Volume 50 Number 98
Produced: Tue Jan 10 5:34:48 EST 2006
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
On the "gender bias" of the phrase "talking to women".
[Mark Steiner]
Sicha Im HaIsha (was Talking To Women)
[Bill Bernstein]
"talking to women" [sic] (5)
[Freda B Birnbaum, Tzvi Stein, Leah S. Gordon, Tzvi Stein, Leah
S. Gordon]
What constitutes "excessive" conversation with the opposite sex
[Steven White]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mark Steiner <marksa@...>
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 09:27:01 +0200
Subject: RE: On the "gender bias" of the phrase "talking to women".
It is true that halakhic literature is written in the male gender--in
the shulhan arukh, all the directives (other than niddah, halah, shabbat
candles) are written in the male gender.
Here are a few examples (these are not direct quotes, I leave it as an
"exercise" for readers to find the exact language):
(a) "He should sweep the floor..."
(b) "He should set the table before nightfall on Pesach, and place a pillow
on his seat..."
(c) "He should clean the house thoroughly before Pesach..."
(d) "He is allowed to wash the dishes Friday night, if he needs them in the
morning..."
(e) "He should shop with Shabbat in mind..."
(f) "He should make sure to wash all the clothes before the Nine Days..."
Mark Steiner
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bill Bernstein <billbernstein@...>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:25:39 -0600
Subject: Re: Sicha Im HaIsha (was Talking To Women)
In a recent MJ I was amused to read this:
> However talking unnecessarily to women has been 'accepted in practice
> throughout the generations" as can be observed in haredi circles. And
> those who don't accept this point of view are presumably non-cognizant
> of the authority of those 'leaders' - the Gedolim throughout the
> generations who maintain and enforce such restrictions. Is there any
> Chacham who does allow unrestricted contact between the sexes
> inclusive of IM, Chat rooms and email?
Whether current practice in hareidi circles is representative of
anything other than current practice in hareidi circles is a worthwhile
question. I am not certain that it is.
But aside from that, if "the Gedolim" gave guidelines for what is and
what is not "excessive talk with women" (other than total prohibition)
then it has escaped my notice.
Further, the injunction is so open-ended and unspecific as to appear to
be merely an eitza tova (good advice) rather than a halakhic
prescription.
The phrase calls to mind the Torah's prohibition on the king marrying
"an excessive number of wives." I jokingly once asked "how many is an
excessive number?" And I answered "sometimes just one."
KT
Bill Bernstein
Nashville TN.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Freda B Birnbaum <fbb6@...>
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 22:34:48 -0500 (EST)
Subject: re: "talking to women" [sic]
Leah Gordon writes:
> I respectfully request, again, that all posters remember that not every
> reader/writer of M.J is male. Therefore, please give subject headings
> such as "men talking to women" instead of meaningless ones like "talking
> to women". Perhaps Avi can help us make sure that the subjects meet
> this request.
>
> After all, I plan to talk to women with abandon....
>
> Sometimes I think I'm shouting into the void about this issue, but it is
> really important because statements that assume maleness on M.J exclude
> us women from the community.
Oh no you're not! I heard you loud and clear! And add my vote to your
request.
The default value of "Jew" is not "male"... even though occasionally
some of us have griped among ourselves about "male-Jewish" (not anywhere
near as much as we used to, though -- thank you Avi).
Freda Birnbaum, <fbb6@...>
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:10:53 -0500
Subject: Re: "talking to women" [sic]
> From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
[Same quote as above]
OK, but how do you deal with the seforim themselves, like the Mishna or
Shulchan Oruch, that make similar male-assuming statements? I think the
Mishna says pretty much verbatim, "Do not talk much with a woman".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 14:18:18 -0800
Subject: Re: "talking to women" [sic]
<Tzvi Stein replies:>
> OK, but how do you deal with the seforim themselves, like the
> Mishna or Shulchan Oruch, that make similar male-assuming
> statements? I think the Mishna says pretty much verbatim, "Do
> not talk much with a woman".
Indeed, to my great distress, female literacy has been significantly
lower than male literacy in most of our history. Certainly, men were
the vast majority of readers/writers/learners in Mishna and Gemara
times, from all our records. We don't have as strong evidence about
Torah times, but I see no reason that it would have been any better,
based on the 'indigenous' peoples who live that sort of desert-tribe
lifestyle today.
This, though true, was a terrible, unnaturally unequal state of
literacy. How fortunate we are that female literacy has started to be
addressed in the modern era. Part of that solution is to make sure that
everyone recognizes that women are now half of the reading, writing,
learning Jewish population.
Interestingly, there are some holy texts that seem to be addressed to
all of us. For example, in kiddush itself, there is the quote from the
Torah about 'You, your son, your daughter, your man-servant and
woman-servant..." and *not* 'You, your wife, your son, your daughter...'
I would be interested in an analysis of which texts seem to be written
in this gender-neutral way, and why that might be.
As for how hard it is for us as women to read the texts that talk to
other people instead, it is depressing and numbing, at least for me.
Sometimes it is difficult to be able to think of ourselves as fully
human, in a world that often ignores our existence without a second
thought. Some women go crazy trying to reconcile these issues. Many,
many, other Jewish women simply go off the Orthodox 'derech'.
When Moshiach comes, Gd willing, and ancient/hallowed writers post to
M.J, I will also explain to them that we are blessed in the modern world
to have a fuller audience for Torah discussions. I can imagine certain
ancients supporting me and others flaming me. ;)
It does indeed take some consciousness-raising for men to understand
that we women don't necessarily hear ourselves included when men talk to
men about men and think that we should be a special case somewhere and
not need to be mentioned. That is why I'm trying to be very, very
patient around this issue which I've addressed on M.J for at least a
decade.
