This post was sparked by one by Carolyn of Juggling Frogs, who talked about the idea of the "supermom." She links to A Mother in Israel's post on "The Truth about the Jewish Superwoman," which looked a little bit to me like a modern version of Eishet Chayil*.
Modern Jewish Mom is a website whose aim is to provide a space for modern Jewish women to talk about the issues in their lives, read articles and discuss. It's pretty cute, and much better designed than some of the new Jewish social networking stuff (ahem Jmerica).
On the standard mommyblogging side there is YoYenta, whose writing I generally find pretty interesting, and whose tags are pretty hilarious. Orieyenta, although not technically a mommyblogger, talks about her adorable daughter LO on a regular basis. For the record, if I had a kid that cute, I'd totally write about her all the time too.
Several other bloggers, while they talk about being a mother, it isn't the biggest part of their blog. For instance Alla Staroseletskaya of Cooking with Yiddishe Mama has a nice mixture of recipes. And probably something else, but I can't read Cyrillic.
I was going to flesh this out some more, but I've had a busy day, so I'll have to let it go.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Posted by Request
Blood and Platelet Donors Needed Posted by Farell Diamond
In April, Toby Pannone, a wonderful, smart, engaged 3 1/2 year old boy was diagnosed with neuroblastoma, a very rare pediatric cancer. He is in the midst of a very long, grueling treatment at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. He has just finished his fourth cycle of chemotherapy, and he had surgery at the end of June to remove his tumor. After his sixth cycle of chemo, he will move on to another phase of treatment which includes regular, painful injections and blood and platelet transfusions. The total length of his treatment will be at least 18 months.
Toby is a great kid. He tells jokes, loves trains of all sorts, adores riding the subway, has a great mischievous smile. He has approached every moment of his ordeal with grace and bravery - rarely complaining, finding amazing ways of playing, making connections and surviving what he is being asked to deal with. He chats with his doctors and nurses and loves the visits he has with his teachers, both at home and in the hospital. It's always important to remember that Toby is so much more than his disease.
Donating blood and platelets is perhaps the most concrete way that most people can participate directly in helping to save Toby's life. For the next six months, he is likely to need 2-3 units of blood and the same amount of platelets per week. Donations must be done at Sloan Kettering (First ave between 67th and 68th sts). They will accept blood of any type, and the Donor Room is open seven days a week. They will provide free parking for donors at the garage at 66th and York. Donating blood takes about an hour, donating platelets takes about 2 1/2 hours. There are certain restrictions about who can give blood, based upon questions of living or traveling abroad to certain places, or low iron levels. Any donations that are not used by Toby will be put into the general blood supply in the hospital, often going to other pediatric patients.
More information can be found on eligibility at www.mskcc.org/blooddonations. To make an appointment to donate, call Mary Thomas at 212-639-3335 or the Donor Room at 212-639-7648. Make sure to tell the person who gives you the appointment that you are donating for Toby Pannone.
For more information about Toby go to Toby's blog: www.tobypannone.blogspot.com.
Thank you in advance for any help you can give Toby and his family.
In April, Toby Pannone, a wonderful, smart, engaged 3 1/2 year old boy was diagnosed with neuroblastoma, a very rare pediatric cancer. He is in the midst of a very long, grueling treatment at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. He has just finished his fourth cycle of chemotherapy, and he had surgery at the end of June to remove his tumor. After his sixth cycle of chemo, he will move on to another phase of treatment which includes regular, painful injections and blood and platelet transfusions. The total length of his treatment will be at least 18 months.
Toby is a great kid. He tells jokes, loves trains of all sorts, adores riding the subway, has a great mischievous smile. He has approached every moment of his ordeal with grace and bravery - rarely complaining, finding amazing ways of playing, making connections and surviving what he is being asked to deal with. He chats with his doctors and nurses and loves the visits he has with his teachers, both at home and in the hospital. It's always important to remember that Toby is so much more than his disease.
Donating blood and platelets is perhaps the most concrete way that most people can participate directly in helping to save Toby's life. For the next six months, he is likely to need 2-3 units of blood and the same amount of platelets per week. Donations must be done at Sloan Kettering (First ave between 67th and 68th sts). They will accept blood of any type, and the Donor Room is open seven days a week. They will provide free parking for donors at the garage at 66th and York. Donating blood takes about an hour, donating platelets takes about 2 1/2 hours. There are certain restrictions about who can give blood, based upon questions of living or traveling abroad to certain places, or low iron levels. Any donations that are not used by Toby will be put into the general blood supply in the hospital, often going to other pediatric patients.
More information can be found on eligibility at www.mskcc.org/blooddonations. To make an appointment to donate, call Mary Thomas at 212-639-3335 or the Donor Room at 212-639-7648. Make sure to tell the person who gives you the appointment that you are donating for Toby Pannone.
For more information about Toby go to Toby's blog: www.tobypannone.blogspot.com.
Thank you in advance for any help you can give Toby and his family.
Writing About Women
This morning I read David Brooks' op-ed in the NYTimes (entitled "The Lone Ranger") which analyzed three current pop songs by three young women. One by Carrie Underwood, Before He Cheats, U+UR Hand by Pink, and Girlfriend by Avril Lavigne.
He uses them as a case study of the new terrain of dating, which stretches from 13-30. He suggests that songs like this wouldn't have been made 30, or even 10 years ago. I don't know that I agree, I think that they might have been recorded, just not as "pop," instead they'd be "country" or "alternative." I have no proof for this though.
I also read an article in Jewish Woman Magazine. The cover has the ever-attractive Lisa Loeb (she looks about 15), and a list of main articles, the first of which is "Bathing Suit Anxiety." I have to admit that I was prejudiced even before I picked up the magazine. While I by no means have a "perfect" body, I have no bathing suit anxiety. Trying them on doesn't make me anxious, nor cause me to question my sense of self. I love that racing suits have sizes whose numbers are essentially meaningless (I'm a 34 in speedo. 34 what? Who knows?), and for bikinis/tankinis/etc I have to use my bra size. There aren't really any major surprises.
I kind of think that anyone who is shocked by bathing suit shopping needs a strong dose of reality. Have you never seen yourself naked? Or in your underwear? That is basically how you look in a swimsuit. I can understand being stressed about wearing one in public, but it's been many years since I wore just a swimsuit. I almost always have basketball shorts or a t-shirt over it. Often both. I don't have an issue with this, and honestly, I don't think anyone else cares either.
Wendy Shanker, one of the authors who was interviewed for the piece said basically the same thing: "Ask yourself this question: If I do what I really want to do, which is take off my shirt and go swimming, how is that going to affect the lives of people who might be watching? It’s our dumb narcissism to believe that all these people are analyzing us."
