Kikar reports that Rav mutsafi is upset that rabbonim are giving shiurim to women. He even somehow connects this to the spread of the Corona virus, saying that the deadly virus is spreading around the world and the Heavens are signalling with every alarm "you want to go to the women?"..

Rav Mutsafi says that never before did rabbonim give shiurim to women, but women were int he womens section of the shul and heard the drasha just like the men - suddenly the women cant hear the drasha in the shul?

Rav Mutsafi then refers to, and criticizes, some rabbonim who say they go to give such shiurim but when they enter and leave they close their eyes so as not to see the women. He calls it a joke, even worse - leitzanus. Women should be giving shiurim and surely there are enough learned women who can speak before women!

Rav Mutsafi further asks, are all the men taken care of? the issues of the men have all been dealt with that all that remains is the women? Have you checked if the men are davening? and how they daven? Are they learning regularly and consistently?  they aren't out smoking a bong and chewing gat? Look how they attack the food table at different events, he says!

Honestly, many many years ago I remember commenting similarly about girls schools and seminaries that are run by men with many male teachers. In a community where we are so strict about separating genders and tzniyus and are strict about not creating situations where men would look at women, it is strange that when ti comes to these schools so many men are administrators in these schools and teachers. Yes, now many such schools have many female teachers and even some women running the schools, but there are still many men involved in many of the schools for women.

I find his comment about there still being enough work  for teachers with the men to be funny. I commiserate with his issue, somewhat.  I am not against men teaching women, per se. I just think we should teach consistency. If you believe there should be no contact between men and women [who are not married to each other], then men should also not be teaching women. Nowadays there are many women who are educated and scholarly and knowledgeable who can, and do, teach. And yes, I know [of] rabbis who do not give shiurim to women only.

Recently, after the issue with the event to benefit Rav Firer's organization was canceled because of a public outcry against the "hadarat nashim" of not allowing female performers to perform for what would be an overwhelmingly secular audience, many pointed to an event that would be for women only by female performers, also for the secular public, and claimed hypocrisy that from the mens side it is considered discrimination while from the womens side it is allowed to happen. One person even petitioned the Ministry of Justice to weigh in on the event in question and offer an opinion if this is a problem of discrimination or not.

The Ministry of Justice has now responded that the specific event in question was not researched by them as the petition came in too close to the event to allow such treatment. That being said, the MoJ says that there is no discrimination against men in Israel, so an event that excludes men is not "hadara" - men do not suffer from being excluded. While men are not excluded or banned, from the public sphere, women do suffer greatly from this, so events excluding women are a strong offense. That is why female-only events can happen but male-only events (from public funding) are a problem.

Personally I think of this like affirmative action. African Americans in the USA, or Hispanics or other minorities, get priority in hiring or acceptance into schools, because they have been discriminated against for so long and have suffered from the discrimination. Whites do not suffer from such discrimination, so occasionally they get the short end of the stick but have to live with it. In Israel, the Haredi askanim fight for affirmative action for hiring Haredim in government jobs, Arabs get affirmative action in acceptance to universities and specifically medical school. The average Jew (male I guess) in Israel is not discriminated against, so even though affirmative action means occasionally the average jew might get the short end of the stick, that is not discrimination, or hadara.

The following announcement for a lecture was posted online this morning:


It strikes many people as funny, as ironic, even as inappropriate. Two men are going to lecture a room full of women about how great it is to be a Jewish princess? can they be more patronizing? can they be more patriarchal?

Somebody later made a spoof, a parody, of the ad, in order to highlight the absurdity of it. I don't know who made it but I am told it was not either of the two women in the spoofed ad. And here it is:



It is really funny, and the juxtaposition of the two ads really makes one wonder.

