I don't know how many of you know "The Logical Song" by Supertramp. When it first came out, I fell in love with it. I loved it originally because of the music. The words were nice, but didn't really stand out too much for me back then.
But now, the words ring out as being so true. "Watch what you say," one line goes, "they'll be calling you a radical, liberal, fanatical criminal. Won't you sign up your name, we'd like to feel you're acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable!" It's really amazing just how true those words sound 24 years later.
It is the same thing with the word "feminist". People bandy this word about, pro or con, without necessarily understanding what it means. I doesn't apply only women. It doesn't mean people who think women are better. And it certainly doesn't mean people who think women and men ought to be indistinguishable.
What it does refer to is people who believe that a person's worth and identity should not be defined by their gender. It does mean that women have capabilities that transcend the kitchen and the bedroom.
Mr. Yehezkel Bin-Nun, in his article "Consequences of the Masculine Movement" in the September 4, 2003 issue of Arutz Sheva, shows the lengths to which anti-feminist, misogynist men will go to discredit the feminist movement. In what I call "creeping Christianity", Mr. Bin-Nun falls prey to the Christian vision of women as either Madonnas or Temptresses. To Mr. Bin-Nun, feminists are the temptresses of the Yetzer Hara.
Women are treated unequally to men. Women earn less money than men for the same job. And, often, women are their family's main "breadwinner". This devalues women and it devalues families that are headed by women. Feminists, by the way - true feminists, that is, not those who misuse the term - believe that men who are househusbands or stay home with their children are no less valuable for their roles than their salaried co-genderists. Feminists also know that there is no such thing as a non-working mother. True feminists have fought for women's traditional role to be valued within our financially-obsessed society. True feminists have fought for paternity leave and recognition of the monetary value of housewifing. True feminists understand that men are capable of being teachers, nurses, hairdressers, interior decorators. True feminists understand that women are capable of being principals, doctors, astronauts, engineers.
To address several of Mr. Bin-Nun?s specific points:
Why is defending yourself, your children, your home, your country, your homeland, your people a bad thing? Why do you feel, Mr. Bin-Nun, the need to disparage women who participate in the defense of Hashem's people? I think it is admirable that religious women, who aren't legally required to serve in Israel's army as are their secular sisters, should choose to perform a Kiddush Hashem by showing how important they think defense of their country is to them.
Why do you think that feminism doesn't promote feminine values? Maybe you feel that women are only capable of love and that (and only that) is how we, as women, should define ourselves and our femininity? Strength is also a feminine value.
I also notice, Mr. Bin-Nun, that you define anything feminists consider "equal" as necessarily "acting like a man". I am a feminist. I am an unabashed feminist. I am a religious feminist. And I make no bones about it. I act as I believe I ought to as a Jew, as a woman, as a person. And I doubt anyone would accuse me of acting like a man, even when I play volleyball or softball or attend synagogue services or even when I read the Torah at our Women's Tefillah Group or learn Gemara in one of our local synagogues. As a matter of fact, when I learn Gemara with the "guys", I interject a woman's perspective. And the men in the class (this includes the rabbi who is teaching the class) gain some insights into the feminine world.
I doubt anyone in town would mistake me for a man, despite my wearing pants. Even if it weren't for my shape, which is decidedly feminine, the pants I wear are certainly women's wear, as is the way I wear them. Please tell me, by the way, what is it that makes pants "men's clothing"? Men don't have a waist as women do, and that's why so many men need belts to keep their pants from sliding down. Women, on the other hand, have a nice little indentation in their torsos perfectly suited for pants to rest.
As for a career being important, women have had careers throughout history. "The World's Oldest Profession" has relatively few male practitioners. Women were teachers, governesses, judges, nurses, wet nurses, midwifes. Women were prophetesses, military leaders, even mohels. Women often need to support their families or themselves. And, unfortunately, life being what it is, economics being what they are, no one, male or female, can survive without some means of support. It is very important for everyone, male or female, to be able to support him/herself in this world.
I also can't understand how you can think that feminism leads to an increase in violence, Mr. Bin-Nun. How do you figure that, when one of the most violent societies in the world is also the society that most suppresses women and most relegates them to inferior substandard status? And, just in case you aren't quite certain which society I'm talking about, I am referring Israel's neighbors. No other society I know of on this earth keeps women in a more subservient role. And no other society I know of on this earth is more violent. They are not only violent against "the other" (read: Israelis, Jews, Americans), they are violent against their own subservient women. Men regularly murder their daughters. Women are killed for being out and about without a male escort. Women are killed for not totally covering their bodies. Women are not permitted to be educated. How can this be looked at as a preferred way of living? How can this be equated with Torah living?
