>>I too have pictures of frum family members showing all of their hair (once again, great job making an accusation without basis of facts).<<
I know you had relatives who didn’t cover their hair. That was my initial point. Unless ones whole family is from Hungary, they have had many relativs and great grandmothers who didn’t cover their hair.
>>By saying what you did, “He wrote that it is no longer a dover sheberva and therefore a man can make a brocha in front of uncovered hair” you ventured into a halachic conversation<<
If you followed my debate with Joseph, you would have seen that my claim wasn’t one of halacha. Rather he tried to correct me stating that women indeed covered their hair. I quoted the Novordoker Rav who wrote that in his time the uncovered hair of women was so rampant that it no longer constituted a davar hamekusa. Without that sentence I would not have been able to use him as a source for my point. It stresses the fact that it was more than just a few women, but rather whole communities.
>>Where is the ignorance. I only requested that you make it known why you were quoting the aruch in the first place, which you did not. <<
I appologize for using that term.
I have written countless times what my purpose in quoting the Aruch was.
>>but your original comment and subsequent justifications are akin to saying that we say 3 times day in davening : ??-??-????? ??? ??-?????? ?????.<<
2 + 2 = 6