Jump to content


Photo

Hadarat Nashim


  • Please log in to reply
570 replies to this topic

#1 Indigo

Indigo

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,723 posts

Posted 15 January 2012 - 12:19 AM

http://www.siawi.org/article2905.html

Apparently the phrase for the orthodox power structure making women disappear is hadarat nashim.

#2 Snag

Snag

    מי זה מחשיך עצה

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,041 posts

Posted 15 January 2012 - 07:11 AM

If we seek accuracy, it should be ha'adarat nashim, I'm guessing.
" All my life I have tried to pluck a thistle and plant a flower wherever the flower would grow in thought and mind."

#3 warren

warren

    click vegetable

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,910 posts

Posted 16 January 2012 - 04:55 PM

If we seek accuracy, it should be ha'adarat nashim, I'm guessing.

The word being used is הדרה, from the root נד"ר - according to the link it's a recent word, meaning "exclusion".
Poe's law: without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between sincere extremism and an exaggerated parody of extremism.

Demand the impossible! everyone will be free

#4 Snag

Snag

    מי זה מחשיך עצה

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,041 posts

Posted 16 January 2012 - 05:09 PM

The word being used is הדרה, from the root נד"ר - according to the link it's a recent word, meaning "exclusion".

Oops, my bad. I wasn't familiar with that word, so I guessed העדר.
" All my life I have tried to pluck a thistle and plant a flower wherever the flower would grow in thought and mind."

#5 warren

warren

    click vegetable

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,910 posts

Posted 18 January 2012 - 12:11 PM

Ynet: "New in Modiin Illit: Segregated elevators"

Walla has an article in Hebrew, and a photo of the announcement.
Posted Image
Poe's law: without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between sincere extremism and an exaggerated parody of extremism.

Demand the impossible! everyone will be free

#6 Jeanette

Jeanette

    Janitor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 198 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 12:23 PM

It should be הדרסת נשים

#7 Snag

Snag

    מי זה מחשיך עצה

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,041 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 12:53 PM

It should be הדרסת נשים

that wouldn't be tznius...
" All my life I have tried to pluck a thistle and plant a flower wherever the flower would grow in thought and mind."

#8 Dan

Dan

    Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,751 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 01:55 PM

Does anyone think that having separate elevators is not a more positive thing, halachically speaking?

#9 Indigo

Indigo

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,723 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 02:12 PM

Does anyone think that having separate elevators is not a more positive thing, halachically speaking?

Me.
Why is it positive? Because of yichud? Is it even yichud?
And against that there are all sorts of reasons that this is problematic halachically. It's a michshol for judging people when they take the non-frummie mixed elevators. It's a michshol b/c then when separation is actually halachically mandated, people are going to think it's just as stupid as requiring separate elevators.
Increasing separation is no a slam dunk as more positive. That's why there are burka babes. Because they think the more machmir you are the better necessarily.
And I don't think having to take an elevator separate from my wife is positive.

Plus it's a traffic flow issue. It will delay getting to where you are going.
If there is only one elevator you can take, and not a choice of two, it will necessarily take you longer.

I don't see this as any more halachically positive than separate seating in buses.
If you want to do it, fine, but it's not like there isn't a downside. And don't impose it on others.

#10 Dan

Dan

    Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,751 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:39 PM

I don't see this as any more halachically positive than separate seating in buses.
If you want to do it, fine, but it's not like there isn't a downside. And don't impose it on others.

Separate seating on buses is also a positive.

Look, obviously i'm not a tzaddik, nor a person of halachic authority, but its obvious to me that with the pritzus these days (i.e. lack of proper dress), it is much easier to be a proper jew with these separations. i personally, during aseres ymei tshuva, tried to be makpid on shmiras einayim. just to give an example of how hard it was, i had to stare at the knob of the door on the bus going to yeshiva in order for me to not be seeing something i shouldn't (this is a non-mehadrin bus). (or close my eyes). who's to blame is a different point - the main thing i want to bring out from that is that for a boy who's trying to keep the only image of a woman in his head to be his wife, and if he wants to not see things he shouldnt be, its very hard. so, is it proper to enforce this in a public transportation - probably not (since, unfortunately, this is not a halachically or jewishly run state), but is there a strong positive reason for it, yes.

#11 Indigo

Indigo

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,723 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:45 PM

If you dont want to sit next to a woman or ride an elevator fine. But you are imposing your standards on others.

And I would argue these public displays of excessive piety not demanded by halacha are a violation of yuhora.

Further I dont believe the driving force is piety and fear of rape and masturbation, lo aleinu. I believe what is driving this nonsense is a desire to disempower and disenfranchise women, using halachic argumentation as an excuse and smokescreen.



