Volume 63 Number 10
Produced: Tue, 22 Nov 16 01:28:37 -0500
Subjects Discussed In This Issue:
Battery Drain (2)
[Perets Mett Isaac Balbin]
Genuine converts (3)
[Martin Stern Martin Stern Orrin Tilevitz]
Genuine Jews (was Genuine converts)
[Yisrael Medad]
Notifying the congregation (2)
[Martin Stern Isaac Balbin]
Sexual harassment (3)
[Martin Stern Isaac Balbin Frank Silbermann]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Perets Mett <p.mett00@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 04:01 AM
Subject: Battery Drain
Carl A. Singer, (Mail-Jewish 63 #09) wrote:
> A related question deals with hearing aids.
What is the related question with hearing aids? Many (most?) hearing aid
batteries are not rechargeable.
Perets Mett
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Isaac Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Battery Drain
Carl A. Singer wrote (MJ 63#09):
> What of a "fit-bit" -- a wrist mounted device which counts steps, for example.
> Some of the simpler devices have NO manual interface -- that is when you're
> wearing them you simply have this thing on your wrist. To see the count, you
> need to engage a computer. However, your movement is noted by the device and
> should you remove the device, this may also be noted.
Unlike a watch, a fitbit is involved in preparation for after Shabbos (Hachono),
where the results are agglomerated. In addition, its very presence could also be
classed as zilusa dshabbosa [cheapening shabbos] given that modes of
gymnastics/sport are themselves forbidden and these openly support the record of
such activity. There might be permission in the case of certain sick people, but
I suspect they would need to ensure it was not visible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Genuine converts
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote (MJ 63#09):
> Martin Stern wrote (MJ 63#08):
>
>> Of course not all his [Rabbi Haskel Lookstein's - MOD] conversions may be
>> invalid but [his expressed] sentiments suggest that they must be examined on
>> an individual basis to make sure he has not been swayed by these
>> extra-halachic considerations.
>
> They *must*? Who is it that would be tasked with that, and what possible
> purpose would be served?
The current arrangement between the Israeli Chief Rabbinate and the Rabbinic
Council of America (RCA) is that the former will accept conversions carried out
in the USA that are 'countersigned' by the RCA.
The case that led to a rejection involved a lady whom, I believe, Rabbi Haskel
Lookstein had converted outside this accepted procedures. This may have been a
bureaucratic error on his part which could be rectified retroactively but, since
there certainly are "orthodox" rabbis in the USA whose conversions do not meet
the RCA's criteria, it must have raised questions in Israel. Hopefully that
particular case has now been sorted out and Rabbi Lookstein will avoid such
technical problems in future by sticking more carefully to the guidelines.
In the absence of the RCA's endorsement we would revert to the anarchical
situation where 'everyone simply does what seems right in his own eyes', often
performing conversions under pressure from powerful, but relatively
non-observant, congregational members who like to think that their children are
not marrying out or, even worse, as a result of financial inducement. I am sure
this does not apply to a well respected rabbi like Rabbi Lookstein but certainly
some such shady characters do exist, which is why the RCA has acted.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 03:01 AM
Subject: Genuine converts
Rabbi Meir Wise wrote (MJ 63#09):
> I should like to assure Martin Stern (MJ 63#08) that I have not been misled by
> anyone. Both Rav Goren and Rav Rabinovitch were correct in stating that the
> attitude of the Yerushalmi was more lenient towards converts that the Bavli.
> There are many situations in Israel that the Bavli doesn't cover but are dealt
> with by the Yerushalmi. The clue is in the title!
Of course, the Yerushalmi does cover certain topics not covered by the Bavli but
they are on the whole the agricultural laws in Seder Zeraim and, even then, the
Bavli does touch on them quite frequently when discussing other matters.
> I did not suggest for a minute that non-Jewish soldiers should be buried next
> to Jews. There are military cemeteries which have sections for Jews, Druze,
> other religions and no religion.
>
> What I do say is that moving to Israel and putting one's life on the line to
> defend the state and the people of Israel should weigh heavily as a factor in
> determining the sincerity ofa person who asks to convert. It would seem that
> the late Rav Ovadiah Yosef zatzal was of the same opinion.
That may well be true but does not justify turning a blind eye to, for example,
a prospective convert who lives on an anti-religious kibbutz where kashrut is
not observed and the Shabbat is routinely desecrated when s/he intends to
remain living there after 'conversion'.