But one thing bothered me about the entire discussion.

the one thing I dont get about all the shock and irony expressed in these two rabbis giving a talk to women about a womanly topic is that most of the women who will be in attendance went to high schools and seminaries where most of the teachers talking to them and lecturing to them about every topic under the sun including topics about women and judaism were almost all male. So suddenly it is ironic? suddenly it is inappropriate? This is the system in orthodox judaism where the overwhelming majority of the teachers are male. maybe that should change, but do they really deserve so much scorn?

As an aside, I would note I am in favor of such change. I advocated for more female teachers and administrators in seminaries and girls high schools many years ago on this blog, especially from a tzniyus perspective (with there being so much stress and focus on tzniyus) as it seems to me somehow a tzniyus problem to have the male principal and teachers around these young women all day long and probably in many inappropriate situations. That is besides for the issue of the young women needing more frum female role models.

This past Tuesday was International Woman's Day. The day is marked by celebrating the achievements of women in various aspects of live - social, political, cultural, etc.

I am not sure why they need a whole day dedicated to women, but I guess if pirates can get a day (FYI: September 19) women can as well.

MK David Biton (Likud) thinks that if women have a day, so should men. We demand equality!

Bitan wants a National Man's Day sometime in May. Bitan thinks the man's world gets no attention any longer, so we need such a day to discuss things. Bitan is worried and concerned that with all the, important, discussion about women the men are being forgotten.
source: INN

I would note that we have enough holidays in May with Yom Hashoah, Yom Hazikaron, Yom Haatzmaut, Pesach Sheni, and Lag b'Omer, and we don't really have the time or energy for another noteworthy day. Bitan is welcome to pick a day in a more boring month to commemorate the achievements of men.

I would also note that International Men's Day is on November 19th. I do not know why that is not good enough for Bitan and why he needs to create another day. Maybe this way men will get two days to celebrate!

In the USA it is not uncommon for men, in the Orthodox community, In Israel it is far less common.

Rav Stav has issued a psak, which he wrote up in the new edition of Techumin, in which he says that while in some communities men should not rear rings, as there is no need to, but in other communities where the men work in mixed-gender environments, they should wear wedding rings to remind both them and the others around them that they are married and thereby avoid any unpleasant situations. And if the wife requests it, the husband should definitely respond positively.
source: INN

I've known people who have worn a ring for that very reason, some only putting the ring on when going to work or to the environment in which they feel it must be worn, though not wearing it when back home and in his regular social environment. Even though some do, in my experience I think most religious men in Israel still do not wear wedding rings, though I think I have noticed in increase in recent years..

Kikar is reporting about a very strange psak by Rav chaim Kanievsky, assuming it is true.

According to the report, Rav Chaim Kanievsky has recently begun adding to his brachos given to visitors a comment that they should stop wearing a wrist-watch. Rav Kanievsky used to commonly make comments to visitors that they should grow a beard, grow longer peyyos, and the like. Recently this new comment has been his focus.

The reason Rav Kanievsky is telling men to not wear a wrist-watch is because in his opinion a watch is a woman's garment and when a man wears one he is transgressing the prohibition of men not wearing womens garments.

According to the report, his talmidim say this is not a new psak or opinion of his, but he has only just started telling to to visitors who come asking for a bracha. Somebody even recently showed him a picture of Rav Elyashiv, his father in law, in which it can been that he is clearly wearing a watch, as well as a picture of Rav Shach as well in which his watch can be clearly seen. Rav Kanievsky responded saying he knows they wore watches, and he himself used to wear a watch as well, until he found out definitively that the Chazon Ish had been of the opinion that it is prohibited.

I sometimes wonder what makes something into a "kli gever" or a "begged isha". Looking around it is clear that watches are worn by men as much as they are worn by women. And it has always been so. So, why is a watch considered "begged isha"? Are eyeglasses also going to be categorized as kli gever or begged isha? Some items are obviously one or the other, depending on their common use, but other items are commonly used by both genders so how is it determined that such an item is dominantly male or female in its usage?

It's about time. A pashkevil about tzniyus, but one not like any you have seen before.. this one forbids tight clothing and says that those who wear them are sinners and cause others to sin...