The article is essentially a self-help, or how-to of bathing suit shopping, filled with lines like "go with a supportive partner." Good lord, I don't want a "supportive" partner, I want an honest one. A friend who will say "that is heinous, VETO." The piece has a number of pull quotes from bathing suit designers/retailers who basically say, "try lots of different swimsuits, everyone is built differently." Really? Are women this stupid? I think that every woman knows that certain styles of clothing flatter her, and certain ones don't. Why would it be different with bathing suits? Do our brains fall out of our heads as soon as we enter the dressing room?
Then again, what did I expect from a magazine whose cover articles ranged from "the history of cheesecake" to "the Holocaust's legacy of meaning?"
He uses them as a case study of the new terrain of dating, which stretches from 13-30. He suggests that songs like this wouldn't have been made 30, or even 10 years ago. I don't know that I agree, I think that they might have been recorded, just not as "pop," instead they'd be "country" or "alternative." I have no proof for this though.
I also read an article in Jewish Woman Magazine. The cover has the ever-attractive Lisa Loeb (she looks about 15), and a list of main articles, the first of which is "Bathing Suit Anxiety." I have to admit that I was prejudiced even before I picked up the magazine. While I by no means have a "perfect" body, I have no bathing suit anxiety. Trying them on doesn't make me anxious, nor cause me to question my sense of self. I love that racing suits have sizes whose numbers are essentially meaningless (I'm a 34 in speedo. 34 what? Who knows?), and for bikinis/tankinis/etc I have to use my bra size. There aren't really any major surprises.
I kind of think that anyone who is shocked by bathing suit shopping needs a strong dose of reality. Have you never seen yourself naked? Or in your underwear? That is basically how you look in a swimsuit. I can understand being stressed about wearing one in public, but it's been many years since I wore just a swimsuit. I almost always have basketball shorts or a t-shirt over it. Often both. I don't have an issue with this, and honestly, I don't think anyone else cares either.
Wendy Shanker, one of the authors who was interviewed for the piece said basically the same thing: "Ask yourself this question: If I do what I really want to do, which is take off my shirt and go swimming, how is that going to affect the lives of people who might be watching? It’s our dumb narcissism to believe that all these people are analyzing us."
The article is essentially a self-help, or how-to of bathing suit shopping, filled with lines like "go with a supportive partner." Good lord, I don't want a "supportive" partner, I want an honest one. A friend who will say "that is heinous, VETO." The piece has a number of pull quotes from bathing suit designers/retailers who basically say, "try lots of different swimsuits, everyone is built differently." Really? Are women this stupid? I think that every woman knows that certain styles of clothing flatter her, and certain ones don't. Why would it be different with bathing suits? Do our brains fall out of our heads as soon as we enter the dressing room?
Then again, what did I expect from a magazine whose cover articles ranged from "the history of cheesecake" to "the Holocaust's legacy of meaning?"
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Running Through My Mind
Two observations about going running:
1) I have awful asthma. I mean really awful. It's an actual handicap, I have to work much harder to maintain a jog than someone without asthma. Add to that the awful air quality and heat of this week, and I'm working really hard to go not very fast. Even knowing this it still stung when a guy who was, at the youngest, 70, lapped me. Ouch.
2) A more Jewish-themed issue. So, I wear shorts to work out in the summer. In this heat I can't make myself put on my sweats, no matter how much it might sanctify me in the eyes of G-d. Since I've made the decision to wear knee-length skirts (instead of full-length) I'll wear knee-length loose shorts, for the sake of modesty. But here's the rub: the shorts are actually men's clothing, from the men's section.
When I started wearing pants again (instead of just skirts) I rationalized it, saying that I was wearing women's pants, so it wasn't beged ish, men's clothing. Clearly no man would want to wear low-rise, flared pants, that I was buying clothing specifically designed and manufactured for women. Unfortunately, in the athletic apparel department the items for summer are a) short, b)tight, or c) both. As a result, to preserve my modesty, I have to buy men's basketball shorts (and by "buy" I mean "steal from my brother's closets"). So I'm breaking one rule to preserve another.
I'm not going to stop running, or start wearing skirts to run (that was an ill-fated experiment), and it is too hot to run in pants (unless I want heat stroke. Again.) so I'm not sure I see a way around this.
As this is a minor theological crisis, I should probably call Tamar.
1) I have awful asthma. I mean really awful. It's an actual handicap, I have to work much harder to maintain a jog than someone without asthma. Add to that the awful air quality and heat of this week, and I'm working really hard to go not very fast. Even knowing this it still stung when a guy who was, at the youngest, 70, lapped me. Ouch.
2) A more Jewish-themed issue. So, I wear shorts to work out in the summer. In this heat I can't make myself put on my sweats, no matter how much it might sanctify me in the eyes of G-d. Since I've made the decision to wear knee-length skirts (instead of full-length) I'll wear knee-length loose shorts, for the sake of modesty. But here's the rub: the shorts are actually men's clothing, from the men's section.
When I started wearing pants again (instead of just skirts) I rationalized it, saying that I was wearing women's pants, so it wasn't beged ish, men's clothing. Clearly no man would want to wear low-rise, flared pants, that I was buying clothing specifically designed and manufactured for women. Unfortunately, in the athletic apparel department the items for summer are a) short, b)tight, or c) both. As a result, to preserve my modesty, I have to buy men's basketball shorts (and by "buy" I mean "steal from my brother's closets"). So I'm breaking one rule to preserve another.
I'm not going to stop running, or start wearing skirts to run (that was an ill-fated experiment), and it is too hot to run in pants (unless I want heat stroke. Again.) so I'm not sure I see a way around this.
As this is a minor theological crisis, I should probably call Tamar.
Friday, July 06, 2007
Mikveh Revisited
I have pretty radical views about mikveh* and the laws of family purity. I was in the car coming back from a sheva brachot* and we began to discuss the prevalence, or not, of the observance of the laws of family purity on the part of the Modern Orthodox.
I voiced my belief that women should start going to the mikveh when they first get their period. I understand that this screws with shmirat negiah*, and causes some other issues, but here's my reasoning:
1) Men have a coming-of-age ritual. Instead of co-opting theirs, or maybe in addition to, women should have their own. After all, girls get bat mitzvahed at 12 generally, in a nod to the fact that a) their fathers can no longer sell them, and b) they physically mature faster than boys.
2) Marriage is a random time to take on a new mitzvah. Your life is already changing a lot. We, or at least I, am able to keep rituals because they become, well ritual. I'm used to them, I don't see them as disruptive. If you start younger, at a more natural point (when the possibility for keeping the mitzvah starts) you are more likely to integrate it into your life, and keep doing it.
