‚Č° Menu

Women of the Wall

Women of the Wall is not a group of women that build walls, itís not even a group of women that likes to be thrown against walls, in fact they arenít even demanding equal rights at a wall, all they really want to do is daven at the kotel in talesim, tefilin and the ability to lain from the torah, in peace.

If I had founded a group such as Women of the Wall, I could think of far more pressing issues facing women at the kotel than davening rights, I also never made it to shachris at the kotel during a six month stint in Israel. Have you noticed how far the women have to backtrack in order to use the bathroom and wash their hands? Arenít womenís restrooms supposed to be closer, than the menís rooms? Have you seen that shaky scaffolding situation balancing precariously above the ladies section?

Donít even get me started about sections Ė if we were going by the law Ė the ladies section at the kotel is not even ďseparate but equalĒ. Have you noticed that the size is much smaller, and they donít have access to the chabad indoctrination table, ahem 24 hour day a mivtzayon. The women donít even get to look through the Plexiglas windows at the old kotel foundations bathed in orange light. I also doubt they get those cool cardboard yarmulkes, wait, do the ladies get cardboard doilies instead?

But the Women of the Wall want none of the menís section perks, they donít even demand to be allowed into the little siddur cave in search of that lone ashkenaz siddur (side point why arenít there ashkenazic siddurs at the kotel?) Nope, these women merely want to put on a talis, tefilin and read from the torah and they donít even want to do it the menís section. I havenít even noticed bimahs in the womenís section, maybe the legal issues are more of convenience issues? Rolling bimahs into the womenís section just isnít possible because thereís no room.

I personally donít think the issue is so cut and dry, the kotel is a religious site open to everyone, but if some people feel discriminated against, how do we deal with that? Is it fair to say that religious Jews control the kotel, or is it the state of Israel that controls what goes down at the kotel? If it is a state owned religious site, then shouldnít these ladies be allowed to do as they please, it doesnít seem like they are hurting anyone. In fact if we flip it around and it looks like the religious folks that are trying to stop the Women of the Wall are the oneís hurting someone. Seems like another case of tyranny of majority to me.

Think about the possibilities, have you seen how scantily the women in Israel dress? Now imagine they were all wearing talesim? Seems like a plan…

I wonder if they realize that if they make bumper stickers with the WOW acronym, they may be inviting whip em out Wednesdays to Israel?

{ 85 comments… add one }
  • Joel Katz March 8, 2010, 11:05 AM

    Heshy,
    Sounds like you nailed this one.
    Except for one small change in the works: Nylon kippot replace cardboard at the Kotel

    Joel
    Religion and State in Israel
    @religion_state

    • Moishe'la has spoken again December 17, 2013, 12:29 PM

      BS”D
      (Discussion with Moishela (with his family
      A Handicapped child
      (Teves 13 ‘5774 (Dec 16 ’13

      “I Looked Out the WindowÖ”

      I have for the last four days felt such a longing, such a longing to be close to Hashem. I felt not only longing, but the actual closeness to Hakodosh Boruch Hu. As I looked out the window, and saw the wind and the snow and the trees falling, I felt that this world of lies is coming apart, is falling apart, is disappearing in front of our very eyes.

      I felt that all the lies are coming to the surface, that this illusion called Olam Hazeh is becoming clearly nothingness. We are looking for truth. At least I am, but I donít have to look for truth, because I see it, feel it. I feel close to Hashem, and that is truth, and I look out the window and watch a mini destruction. This mini destruction is brought to us in order to bring us to the truth.

      Here we are, all of Israel, the State of Israel, dependent on electricity. We are dependent on electricity, for all of our materialistic needs, for everything. Isn’t it strange that in such an advanced world people are so foolish to depend on one thing to keep them alive, and the more they depend on it the more they build what to depend on. Everything is based on electricity, and now so many people are without electricity, which is putting their very lives in danger, their lives and their children’s lives.

      There are many places without water or any kind of heating in this terrible cold, without the ability to get out to buy anything, and of course very few people are coming to the rescue to help them. This electricity that we live on is all an illusion. Whoever controls the electricity, controls humanity.

      I look out the window and I see that Hashem is sending us a message. This snow that appeared so suddenly on the Israeli scene with such devastation, is a terrible warning about the future.

      Hashem is trying to pull us close to Him in every way, and one of the ways is to show us that only He can save us. Only He can give us sustenance. Only He can bring us our Parnasa (livelihood). Only He can keep us alive.

      Rulers have always wanted to control the water and the food. Water and food keeps people alive, and once you’ve controlled that, their Cheshbon (intention) is you control people. But they forget one thing, the Ribbono Shel Olam is the one that controls everything. They can die of starvation even if they’re surrounded by every type of food, and they can die from thirst even in a swimming pool.

      Hakodosh Boruch Hu decides all, and those villains that are trying to be instead of Hakodosh Boruch Hu, Chas Vesholom, still havenít learned their lesson from all these generations. Very soon however, they will learn their lesson, and whether they learn it or not, they will disappear from existence.

      I am longing for Moshiach, to be together with Hakodosh Boruch Hu without Mechitzas (barriers); to bask in the light of the Kedusha. I feel it coming. I feel it coming very soon, and with it the longing to see that day is becoming stronger and stronger, until I can almost not bear it. I feel the Geula so strongly coming closer to us that I cry. I cry out in pain and longing. In pain, in pain because it’s so distressing to me not to be there yet. I look out the window, see the trees fall, see people falling in the snow, and I cry. I cry for this world of illusions that so many believe in. I cry for what’s going to be when they realize their big mistake. I cry because we still have so much suffering to go through, and what has happened here in Eretz Yisroel with the snow is not by chance. It’s to bring all the true Jews to that realization.

      True that once the danger is over, many people will go back to their silliness, but we will have more trials very soon, whether weather, or fear of war, or whatever it will be. However Hashem will do it, it will be meant to bring us close to Him. It will be meant to take away the Mechitzas so we can be very close to our Creator. This winter is still going to be very eventful and very difficult. I beg every Yid when you get into big trouble, remember Hakodosh Boruch Hu is the only Hakol Yachol. He is everything. Hold on to Him, and He will save you in every situation. Just be close to Him, and do His will. It’s not enough to try to use Him for your own needs. No, you have to be one with Him. You have to do His Mitzvos, do His Ratzon. I look out the window and I see my own reflection, and I’m so glad that at least I know the truth, but I’m so sad that so many do not.

      I cry at night because I’m afraid for the suffering we still have to go through. If this snow storm was difficult, we are going to be tested and taught in even more difficult ways.

      Each Jew that has grasped the truth from stage one of our difficulties and our trials will suffer less from stages two, three, four, etc. For those that quickly understand and
      accept the truth, each stage will be progressively easier.

      However those who ignore the tests that Hashem is going to
      z give us, and refuse to learn the right attitude and the right direction, will only suffer more and more at every stage.