Mr. Bin-Nun, you seem to confuse cause and effect. Just because violent crime has risen in some countries over some of the time that feminism has been popular (ever hear of Susan B. Anthony, Emelline Pankhurst, Amelia Bloomer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Elizabeth Blackwell? They were feminists too. They were feminists long before Kennedy's Camelot and miniskirts, long before WWII, for that matter, long before rising violence in Western Society) doesn't mean that feminism causes increased violence. The rise of violence also coincides with the rise in illicit drug use. I would think illicit drugs - though I am not saying they are definitively the cause of increased violence - might be more closely connected to violence than feminism.
True feminists do not consider motherhood to be wimpy. On the contrary. We believe motherhood is not for the weak of heart. We extol motherhood. We value motherhood more highly than the anti-feminist world does. It is men who measure value by the ?almighty buck?. I doubt, Mr. Bin-Nun, that you know terribly many true feminists.
I also question your use of the word halacha. Seems to me, you use it to mean only your interpretation of halacha, Mr. Bin-Nun. This is why it is very important for women to study halacha and to study the "river" of halacha to understand the foundation as well as the current rabbinic opinions on these matters. Halacha, Mr. Bin-Nun, is not monolithic. There is not only one way of interpreting halacha. And there are many differing rabbinic opinions on almost every issue.
In a time when women didn't learn much in the religious or secular world, as in Maimonides's time, it was appropriate to discourage women from learning Gemara. Until about 100 years ago or so, girls weren't given yeshiva educations. Now, there are very few rabbis who would say that girls shouldn't be given yeshiva educations. Also keep in mind that not everything that Maimonides says in his halachic literature is part and parcel of practical halacha in 5763.
I also see, Mr. Bin-Nun, that you feel the need to blame feminism for all the ills of society. You seem to blame feminism for the debacle known as "Oslo". Sorry to say, Mr. Bin-Nun, feminism, even the misguided vision you have of it, is not the only evil in this world. It is not the cause of all the evil in this world. To read the Torah is to understand that Hashem is a feminist.
You fall prey to creeping Christianity again, Mr. Bin-Nun. You see all things that you define as "secular" as evil. G-d put both gashmiyut (referring to the physical world) and ruhniyut (referring to the spiritual world) in this world. It is important for us to raise both. It is our job on this earth that Hashem has given us to find the Torah value in all things.
Three of the four imahot (foremothers) had trouble conceiving children. The rabbis ask why this is. My answer is simple. Hashem wanted people to know that a woman's worth is not solely her ability to have children. Sara was 90 before she contributed that womanly offering. But Sara's value predated Yitzhak's birth. Remember that, Mr. Bin-Nun, when you accuse Orthodox Feminists of rejecting the Torah.
But now, the words ring out as being so true. "Watch what you say," one line goes, "they'll be calling you a radical, liberal, fanatical criminal. Won't you sign up your name, we'd like to feel you're acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable!" It's really amazing just how true those words sound 24 years later.
It is the same thing with the word "feminist". People bandy this word about, pro or con, without necessarily understanding what it means. I doesn't apply only women. It doesn't mean people who think women are better. And it certainly doesn't mean people who think women and men ought to be indistinguishable.
What it does refer to is people who believe that a person's worth and identity should not be defined by their gender. It does mean that women have capabilities that transcend the kitchen and the bedroom.
Mr. Yehezkel Bin-Nun, in his article "Consequences of the Masculine Movement" in the September 4, 2003 issue of Arutz Sheva, shows the lengths to which anti-feminist, misogynist men will go to discredit the feminist movement. In what I call "creeping Christianity", Mr. Bin-Nun falls prey to the Christian vision of women as either Madonnas or Temptresses. To Mr. Bin-Nun, feminists are the temptresses of the Yetzer Hara.
Women are treated unequally to men. Women earn less money than men for the same job. And, often, women are their family's main "breadwinner". This devalues women and it devalues families that are headed by women. Feminists, by the way - true feminists, that is, not those who misuse the term - believe that men who are househusbands or stay home with their children are no less valuable for their roles than their salaried co-genderists. Feminists also know that there is no such thing as a non-working mother. True feminists have fought for women's traditional role to be valued within our financially-obsessed society. True feminists have fought for paternity leave and recognition of the monetary value of housewifing. True feminists understand that men are capable of being teachers, nurses, hairdressers, interior decorators. True feminists understand that women are capable of being principals, doctors, astronauts, engineers.
To address several of Mr. Bin-Nun?s specific points:
Why is defending yourself, your children, your home, your country, your homeland, your people a bad thing? Why do you feel, Mr. Bin-Nun, the need to disparage women who participate in the defense of Hashem's people? I think it is admirable that religious women, who aren't legally required to serve in Israel's army as are their secular sisters, should choose to perform a Kiddush Hashem by showing how important they think defense of their country is to them.
Why do you think that feminism doesn't promote feminine values? Maybe you feel that women are only capable of love and that (and only that) is how we, as women, should define ourselves and our femininity? Strength is also a feminine value.
