it so i can look it up, because if i have to do it my self it will litteraly take me days and weeks. thank you)
at this point i found it.
it's then the earliest support of some of this narishkeit. . .
(and i find it very segnificant rabbi shneur zalman didn't find the need to put such a clause in his text)
[giggle]
that's so funny limey, it really is.
OK, I refuse to read 108 comments to put in my two cents so I'll just stick it here. Take it or leave it.
It says in pirkei avos: Al Tarbeh Sichah im haisha. Rashi (I think it's rashi anyways) says Kal vachomer im isha acheres. We also know how shelomis bas dibrie went from blaber mouth to rape victim. While I do think the supermarket thing is a bit extreme for most of us; too much meaningless jabber is never a good thing with anyone and certainly not with the opposite sex. It just doesn't lead to good.
However, I do wish we would calm down a bit on the issue with our teanagers. Teach them why they have to be careful, watch them, but don't stick them into exodus for being hormonal.
As for adults, semgirl, last I checked you are a halachic Jew. If being neheneh mi etzbah ketanah is assur then don't you think being careful is in place? Could you really say that the Etzbah ketanah line is never crossed in these relationships?
I talk to single guys and my husbands friends all the time. I have to. Our children play with eachother, our yards connect, we need to make arrangements and be polite or whatever, but there are limitations. I try to call them by title and last name as much as possible to establish that distance and many of them do the same. I think this is important and commendable.
As far as michelle, I haven't even been able to locate the comments you speak of but I'm still ashamed at you. You seemed to open minded to cut someone off like that without just reason and I don't know the whole story so I guess I'll just stay out of it.
WearyWife raises an interesting point. Maybe, I'm naive, but I think shes exaggerating a bit.
Reasonbly...Thanks for the concern, but if you scroll up to the top ten comments, you'll see made peace a long time ago.
Wow- you guys are fuunnyy!
and although you have 111 posts, I'd like to add another...
Platonic relationships...
well, I can say that I have had 'platonic' relationships of my own.. HOWEVER, I found out, through the grapevine and straight up- that ALL the guys I thought were just 'friends' ALL had a crush on me! So.. that's one down for 'platonic'.
Then, one guy, who had a crush on me, but was straight foward and said he knew we could just be friends (before I was married) b/c our way of life was different, I kept up with. But when he got married (TO HIS PLATONIC FRIEND OF... OH SO MANY YEARS) it just didn't go- even if I was friends with his wife as well. So, down with number two.
Thirdly, my husband absolutely does not like it when I talk to guys that I know and he doesn't. Yes, he tries to be accommadating (however it's spelled) and understanding, but in the end, he really does not like it.
So.... I don't think there's REALLY such a thing as 'platonic' relationships.
but I don't see anything wrong with being 'mentschlich' to the people you know. On that- I think it's only kavod habrios to at least say 'hi'- but you don't need anymore than that....
Workingema welcome aboard. 112 is just as appreciated as #1, sorry I couldnt respond sooner. In all fairness, I think you curve fitted your reactions to fit the brainwashing (excuse me, Bais Yacov education). I think its a chicken or egg kind of thing. We are told repeatedly from the earliest age that a male-female rel-ship ooutside of close family (hopefully), is a sexual one, so any friendship we make with a male becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Or is it precisely because every male-female rel-ship inevitably goes in that direction that we need to be indoctrinated.
Im not sure which it is. But I am positive, that forcing girls to forgo basic needs for many years in many cases, and instilling an irrational paranoia of all men in them, regardless of age or marital status so that the slightest social interaction makes them get all weird, even if its just Good Shabbos, is not healthy or normal.
"I think you curve fitted your reactions to fit the brainwashing (excuse me, Bais Yacov education)"
Uh.. I think you're wrong on that. I was one of those that totally did not listen to anything my school had to say. I went to a BY school, but had very un-BY friends, so my way of thinking is not necessarily on that wavelength.