      I look out of the window into the cold snowy night and see clearly that what I am seeing is very depressing, but I can also visualize beyond this scene the light of Moshiach Tzidkeinu.

  • Rachel March 8, 2010, 11:39 AM

    Great post, Heshy. You wrote all and more than I wanted to say on this subject!

    Rachel

  • Adena March 8, 2010, 12:09 PM

    awesome post, and totally agree! so glad to see that you are really a feminist at heart!

    • SkepticButJewish March 8, 2010, 12:30 PM

      There is a difference between feminism and being pro women being treated fairly. I am definetly pro women being treated, because I am an individualist and so women being treated fairly is a corollary to do. But I am not a feminist whatsoever. Feminism is something radically different. If you actually read anything on feminism or studied feminist thought you would quickly realize that feminism is a psedo-scientific belief that women need to have special privledges over men, it is a attitude of sexism (towards men) and hatred of the male. I know I am being excessively harsh on feminism, but that is what I think feminists deserve. The word has been hijacked. One hundred years ago “feminist” meant just a person pro women being treated fairly. Today “feminism” is a belief that deserves to be mocked and expoused for what it truly is.

      • Heshy Fried March 8, 2010, 8:11 PM

        Wow I don’t think I could have said it better myself, I think that being feminist has been hijacked by radicals – same thing with saying you lean to the left, people assume you are a liberal.

      • A. Nuran March 8, 2010, 9:16 PM

        Actually, there’s no difference between the two. The fact that people believe there is is a sign of how far we’ve come and how vicious and thorough a smear job the Right has done on the word.

        Here are some things “feminists” did. Every one of them was decried by “right thinking” people, by the conservatives of the day, by the religious establishments and by people who thought that (of course) women should be treated fairly but it came under regular fair treatment. No special attention was needed…

        1) Women can own property
        2) Women’s wages belong to them
        3) Women can eat by themselves in restaurants
        4) Women can enter into contracts
        5) It is a crime for women to beat their wives
        6) Women can vote
        7) Women can hold office
        8) Women cannot be paid less than men simply because they’re women.
        9) A rapist’s criminal record can be entered into a trial.
        10) A woman cannot be fired simply because she is a woman.
        11) A woman can apply for any job she can do.
        12) Women can serve in the military. Until late in WWII there was no place for them
        13) Women can be doctors and lawyers.
        14) A woman’s children are legally hers as much as the father’s.
        15) A woman cannot simply be declared “mad” by her family and put away for the rest of her life without ajudication (see the classic horror story The Yellow Wallpaper and look at the author’s commentary)
        16) A woman cannot have her children taken away simply because she was not married when they were conceived
        17) A woman can legally get birth control
        18) A woman cannot have her clitoris sawn off by doctors to treat “hysteria” or because she’s “out of control”. Yes. It happened. Regularly. In this country. FGM isn’t just for rug-thumping towel-heads
        19) Women can give testimony in courts.
        20) Women can give testimony against their husbands if they so desire.

        As I said, every one of these was the result of unacceptably radical “feminists”. Many of them happened in my lifetime.

        • Phil March 8, 2010, 9:36 PM

          Nuran,

          re number 18:

          They should have stimulated the clits instead of sawing them off, works a lot better.

        • SkepticButJewish March 8, 2010, 9:41 PM

          A Nuran, you do not understand what I have said. I have said that there is a difference between “feminism” and “women’s rights”. I have studied some of what feminists say and I know exactly what the entire group is about. Like I said I support any women’s rights movement 100 percentent, they are doing something noble and virtous. But I will never support feminism because I actually know what feminism is about. Feminism is a despicable philosophy. And I shall continue to make fun of feminism as long as live because they are not only evil, they are more than that, they are seen to be good by the masses. At least the KKK is seen as evil by the masses and so I do not have to expouse the KKK. But feminists, they are evil, and what bothers me is that people thing that feminism is good because they mistakenly misidentify it to women’s right.

          The term “feminism” is out-dated, extremely out-dated. If you want to know what these feminists I am referring to believe I can tell you because I have read about them. They support banning prostitution, they support banning porn, they believe that if a women is being paid less it automatically means the employer is sexist, and so forth … and they believe in the social theory of learning. The social theory of learning is complete pseudo-scientific non-sense. It can be disproven by basic common sense and science. But these feminists still refuse to accept that they theory is wrong. Why? Because they are radicals, they have turned feminism into a religion, they do not care what Reason tells them as long as they get their way. So I will continue to mock feminists and expouse their disgraceful philosophy as much as I can.

          • A. Nuran March 8, 2010, 11:15 PM

            No, I absolutely understand what I was talking about. All of these were classic first, second and third-wave feminist positions. And all of them were “too radical” or “unnatural” or “unecessary” when feminists were fighting for them. Now we take them for granted.

            Forty years of unremitting lies and slander have poisoned the word “feminist” to the point where people who are classic feminists are afraid of using the word or are sure it doesn’t include them.

            • SkepticButJewish March 8, 2010, 11:59 PM

              I would not have any problem with what the “feminists” wants to achieve in the past. I would have not been against it, nor I would have claimed it was unnatural or unnecessary. There are plently of things today that I strongly support and very few people do, like polygamy. I have always been against the norm.

              But you did not deny my charges against feminism. I have said that: They support banning prostitution, they support banning porn, they believe that if a women is being paid less it automatically means the employer is sexist, and so forth Ö and they believe in the social theory of learning. What about these things? You do realize that mainstream feminism often supports these ideas (not necessarily all of them and some decisions are split but you can find many feminist supporters of these things). This is what feminism is today, it is this radical pseudo-scientific non-sense of a philosophy. The old form of it was nobel but it has lost its credibility to those who actually know what it is about (like myself).

              • Sarah January 19, 2012, 7:34 AM

                I hope you know that prostitution is already illegal.

          • Russian Jew March 9, 2010, 12:00 AM

            who are these so-called “feminists” that are against men. Please provide some evidence, all you are doing now is repeating yourself over and over.

            • SkepticButJewish March 9, 2010, 1:52 AM

              If you want to find evidence you can study feminism and realize what I am saying is true. An easy way to find what I am saying is to go on Wikipedia, go under Feminism and read about “anti porn movement”, yes that is right, there are actual feminists who want to ban porn. There are also many who are anti-prostitution. I have also talked about the feminists who believe in the pseudo-scientific social theory of learning. I have actually had a feminist professor in college, she never talked about feminism but I asked her in an e-mail. She told me she was an anti-porn feminist and a supporter of the social theory of learning.

              I said that there are some feminists who hate men. Oh yes, that is true. They might not openly say it, but anyone who endorses such views above suggests to me that they have a hatred of men on a subconscious or conscious level. Indeed, there have been some pretty nasty quotations (you can read them) from the famous feminists like: Stanton, Dworkin (part of anti-porn movement), Gearhart, de Beauvoir, and Robin Morgan. There is no doubt in my mind that these famous feminist leaders had a resentment for men.