> There are 600,000 Israeli citizens whose status is undetermined. In the
> absence of secular marriage I have yet to hear anybody offer a solution apart
> from the illustrious Rosh Yeshiva of Maalei Aumim.
Admittedly they have a problem but that has been caused by the secular
authorites allowing non-Jews with some Jewish ancestry to immigrate under the
Law of Return. It is for the Israeli state to solve their problems NOT the
Rabbinate.
Personally, I am in favour of civil marriage provided the Rabbanut is permitted
to treat it, from a halachic perspective, as being legalised fornication
producing no marital status, on the assumption that those opting for it when
halachic marriage is available are excluding themselves from chazakah ein adam
oseh beilato beilat zenut [the presumption that people prefer to be
halachically married].
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Orrin Tilevitz <tilevitzo@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Genuine converts
Regarding Rabbi Wise's point (MJ 63#09) that according to Rav Goren the
Yerushalmi took a more lenient position on converts, a point of information:
At least at one point, conversion certificates issued by Rav Goren had a caveat,
"ein lo tokef michutz laaretz [this certificate has no authority outside of
Israel]".
I had always thought that this was intended merely to encourage the convert not
to leave Israel. Maybe there was more to it. However, a rav in the U.S.,
presented with this certificate and a question of what to do about it, asked Rav
Goren about it on one of his trips to the U.S., and his response was "es is
gornisht [it is nothing]. I'll erase it if you want."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yisrael Medad <yisrael.medad@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 03:01 AM
Subject: Genuine Jews (was Genuine converts)
Martin Stern writes (MJ 63#09) in our continuing odyssey on the issue of
conversions that
"It would, therefore, be helpful if Yisrael could clarify...".
Instead of that, let's muddle things up more.
If the concern is that non-Jews are converting but with no true/genuine
intention of observing halachic Judaism, in other words non-observance is the
measure of one's Judaism, what could develop is, despite Rabbinic prouncements
such as A Jew, even though he has sinned, is still a Jew (Sanhedrin 44a), that
certain Rabbis of a certain strain of Judaism could adopt a certain stricture
that would begin to seek to deny the Judaism of Jews born Jewish from the start.
Then what?
Yisrael Medad
Shiloh
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 02:01 AM
Subject: Notifying the congregation
Carl Singer wrote (MJ 63#09):
> Perhaps one issue is WHEN does davening begin AND whether that time is adhered
> to.
>
> There are some congregations where the Shatz stands staring at the wall clock
> and the moment the time is reached he begins.
>
> There are others where davening starts "on or about" -- and this uncertainty
> usually results in talking continuing until everyone realizes that the
> davening has, indeed, begun.
Unfortunately, in the first case, even though the Shatz stands staring at the
wall clock and the moment the time is reached he begins, the bulk of the tzibbur
in most places, in my experience, is NOT watching it and DOES continue talking
unless he raises his voice sufficiently, usually when he gets to kaddish.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Isaac Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Notifying the congregation
Yisrael Medad wrote (MJ 63#09):
> Orrin Tilevitz suggests (MJ 63#08) that, to notify the congregation, a flag
> should be waved as that's what they did in Alexandria to let people know when to
> say "Amen". (Sukkah 51a)
>
> And for those behind the mechitza, especially in the back rows (the front row
> women may be peeking)?
And what about it? If the flag is high enough they will see it as well as the
men in the back rows, especially as the men's side often is bigger.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Martin Stern <md.stern@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 05:01 AM
Subject: Sexual harassment
Leah S. R. Gordon wrote (MJ 63#09)
> The acquittal of one Orthodox man from one groping incident on one bus, hardly
> implies that sexual harassment, even by Jews, isn't a problem.
Nobody has ever suggested otherwise
> I found this article to be subtly biased against the actress. For example,
> why mention that this guy is the father of 13? Why emphasize that the actress
> why mention was "young"?
I think the reporter wanted to suggest he was "ultra-Orthodox" and therefore,
prima facie, suspect, i.e. the subtle bias was against him rather than her.
> In no way does one acquittal imply that men are somehow under attack by women
> looking to make accusations. One case of an Orthodox man also does not in a
> vacuum imply anything about Jews being accused. I don't even follow that
> logic.