3) By explicitly tying mikveh to sexuality and marriage (which I understand that it is, really) it comes with all sorts of baggage about being "dirty" and "male oppression" and many other issues. If we can separate mikveh into two distinct parts, one being about coming of age and womanhood, and the other being about sexuality, I think that it would be easier for the modern woman to observe, or be comfortable with observing.
This brings me to my nex point. David Kelsey, of blog-crush fame, posted on Jewschool about the issue of bnei niddah*. Basically saying that people who become more religiously observant should be told that as their mothers did not (presumably) observe the laws of family purity, that they are considered unclean, or unmarriageable. This explains, in part, some of my popularity during my brief foray into frumster.
At any rate, I'm pretty sure that I heard the following at a shiur* a year or so ago, and I'd like to know if that is my crazy imagination, or if I really heard it. Amit seems to think that it's my crazy imagination, but I'd like a second opinion:
Some sources hold that a shower can be considered in place of mikveh for women who do not observe the laws. It isn't permissible to observe in this way, but it is acceptable b'di eved*. This would mean that really very few people are bnei niddah*.
*Mikveh is the ritual bath, there are a number of restrictions on what qualifies. According to the laws of family purity, a woman must immerse herself in the mikveh seven days after her period has finished before she can resume relations with her husband.
*Sheva brachot is Hebrew for seven blessings and refers to the seven days after a couple is married, during which time friends and family hold celebrations for them, and at each of these gatherings the seven blessings are recited.
*Shmirat negiah, to observe the touch, meaning observance of the laws governing physical relations between men and women. Practically means not touching any non-related member of the opposite sex. Except one's spouse.
*B'di Eved is a Talmudic term, meaning that while an action isn't acceptable if you set out to do it, it is an acceptable alternative if it has already happened. For instance, it is preferable to keep meat and milk separate, but if you drop some meat (less than 1/60th of the total) into a boiling pot of milk product, you can still eat it. That doesn't mean that you should go around adding in 1/60th meat to everything, just that if you mess it up, it is ok.
*B'nei niddah, children who were concieved by parents who did not observe the laws of family purity.
I voiced my belief that women should start going to the mikveh when they first get their period. I understand that this screws with shmirat negiah*, and causes some other issues, but here's my reasoning:
1) Men have a coming-of-age ritual. Instead of co-opting theirs, or maybe in addition to, women should have their own. After all, girls get bat mitzvahed at 12 generally, in a nod to the fact that a) their fathers can no longer sell them, and b) they physically mature faster than boys.
2) Marriage is a random time to take on a new mitzvah. Your life is already changing a lot. We, or at least I, am able to keep rituals because they become, well ritual. I'm used to them, I don't see them as disruptive. If you start younger, at a more natural point (when the possibility for keeping the mitzvah starts) you are more likely to integrate it into your life, and keep doing it.
3) By explicitly tying mikveh to sexuality and marriage (which I understand that it is, really) it comes with all sorts of baggage about being "dirty" and "male oppression" and many other issues. If we can separate mikveh into two distinct parts, one being about coming of age and womanhood, and the other being about sexuality, I think that it would be easier for the modern woman to observe, or be comfortable with observing.
This brings me to my nex point. David Kelsey, of blog-crush fame, posted on Jewschool about the issue of bnei niddah*. Basically saying that people who become more religiously observant should be told that as their mothers did not (presumably) observe the laws of family purity, that they are considered unclean, or unmarriageable. This explains, in part, some of my popularity during my brief foray into frumster.
At any rate, I'm pretty sure that I heard the following at a shiur* a year or so ago, and I'd like to know if that is my crazy imagination, or if I really heard it. Amit seems to think that it's my crazy imagination, but I'd like a second opinion:
Some sources hold that a shower can be considered in place of mikveh for women who do not observe the laws. It isn't permissible to observe in this way, but it is acceptable b'di eved*. This would mean that really very few people are bnei niddah*.
*Mikveh is the ritual bath, there are a number of restrictions on what qualifies. According to the laws of family purity, a woman must immerse herself in the mikveh seven days after her period has finished before she can resume relations with her husband.
*Sheva brachot is Hebrew for seven blessings and refers to the seven days after a couple is married, during which time friends and family hold celebrations for them, and at each of these gatherings the seven blessings are recited.
*Shmirat negiah, to observe the touch, meaning observance of the laws governing physical relations between men and women. Practically means not touching any non-related member of the opposite sex. Except one's spouse.
*B'di Eved is a Talmudic term, meaning that while an action isn't acceptable if you set out to do it, it is an acceptable alternative if it has already happened. For instance, it is preferable to keep meat and milk separate, but if you drop some meat (less than 1/60th of the total) into a boiling pot of milk product, you can still eat it. That doesn't mean that you should go around adding in 1/60th meat to everything, just that if you mess it up, it is ok.
*B'nei niddah, children who were concieved by parents who did not observe the laws of family purity.
An Open Letter: Gossip Rags
Dear Gossip Rags (superficial, go fug yourself, etc),
please stop using "paps" as an abbreviation for papparazzi. I realize in the former case that it is actually Britney Spears who used the abbreviation, but still. Do you know what pap means? Either "something resembling a teat or nipple," or "soft or liquid food," or "a material lacking substance."
At any rate, I keep thinking "pap smear," and that's just gross.
Please stop.
Best,
Annie
please stop using "paps" as an abbreviation for papparazzi. I realize in the former case that it is actually Britney Spears who used the abbreviation, but still. Do you know what pap means? Either "something resembling a teat or nipple," or "soft or liquid food," or "a material lacking substance."
At any rate, I keep thinking "pap smear," and that's just gross.
Please stop.
Best,
Annie
My Father is Hilarious
So when I was younger I lived in a very wealthy, but small Jewish community. At one point there was a rabbi search, and my father was on the synagogue's board during that time. This rabbi search was incredibly acrimonious with awful things being said about all of the board members. We even knew of board member's bosses receiving faxes about them saying libelous things. Really awful.
So, first of all, my father wasn't harassed because of a comment that I made (at the age of 12 or so) suggesting that he might work for the CIA. He doesn't. And never has. And really doesn't appreciate it when you suggest that he does. Secondly, a family with whom we had been very close prior to the search cut off all relations with us. At one point while walking to shul, my mother wished the woman a "good shabbes" and she just ignored us. Awful, right?
Ok, flash forward 7 years (or so). That family's eldest son is working for my father's company, and moving to the community where my family currently lives. My father has (graciously) offered to house this young man until he can find an apartment, as the move does not come with a moving allowance. This guy will be living with my parents for the foreseeable future. And for the record, he isn't even the cute son that continued to hang out with us after the break.
Why is my father doing this? So that he can either a) force the mother to acknowledge him, or b) show her that he is the better person.