To be honest, I came to the conclusion of "no such a thing as platonic rel-ship"on my own, after witnessing and experiencing what happened to me and my friends- male and female.
and I'm with you on the irrational paranoia, but not on withholding on basic needs. Some needs are meant to be held in check until further use... But girls (and guys) should not be taught to be 'frightened' of the opposite sex.
sg - Sorry. I told you I didn't have time to read all the earlier comments.
In regard to your most recent comment: I agree that the holding off on most basic needs for so many years becomes a real problem. Girls start showing signs of lesbian behavior without even knowing it, or they fall in love with love itself and go crazy over the thought of it. I'm at a loss with a solution to this problem. I don't think allowing more interaction is the answer. My father says we should go back to marrying girls off when their twelve although I'm not so sure that wouldn't cause at least a hundred other problems. (Even if we mandated BC for the first ten years or so.)
Another solution is instilling in our girls a better understanding of what a real relationship between H&W is supposed to be, teaching them the beauty and telling them what they will gain from 'holding off' and showing a higher level of self control. I think we need to be more open with our students in BY schools and our daughters in our own home. If they had a better understanding of what life was all about and how much more rewarding their relationship could be if it is at a highler level of commitment, they wouldn't have as much trouble. I think the only reason I didn't have to do those things when I was growing up was because I could discuss anything, and I mean anything with my parents, brothers and sisters. We held eachother together and understood fully why we were doing the things we did and weren't doing the things we didn't. It sure helps.
it's a problem for boys too.
heaven knows the estrogen depravation isn't doing them a bit of good.
True. It has nothing to do with girl or boy. We were just talking from the girls point of view. In America we refer to it as teenagers. Too immature to have a safe and healthy relationship yet too hormonal to manage without one. That's why they need good parents, teachers and peers to help them get through these years safely and understand why they have to wait.
agian i say, read the statement in the rambam again, look deeply in to what he says there, and read his examples of what he means by "distancing your self exceedingly" from women.
he tells you what he means, and it isn't what people say it is.
if he ment that your supposed to never go near them, then he would have said so. however he didn't.
(and believe me, i have researched alot of the sources on this issue)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Quotes in general, and particularly from Torah, must remain in context. The stipulation that a man may not look even at a woman's little finger is qualified as applying specifically when looking would be associated with carnal pleasure.
The fact is, that members of both genders are permitted to be in public, and men are not required to wear blindfolds. If however a man is particularly sensitive to the sight of any part of a womans body, he is obligated to avoid any such exposure.
Reasonably Nuts Frummy:
There's no need to go as far as Rashi. The mishna itself states it immediately. "V'al tarbeh sicha im ha'isha. B'ishto omru, kal v'chomer b'ashes chavero."
But do keep in mind that "tarbeh sichah" is relative. Perhaps a reason for the ambiguity is that the exact location where the line must be drawn is variable for different individuals.
A halacha may not be dismissed because one feels they are above it, or that the reason does not apply to them. However when a halacha is stated ambiguously lechatchilah, the halacha it's self is leaving room for interpretation based on personal standing. This requires extreme caution and absolute honesty with one's self, combined with direction from a reliable Rav or Mashpiah.
Shulchan aruch states (Even Ha'ezer 21,1)"Tzarich Ha'adam l'hisrachek me'hanashim meod meod." Shulchan aruch continues to list things that are forbidden under the umbrella of this halacha and includes 'flirting.' It does not forbid merely talking to a woman, nor does it forbid being polite and greeting a neighbor.
Consider a scenario where one knows of a mixed Jewish social event where there will be a large number of young adults who may be receptive to inspirational divrei Torah, but as of yet there are none planned and the event is purely social. I do not think it would be out of place for an individual who is comfortable that they will not suffer any downfalls as a result of attending the event, to go and present divrei Torah.
Of course it is necessary that the individual be absolutely certain in their belief that they are strong enough, and have the approval of their Rav or Mashpiah. But if one is honestly certain, is it in the best interest of avodas Hashem to have all the Yidden at the event miss out on divrei Torah and eat from zivchei mesim (Pirkei Avos 3,3)? **
In the order of the world we currently live in, to spread the light of Torah and increase the volume of Torah and Mitzvos being observed, it is at times necessary that one interact with members of the opposite gender -obviously within the boundaries of halacha.
