Volume 53 Number 64
Produced: Mon Jan 8 6:03:31 EST 2007
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Back of the Bus, remembered
[Freda B Birnbaum]
Blaming the Victim -- Anonymous Rabbis
[Carl Singer]
Leadership--and the bus incident
[Michael Feldstein]
Midos (2)
[Carl Singer, SBA]
Respect for Rabbanim
[SBA]
Segregated Buses (2)
[David I. Cohen, Meir Shinnar]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Freda B Birnbaum <fbb6@...>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 09:42:00 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Back of the Bus, remembered
Sarah Beck writes:
> In all seriousness, I would not have a problem, in practice!, with
> this separate seating if it were men on one side, women on the other.
I had meant to address this issue earlier, but since you mention it
here...:
Even if one accepts the idea of separate seating, whether front-to-back
or side-to-side (which I hasten to assure you, I don't), what about the
situation where someone is assisting a spouse or an elderly or
less-than-fully-abled person of the other gender? Does the wife have to
sit in the back while the elderly husband with the walker sits
elsewhere? (I've actually encountered difficulties of this sort at some
events.)
> If anyone asks me my _personal_opinion_ on the practice of separate
> seating outside of shul, I would reply that back South we actually do
> learn about Jim Crow in elementary school, and apartheid in middle
> school, and the Black train car case whose name I shamefully forget
> (anyone?) in high school, and every schoolkid worldwide would hardly
> be harmed by the broadening experience of studies like that. I think
> that the apologists for the back of the bus would probably sing a
> different tune if their own mothers, or they themselves, had seen
> "colored" restrooms in their basically non-bigoted childhoods.
When I was nine years old, I saw those signs on the buses (and the water
fountains) in North Carolina where we lived at the time. I knew it was
wrong then. It's still wrong. (Though North Carolina has considerably
cleaned up its act since then.)
> But these buses don't run through my neighborhood, so I am hard put to
> effect change from within. But do I shrink from calling it Jim Crow?
> Nope. If Egged wants to perpetrate it from without, I hardly have
> standing, from the cozy confines of the Interborough Rapid Transit, to
> do anything about it.
Right, we can't change every injustice in the world, only (we hope)
those in our own bailiwick. But we can at least register an opinion and
not add to a climate that supports them.
Freda Birnbaum, <fbb6@...>
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks"
P.S. I should have added to:
> When I was nine years old, I saw those signs on the buses (and the
> water fountains) in North Carolina where we lived at the time. I knew
> it was wrong then. It's still wrong. (Though North Carolina has
> considerably cleaned up its act since then.)
the recollection that, on those buses, men DID give their seats to
women... and not all of them pregnant!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 08:15:44 -0500
Subject: Blaming the Victim -- Anonymous Rabbis
> I think when it comes to exposing idiocy and statements/behaviors that
> are spiritually destructive and theologically incorrect, the communal
> need of knowing which rabbis to avoid overrides kavod harav. Thus, I
> think on the contrary, one should not "hide out of respect" the name
> of this Israeli rabbi who apparently claimed that a bus or busses were
> blown up because of mixed seating. Rather his name should be
> publicized so that people of faith and common sense (here I am
> speaking of myself and I hope others as well) will know to avoid him,
> and to insure that none of their charitable contributions go to any
> institution with which he is affiliated. After all, I'm sure this
> person took great pride in his brilliant Torah insight (or was he
> zocheh to a direct communication from God?) that hakadosh baruch hu
> sent a suicide bomber to that s'dom on wheels as a punishment for men
> sitting next to women, so your sense of tzniut on his behalf is
> misplaced, particularly given the communal need.
>
> -Eitan
WELL SAID!!!!
The "Buses were blown up because" is as stupid as the "Holocaust
occurred because" claims alleged to be have been made by certain
Rabbiem. Any attempt to blame the victim is ludicrous and any source of
such inflammatory statements should be identified (if there really is a
source -- i.e., if such a Rabbi truly exists.)