              Feminism also has a double standard. It wants promotive of special priveldges in one area if it means that they get an advantage over a man. One very simple and humorous example. We have a tradition that if a boat sinks then men have to leave the boat last and let the women go off first. I have never heard a feminist ever complain about this and say it is a sexist tradition. We have a tradition that a man has to hold a door open to a woman or a give up his seat (I do this myself sometimes and have no problem doing this) but no feminist ever complained and said that women need to do the same to men. They do not complain about these things, because they have special privledges. What they care about is having special privledges and getting as many as they can.

              And the funny thing is, this makes me laugh, there are some feminists who try to encourage women to become lesbians! What does this have anything to do with women’s rights? Seriously. Come on, can we not see through this ridiculous philosophy already? To be fair this is not part of mainstream feminism, and I think it was more popular in the past, but there are feminists who identify themselves with this feminist movement. They actually encourage women to become lesbians. Now do not misunderstand me, I think if women want to be lesbians that is all great, good for them, but I am just laughing at the fact that this has nothing do with women’s right. I think these radical pro-lesbianism feminists actually hate men.

              I will always love the quotation by Freud:
              “The female acknowledges her castration, and with it too, the superiority of the male and her own inferiority, but she is welcome to this state of affairs.”

              That is the quote that drive lots of feminists crazy, that is the only reason why I say it. I love making feminists go crazy. They deserve it. But not pro-women right’s group, those I do respect and I fully support.

              In truth, feminism is a religion.

              • E March 9, 2010, 11:46 AM

                Man, aren’t you taking it a little TOO far??
                How does this whole discussion about feminism have to do with Women of the Wall?

                And yes, a lot of feminists got radical. happens to the best of us. It doesn’t hurt to shake things up a bit.

                and hey, I’m also against porn, does that automatically make me a crazy radical?

                • SkepticButJewish March 9, 2010, 9:02 PM

                  It depends what you mean “against porn”. If you mean you do not like porn, then that is fine. But if you are willing to use the state to enforce that people cannot watch porn then yes you are a radical. There are plently of things I do not like, like drugs, but I am not going to tell another person what to do as long as he is minding his own business. I do not like drugs but I will not take away drugs from someone who is minding his own business. The same with porn, you do not have to like it, as long as you are not an anti-porn feminist. Anti-porn feminists are not so much different from conservative Christians or Rabbis who want to ban porn because they do not like it. Remember Voltaire, “I might not agree with what you say but I will give up my life to defend your right to say it.”

                  “Man, are you not talking it a little TOO far??”: No, I am not taking this too far. It is the feminists who take it too far. It is I who sees feminism for what it truly is and criticize their dispicable philosophy.

                  “How does this whol discussion about feminism have to do with Women of the Wall?”: If you go to the top of this discussion, a poster said that Hershy is a feminist at heart, then I responded saying that there is a huge difference between being pro-women’s rights and feminism. Then some people responded to my harsh statements, perhaps they are feminists themselves, and from there I kept on responding back.

                  “And yes, a lot of feminists got radical. Happens to the best of us. It does not hurt to shake things up a bit”.: What do you mean by “it does not hurt”? Their dispicable philosophies are dangerous on some levels. If you really think that getting radical is not dangerous then consider what PETA do. They cannot be simply against animal abuse, they use to use terrorism in some cases to achieve their ends. This is the dangers of radical movements, because they turn into religions. Now to be fair I never heard of feminists movements endorsing violence, but nonetheless it is a radical movement and these radical movements of often dangerous. So you are wrong when you say that radical feminism is unhurtful.

                  • RussianJew March 11, 2010, 12:07 AM

                    Academic feminists, ie people who have academic positions or even those who have books published in the mainstream press/newspapers do not call for anti-male policies. Many of them do critically examine gender roles, media portrayal of women, the objectifying effects of porn/prostitution (also lots of people want to ban porn/prostitution. and may I remind you that prostitution is illegal in this country). Furthermore there are plenty of feminists who do support prostitution/porn if women are working for themselves as opposed to for pimps. Dworkin does not represent the entire feminist movement and denouncing the entire feminist movement based on someone who has extreme views. There are plenty of feminists who do not ascribe to her views. All you’re doing is committing logical fallacy and mis-characterizing and fairly extensive albeit recent academic tradition

                    • SkepticButJewish March 11, 2010, 1:08 PM

                      “Academic feminists, ie people who have academic positions or even those who have books published in the mainstream press/newspapers do not call for anti-male policies. ” I just gave you a list above of some leaders of feminism that have anti-male views. And you respond to me by saying “they do not have anti-males views”. Explain to my why there are so many anti-male feminist leaders.

                      “Many of them do critically examine gender roles, media portrayal of women, the objectifying effects of porn/prostitution.” Yes and after that that “critical examation” they conclude that they need laws to create a world that they would like. An example of “critical examation” is a feminist writing a paper about Snow White and the Seven Dwarves and saying how sexist it is. This is not “critical examation” anymore, this is a waste of time, these women need to get themselves real jobs, stop wasting their time and braincells.

                      “also lots of people want to ban porn/prostitution. and may I remind you that prostitution is illegal in this country.” That does not a good defense for feminist. I know a lot of people hate porn and prostitution and want to ban it. These include, of course, conservative Christians and Rabbis. But saying that it is not just the feminists who want to ban it does not defend feminists. They are just as guilty as the socially conservative people.

                      “Furthermore there are plenty of feminists who do support prostitution/porn if women are working for themselves as opposed to for pimps.” What feminism is, is a bunch of elitist non-sense. It is a group of women who want women to behave in a certain way. They do not like the idea of women being at home housewives or the idea of women doing prostitution. So they want to get rid of these choices that women have to promote their own elitist views. Here is a quotation from Simone de Beauvoir, another feminist leader, “No, we do not believe that any woman should have this choice. No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women SHOULD NOT have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make it.” Look at this crazy radical feminist statement. It is a excellent demonstration of what an elitist person she is.

                      ” Dworkin does not represent the entire feminist movement and denouncing the entire feminist movement based on someone who has extreme views. There are plenty of feminists who do not ascribe to her views. All youíre doing is committing logical fallacy and mis-characterizing and fairly extensive albeit recent academic tradition.” It would be a logical fallacy if what I said was rare. It is not rare. It is common in feminist ‘thought’. Their extreme policies of being anti-porn are common. Their extreme policies of sex quotas are common. As I mentioned within the feminist movement some encourgage others to become lesbians. These are not rare instances, they happen. Let me give you an example. I think that Christianity is an evil religion. It also have a lot of anti-gay views. Now suppose I am speaking with a moderate Christian. I keep on telling him how Christianity is an evil religion and how it is anti-gay. He tells me, I am not being fair, he tells me, there are Christians who are not like that. My question is, so what? Just because there are non anti-gay Christians would there does not mean that Christianity itself is anti-gay, rather it means there are people who saw the anti-gay policies in Christianity and never accepted them. That is exactly what I see in feminism. It is inherently anti-male as seen with feminist leaders. But some of feminist do not accept the anti-male views, it is not that feminism is not anti-male, it is rather that they just did not attach those views to their own.