One acquittal does not imply that men, in general, never harass women. What it
does imply that one cannot presume that EVERY man is a potential rapist unless
proven otherwise - which seemed to be the lady's perception.
> Women get groped *all the time* in public places, and we get
> comments/whistles/stares nearly daily, in spite of minding our own business
> while dressed modestly.
Of course, this is unacceptable behaviour.
> I say, kudos to the woman for calling out what she perceived to be
> inappropriate behavior (and what we cannot be sure was appropriate, but only
> beyond proof in a court of law - I don't need to remind Martin that in modern
> courtrooms, acquittal is different from innocence). We on M.J have basically
> no data as to what this guy's intentions were.
Unless it must be presumed that EVERY man is a potential rapist until proven
otherwise, why did this case take almost a year come to court, only to be
dismissed by the jury in ten minutes?
> In my unfortunately nonzero experience with such things, women are very
> sensitive to their bodies/space being invaded by this kind of contact. I do
> wonder why this man felt the need to sit by this woman on a bus with other
> seats available. If it happened to me, I would be uncomfortable and might
> even ask him to take one of the other seats (or move myself) - because more
> often than not, this is exactly how harassers behave.
He gave a very good reason why he chose that seat - that he chose it because it
had good views out of the front and sides of the bus so he knew when to get off.
Why should a woman be entitled to tell a man not to sit next to her while a man
is not allowed to ask not to sit next to a woman? I also often have to sit next
to women on buses because there are very few seats with sufficient space for my
femurally-challenged legs. Usually I explain my choice so I would be quite
insulted if the woman ordered me to sit somewhere else. Leah's claim seems to me
to be a not very subtle example of gender bias. How would she react to a man
asking her to move from the seat next to where he was already sitting - a case
of sauce for the goose ...
> But a bus with open seating is quite different from an airplane with crowded
> conditions and seating assigned by the airline (i.e. not open to abuse by a
> man who is looking for trouble). As to whether an Orthodox man should behave
> like a toddler throwing a tantrum if asked by public accommodation (e.g.
> airplane) to take his seat next to a woman, the answer is still clearly, "it's
> offensive"
Of course throwing tantrums is beyond the pale but why do some women take
offence at a polite request? If there is a particular reason why she has chosen
a specific seat, that is one thing but, just to refuse to accommodate someone
because he is "an ultra-Orthodox fanatic" strikes me as an example of prejudice.
Perhaps, on routes where such men travel frequently, it would be best if the
airline gave the option at book-in to choose the gender of the person in
adjacent seats. This may not always be possible but refusal to consider it would
show a level of intolerance. From what Leah has written, it would seem that such
an option might be attractive to some women as well.
> and if there were more normalized gender relations (as have been the case
> throughout Jewish history; this strict segregation is *not* required), then it
> wouldn't even be a question.
I agree entirely with Leah that halachah does not demand that a man not sit
next to a woman on the bus (except his own wife under certain circumstances)
as ruled by R. Mosheh Feinstein z"l, but we are discussing stringencies taken
on in certain circles and I feel that, everything else being equal, true
tolerance means we should try to accommodate other people's 'meshugassen'.
> All research shows that groping/harassment behavior is worse among people who
> have strict gender separation/segregation in their culture, as Martin should
> know from reading all of the controversy about the middle-eastern immigrants
> coming to more open EU societies and resulting rates of sexual harassment.
While this may be the case with "middle-eastern immigrants coming to more open
EU societies", I do not know of any reseach that shows it also applies to men
from chareidi circles. It is more likely that this is unwarranted extrapolation
by those who are inherently prejudiced against this sector of the population.
Martin Stern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Isaac Balbin <isaac@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 06:01 AM
Subject: Sexual harassment
Leah S. R. Gordon wrote (MJ 63#09):
> The acquittal of one Orthodox man from one groping incident on one bus, hardly
> implies that sexual harassment, even by Jews, isn't a problem.
And who, pray tell did imply this, if not the paper who reported it proudly?
> I found this article to be subtly biased against the actress. For example,
> why mention that this guy is the father of 13?
To tell us that he had extreme sexual urges of course and wasn't satisfied and
was more likely to do such a thing.
> Why emphasize that the actress was "young?
Because he'd be more attracted to her
> In no way does one acquittal imply that men are somehow under attack by women
> looking to make accusations.