Amazing. And FYI, my father isn't a spy. For reals. Seriously, he is the least spy-like person ever, and not so good at secret-keeping. I bought my mom a birthday present and told him to hide it until I got home, he instead delivered the package directly to her.
So, first of all, my father wasn't harassed because of a comment that I made (at the age of 12 or so) suggesting that he might work for the CIA. He doesn't. And never has. And really doesn't appreciate it when you suggest that he does. Secondly, a family with whom we had been very close prior to the search cut off all relations with us. At one point while walking to shul, my mother wished the woman a "good shabbes" and she just ignored us. Awful, right?
Ok, flash forward 7 years (or so). That family's eldest son is working for my father's company, and moving to the community where my family currently lives. My father has (graciously) offered to house this young man until he can find an apartment, as the move does not come with a moving allowance. This guy will be living with my parents for the foreseeable future. And for the record, he isn't even the cute son that continued to hang out with us after the break.
Why is my father doing this? So that he can either a) force the mother to acknowledge him, or b) show her that he is the better person.
Amazing. And FYI, my father isn't a spy. For reals. Seriously, he is the least spy-like person ever, and not so good at secret-keeping. I bought my mom a birthday present and told him to hide it until I got home, he instead delivered the package directly to her.
An Open Letter: Lululemon
Dear Lululemon Athletica,
I just passed your store in the Lincoln Square area, and was delighted to see that you were having a sale. This was exciting as I have just started jogging again, and am in desperate need of new running clothes. Specifically, new sports bras.
I went in to try some on, and before I say anything, I'd like to mention that I am a "traditionally built" Ashkenazi* woman (read: large-bosomed), so I have certain requirements in a sports bra. Like support. Unfortunately, you, lululemon, seem to be confused. You seem to think that sports bras work on proportional scale. This is not true. Just because a size is larger, and technically "fits" does not mean that it is useful to someone of that size.
Seriously? This is it?
Basically, I have just discovered that while I may admire your style, you and I will never be friends. Sad for me.
Best,
Annie
*Ashkenazi Jews are Jews of Eastern European desecent.
I just passed your store in the Lincoln Square area, and was delighted to see that you were having a sale. This was exciting as I have just started jogging again, and am in desperate need of new running clothes. Specifically, new sports bras.
I went in to try some on, and before I say anything, I'd like to mention that I am a "traditionally built" Ashkenazi* woman (read: large-bosomed), so I have certain requirements in a sports bra. Like support. Unfortunately, you, lululemon, seem to be confused. You seem to think that sports bras work on proportional scale. This is not true. Just because a size is larger, and technically "fits" does not mean that it is useful to someone of that size.
For instance? I tried your "marathon" bra and laughed out loud. Any woman looking at it can tell that it will not provide the requisite support. It is a single piece of material, and only one layer of support. There is no mechanism to lift, or separate, it will necessarily give uniboob, and the only support provided is by means of strapping everything in.
Seriously? This is it?
Compare to your far superior "bounce breaker" which you did not have in my size. According to the site, the "marathon" bra provides maximum support. Really? Just look at the difference. The "bounce breaker" has an inner bra for extra support, mesh panels that separate different parts (and keep the bra from becoming a "two puppies, one bag" bra), and far less annoying straps. If by "support" you mean "covering as much of your chest as possible," then yes, the "marathon" is more supportive.
Basically, I have just discovered that while I may admire your style, you and I will never be friends. Sad for me.Best,
Annie
*Ashkenazi Jews are Jews of Eastern European desecent.
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Know Your Jewish Community: Wedding Shtick
I'm actually not so sure about the origins of this one. I'm pretty sure that wedding shtick has its basis in the mitzvah to make a bride happy on her wedding day. The actual language is to "mesameach" the bride, which I think translates to "enhappy."
In the name of "enhappying" the bride (and groom) their friends dress up/ do foolish things, usually inside joke related. This also serves the purpose of letting the bride and groom sit down in between sessions of dancing, which are usually pretty athletic. Especially considering that the bride and groom have been fasting until about 5 minutes before dancing starts.
At any rate, I've seen some bizarre things, including guys dressed up as food (I think Aqua Teen Hunger Force, but the costumes were pretty bad, so: unclear), girls carrying those molecular models you get in chemistry class (the bride is a chem PhD), and a bridesmaid that looked like a matador. Oh wait, her dress was just unfortunate, it wasn't part of the "bull and bullfighter" dance that is prevalent, and incongruous (you know, the one where one person waves a napkin, and the other runs towards it with fingers on their head like horns?).
In the name of "enhappying" the bride (and groom) their friends dress up/ do foolish things, usually inside joke related. This also serves the purpose of letting the bride and groom sit down in between sessions of dancing, which are usually pretty athletic. Especially considering that the bride and groom have been fasting until about 5 minutes before dancing starts.
At any rate, I've seen some bizarre things, including guys dressed up as food (I think Aqua Teen Hunger Force, but the costumes were pretty bad, so: unclear), girls carrying those molecular models you get in chemistry class (the bride is a chem PhD), and a bridesmaid that looked like a matador. Oh wait, her dress was just unfortunate, it wasn't part of the "bull and bullfighter" dance that is prevalent, and incongruous (you know, the one where one person waves a napkin, and the other runs towards it with fingers on their head like horns?).
This video has an example of the bullfighter about 10 seconds in.
Instead of dancing, you could wave flaming nunchucks, like this guy. Also, if you look at the comments below, I like how one of the commenters seems to believe that flaming nunchucks are traditional at a Jewish wedding, saying "I wanna go to an Orthodox wedding, so fun." To which someone responded: "yeah they r fun, at my sisters wedding some guys put their black hats on fire (old ones ofcourse) and they juggles fire and knives 2." Really? Flaming hats? Clearly I'm attending the wrong type of weddings.
Now, like many Jewish traditions, this one has been co-opted by the guys. What seems pretty clearly to be a mitvah for the benefit of the bride is often in practice a bunch of guys doing silly things, often an inside joke with the groom.
Like these guys with their "Riverdance." Not that it isn't funny, but after googling "Wedding Shtick" I only came up with male entries. This could be, in part, because shtick often involves singing and/or dancing, which can be religiously problematic if done by women (in front of men).
More guys dancing.
For my own (hypothetical) personal wedding, I expect the girls to bring the game. For serious yo. I'm talking to you, roommate. And my wedding can totally be an "arts and crafts project."
Better Political Songwriting
Condilicious. Fa sho.
From The Message, which has a lot of great material, including a hilarious critique of Rage Against the Machine by "Idi Amin Jr."
A Far Inferior Copy of Obama Girl
Awful. Truly Awful. Also does it always have to be women who engage in politics through crushes? I wanted to see a "Hillary Boy" or even an "Obama Guy."
Also, I realize that it's supposed to be campy, but the original had enough of that. It just ends up looking stupid.