                      I have a questions for you, to see if you are a a radical feminist or not: 1) Do you believe that women and men are the same in their personality and abilities, and that the only difference between them is developed by the way society views men and women? 2) Are you part of the anti-pornography movement. 3) Do you support sex quotas?

      • Ilana March 10, 2010, 11:32 AM

        That’s completely untrue. Feminism has many problems, but none of them have anything to do with female supremacy over men. It’s really insulting to insinuate what you did.

        There’s nothing pseudo-scientific about feminism- it’s not even science of any kind to begin with! Feminism is the philosophy that women are equal to men and should be accorded the same rights.

        That’s it! Is that so threatening to you?

        • SkepticButJewish March 10, 2010, 10:06 PM

          “That is completely untrue.” Then you are ignorant to feminism. Read what I have said above, this is all part of the different aspects of the feminist movement. Read the major feminist authors and the things they had to say about men. Many of them have equated men to rapists. If you do not know this then you are ignorant to feminism.

          “Feminism has many problems, but none of them have anything to do with female supremacy over men.” Again you are ignorant. Elizabeth Stanton, a feminist leader, has said that, “we as a sex are infinitely superior to men”. Now I do not care that she said that, she is welcome to have such a views. What I have a problem with is that anyone who is going to tell me that this feminist is not anti-male. Clearly she is, and so many more numerous feminist leaders are. Just read their quotes.

          “Itís really insulting to insinuate what you did.” Sometimes the truth is unpleasant to hear, the fact that it many be insulting does not change its validity.

          “Thereís nothing pseudo-scientific about feminism- itís not even science of any kind to begin with!” ESP is also not scientific, but it is a pseudo-science. A lot of feminism is based on the idea that male and females are exactly identitical and the only difference between them is obtained because of the social perception of females. This statement rejects everything we know how in genetics and how the birth of a person mostly determines what kind of person someone is.

          “Feminism is the philosophy that women are equal to men and should be accorded the same rights.” You say that because you are ignorant of what feminism is. As I have said many times above women rights movements are based on women being treated fairly but feminism wants special privledges. For example, there is a movement within feminism to ban porn. I challenge you to tell me what banning porn has anything to do with women being treated equally. I challenge you to tell me what encouraging women to become lesbians have anything to do with women being treated equally.

          “Is that so threatening to you?” Yes, when it is a radical belief (religion basically) that wants to use the state to force people to do what they (feminists) think is appropriate, like banning porn. Or forcing sex quotas.

          Feminism is an evil philosophy. I prefer the KKK to feminists. Because the KKK hate like 15% of the world’s population, feminists hate 50% of the world’s population.

          • Ilana March 10, 2010, 10:39 PM

            I am a feminist and I do not believe that either sex is inherently superior to the other. I do believe that sexes should have equal rights instated by law. I am not “ignorant of feminism”, and that isn’t even grammatically correct.

            I am not insulted by what you call the truth, I am insulted by your absurd misconceptions and how you try to pass them off as truth.

            Feminism is not based on the idea that men and women are biologically or genetically identical; you’re asserting a straw man argument which I will easily refute. Feminism is based on the idea that women should be treated the same way that men are. It has little to do with biology.

            Not all feminists want to ban porn. Those who do want to ban it (a minority opinion) feel this way because the porn industry is problematic. Many women are forced into sex work, and this includes the porn industry. Many people also feel that the role that women pornstars play in mainstream porn is degrading, not empowering. For more info on this idea, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_views_on_pornography#Anti-pornography_feminism

            I will reiterate that not all feminists subscribe to this opinion.

            Finally, I am shocked that you say you’d prefer an organization that promotes murder over radical feminism. I understand not agreeing with radical feminism, but you’d really take an organization that lynches people over an organization that doesn’t? It’s not a question of percentages; the KKK is founded on baseless blind hatred. Feminism is based on justice and egalitarianism. Like any other belief system, it’s not immune to problems, but it’s not murderous.
            Feminists do not hate men. We hate the status quo.

            Finally, what the hell is a “sex quota”?

            • SkepticButJewish March 10, 2010, 11:52 PM

              “I am a feminist and I do not believe that either sex is inherently superior to the other. ” Neither do I. But recognize that the male brain and female brian is different. Recognize that the male personality is different from the female personality. So on and so forth. They are not identical, but one’s life is not more important than another. I equally value a male’s life to a female’s if all things are kept equal, I decide the value of a person based on his own individual accomplishments in life.

              “Feminism is not based on the idea that men and women are biologically or genetically identical; youíre asserting a straw man argument which I will easily refute. ” This is not a strawman, this is what some feminsits actually believe. Maybe you do not believe in that but my college professor was a subscriber to this pseudo-scientific view.

              “Not all feminists want to ban porn.” Ah, so you do admit that some feminists want to ban porn, you do not deny it. So there is a movement within feminism to ban porn. This movement is a radical movement, like I have been saying above. You should watch Penn and Teller’s Bullshit episode called “The War on Sex”, when they have some feminists on their show. One of the feminists dares to compare watching porn to pedophilia. Like I have said, this is a radical position. Now I am curious to know, do you want to ban porn too? Are you a radical like those feminists?

              “I will reiterate that not all feminists subscribe to this opinion.” Plenty of them do. And they are radical crazy people. Banning porn? Seriously, what is wrong with these people? They remind me of conservative Christians and Rabbis who hate porn too. Let me give you an example. Suppose I am talking with a Christian and telling him how his religion is so anti-homosexuals. Then he would proceed to tell me, “not all Christians subscribe to this opinion”. What am I supposed to think? It still does not change the fact that this is a view within the Christian religion to be anti-gay, and so I will expouse Christianity for what it truly is (which is of course, an evil religion).

              “Finally, I am shocked that you say youíd prefer an organization that promotes murder over radical feminism.” I can justifiy my position. First, of all the KKK is a group that is a do-nothing group. The KKK from 150 years ago actually did something, the KKK today is just a man’s club. They never do anything anymore. Now there are three reasons why I prefer the KKK to feminists. First reason, like I said KKK hate about 15% of the world, feminists hate about 50% of the world, so feminists are bigger haters than the KKK. Second reason, KKK do not do anything today, they just sit around in their own clubs talking about how great the white man is. Feminists, do stuff, they want to enforce their vision unto the rest of the world by using the law. For example, plently of them want to enforce no sex videos. If they were just another hate group then I can ignore them, but they do interfere with freedom. Third reason, and this is the main reason, the KKK does not pretend to be just or virtuous, they openly admit they are racists, the feminists do not, they pretend they stand for virtue and justice but in actuality are sexists (against men). Because of this hypocrisy and other reasons above I prefer the KKK to feminists.