In many ways it shows that the above assumptions should never be made and issues
that are not relevant should not be reported. If a woman gropes a man on the
bus, does it interest me if she had a broken home. It does, in that it might
mitigate her sentence, but not her guilt.
> One case of an Orthodox man also does not in a vacuum imply anything about
> Jews being accused. I don't even follow that logic.
Ah, thats because there is a vacuum. You see, Orthodox men are likely
statistically to be underrepresented in such things, and therefore this is big
news and accordingly needs to have the story completed.
> Women get groped *all the time* in public places, and we get comments/whistles
> /stares nearly daily, in spite of minding our own business while dressed
> modestly.
Funny, I'm on public transport every day, and I rarely if ever see this. Is the
air different in the USA?
> I say, kudos to the woman for calling out what she perceived to be
> inappropriate behavior (and what we cannot be sure was appropriate, but only
> beyond proof in a court of law - I don't need to remind Martin that in modern
> courtrooms, acquittal is different from innocence). We on M.J have basically
> no data as to what this guy's intentions were.
And for that reason, the Kudos is misplaced. She could be a borderline
schizophrenic. The finality of the issue should have been reported so that women
know they are not less safe on a bus with a man who has 13 kids.
> In my unfortunately nonzero experience with such things, women are very
> sensitive to their bodies/space being invaded by this kind of contact.
I am a man, and there are female non-Jewish colleagues who, despite my beard,
tzitzis hanging out, yarmulka, etc, occasionally do things which I consider to
be unacceptable, but for them its just a token of mateship. I could complain,
but I wouldn't.
> I do wonder why this man felt the need to sit by this woman on a bus with
> other seats available. If it happened to me, I would be uncomfortable and
> might even ask him to take one of the other seats (or move myself) - because
> more often than not, this is exactly how harassers behave.
More often than not. Where do you get your stats from? Did you see the bus? Do
you know how many seats which were just as good were available? Was he nervous
about getting off at the right stop (as I often am). Your rhetoric is laden. For
this reason, the case should have been reported and you, I believe, should never
sit on a jury.
> But a bus with open seating is quite different from an airplane with crowded
> conditions and seating assigned by the airline (i.e. not open to abuse by a
> man who is looking for trouble).
Really? I have read of horrid things on airplanes, especially in the better
sections.
> As to whether an Orthodox man should behave like a toddler throwing a tantrum
> if asked by public accommodation (e.g. airplane) to take his seat next to a
> woman, the answer is still clearly, "it's offensive" - and if there were more
> normalized gender relations (as have been the case throughout Jewish history;
> this strict segregation is *not* required), then it wouldn't even be a
> question.
Gender relations in Judaism are not regulated by what you feel is right. If a
man politely asks to sit elsewhere, and doesn't make the issue known, I see no
issue. If he will insult someone in the process, then he might bury his head in
a Gemora. On the other hand, if he's sitting next to YOU, I'm not sure what
you'd make of him. He'd be wrong either way.
> All research shows that groping/harassment behavior is worse among people who
> have strict gender separation/segregation in their culture, as Martin should
> know from reading all of the controversy about the middle-eastern immigrants
> coming to more open EU societies and resulting rates of sexual harassment.
Please quote the research. The gropers in Melbourne, seem to be pretty carefree,
and it's usually alcohol and drugs not segregation that disinhibits them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank Silbermann <frank_silbermann@...>
Date: Sun, Nov 20,2016 at 09:01 AM
Subject: Sexual harassment
Leah S. R. Gordon wrote (MJ 63#09):
> The acquittal of one Orthodox man from one groping incident on one bus
> hardly implies that sexual harassment, even by Jews, isn't a problem. ... (nor)
> that men are somehow under attack by women looking to make accusations.
> ...
> a bus with open seating is quite different from an airplane with crowded
> conditions and seating assigned by the airline (i.e. not open to abuse by a man
> who is looking for trouble).
Perhaps some Orthodox men on planes insist on being seated away from women so as
not to become 'guilty' of sexual harassment or groping.
> All research shows that groping/harassment behavior is worse among
> people who have strict gender separation/segregation in their culture.
Or, as those who adopt these extra-strict measures might put it -- the greater
the man, the greater his Yetzer haRa (evil inclination).
:-)
Frank Silbermann
Memphis, Tennessee
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Volume 63 Issue 10