#12 Dan

Dan

    Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,751 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 04:24 PM

1) If you dont want to sit next to a woman or ride an elevator fine. But you are imposing your standards on others.

2) And I would argue these public displays of excessive piety not demanded by halacha are a violation of yuhora.

3) Further I dont believe the driving force is piety and fear of rape and masturbation, lo aleinu. I believe what is driving this nonsense is a desire to disempower and disenfranchise women, using halachic argumentation as an excuse and smokescreen.


1) I discussed that. If it's privately owned, they can do whatever they want.
2) It's not excessive, and its not piety. It's assur to look at improperly clad women. And the part of your wife being the only woman, thats in OC and EH.
3) False. At least in the frum/yeshiva world that I'm in.

#13 Indigo

Indigo

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,723 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 04:54 PM

1) I discussed that. If it's privately owned, they can do whatever they want.
2) It's not excessive, and its not piety. It's assur to look at improperly clad women. And the part of your wife being the only woman, thats in OC and EH.
3) False. At least in the frum/yeshiva world that I'm in.

1) Yes and no.
2) So don't look. Do what gedolim used to do, and quietly and without fuss get off the bus. Or quietly and without fuss take the stairs rather than the elevator. Or that story in Making of a Gadol...quietly and without fuss wait outside till the cleaning lady finishes.
3) It's counterproductive. I don't think this shmirat eiynayim business actually cuts down on masturbation or molestation in that community. It just makes them crazier when they do see a woman.

#14 Moshi

Moshi

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,543 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 05:07 PM

3) It's counterproductive. I don't think this shmirat eiynayim business actually cuts down on masturbation or molestation in that community. It just makes them crazier when they do see a woman.


Diminishing returns.

#15 Indigo

Indigo

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,723 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 06:46 PM

Or that story in Making of a Gadol...quietly and without fuss wait outside till the cleaning lady finishes.


oh man... I totally mis-remembered that story.

It's here, page xxi-xxiii
about R. Yitzchak Kulitz
http://dl.dropbox.co...1RFMA%3D%3D.pdf

#16 short

short

    Student

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 299 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 10:09 PM

Separate seating on buses is also a positive.

Look, obviously i'm not a tzaddik, nor a person of halachic authority, but its obvious to me that with the pritzus these days (i.e. lack of proper dress), it is much easier to be a proper jew with these separations. i personally, during aseres ymei tshuva, tried to be makpid on shmiras einayim. just to give an example of how hard it was, i had to stare at the knob of the door on the bus going to yeshiva in order for me to not be seeing something i shouldn't (this is a non-mehadrin bus). (or close my eyes). who's to blame is a different point - the main thing i want to bring out from that is that for a boy who's trying to keep the only image of a woman in his head to be his wife, and if he wants to not see things he shouldnt be, its very hard. so, is it proper to enforce this in a public transportation - probably not (since, unfortunately, this is not a halachically or jewishly run state), but is there a strong positive reason for it, yes.

Mehadrin buses and similar restrictions can and are only implemented among the super-frum anyway, and please don't say that frum women are so immodest as to be a distraction.

Shmiras einayim is important, and the onus is on men to keep it. The onus should NOT be on frum women to have to hide or told to disappear. I don't know if you're single or married, but surely you don't think there's anything wrong with sitting next to one's spouse on a bus.

Personally I'm of the opinion that a bus that runs a mostly 'frum' route would self-segregate to some degree, as women will choose to sit next to women and vice versa for men.

#17 warren

warren

    click vegetable

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,910 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 03:40 AM

It should be הדרסת נשים

that wouldn't be tznius...

What does that mean? If you were trying to say "trampling of women" (the only thing I can come up with using the root דר"ס), that would be דריסת נשים.
Poe's law: without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between sincere extremism and an exaggerated parody of extremism.

Demand the impossible! everyone will be free

#18 greentiger

greentiger

    TA

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 806 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 05:58 AM

i was watching a documentary last night about a tribe in new guinea. The tribal man is showing the tv interviewer the sleeping quarters/huts, and takes him into the hut shared by the women and the pigs.
Interviewer: (suprised) why don't they sleep with you?
Naked painted tribal man: (confused) the pigs??

Haha glad we haven't yet reached that point.

#19 Snag

Snag

    מי זה מחשיך עצה

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,041 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 06:39 AM

What does that mean? If you were trying to say "trampling of women" (the only thing I can come up with using the root דר"ס), that would be דריסת נשים.

Drisat would be direct, hadrasat would be indirect "the causing to be trampled of" or something to that effect.
" All my life I have tried to pluck a thistle and plant a flower wherever the flower would grow in thought and mind."

#20 Indigo

Indigo

    Dean

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,723 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 06:52 AM

It is more tznius to cause women to be trampled than to directly trample them.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users