              “Feminists do not hate men.” Then explain to me all the numerous quotations by feminists that were anti-male statements. Explain to me why some feminists want to promote a lesbian lifestyle. Explain to me why there were feminists leaders who equated any form of sex to rape. Explain to me why many feminists want to get rid of the family unit because it is father oriented. Explain these things to me. And yes these ideas are present in various feminist movements. The simplest and more straightforward answer is that they hate men and want to get away from them as much as possible. Can you at least admit that there are a lot of man-haters within the feminist movement? Maybe you are not a man-hater but you can at least admit that some of your feminist sisters are man-haters. I want to hear an admission form you, or a defense for what I said above, though I doubt you can defend it.

              “Finally, what the hell is a sex quota?” It is another retarded idea proposed by the feminists. There are a lot of feminists who want to force companies or businesses (or whatever other institution) to hire women to their job based on a certain quota/percentage. This means that they would be required to have 20% (or whatever number it happens to be, I use 20% only as an example) women in the workplace. This is obviously a sexist policy. If you judge the virtues of a person not based on his individual accomplishments but rather on the sex the person belongs to, then you are a sexist. This is why I said feminism is a sexism philosophy because it is not based on looking individual accomplishments but rather on the collective group of women.

              “And that is not even grammatically correct.” Whether it is grammatically correct or not does not change my status of the truth in my argument. It is the same if I was to mispell word (which I am sure I did already) and you were to tell me that I have a spelling mistake. This is all irrelevant, this is not a discussion about grammar but about the feminist religion. Grammar nor spelling is not my strongpoint, what is my strongpoint, however, is seeing non-sense beliefs and beating them down (like feminism).

  • sabros March 8, 2010, 12:46 PM

    We discussed this issue with our rabbi at a limmud recently. The take on it was that it’s an Israeli political issue: the Haredim are opposed to these practices for a variety of reasons. Haredim also make up a huge voting bloc, so pissing them off is not in the government’s best interests. As for the issue of human/equal rights, the thought was that modern Israel is a young country that continually struggles with existential and defense-related crises. Civil rights are just not on their radar with the larger pressing issues.

    • Meir March 8, 2010, 3:38 PM

      Well, I think religion/state has been hitting the radar a bit more lately (somewhat in line with the increase in Haredi rioting and the like), which is part of the reason why Tommy Lapid’s son Yair is considering getting into politics

  • Estee Lavitt March 8, 2010, 1:05 PM

    1. there is actually a women’s section within the orange glowing light area… mist women don’t know or go there because you’d have to walk down 3/4 of the way into the men’s section to get there.
    2. Women are lucky because they get head and arm scarves to make sure they are dressed modestly. These cover a lot more than any kipah.
    3. we are able to give more tzedaka because proportionately more women collect at the kotel than men. Which means we are hocked more and say no more… but ultimately give more too.
    4. there is a small enclosed section all the way in the front right-hand side beneath all the scaffolding where women can sit indoors with a small section of the wall. very tight quarters but there are also always candles lit there which makes it kind of mysterious.
    5. there have been bimah’s on occasion in the women’s section… but they are just there to hold all the sefardi siddurim.

    Funny post. Hope I added some insight!

  • E March 8, 2010, 1:08 PM

    Well, I think it’s simple.
    In Israel, the major consensus is that the conservative and reform movements are bullshit, and therefore should not be acknowledged at all.

    Therefore, nobody really cares about these women anyway. It’s like, “go wail somewhere else”

  • anonymous March 8, 2010, 3:51 PM

    firstly, in america the majority rules except for human rights(that requires a two-thirds majority); this isn’t a human right. You say that they aren’t harming anyone by doing whatever they do; by the same logic they aren’t being harmed when prevented from doing that. It is surely offensive to the religious people there when they see this going on, and the religious women, if not the men as well, do see them. It is not a rights issue of women vs. men; it is an issue of religious vs. irreligious(or orthodox vs. reform). The proof being that if men wanted to do certain things over there , they would be prevented as well.

    • Different Anon March 8, 2010, 4:39 PM

      If the religious bystanders are going to be offended, well, they can just go somewhere else. No one is forcing them to watch.

      • Heshy Fried March 8, 2010, 8:12 PM

        Aren’t the men supposed to be lost in a state of non-sexual ecstasy at the kotel while they communicate with God? Besides the mechitza is quite high to prevent any peeking.

      • Phil March 8, 2010, 8:16 PM

        Different anon,

        You seem to forget that the kotel is a religious site. Telling religious people to go elsewhere is absurd.

        If these feminist quacks want equal rights, let them come to Canada, have a few beers, and trying peeing there names into the snow.

        • LRQ February 11, 2013, 3:29 AM

          “Telling religious people to go elsewhere is absurd.”

          Unless they don’t happen to have a penis, in which case they must obey your every command?

  • n March 8, 2010, 7:17 PM

    There is no reason to say that the State should control the site, as the state is 60ish years old. The Jews had control long before hand. Yerushalmi Jews lived in Jerusalem before the Zionists came in the years preceding the War of Independence. There is no reason they should back down on Halacha, they have tradition on their side.

    • M March 8, 2010, 7:51 PM

      Are you under the impression that surrounding Arab countries would not have forcibly grabbed Jerusalem without the War of Independence? The world you long for is a figment of your imagination. Take away “state control” of the Western Wall or for that matter Jerusalem, seeing as it has only been under Zionist rule for 60 years, and watch how quickly you will be speaking Arabic.
      Tradition doesn’t fight wars, assert control, or protect its citizens;
      it does nothing of the sort.

      • A. Nuran March 8, 2010, 9:20 PM

        The only reason Jews control the Wall is because of the Israeli Army. Doesn’t anyone know anything about history? The kotel was under Arab control until the Six Day War. Jews were attacked and sometimes killed for praying there until then.

        Davening didn’t bring it back to the Jews.

        OCD examinations of mezzuzot didn’t.

        Neither did saying tehilim, studying Talmud or making sure women’s stockings had visible seams.

        It was Jews with guns, many of them *shudder* secular OTD Jews who fought and died against overwhelming odds who did it. So if anyone should control the Wall it isn’t the black hats. It’s the Israeli government.

        • Phil March 8, 2010, 9:33 PM

          Nuran,

          What makes you think that Jews praying worlwide don’t help the Israeli military?

          Do you honestly think that Jewish victories in 48, 67, 76 etc. were anything but open miracles?

          How else would you explain a minority force using inferior arms defeating all the surrounding countries with such crushing force?

          Finally, the soldiers liberated the kotel because it was a religious site, and the first things they all did was pray there.

  • Phil March 8, 2010, 8:10 PM

    Women that want to lein the Torah in a Tallis are macking a mockery of frum Judaism in general. Now they have the nerve to want to do it at our holiest site too. Women in the Beis Hamikdash had ezrat nashim, they were kept separate, and to the best of my knowledge, they weren’t wearing talits or leining either.

    As for blaming the men for trying to control them, welcome to the middle east. Do you think that any woman would dare try to pull of something similar at any muslim shrine? She’d be gang raped and stoned to death within seconds.