Know Your Jewish Community: Liturgy
As I've already mentioned, I recently spent a weekend at a Jewish camp. It happens to be pluralistic, and Zionist, so although it is Sabbath observant, and entirely kosher, there are some interesting practices. One of which is the removal of all messianic references from the grace after meals. Aside from the issues with changing liturgy (I personally have very few, with a couple exceptions) I found it very hard to follow along with the modified version of the grace.
Treppenwitz also posted about removing pieces of the liturgy, but in that case it was about Catholics removing (then re-instating) a Good Friday mass "that contains language that is somewhat less than flattering towards the Jews." He makes two excellent points, which I will crudely try to summarize:
1) If Catholics believe that Jews are going to Hell (and they do) what difference does it make if they say so in the mass, or not? It is a part of their theology, so saying it, or not, shouldn't really be a big deal, and
2) We have passages of our own that are just as incendiary, as in the prayer Aleinu where we claim that "He has not made us like the nations of the lands and has not emplaced us like the families of the earth; for He has not assigned our portion like theirs nor our lot like all their multitudes. For they bow to vanity and emptiness and pray to a g-d which helps not."
Although, for the record, that last line has been deleted from many prayerbooks, and I didn't know it existed until I went to college. But that just proves Trep's (and my) point, that it is sort of silly to take out lines from prayers that correctly espouse a belief, if that belief is un-PC. Shouldn't we instead wrestle with the issue of how we feel about other nations, instead of just scrubbing our prayerbook?
My second thought on liturgy was also prompted by my stay at camp. During the Saturday morning prayer service, every single camper and counselor knew by heart the words to the prayer for the State of Israel. Terrific, but they didn't even know where to FIND the prayer for the government of the United States. Ari posted about the history of this prayer, which I found fascinating, and mentioned that he attended services in a place where "the gabbai read the names of thirty-seven American soldiers who were killed in action the previous week."
I love that practice. I grew up in a synagogue where the prayer for the State was said right after the prayer for the State of Israel. If we say prayers for the members of the IDF, should we not also say a prayer for those whose lives are on the line for our country of residence? Does George Bush really need wisdom and guidance* any less than Olmert?
*The prayer for our country, differently rendered in different sources, often contains a piece that says "may he deal compassionately with us, and with all Israel..."
Treppenwitz also posted about removing pieces of the liturgy, but in that case it was about Catholics removing (then re-instating) a Good Friday mass "that contains language that is somewhat less than flattering towards the Jews." He makes two excellent points, which I will crudely try to summarize:
1) If Catholics believe that Jews are going to Hell (and they do) what difference does it make if they say so in the mass, or not? It is a part of their theology, so saying it, or not, shouldn't really be a big deal, and
2) We have passages of our own that are just as incendiary, as in the prayer Aleinu where we claim that "He has not made us like the nations of the lands and has not emplaced us like the families of the earth; for He has not assigned our portion like theirs nor our lot like all their multitudes. For they bow to vanity and emptiness and pray to a g-d which helps not."
Although, for the record, that last line has been deleted from many prayerbooks, and I didn't know it existed until I went to college. But that just proves Trep's (and my) point, that it is sort of silly to take out lines from prayers that correctly espouse a belief, if that belief is un-PC. Shouldn't we instead wrestle with the issue of how we feel about other nations, instead of just scrubbing our prayerbook?
My second thought on liturgy was also prompted by my stay at camp. During the Saturday morning prayer service, every single camper and counselor knew by heart the words to the prayer for the State of Israel. Terrific, but they didn't even know where to FIND the prayer for the government of the United States. Ari posted about the history of this prayer, which I found fascinating, and mentioned that he attended services in a place where "the gabbai read the names of thirty-seven American soldiers who were killed in action the previous week."
I love that practice. I grew up in a synagogue where the prayer for the State was said right after the prayer for the State of Israel. If we say prayers for the members of the IDF, should we not also say a prayer for those whose lives are on the line for our country of residence? Does George Bush really need wisdom and guidance* any less than Olmert?
*The prayer for our country, differently rendered in different sources, often contains a piece that says "may he deal compassionately with us, and with all Israel..."
Jews Love: Independence Day
Not too long ago I was visiting a Jewish camp, and I heard the following anecdote:
"I couldn't remember where in England one of the counselors was from, so I asked her, 'where are you from?' and she responded 'England, temporarily.' Why temporarily? 'Because my homeland is in Israel."
This type of statement makes me very uncomfortable unless you have immediate plans to make aliyah*. Now, I love Israel, but I'm also a pretty patriotic American. I recognize that this country has given me, and my ancestors (and hopefully my children) amazing opportunities that just weren't available anywhere else. It has allowed us religious and intellectual freedoms, and given us full citizenship and equal rights under the law. None of these are small things. I am by no means saying that America or its government are perfect, but that if you live here, you should recognize that it has probably been good to you.
My friend, another counselor, and I discussed how we hate that many young Jews are more than willing to run and serve in the IDF, but would NEVER consider serving in the American army. This wasn't always the case, in World War I Jews volunteered to serve in a much higher percentage than the rest of the population, in part because they wanted to prove their loyalty to America, but in part because the immigrant generation felt strongly that they were Americans and owed a debt of gratitude to the country that took them in. On that topic, Jameel posts some musings about July 4th, saying that he "didn't leave America and make aliya to Israel because of negative issues in the USA; it was the lure of the positive aspects of Israel that brought [him] here." And that is a position which I can respect, and get behind.
Snake Oil Sam of Snake Oil Sam's Radio Review just found out that " a Jew played a critical role in the early days of this nation in its fight for independence." Now I'm not sure who he is talking about, but I do know that almost every group currently in America has their "pet revolutionary" whose participation in the Revolutionary War establishes that group's authenticity as Americans. Dennis Prager of The Outraged Spleen of Zion also talks about the Revolutionary War, but he speaks in terms of remembrance. His suggestion is that we create a 'Fourth of July Seder' because ritual is one of the only ways to preserve a meaningful memory. However, the memories stirred by Jack's photo from September 11th are still fresh, as he suggests (I think) that we remember on July 4th that "Freedom isn't free."
On a "light"-er note, themiddle and Jacob DaJew both posted about fireworks displays. I'm actually not such a fan of fireworks on the 4th, mostly because I grew up with really impressive displays, after which the ones in New York seem pretty lame. Themiddle posted a photo of some fireworks, while Jacob talked about his experience with illegal fireworks and the local police. Some idiots on my block set off amateur fireworks in the middle of the street, which was sort of beautiful (also loud and dangerous) until the fire department came to put a stop to it. It seems like people forget that fireworks are actually airborne explosives, just because they produce a pretty show when they explode. While the fireworks were going off on my street last night it felt a little like being in a war zone between the bright flashes of light and loud explosion noises. I actually have a few friends who, after having been near rocket attacks, can no longer enjoy fireworks, and I can't say that I blame them. Similarly, Muse of Me-ander has a friend who can't enjoy them because they sound like "tanks exploding."