In a personal inter-gender relationship where there is no specific avodas Hashem-related intention, one has to ask themselves why they are entering into it, platonic or not. After all it does say in shulchan aruch that man must distance himself from woman very very much.
**Care must be taken that one is not providing an excuse for an unsanctioned event by presenting divrei Torah. There have been precarious scenarios where anti-religious organizations may have used the presence of divrei Torah to support their competition with frum organizations.
I would tend to agree with Trying Hard, I mean just look how ladies ( and I use the term very liberally ), dress at Chasanas today, Recently, I was watching my parent’s video from the 80s and it was like night and day. However, by ramming more Tznius down young girl’s throats and making more and more Chumros, you are just going to have more rebellion, especially from the most repressed girls, once they get married and are on their own. Unfortunately, it also causes some girls to marry the wrong person, out of a desire to just be free of their parents and school.
HNC: “he tells you what he means, and it isn't what people say it is” Ok, so what does he mean and what do you base that on.
Dr S… Excellently well-written comment. I think you hit the nail on the head,
“It does not forbid merely talking to a woman, nor does it forbid being polite and greeting a neighbor.”
It is precisely this sort of extremism, don’t say Good morning, don’t say Good Shabbos, act weird around your neighbors of several years, that unfortunately caused and continues to cause myself and my friends, to become repulsed with the whole idea, and go to the other extreme and act in a possibly inappropriate way. Is it right, probably not. Its just reality.
i think the person who posted after me illucidated quite well.
Its interesting, I one time had a disscution with someone, and we both realized that neither of us know the REAL halachos of tznius, like the ones from the mishna brura. not the chumras from the rabbanim. we looked it up, and we are still in the procces but we learnt many interesting things. for example, it say that a girl has to cover her 'ad kaf haregel' there were two mifarshim on what a kaf regel is and one said that it is the knee, ans one the ankle. but the miforesh on the knee was only a 'ashkinazi' posek. Maybe all sefardim have to cover till there ankle. Oh ans one biggy... it never said anywhere that you have to cover your toes!
SG - You know I disagree with you sometimes, but I do agree with your statement that one of the effects of all the Gedarim is that men and women dehumanize each other into sex objects, to some extent. One the one hand, less forbidden activity takes place, but on the other hand, I think that a lot worse ideas are flying through many bochurim's heads as a result.
Rayzee - yeah, I think if people made decisions on their own, people would have a lot more respect for the Halacha, and those that chose it would wear things a lot more in tune with Tznius. In many communities, toes are allowed. You just have to think about what it means to be frum, and how you want to live. It's not an easy decision, but I think anyone who is honest with themself is better off than somebody who just follows the crowd.
Rayzee....its interesting to note that the Mishna Brura seems to be meikl till the knee and allows for socks and sneakers, which is fairly standard practice in many community. Thats also the basis for Reb Moshe's tshuva that sheer stockings are fine because they cover an area that technically doesnt absolutely need to be covered.
Josh..excellent insightful comments as always. I apologize for the duration in posting. I have several new articles, just need to find the time to type it up.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
"I think anyone who is honest with themself is better off than somebody who just follows the crowd." -Josh
This ideal is universal. It is better to observe any halacha out of personal interest rather that to follow the crowd. The halachos of Tznius in particular, are conducive to a lifestyle and perspective that are important for a G-d-fearing Jew, and there is much more to tznius that just the halachos. (See my first comment in this discussion
However when it comes to halacha, observance of the rules is paramount. It does not say in Shulchan Aruch that one should cover until their knees if they have an appreciation for it.
It is certainly ideal to observe standards of tznius out of appreciation for the broader issue behind the halachos, but when it comes to halacha it is crucial that one observe the halachos whether or not they personally appreciate what the halachos represent. Halachos are about action. The right motives and appreciation certainly enhance the mitzvah immensely, but they are still secondary.
hmmmmm
rock my boat baby!
Post a Comment
<< Home