    • DrumIntellect March 15, 2010, 5:22 PM

      Why do you see it as making a mockery?
      I find it strange that charedi Israelis see everything people do as being for or against them. Why can’t they be doing it for themselves.
      I agree, from an Orthodox POV there are issues. But who cares?

      Your paragraph about the Middle East doesn’t make sense to me. Israel wasn’t trying to be the Jewish Iran. Israel of 1948 had very prominent women. I’m sure they wouldn’t have lived long in those roles in Iran.

      • Phil March 15, 2010, 5:55 PM

        Drum,

        Ortho Judaism has very clear guidelines for the different roles of Men and women when it comes to religious practice and rituals. What these women did at our holiest site, was basically telling all of frum Jewry “we’ll do as we please, whre we please, forget what the halacha has to say”.

        As for the Middle East and men controlling women, that’s just the way it is in the region, nothing to do with American values. Ditto for so called democracy.

        I don’t think Israel has anything to be proud of when it comes to it’s women leaders. Golda Meir is the perfect example of an idiotic old hag that somehow made it as prime minister and did a horrible job in office.

        Rather, Israel and Jews in general need to be proud of women that perform their roles in society with grace and dignity, such as bringing up children the proper way, being the pillar of the household, just as our matriarchs were.

        • DrumIntellect March 16, 2010, 11:27 AM

          Agreed about Orthodox Judaism and gender roles. But, that doesn’t mean they are making a mockery. And, it doesn’t mean that they are making an announcement to all of frum Jewry. They might just feel closer to god through this service.

          I disagree with you about the Middle East being a place where things need to be a certain way because some dictators in that region behave badly and enforce immoral laws.

          It doesn’t matter whether you are proud or ashamed of Golda Meir. The point I was making, which I’m not sure I made clearly enough, is that Israel, since its inception, has chosen not to be like the nations surrounding it. Women were involved in many aspects of “male” life from the beginning. The idea that because Israel is in the Middle East, it must keep women out of “male” roles, is ridiculous and untrue. (And, by the way, I’m not only talking about politics, though that is definitely one aspect of it.)

          • Phil March 16, 2010, 12:16 PM

            Drum,

            You seem to forget that the middle East, which is the cradle of civilization, has been that way for thousands of years, way before America and it’s brand of democracy / equal rights existed.

            Modern Israel’s founding fathers were gravely mistaken when they thought they would be able to form a Godless, hodge podge democracy with a racist charter in the middle east.

            According to Judaism, for the Jews to live in Israel in peace in Israel, they need to follow the Torah. Anything else is bound to fail and will eventually cause us to lose the country.

            It’s happened a couple times before, which ought to serve us as a lesson, but unfortunately, it seems the vast majority of Israeli Jews don’t give a hoot, and think they will be able to appease our bloodthirsty cousins as well as the hypocritical, anti semitic American administration by making concessions.

  • aml March 8, 2010, 8:20 PM

    One of my very first memories after my conversion was being at the Kotel for Shauvot. I’d converted just before Pesach that year and stepped on a plain to the Promised Land. I was so idealistic, naive, and starry-eyed. I stayed up all night that night, going from one shur to another in the Old City and made my way towards the Kotel in the morning. I was shocked and in a literal war zone when I arrived: Grown men (the heredi kind) were throwing full bottles of soda at grown women (the talit wearing kind). It was a war zone. Friggen unbelievable. The women were provoking the men just by being there. And the men could have easily ignored it and walked by and not given them the attention they sought, but instead they gave them just what they were looking for- and more, unfortunately.

    • Heshy Fried March 8, 2010, 8:58 PM

      So you think the women want attention and not to just do their thing?

      • DrumIntellect March 15, 2010, 5:24 PM

        My initial reaction as well!

        aml, what say you?

      • Sarah January 19, 2012, 7:42 AM

        Having been there, I do not think so. It is certainly a protest, but they are protesting to be *allowed* to be there and *not* be bothered. A rosh chodesh when there is no violence and limited shouting is considered a success and a good thing.

        • Dan January 19, 2012, 8:09 AM

          If you want to make a feminist statement, go have an abortion. Leave my religion out of it.

  • ari March 8, 2010, 10:57 PM

    cmon man unless i am not understanding this right, i expected a little more of u. if it has been accepted for thousands of years that women dont put on teffilen or lane from the torah why go ahead and change it.

    if these women wanto daven then no one is stopping them, but if they go to the holiest place in the world and clearly violate some of the simplest rules in the torah then thats another story.

    • Frumsatire Fan March 9, 2010, 11:27 AM

      Well, for many centuries women were more or less owned by their fathers and polygamous husbands, couldn’t get an education, etc. Why go ahead and change it? We should be able to separate from what is Judaism, and what are social conventions of the time of Beis haMikdash. As society changes, concessions can and should be made and Judaism won’t be essentially affected.

      • ari March 9, 2010, 9:46 PM

        eitehr u believe the torah or not. if you wanto change it that is fine just dont bring otheres into it. go ahead and put teffilen on in your own home. not around hundreds of orhodox jews who it will genuinly offend. these women clearly want attention

        • Sarah January 19, 2012, 7:44 AM

          Or maybe, they want to daven and wear talleisim at the kotel for the same reason that Orthodox men do; because it is the holiest site.

          Consider, just for a moment, that they are not doing it for attention or to bother people. Consider that they are doing it because they want to daven, in the way that brings them closest to God, at the holiest place in the world.

          • Crowin' Cock January 19, 2012, 8:21 AM

            Sarah,

            100% B.S. Since when are women supposed to wear a tallis at a holy site? It’s actually forbidden under halachot related to cross dressing. Besides, men don’t want to wear a tallis because they are at holy sites, we are obligated to do so while we daven.

            If these women want to come dressed as they should be at a holy place, let them make sure to have their hair properly covered, as it’s considered ervah (for married women) if the hair is showing.

  • E March 9, 2010, 12:53 AM

    Honestly, nothing in their behavior violates any halakha.
    According to wikipedia, the Israeli rabbanite is against them for political reasons. They say that, “Women of the Wall are motivated by a desire to make a political statement against traditional Judaism rather than a sincere desire to pray.”

    I think that there are two reasons people are so up in arms with this issue.
    First- when a woman performs the tasks of the man, it seems that she demasculinzes him. After all, why were the Haredi men were throwing stones in aml’s story?? Because the only affirmation and evidence to their masculinity are these commendments, and making them not gender specific takes this self-definition away.

    Second, As mister anonymous said, it is an Orthodox vs. Reform struggle. Orthodoxy will probably never acknowledge the validity of the Reform movement, and it has absolutely no interest in giving it space to exist alongside in the kotel.