Jacob also posted about putting out his flag on Independence Day. Since I live in an apartment building, that isn't really an option for me, but I'm sure that my parents had theirs out. I'm sure of this mostly because our flag is out almost every day (barring rain). In my neighborhood flags are more common than not, in part because so many people are active duty, retired, or the parents of military service members.
Also, did anyone in the J-blogosphere go to a BBQ? Sadly, I didn't get a chance to, and from my first scan it doesn't seem like anyone else did either, but that's hard for me to believe.
*Aliyah means to go up, and to make aliyah means toemigrate immigrate to Israel.
"I couldn't remember where in England one of the counselors was from, so I asked her, 'where are you from?' and she responded 'England, temporarily.' Why temporarily? 'Because my homeland is in Israel."
This type of statement makes me very uncomfortable unless you have immediate plans to make aliyah*. Now, I love Israel, but I'm also a pretty patriotic American. I recognize that this country has given me, and my ancestors (and hopefully my children) amazing opportunities that just weren't available anywhere else. It has allowed us religious and intellectual freedoms, and given us full citizenship and equal rights under the law. None of these are small things. I am by no means saying that America or its government are perfect, but that if you live here, you should recognize that it has probably been good to you.
My friend, another counselor, and I discussed how we hate that many young Jews are more than willing to run and serve in the IDF, but would NEVER consider serving in the American army. This wasn't always the case, in World War I Jews volunteered to serve in a much higher percentage than the rest of the population, in part because they wanted to prove their loyalty to America, but in part because the immigrant generation felt strongly that they were Americans and owed a debt of gratitude to the country that took them in. On that topic, Jameel posts some musings about July 4th, saying that he "didn't leave America and make aliya to Israel because of negative issues in the USA; it was the lure of the positive aspects of Israel that brought [him] here." And that is a position which I can respect, and get behind.
Snake Oil Sam of Snake Oil Sam's Radio Review just found out that " a Jew played a critical role in the early days of this nation in its fight for independence." Now I'm not sure who he is talking about, but I do know that almost every group currently in America has their "pet revolutionary" whose participation in the Revolutionary War establishes that group's authenticity as Americans. Dennis Prager of The Outraged Spleen of Zion also talks about the Revolutionary War, but he speaks in terms of remembrance. His suggestion is that we create a 'Fourth of July Seder' because ritual is one of the only ways to preserve a meaningful memory. However, the memories stirred by Jack's photo from September 11th are still fresh, as he suggests (I think) that we remember on July 4th that "Freedom isn't free."
On a "light"-er note, themiddle and Jacob DaJew both posted about fireworks displays. I'm actually not such a fan of fireworks on the 4th, mostly because I grew up with really impressive displays, after which the ones in New York seem pretty lame. Themiddle posted a photo of some fireworks, while Jacob talked about his experience with illegal fireworks and the local police. Some idiots on my block set off amateur fireworks in the middle of the street, which was sort of beautiful (also loud and dangerous) until the fire department came to put a stop to it. It seems like people forget that fireworks are actually airborne explosives, just because they produce a pretty show when they explode. While the fireworks were going off on my street last night it felt a little like being in a war zone between the bright flashes of light and loud explosion noises. I actually have a few friends who, after having been near rocket attacks, can no longer enjoy fireworks, and I can't say that I blame them. Similarly, Muse of Me-ander has a friend who can't enjoy them because they sound like "tanks exploding."
Jacob also posted about putting out his flag on Independence Day. Since I live in an apartment building, that isn't really an option for me, but I'm sure that my parents had theirs out. I'm sure of this mostly because our flag is out almost every day (barring rain). In my neighborhood flags are more common than not, in part because so many people are active duty, retired, or the parents of military service members.
Also, did anyone in the J-blogosphere go to a BBQ? Sadly, I didn't get a chance to, and from my first scan it doesn't seem like anyone else did either, but that's hard for me to believe.
*Aliyah means to go up, and to make aliyah means to
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
Transformers are AWESOME
Last night CJ and I went to see Transformers with the upstairs neighbor. While I enjoyed the TV show as a child, I was a little concerned about this remake. There were some pretty awful reviews, but a friend of mine had seen it and described it as "two hours of robots fighting eachother." That description was absolutely apt.
If you cannot watch robots fighting/transforming/car chases/explosions for an extended period of time then Transformers is not for you. If it is, you should definitely go. Definitely. It was a great mix of action, fairly good comedy, and more action. And Josh Duhamel, who is beautiful.
Before the movie started there were a number of ads for The Army National Guard, about which we were pretty confused. Transformers does a great job of portraying the American military as made up of able, committed, and intelligent men and women who, even when working under difficult conditions, can achieve amazing things. It also showed how even when individual soldiers do their best how faulty logistics or communication problems can screw up even the best run of missions.
Also, Josh Duhamel is great publicity for any group. Just look what his presence on the show Las Vegas did for Vegas hotels. Or something.
If you cannot watch robots fighting/transforming/car chases/explosions for an extended period of time then Transformers is not for you. If it is, you should definitely go. Definitely. It was a great mix of action, fairly good comedy, and more action. And Josh Duhamel, who is beautiful.
Before the movie started there were a number of ads for The Army National Guard, about which we were pretty confused. Transformers does a great job of portraying the American military as made up of able, committed, and intelligent men and women who, even when working under difficult conditions, can achieve amazing things. It also showed how even when individual soldiers do their best how faulty logistics or communication problems can screw up even the best run of missions.
Also, Josh Duhamel is great publicity for any group. Just look what his presence on the show Las Vegas did for Vegas hotels. Or something.
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Chickens Deserve to be Eaten
But no today (at least until sundown).
At any rate, The Spiked Review of Books has a review of Planet Chicken (review by Mike Hume) where the reviewer suggests that the book is a load of crap. I agree. The book is a PETA-like apologist tract about chickens, which claims that eating them is barbaric, inhumane, etc.
Now, I worked on a farm for a summer, and I can understand if you don't want to eat cows, or even pigs. They are to some degree sentient, interesting creatures. They can make good companions, have distinct personalities, and are cute. Not chickens. As Hume points out, chickens are "cannibalistic balls of faeces and feathers." Seriously. They are awful. Left to their own devices they rip each other to shreds, are mean to those providing food, dirty, noisy, disgusting, and well, just plain mean. For the record, that summer was the beginning of the end of my vegetarianism. I still have difficulty eating red meat, but I enjoy chicken and turkey. I really enjoy it. Which might be somewhat sadistic, but really, we're eating the flesh of another living being, we should be honest with ourselves about it.