I also notice, Mr. Bin-Nun, that you define anything feminists consider "equal" as necessarily "acting like a man". I am a feminist. I am an unabashed feminist. I am a religious feminist. And I make no bones about it. I act as I believe I ought to as a Jew, as a woman, as a person. And I doubt anyone would accuse me of acting like a man, even when I play volleyball or softball or attend synagogue services or even when I read the Torah at our Women's Tefillah Group or learn Gemara in one of our local synagogues. As a matter of fact, when I learn Gemara with the "guys", I interject a woman's perspective. And the men in the class (this includes the rabbi who is teaching the class) gain some insights into the feminine world.
I doubt anyone in town would mistake me for a man, despite my wearing pants. Even if it weren't for my shape, which is decidedly feminine, the pants I wear are certainly women's wear, as is the way I wear them. Please tell me, by the way, what is it that makes pants "men's clothing"? Men don't have a waist as women do, and that's why so many men need belts to keep their pants from sliding down. Women, on the other hand, have a nice little indentation in their torsos perfectly suited for pants to rest.
As for a career being important, women have had careers throughout history. "The World's Oldest Profession" has relatively few male practitioners. Women were teachers, governesses, judges, nurses, wet nurses, midwifes. Women were prophetesses, military leaders, even mohels. Women often need to support their families or themselves. And, unfortunately, life being what it is, economics being what they are, no one, male or female, can survive without some means of support. It is very important for everyone, male or female, to be able to support him/herself in this world.
I also can't understand how you can think that feminism leads to an increase in violence, Mr. Bin-Nun. How do you figure that, when one of the most violent societies in the world is also the society that most suppresses women and most relegates them to inferior substandard status? And, just in case you aren't quite certain which society I'm talking about, I am referring Israel's neighbors. No other society I know of on this earth keeps women in a more subservient role. And no other society I know of on this earth is more violent. They are not only violent against "the other" (read: Israelis, Jews, Americans), they are violent against their own subservient women. Men regularly murder their daughters. Women are killed for being out and about without a male escort. Women are killed for not totally covering their bodies. Women are not permitted to be educated. How can this be looked at as a preferred way of living? How can this be equated with Torah living?
Mr. Bin-Nun, you seem to confuse cause and effect. Just because violent crime has risen in some countries over some of the time that feminism has been popular (ever hear of Susan B. Anthony, Emelline Pankhurst, Amelia Bloomer, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Elizabeth Blackwell? They were feminists too. They were feminists long before Kennedy's Camelot and miniskirts, long before WWII, for that matter, long before rising violence in Western Society) doesn't mean that feminism causes increased violence. The rise of violence also coincides with the rise in illicit drug use. I would think illicit drugs - though I am not saying they are definitively the cause of increased violence - might be more closely connected to violence than feminism.
True feminists do not consider motherhood to be wimpy. On the contrary. We believe motherhood is not for the weak of heart. We extol motherhood. We value motherhood more highly than the anti-feminist world does. It is men who measure value by the ?almighty buck?. I doubt, Mr. Bin-Nun, that you know terribly many true feminists.
I also question your use of the word halacha. Seems to me, you use it to mean only your interpretation of halacha, Mr. Bin-Nun. This is why it is very important for women to study halacha and to study the "river" of halacha to understand the foundation as well as the current rabbinic opinions on these matters. Halacha, Mr. Bin-Nun, is not monolithic. There is not only one way of interpreting halacha. And there are many differing rabbinic opinions on almost every issue.
In a time when women didn't learn much in the religious or secular world, as in Maimonides's time, it was appropriate to discourage women from learning Gemara. Until about 100 years ago or so, girls weren't given yeshiva educations. Now, there are very few rabbis who would say that girls shouldn't be given yeshiva educations. Also keep in mind that not everything that Maimonides says in his halachic literature is part and parcel of practical halacha in 5763.
I also see, Mr. Bin-Nun, that you feel the need to blame feminism for all the ills of society. You seem to blame feminism for the debacle known as "Oslo". Sorry to say, Mr. Bin-Nun, feminism, even the misguided vision you have of it, is not the only evil in this world. It is not the cause of all the evil in this world. To read the Torah is to understand that Hashem is a feminist.
You fall prey to creeping Christianity again, Mr. Bin-Nun. You see all things that you define as "secular" as evil. G-d put both gashmiyut (referring to the physical world) and ruhniyut (referring to the spiritual world) in this world. It is important for us to raise both. It is our job on this earth that Hashem has given us to find the Torah value in all things.
Three of the four imahot (foremothers) had trouble conceiving children. The rabbis ask why this is. My answer is simple. Hashem wanted people to know that a woman's worth is not solely her ability to have children. Sara was 90 before she contributed that womanly offering. But Sara's value predated Yitzhak's birth. Remember that, Mr. Bin-Nun, when you accuse Orthodox Feminists of rejecting the Torah.