  • Frumsatire Fan March 9, 2010, 11:30 AM

    The other day I read about a fascinating debate in 19th-century France, where these MAD feminists were starting to write and publish books. Most people were throwing their hands in the air, saying that the world was going to the dogs. “A woman can’t do something as male as writing, and remain a woman; she loses her feminity and becomes a ridiculous abomination”. Basically, they used the good old “men and women are different” discourse (or as E said, men feeling demasculinized). I’m not saying that the roles of men and women should be exactly the same. Still, now we read that stuff and think, what was the deal, what was so shocking about a woman writing a book?
    I think we should ask questions like: is it really offensive if a woman chants Torah? If anyone gets all sexed up about hearing a kol isha, whose fault it is/should be? Should the community try to educate this man, or is it better to stop women from singing? And so on.

  • FrumGer March 9, 2010, 10:17 PM

    Phil- I have always said, that Israel could only have gained its independence with Hahsems help…. 7 National armies in 6 day?? no way… we have been in Iraq and Afganistan for 8 years….

    As to these women, bottom line they are not davening, they are trying to send a political message. they are definatley sending a F**CK You to the frum yidden that maintain the site. they trying to make a point, to pump there Apikoros doctrine… It has nothing to do with the Torah and less to do with Hashem.

    you know I heard a Frum rabbi once say on a documenary, when being asked about when he snatched a tallis off a so called women rabbi (no such thing) who was trying to put one on in a shul, then she went and got another, he snatched that one too,… he said simply and with no hatred in his voice- ” this shul was an orthodox shul, and we (orthodox jews) are not going into their shuls snatching tallis off any women, if they want to do that then do it there, not here. :
    ie – respect where you are. the Kotel is open to all as long as you respect the rules. no one would be saying anything if it was goyim trying to approach the kotel with out a yarmulke (cardboard or not)…. the womens section is smaller because less women traditionally daven regularly because they don’t have to daven like men do they are exempt…

    • Dave March 9, 2010, 10:39 PM

      Typically, yes women daven less than men, but not in this case! They are praying more often than the men and deserve better treatment.

      Also the Kotel is NOT an Orthodox Shul. if you see pictures of it from a couple decades ago, people davened there without a mechitza. It was treated as any other place where people daven in public and the idea that its suddenly a shul is ridiculous. It is very holy, this can NOT be deemphasized, but it was not traditionally a shul with a mechitza and the Reform/Masorti Jews should have the right to practice Judaism as they please. They should not be forced into Orthodox traditions, right or wrong.

      • Phil March 10, 2010, 9:02 AM

        Dave,

        That’s exactly what reform and masorti people don’t want to realize; their way of practice is in insult to frum Jews.

        The beit Hamikdash didn’t allow reform or masorti to come in their to do as they please, nor should the kotel.

        Since you seem to be so open minded about Jewish observance, let me put the question back to you:

        What if a new branch of reform Jews forms a new custom, where instead of praying, they take a dump, kind of the way the moabites worshiped baal peor?

        Will you allow them to shit all over the kotel and say “They should not be forced into Orthodox traditions, right or wrong”?

        • Dave March 10, 2010, 10:02 AM

          Well obviously theres a fine line Phil. The difference is Reform/Masorti Jews are still worshipping in the same manner as Orthodox Jews, they just let women wear tallises and lead prayer. The only difference between the Orthodox men and the Women of the wall is the liturgy (some prayers are modified and their gender is different). Obviously their ideology is miles apart, but how they pray isn’t radically different.

          And yes, even if the frum are offended, it doesn’t make a bit of difference. Israel is a Democracy with freedom of religion, not a Theocracy with a Sanhedrin. Besides, like a stated previously, the Kotel was never considered a shul and never had a mechitza until recently (you can check Rabbi Maryles on that one).

          Frum Jews do now own the Kotel or have any more rights to it than the Women of the Wall, who for a long time prayed there in peace. I know you don’t like the liberal Jewish movements, but theres a concept called freedom that must be respected, even if you disagree. I don’t agree with all their practices either but you can’t force Orthodox beliefs on other Jews.

          • Phil March 10, 2010, 10:38 AM

            Dave,

            Judaism is not a democracy. Israel might call it self one, but is far from it as well.

            You can tell Rabbi Mary that the Beit Hamikdash was built with an ezrat nashim, and it was more than a shul. It was under strict laws which were not up for debate by “enlightened” jackasses.

            You still didn’t answer my question regarding the hypothetical situation where reformers would decide to crap instead of pray.

            • Dave March 10, 2010, 11:59 AM

              I didn’t want to dignify your insults with a response. If anyone prayed like that they should not be allowed in any respectable shul or holy place. Please don’t engage in hyperbole and exaggerations. They don’t bolster your argument, they just reveal misconceptions.

              Its Rabbi Maryles, he has a a blog if you want to read it. He’s a centrist and MO and explains it better than I do. The Beit Hamikdash had very strict rules yes, but that was when we still had a temple and when the Third Temple is built those rules will be followed again.

              You’re right, Judaism is not a democracy and anyone who is Orthodox understands that. They rely on poseks because the people cannot decide for themselves. But thats purely intra-denominational, not inter-denominational. Within a single movement its understandable, but when it comes to several groups, one group can’t impose its beliefs on another.

              Israel is a free and democratic state, don’t know whats hard to understand there. Without freedom of religion, Israel will end up like some backwards, third world nation its surrounded by.

              • Phil March 10, 2010, 12:30 PM

                Dave,

                So in essence, you’ve just denied the hypothetical crappers their rights based on your personal or denominational beliefs, as you find it an insult. Sounds exactly like what I proposed.

                Judaism has no room for denominations. Yes, the shulchan aruch might have some conflicting opinions when it comes to certain details or situations, but the arguments are put forth by VALID poskim, not sleazebags that allow interfaith marriages and drive to shul on Shabbat while eating pork sandwiches.

                Authentic Israel and Judaism never had any room for such people. They were deemed apikorsim, and considered inferior to the gentiles living there at the time.

                Modern democracy had nothing whatsoever to do with Judaism, and will not once mashiach comes. People will then realize the truth and repent.

                As for modern day Israel, it’s nowhere near a democracy, and will never be. Arabs have less rights and freedom than Jews, religious Jews have more privileges than non religious Jews, and the state discriminates against settlers, more than it does so againt arabs.

                When will people realize that democracy simply wont work in that part of the world?

                • Dave March 10, 2010, 2:04 PM

                  Theres always a line in terms of whats allowed in public. Defecation is always going to be one of them and thats my personal decisions.

                  Judaism itself does not have room for denominations, but one of the greatest rights is the right to be wrong. Once you take away that right you end up with a society so intent on rooting out wrongness its no longer free.

                  When the moshiach comes there may be no democracy, but until then democracy is the best thing we have.

                  Just because Arabs, religious Jews, and seculars are not treated equally doesn’t not make it a democracy. It makes it an imperfect one in need of fixing, but a democracy nonetheless. Every nation has gone through this struggle.

                  • Phil March 10, 2010, 2:25 PM

                    What kind of democracy allows members of only one religion to emigrate no questions asked, while barring entry/right of return to the other?