At any rate, Hume writes about the difference between animals and humans, and says that "An unsentimental attitude towards farm animals is actually sensible and human. Those who have to work with them for a living have always been the most clear-eyed about these matters – at least until the advent of hobby farmers who give their hens names like ‘Chickpea’."
This reminded me of a piece that I saw in Slate (where else) a few weeks ago. One of their regular contributors (Jon Katz) is a farmer, and he wrote about the difference between naming and numbering farm animals, and how it signified a different philosophy about their worth and use. Basically, those who number their animals will only spend up to the cost of the animal on health care, whereas those who name them will generally spend as much as it takes to heal them. This is not to say that those who have numbered animals don't also have named animals. Katz has a hierarchy of animals from dogs on down to sheep in declining emotional importance.
I agree with Katz's philosophy. Some animals exist for companionship, and some for food. If you conflate the two it becomes impossible to deal humanely with the latter. I think that, in some cases, people extend the life of an animal beyond where it is humane, believing that life is valued above all else. I disagree. I think that in some cases there are things worse than death. I would hate to have a painful, lingering illness, and if I was in a comatose state I'd like to have someone pull the plug. Yeah, I could probably come back from it, but what about that guy, stuck in his shell of a body for years, able to hear but not communicate? That would be my personal hell. I'd rather be dead.
In conclusion: eat chickens, and don't bother feeling guilty about it. G-d told us that we can eat animals, and who are you to be more merciful than G-d?
At any rate, The Spiked Review of Books has a review of Planet Chicken (review by Mike Hume) where the reviewer suggests that the book is a load of crap. I agree. The book is a PETA-like apologist tract about chickens, which claims that eating them is barbaric, inhumane, etc.
Now, I worked on a farm for a summer, and I can understand if you don't want to eat cows, or even pigs. They are to some degree sentient, interesting creatures. They can make good companions, have distinct personalities, and are cute. Not chickens. As Hume points out, chickens are "cannibalistic balls of faeces and feathers." Seriously. They are awful. Left to their own devices they rip each other to shreds, are mean to those providing food, dirty, noisy, disgusting, and well, just plain mean. For the record, that summer was the beginning of the end of my vegetarianism. I still have difficulty eating red meat, but I enjoy chicken and turkey. I really enjoy it. Which might be somewhat sadistic, but really, we're eating the flesh of another living being, we should be honest with ourselves about it.
At any rate, Hume writes about the difference between animals and humans, and says that "An unsentimental attitude towards farm animals is actually sensible and human. Those who have to work with them for a living have always been the most clear-eyed about these matters – at least until the advent of hobby farmers who give their hens names like ‘Chickpea’."
This reminded me of a piece that I saw in Slate (where else) a few weeks ago. One of their regular contributors (Jon Katz) is a farmer, and he wrote about the difference between naming and numbering farm animals, and how it signified a different philosophy about their worth and use. Basically, those who number their animals will only spend up to the cost of the animal on health care, whereas those who name them will generally spend as much as it takes to heal them. This is not to say that those who have numbered animals don't also have named animals. Katz has a hierarchy of animals from dogs on down to sheep in declining emotional importance.
I agree with Katz's philosophy. Some animals exist for companionship, and some for food. If you conflate the two it becomes impossible to deal humanely with the latter. I think that, in some cases, people extend the life of an animal beyond where it is humane, believing that life is valued above all else. I disagree. I think that in some cases there are things worse than death. I would hate to have a painful, lingering illness, and if I was in a comatose state I'd like to have someone pull the plug. Yeah, I could probably come back from it, but what about that guy, stuck in his shell of a body for years, able to hear but not communicate? That would be my personal hell. I'd rather be dead.
In conclusion: eat chickens, and don't bother feeling guilty about it. G-d told us that we can eat animals, and who are you to be more merciful than G-d?
Subway Awkward
So I was on the subway this morning, and a beautiful, and well dressed woman sat next to me. She was wearing nice, and clearly expensive clothing and jewelry. I know this because everything was clearly branded (Fendi bag, Prada earphones*, etc). She was also wearing some distinctive earrings. They looked like lapis or jade discs on a gold post. Not so sure.
Anyway, in the seat catty-corner to us was a woman dressed professionally, if not nicely. She was wearing a top that wasn't so pretty, a filmy brown/black/blue peasant-style blouse, plain black pants, and sandals that could best be described as "orthopedic." I usually don't care about what people wear on the subway, but the unfashionable woman asked the fashionable one (who had her earphones in, a clear sign that she didn't want to be disturbed) about her earrings:
U: Those earrings are beautiful.
F: Um, thanks.
U: They are so unusual, and I love unusual things.
F: (under her breath) Yeah, I can tell.
And there I was, wearing my outfit that cost about $35 total, wondering... what does she think of me?
* I didn't even know that Prada made earphones.
Anyway, in the seat catty-corner to us was a woman dressed professionally, if not nicely. She was wearing a top that wasn't so pretty, a filmy brown/black/blue peasant-style blouse, plain black pants, and sandals that could best be described as "orthopedic." I usually don't care about what people wear on the subway, but the unfashionable woman asked the fashionable one (who had her earphones in, a clear sign that she didn't want to be disturbed) about her earrings:
U: Those earrings are beautiful.
F: Um, thanks.
U: They are so unusual, and I love unusual things.
F: (under her breath) Yeah, I can tell.
And there I was, wearing my outfit that cost about $35 total, wondering... what does she think of me?
* I didn't even know that Prada made earphones.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Dave Albo: Asshat
Basically he's sponsored a piece of legislation that is not only regressive (the burden falls much more heavily on those who can afford it the least), but also helps his personal law firm. The law raises the fines for traffic offenders.
This benefits Albo greatly, as Radley Balko of Reason explains in his piece: That's right. Albo's a lawyer. And not just any lawyer. The firm that bears his name specializes in traffic law, particularly in representing people charged with DWI and reckless driving. And yes, that's the firm's actual URL: virginiadui.com.
Reason number 583 why Albo is a douchebag.
This benefits Albo greatly, as Radley Balko of Reason explains in his piece: That's right. Albo's a lawyer. And not just any lawyer. The firm that bears his name specializes in traffic law, particularly in representing people charged with DWI and reckless driving. And yes, that's the firm's actual URL: virginiadui.com.
Reason number 583 why Albo is a douchebag.
On Happiness
Congratulations to Zie and her girlfriend, Mel, on their recent engagement (yesterday!).
Zie,
I cannot wait to accompany you down the aisle, dressed in paisley, crying endless happy tears. As someone who has brought such love, joy, and true caring to other people's lives, I am so happy that you have found someone who brings those things into your life. Watching the way that you two love and care for each other is positively inspiring and I am grateful to know both of you.