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <mike38ct@...> (Michael Feldstein)
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 12:33:07 -0500
Subject: Leadership--and the bus incident
> OTOH, I will withdraw everything I have written here, if you can show us
> that the rabbinic leadership and Roshei Yeshivos encourage this kind of
> behaviour. But until then I request that you refrain from accusing good
> Jews of doing bad things.
By refusing to actively condemn this kind of behavior and looking the
other way, the rabbinic leadership and Roshei Yeshiva are tacitly giving
their approval to this--and conveying the impression that what happened
was not so bad.
> The chances are that he could very well be one of those crazy BTs who
> take matters too far (a la Baruch Goldstein). Whilst BH, the VAST
> majority of BT succeed in living normal, decent and halachik lives,
> there are also a few (and most of us know of them) who were a bit
> crazy before and just as crazy after 'seeing the light'.
Baruch Goldstein is a bad analogy. After he acted, virtually every
Modern Orthodox and Religious Zionist leader strongly condemned hios
actions and disassociated themselves with his thinking and his actions.
Where are the Chareidi leaders who are doing the same?
Michael Feldstein
Stamford, CT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Carl Singer <casinger@...>
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 08:30:27 -0500
Subject: Midos
> Here are two stories to illustrate. While flying alone with two
> children, I asked 2 haredi young men to change seats with me so that
> my 5 year old daughter could sit in the same row with me. They gave me
> the hat treatment (despite my modest clothing) and said they don't
> understand.
>
> On a different trip (once again alone with two kids), while standing
> in line for passport control at the Moscow airport a young Russian
> policeman approached me and walked me to the beginning of the line (in
> his mind a woman alone with children should be given preferential
> treatment).
>
> I would hate to think that a Russian goy has better midos and better
> upbringing than our own yungerlite!
If I may over generalize
Some yungerlite have not been taught (upbringing) and thus do not know
how to properly react to / with women (among others.) They are so
wrapped up in misinformation and ignorance that the simple chesed that
the Russian policeman did is beyond their understanding.
If "some yungerlite" becomes "many" or "most" or "all" -- then we have a
true problem -- as these yungerlite will grow into men with similar
midos.
Time and again, I puzzle over the fact that nearly all of the Rabbis who
I know (some congregational Rabbis, some Roshei Yeshiva, etc.) have such
exemplary character and midos and ahavas Yisroel and how far short of
this example many of their students (current and former) fall.
Carl Singer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SBA <sba@...>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 03:19:22 +1100
Subject: Re: Midos
From: Ari Trachtenberg <trachten@...>
>> From: Leah S. Gordon <leah@...>
>> A personal example--when my husband and I were last driving in B'nei
>> B'rak and had to ask directions, we pulled over and the two
>> [black-hat] men whom I asked [nicely, in Hebrew] just kept walking
>> until my husband leaned over and asked them instead.
>
> I have gotten ignored a number of times along the charedi streets of
> Jerusalem, despite being dressed modestly [as far as I know] and being
> clearly male (although I do dress like the religious Zionist I am,
> knitted kippah and all, and my wife will wear pants in public with
> me).
I think we are making too much about simple rudeness - or lack of
manners, which BTW is not limited to charedim.
I am a dark suit black hatter - male -, and recall once asking a few
chassidish kids in Bnei Brak where I can get a cab?
They didn't even bother to reply "I don't know". Just shrugged their
shoulders and turned away.
I suppose rude kids turn into rude adults.
But that is one case. There are dozens on the other side of the balance
sheet, where not only do they reply/talk respectfully, but went out of
their way to help.
SBA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: SBA <sba@...>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 03:01:53 +1100
Subject: Respect for Rabbanim
>From: <smwise3@...>
>>From: <FriedmanJ@...> (Jeanette Friedman)
>>If the rabbanim want respect, let them earn it.