                    What kind of democracy allows part of it’s population an army exemption based on the religious schooling they attend, while forcing everyone else into the army?

                    What kind of democracy provides water, electricity and healthcare to it’s enemies, while destroying it’s own synagogues and communities of it’s own citizens?

                    When will you liberal minded people stop convincing yourselves that is Israel is a democracy and come to the realization that the only chance for survival in the mideast is by promoting my brand of justice, based on race and religion?

                    You see, the state’s existence as a “Jewish state” works perfectly well for racists and bigots like myself, yet causes fear and confusion and insecurity among so called liberals such as yourself and the majority of American Jewry.

  • FrumGer March 10, 2010, 8:38 AM

    Sure they can and should, go try and convert in israel and see if you can have a reform conversion. wont happen. there is only one true yiddishkeit, those that depart from that then that is there decision, but the kotel must be kept up by frumkeit, because they are the only ones to do it. what if korah and his sons became high priest and the levitical priesthood, instead of being destroyed, what kind of judaism would we have today? it would be pagan if nothing else. also look at all the heart ache israel has gone through because of assimilated/ non practicing jews. These women daven more? who care if they shuckle and and laign and look pious, they are not praying to Hashem, they are not being Goy HaKodesh. they are being political, disrespectful, and are trying to cause strife. This isn’t rosa parks on the bus here…these women are not oppressed they are pissed because they are not men. leave our things to us. women wearing tallis tefillin leigning. its like we men cant have any male id markers according to femmy’s. wearing tallis is one of the prides of yiddish men, why do women have to try to steal that? tefillin too… Cant we have anything in this world that is for men? whats wrong with that? women have there things and i want them too. but femmys want to Dominate men, and to me these women are being lead by their yetzer hora, and this all stems from Klipot. It is Jezabel and divination.

  • Bubba Metzia March 10, 2010, 3:16 PM

    They should start praying at the Kotel Katan. It’s much closer to the Holy of Holies and it doesn’t have all restrictions that are at the main Kotel plaza.

  • FrumGer March 10, 2010, 6:36 PM

    And Israel is not a democracy, and the Kotel is not a democratic site..
    Israel has democratic features, but retains its jewish statehood very well, if anything Israel is more socialist than any other country i can think of. it was founded by kibbutzim, man… you cant get more socialist dogma then on a kibbutz…

    • Phil March 10, 2010, 10:29 PM

      I always found those early kibbutznick more communist than soicalist The tactics they used to try to defeat their opponents were facist as well. Ben Gurion vs Begin, Labor + Likud vs. Kahane, etc.

      When you add the racist national anthem and laws like the right of return for Jews only, I really wonder how some idiots have the nerve to call Israel a democracy. The lie is repeated so often, that people actually start believing it.

      History has proven itself over and over.In that region, the jungle law of survival of the fittest by any & all means necessary has always prevailed. Anything less is bound to fail.

  • anonymous March 11, 2010, 3:41 AM

    wearing a talit is an issur de’oraisah for a woman;Beged Ish. it is just like any other avairah being committed in public and especially at such a holy place. The point is not men controlling women; the same response would be directed at a man coming in and wearing garments meant for women. why is it that every goy comes in with respect- they even cover their heads when there is absolutely no halachik requirement for them to? not even a minhag. Yet these whack-job-ultra-lefties come no respect for the place. It is just like the gay pride parades that go on all over. the extreme left is always very in-your-face when they know it disturbs people. when was the last time there was a heterosexual pride parade? At the end of the day the problem is essentially intellectual dishonesty. They have certain practices that they observe because they claim that is what G-d wants of them and the source is the Torah, yet when you study the Torah the exact opposite is wanted of them. Now if someone doesn’t know any better e.g. they were raised reform, then that’s one thing. But to take it to the streets and do that publicly and get into fights about it-you had better know what you’re talking about, and intellectual honesty should be a basic requirement.

    • DrumIntellect March 15, 2010, 5:32 PM

      Wear a tallit is begged ish? Are you serious?
      A tallis is merely any four cornered garment. That’s it. The tassels are required for men during the day and optional for women.
      Stop looking for reasons to be offended and start looking for ways to be human.

  • FrumGer March 11, 2010, 10:38 AM

    I would say many Kibbutzim has a mix of both ideologies, and still the ideologies are so similar and over lap in many areas but you’re right communism is a main building block of Israel, and Most definatly facism. Take the recent short war a year and a half ago with Gaza, how many Israeli’s died in comparison to the miriad of thousands of Palestinians that died. The IDA takes no shit . And I say Yasher Koach . it reminds me the line in the movie Munich when Daniel Craig says – The only blood i care about is Jewish Blood. Now I am not quite that extreme all the time, but there are many many times i couldn’t posibably care less for the goyim, especially when they attack any yidden.
    Its just that in america the words Communism or Socialism are ultimo evil, so inorder to justify Israel they have to spin the facts to make it sound like its a democracy so that the american people with then support israels existence. its so funny right wingers are so scared of anything socialist or communist, they hate the words so much because so much indoctrination that goes into making communists or socialist out to be basically the greatest form of evil that could ever possibably exist.. No one stops to learn what communist and socialist doctrine entails and what injusticies were and still are going on to create them.

    That is whats going on now in america about healthcare. the people are so indoctrinated that socialism is bad, the fear/ propoganda has not been so rampant since McCarthyism. I don’t really think much of Obama one way or another he is just a face, but Not Socializing healthcare is Caveman. It reminds me of when people thought the world was flat, and the sun in the sky was a god. the only modernized country in the world and some say the most modernized has the most backwards, greedy, terrible sytem of healthcare.. yet we don’t think two thoughts of the public schools, librarys, Police Dept., Fire Dept., Water systems, Road way systems that are all socialized as should they be.

    People are sheep and they buy into any affective Marketing campaign of propaganda, like Israel is a democracy for an example, or like America is a democracy for better example. America is a capitalist state, the gov is run by corperations, the law the supreme courts overturned recently proved that, now corperations can legally buy people in our goverment. Special interest groups will be in a bidding wars over our congress, and all i can say is that our house and senate is the new Wall St.

  • FrumGer March 11, 2010, 10:42 AM

    anonymous-

    very well said, and I like that terminology- Intellecual dishonesty.

  • Aliza, one of the Women of the Wall June 3, 2010, 7:55 AM

    The rabbi of the kotel has introduced a proposal that the back part of the kotel plaza, where women and men currently mingle, be separate-sex. What do people think of that?

    • Heshy Fried June 25, 2010, 5:37 AM

      That would provide better ogling options for us men, the current situation sucks because they are interspersed with the men so that you cannot really see them alone in good light the shadows kill the view.

  • Aliza, one of the Women of the Wall June 25, 2010, 4:54 AM

    p.s.
    That would mean, for example, that tourists could not take a picture of their whole family with the kotel in the background.

Cancel reply

Leave a Comment