The simple truth is that I expect anyone modern enough to use a co-ed
email list, to realize that both men and women are reading.
In the meantime, M.J modern-era posters will have to include
female.Jewish or listen to me complain. I suppose that I would rank the
possible email subject headings from worst to best thus:
1. talking to women
[ignores female audience; ignores that this is a direct quote]
2. "do not talk much to a woman"
[ignores female audience; acknowledges direct quote]
3. "do not talk much to a woman" as halakha
[ignores female audience; acknowledges and contextualizes direct quote]
4. "do not talk much to a woman" [sic]
[quickly contextualizes direct quote with apparent regret for its sexism]
5. "[men,] do not talk much to a woman"
[explains what is meant by apparently sexist quote]
6. halakhic status of men talking to women
[accurately describes content and does not make gender assumptions]
7. halakhic status of different sexes talking to each other
[accurately describes content, does not make assumptions, does not make
either gender into the talker/talkee]
--Leah S. R. Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tzvi Stein <Tzvi.Stein@...>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:31:39 -0500
Subject: Re: "talking to women" [sic]
From: "Leah S. Gordon" <leah@...>
> As for how hard it is for us as women to read the texts that talk to
> other people instead, it is depressing and numbing, at least for me.
> Sometimes it is difficult to be able to think of ourselves as fully
> human, in a world that often ignores our existence without a second
> thought. Some women go crazy trying to reconcile these issues. Many,
> many, other Jewish women simply go off the Orthodox 'derech'.
>
> When Moshiach comes, Gd willing, and ancient/hallowed writers post to
> It does indeed take some consciousness-raising for men to understand that
> we women don't necessarily hear ourselves included when men talk to men
> about men and think that we should be a special case somewhere and not
> need to be mentioned. That is why I'm trying to be very, very patient
> around this issue which I've addressed on M.J for at least a decade.
Here's an irony for you... you find it painful to read "do not converse
with women" because the words don't speak to you. I find it painful to
read it because the words *do* speak to me. :) It just goes to show that
we each have our "pekele" (burden) ... each person is going to find
parts of the Torah that are enormous challenges, which other people
won't give a second thought to. And sometimes, it will be the same part
of Torah that is difficult for each person in different ways. I can
recall a converstion with a female relative who made an offhand remark
about the Torah being harder for women than for men, and when I
disagreed, she could not fathom how anyone could think otherwise.... she
had thought it was obvious that it was harder for women and that
everyone agreed!
As for the gender used in seforim... think of the history. All of our
halachic literature is derived from oral discussions in ancient
rabinnical academies. All the people studying and teaching were men.
The goal for them was to learn in order to be able to judge halachic
cases (for both men and women) and in turn teach other men. They may
never have forseen that their teachings would eventually be written down
and studied by women. So practically speaking, it would only be
expected that these oral teachings were directed to a male audience. We
are loathe to change the original wording we received from these
original oral teachings, so the male-audience bias remains.
As for Judaism and femaleness, I think it is safe to say that the "male
bias" is essentially a superficial, external aspect. The deeper you go
into the Torah, the more female it becomes. For example, the Divine
Presence is female, the Torah is female, and the Jewish people are often
spoken of as a single, female entity. This fits in totally with the
deeper concepts of male and female, namely that the male aspect of
something is external and the female aspect is internal, just as that is
true physically.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2006 02:34:07 -0800
Subject: Re: "talking to women" [sic]
Dear Tzvi,
You seem to be a thoughtful, kind person, but I think that you are
missing my main point about gender and Jewish texts. If you read my
previous post, you will see that I acknowledge the history of how the
texts became so male-oriented. But in this context, it is incumbent
upon all of us who are now in a half-female literate world, to start
using different wording.
As for your comments:
> As for Judaism and femaleness, I think it is safe to say that the
> "male bias" is essentially a superficial, external aspect. The deeper
> you go into the Torah, the more female it becomes. For example, the
> Divine Presence is female, the Torah is female, and the Jewish people
> are often spoken of as a single, female entity. This fits in totally
> with the deeper concepts of male and female, namely that the male
> aspect of something is external and the female aspect is internal,
> just as that is true physically."
I'm afraid we will have to disagree here. First, the 'male bias' is
regrettably alive and well in many aspects of Jewish life, from
stereotypes about parenting to available learning opportunities, to
almost every other aspect of life. Second, the nuancing of things like
'the Jewish People' as female is, if anything, further proof of sexist
mores. It is not equal or feminist to set up an idea like 'Gd is male
and the Torah is female'...this kind of thing just reinforces gender
splitting. And finally, I must disagree that 'the male aspect is
external...[etc.]". Both sexes are primarily external in manifestation,
of course.
--Leah S. R. Gordon
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <StevenJ81@...> (Steven White)
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 01:29:04 EST
Subject: What constitutes "excessive" conversation with the opposite sex
This thread reminds me of a time when a female friend and I were invited
to Bnai Brak for Shabbos. We were supposed to meet our hosts at a
certain rabbi's home, but got lost. My Ivrit was pathetic then (as
opposed to "poor" today), so my companion, an Olah, tried to ask
directions. We weren't naive - ideally she would have asked a woman -
but there were none around, so she asked a young man. He proceeded to
cross the street without answering the question.
It's all well and good to avoid "unnecessary" conversation, whatever
that is. My problem is when in the name of piety, people are incapable
of entering into an appropriate conversation.
Steven White
Highland Park, NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 50 Issue 98