Wait. What do you mean this one is like none you have seen before? that is the basis for almost every tzniyus pashkevil ever pasted up on a wall! Nothing new and unique about that!

What's new about this pashkevil's message is that it is directed at men.

If the women were starting to feel picked on, everything is their fault, they are always the ones who have to hide themselves or change their style, now they can sit back and relax while it's the mens turn to be picked on for tzniyus issues!


The pashkevil being signed by sefardic rabbonim seems to indicate that the problem is one that afflicts the sefardi boys and men, and not necessarily the ashkenazi. Either it is a matter of style, or else the ashkenazi rabbonim just haven't caught up yet. Though it is interesting that the Sefardi rabbonim are basing half (one of two reasons) of their statement on the Rama.

The pashkevil says that recently the modesty of mens dress also needs strengthening and repair... men are obligated by the Torah to dress modestly in wide and modest clothing. It is a Torah prohibition to dress in pants that are tight against the body as the goyim wear.. and wearing tight pants is prohibited because of that which is said by the Rama... those who dress so are sinners and cause others to sin....


------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------

According to some new survey and research from England (I saw it reviewed on the Israeli website Mako, not the original survey), women are much more likely to cheat on their spouse than men.

The main reason given by women for their infidelity is boredom.

I am not going to break down the numbers or analyze the statistics. You can go there and do it yourself.

I recently learned in Shulchan Aruch that a wife should be encouraged to work, even part-time for just a small part of the day ("work" does not necessarily mean a regular job in an office, but "work" means to keep busy with something and not just sit around and have maids taking care of all her obligations. It could be housework and raising children could also be considered "work" for this purpose. Speak to your LOR or therapist for clarification on this). The reason is, the Shulchan Aruch says, is that boredom gets people in trouble, specifically "trouble" in the form of sexual infidelity.

So the English research project of today confirms what the SHulchan Aruch wrote 500 years ago.

Shkoyach!

This morning I was leaving shul and I saw a sight that struck me as wrong.

Across the street was an all-girls seminary waiting for buses to head out on a tiyul. I do not know for how long the tiyul is - one day or a sleepover two-three day tiyul. The girls looked pretty heavily laden, so it struck me as being for longer than one day, but maybe not.

That is besides the point anyway. The head of the seminary was there. He is an acquiantance of mine, so I knew who it was. With him were some other adults, I assume various teachers and madrichim, both male and female. They were all waiting for the bus to go on the tiyul.

I find it highly inappropriate that men are running all-girls schools. My friend running this school is a wonderful person and I would trust him with my life. he has complete integrity and I would never suspect him of anything.

We in the orthodox world are so concerned with separation of the sexes, rightly or wrongly, that it seems a bit hypocritical to have male principals and teachers of an all-girls seminary/school.

Are there not enough qualified and educated women who can run these schools? Must we have men running womens institutions? When climbing up a mountain, will all the girls stay perfectly tzanua that the male principal will not be put in a situation of compromising his standards of tznius. That could then lead to improper thoughts at other times, which could lead to any myriad of "michsholim" that would be inappropriate.

Again, I do not suspect this fellow in the slightest. I am using this as an example because seeing it this morning made me think about the issue a bit.

People are human. If we are really so concerned about separation of the sexes so that no hanky panky should occur, there is no reason to assume that principals and teachers are any better and above such concerns. They are human and can fall to the same urges as anybody else. This is especially true when the teachers and principal are young, as is common in today's seminary world. When older, the concern might exist, but I would think it would be less. With young teachers and principals as is fairly common, the age of the teacher might be just a few years older than the young women he is teaching. There is no reason to create such a combustible situation. there are fine women who are educated and qualified to run the schools and teach in them and they should be the ones doing so.

And if not, and if we are not concerned about teachers and principals being in these situations, than we should not be so paranoid about separation of the sexes among us regular people either.