>
>Jeannette Friedman seems to have gotten carried away with her criticism
>of the rabbonim. It appears because they don't meet her expectations,
>they haven't earned respect in her eyes.
>From: <mike38ct@...>
>By refusing to actively condemn this kind of behavior and looking the
>other way, the rabbinic leadership and Roshei Yeshiva are tacitly
>giving their approval to this--and conveying the impression that what
>happened was not so bad.
I feel that there is a chiyuv of macho'eh for the insult to the rabbinic
leadership..
You REALLY think that a RY who hears that a student of his beat up a
woman (for whatever reason) would simply let it pass...? You portray
them to be almost as evil as the mullahs of the Taliban.
Have you even considered the possibilty that these RYs do not waste
their precious time reading the openly anti-religious Haaretz nor the
rantings of anti-Charedi and anti-Torah bloggers - with their alleged
accounts of the rotteness of the entire Charedi world?
Have you even considered that they may have never even heard of this
attack (or should I say "attack") ?
>>The chances are that he could very well be one of those crazy BTs who take
>>matters too far (a la Baruch Goldstein).
>Baruch Goldstein is a bad analogy. .
No. It is a pretty good analogy. Because Goldstein did what he did
after being swayed and influenced by the extremist views so popular in
the RZ world.
> After he acted, virtually every Modern Orthodox and Religious Zionist
> leader strongly condemned his actions and disassociated themselves
> with his thinking and his actions
Of course they did. They had no choice, did they? After all, one can't
deny the dozens of Arab corpses - which showed the world the results of
this extremism.
However in the case of this bus lady, we are still awaiting the promised
video evidence and busloads of witnesses and threatened charges.
Nothing much yet except the opinion of biased bloggers, who have NEVER
found a nice thing to say about Charedim anyway.
OTOH, you may indeed be right. "Baruch Goldstein is a bad analogy". .
Because he unquestionably did what is alleged, while with the Bus Lady,
we are yet to know.
(Just before posting the above, (and after getting some more info) I
added the following 3 points:)
1) Wouldn't some of the comments made here (and other forums) constitue
modern-day examples of the Chazal's description of "Heiche dame
apikores? One who says: Ma ahane lon rabonon?
2) Those who complain about Rabbonim "refusing to condemn" seem to
forget that Lo ro'isi eino rayeh...Just because YOU haven't heard of a
condemnation, does not mean that it hasn't happened.
3) Indeed it has. Exactly as required - strictly forbidding all acts of
violence against persons or property - no matter what 'issur' or 'sin'
has been committed - and issued by no less than the Bedatz of the Edah
Charedis.
See
http://tinyurl.com/so56l
Are we satisfied yet?
SBA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <bdcohen@...> (David I. Cohen)
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 15:42:25 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Segregated Buses
Perets Mett wrote:
> The only alternative is to take a taxi which, for one person
> travelling, is considerably more expensive. So perhaps it is
> understandable that many men who would rather not travel on Egged
> buses feel that they have no choice."
So let me see if I understand:
It's OK to lose lots of money but keep the ElAl boycott for Shabbat
desecration, but when it comes to avoiding bus interactions with women,
in order to save money it's OK to use the busses, as long as there is a
solution at someone else's (i.e. the women inconvenienced) expense.
And, of course, this still doesn't answer the question, why aren't the
men in the back? Of course, the true answer is that the women werenver
consulted (or even considered).
David I. Cohen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Meir Shinnar <chidekel@...>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 09:49:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Segregated Buses
Perets Mett
>Is it not reasonable for a public transport monopoly to make provision
>for a sizeable section of its customers?
If one would survey Israelis, I am sure that one would find a sizable
section of the bus riders who do not want to sit next to haredim. Would
you say the same thing about egged providing a similar provision
(haredim to the back of the bus) to make provision for its customers?
The problem is that the essential bigotry of the situation is not
recognized.
Meir Shinnar
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 53 Issue 64