Now, I'm all mushy and crying, again. Alright, enough. You're a blessing in my life.
Mazel Tov!
Love,
Harley
Zie,
I cannot wait to accompany you down the aisle, dressed in paisley, crying endless happy tears. As someone who has brought such love, joy, and true caring to other people's lives, I am so happy that you have found someone who brings those things into your life. Watching the way that you two love and care for each other is positively inspiring and I am grateful to know both of you.
Now, I'm all mushy and crying, again. Alright, enough. You're a blessing in my life.
Mazel Tov!
Love,
Harley
On Lashon Hara, Again
I know that I've talked about Lashon Hara* before, but something came up that made me think about it. And I apologize as this entry is sort of introspective, and therefore boring.
While in college I was shomeret negiah* for a significant period of time. After a while I changed my mind about what I was doing and why, and as part of my spiritual trade-off I decided that I'd shake hands, but that I'd focus on learning and observing the laws of lashon hara. So, my chevrusa* (a really terrific girl, who is one of the holiest people I've ever met. No joke, the light of G-d shines from her countenance) and I learned the major laws, and I've tried pretty hard to observe them. I had a sign in my room that said "Goal of the day: Don't speak lashon hara; defend others from the same."
I recognize that this is super-lame, but, hey, it worked for me. Or at least, for the most part. Yesterday I found myself doing something I rarely do: I repeated malicious gossip about a person, by name, to someone of their acquaintance. As soon as the words left my mouth I said "oh that was awful lashon hara," and begged the person's forgiveness for exposing them to it. You see, I, by my carelessness implicated the hearer, and caused him to sin as well. Fortunately, or unfortunately, I'm not good enough of a person to be kept from sleep by an event like this, but it made me think. Why did this happen? Why now?
One theory is as follows: a few days ago, a fellow bloggers' ex forwarded me an email full of malicious gossip. I was pretty taken aback by it, and responded that I didn't really want to be involved, but a day later I received another email with more of the same. This fellow blogger had warned me a week or two ago that I might get such an email, but the virulence, and absolute awful things said were still shocking. And I think that having read them, I was affected. I have only myself to blame for my behavior, but I don't think that I would have tended towards lashon hara if I hadn't been so recently exposed to it.
One of the reasons I became Modern Orthodox (my parents are fairly observant Conservative) is that I believe that the Torah is a great guide to life. The mitzvot* bein adam l'chavero (between man and his fellow) constitute a guide to behavior that I find very attractive. The laws of lashon hara are just a part of that.
I'd be the first person to tell you that I'm none to holy. I'm not as good at going to services as I used to be, or at blessing my foods, but there are certain things that I absolutely will not allow to fall by the wayside. One of those is my treatment of other human beings. It is absolutely crucial to me to see btzelem elokim* (the light of G-d) in every individual, and to use that to treat them with dignity and respect, no matter the situation. Yet, somehow I've managed to let some of that slip. I think that it's probably time to call my chevrusa...
*Lashon Hara literally means evil speech, but refers to gossip. In Jewish law gossip isn't just malicious gossip, but really any non-essential information passed from one person to another about a third party. There are a few exceptions where this type of speech is allowed, but very few, and very specific situations.
*Shomeret negiah is the feminine version of shomer negiah, to observe (against) the touch. It signifies the observance of a sometimes complex set of laws derived from a biblical commandment to not "come near a woman who is niddah (having her period)." Practically it is observed through the avoidance of physical contact of any kind with people of the opposite gender. The exceptions are your immediate family, and your husband/wife. Different traditions hold that it is either acceptable to shake hands, or not, acceptable to hug, or not, and so on and so forth.
*Mitzvot are commandments, or good deeds, sometimes both
While in college I was shomeret negiah* for a significant period of time. After a while I changed my mind about what I was doing and why, and as part of my spiritual trade-off I decided that I'd shake hands, but that I'd focus on learning and observing the laws of lashon hara. So, my chevrusa* (a really terrific girl, who is one of the holiest people I've ever met. No joke, the light of G-d shines from her countenance) and I learned the major laws, and I've tried pretty hard to observe them. I had a sign in my room that said "Goal of the day: Don't speak lashon hara; defend others from the same."
I recognize that this is super-lame, but, hey, it worked for me. Or at least, for the most part. Yesterday I found myself doing something I rarely do: I repeated malicious gossip about a person, by name, to someone of their acquaintance. As soon as the words left my mouth I said "oh that was awful lashon hara," and begged the person's forgiveness for exposing them to it. You see, I, by my carelessness implicated the hearer, and caused him to sin as well. Fortunately, or unfortunately, I'm not good enough of a person to be kept from sleep by an event like this, but it made me think. Why did this happen? Why now?
One theory is as follows: a few days ago, a fellow bloggers' ex forwarded me an email full of malicious gossip. I was pretty taken aback by it, and responded that I didn't really want to be involved, but a day later I received another email with more of the same. This fellow blogger had warned me a week or two ago that I might get such an email, but the virulence, and absolute awful things said were still shocking. And I think that having read them, I was affected. I have only myself to blame for my behavior, but I don't think that I would have tended towards lashon hara if I hadn't been so recently exposed to it.
One of the reasons I became Modern Orthodox (my parents are fairly observant Conservative) is that I believe that the Torah is a great guide to life. The mitzvot* bein adam l'chavero (between man and his fellow) constitute a guide to behavior that I find very attractive. The laws of lashon hara are just a part of that.
I'd be the first person to tell you that I'm none to holy. I'm not as good at going to services as I used to be, or at blessing my foods, but there are certain things that I absolutely will not allow to fall by the wayside. One of those is my treatment of other human beings. It is absolutely crucial to me to see btzelem elokim* (the light of G-d) in every individual, and to use that to treat them with dignity and respect, no matter the situation. Yet, somehow I've managed to let some of that slip. I think that it's probably time to call my chevrusa...
*Lashon Hara literally means evil speech, but refers to gossip. In Jewish law gossip isn't just malicious gossip, but really any non-essential information passed from one person to another about a third party. There are a few exceptions where this type of speech is allowed, but very few, and very specific situations.
*Shomeret negiah is the feminine version of shomer negiah, to observe (against) the touch. It signifies the observance of a sometimes complex set of laws derived from a biblical commandment to not "come near a woman who is niddah (having her period)." Practically it is observed through the avoidance of physical contact of any kind with people of the opposite gender. The exceptions are your immediate family, and your husband/wife. Different traditions hold that it is either acceptable to shake hands, or not, acceptable to hug, or not, and so on and so forth.
*Mitzvot are commandments, or good deeds, sometimes both
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
