December 9, 2016 7:50 am at 7:50 am #1204589
LU -“Health – my comment was based on some of the things you said. I don’t want to repeat them, so please look back on your comments and you will see what I was referring to.”
I did look back and there is nothing that I said that you could come to the conclusion that I should seek new friends, especially if you were Daning L’caf Zecus!
Unless you think that e/o holds you can’t have internet, even if it’s filtered?!? (Btw, this isn’t true.)December 9, 2016 5:08 pm at 5:08 pm #1204590
WTP, that’s a good question. I guess it depends on the context. If someone says “it’s night”, and I bring ample evidence that it is day, I am indeed invalidating his or her opinion, and I don’t feel it is wrong to do so. That doesn’t mean I should use harsh language, but presentation of the facts or evidence does sometimes invalidate an opposing view.
In the CR environment, there are so many absolutes tossed around, so many strident opinions and positions, that I think the more evidence based responses to these, the better.
On the other hand, there are many conversations here which depend on opinion or the opinion of another (a rav, an authority, a teacher or a posek) that aren’t expressed as supported by factual evidence, but rather by philosophy or world view and what logically follows from that world view. In that case, it’s my opinion that the argument against it shouldn’t be “that’s factually wrong”, it should rather be “that’s an opinion I don’t share, and here’s why.”
That’s certainly not how I structured my responses when I started here, but it is how I try to do so now.December 10, 2016 8:50 pm at 8:50 pm #1204591WinnieThePoohParticipant
Yichusdik, I appreciate what you are saying, it would be nice if that could be a general rule here.
Anyway, back to the OP. There was a very interesting article in Mishpacha this shabbos in which Miriam Kosman was addressing hashkafa of feminism. She feels that the change in gender roles that have become the norm even in the frum world has seriously impacted on shalom bayis. For example, the challenge for a wife who may be more educated that her husband, and may be providing more of an income in a better job, to be able to respect her husband. I don’t know if this is a contributing factor to escalating divorce rates, but it was definitely food for thought and may be relevant to the original topic.December 11, 2016 1:03 am at 1:03 am #1204592
WTP I think in prior years when the wife had to rely on her husband’s income she would put up with it and didn’t ask for a divorce. But in today’s generation with the wife contributing most of the family income she doesn’t want to put up with it. She sees frum men in her office and wonders why she can’t marry a frum professional like that. I think it’s a more logical explanation then internet addiction or psychological abuse.December 11, 2016 1:51 am at 1:51 am #1204593December 11, 2016 1:54 am at 1:54 am #1204594
If unfortunately it does come to divorce, then there is assistance to help the family, especially the children adjust and cope.
Crown Heights info:
“If a family is going to separate why not go about it in a healthy manner at least for the kids?
Ohel offers support groups that specialize in assisting families that are trying to get through a divorce while educating them on what a healthy divorce or a bad one can do to the children.
Ohel is funding workshops and webinars in which partner children of divorce up with teenagers who have dealt with the same ordeals. Ohel regional family centers are offering these workshops and are taking place in various locations including Brooklyn, New Jersey and Long Island. Call 1-800-603-OHEL for more information.”December 11, 2016 2:15 am at 2:15 am #1204595
LU, you constantly make broad, sweeping claims based upon nothing more than people that you know. Yet, when Health makes a claim based upon the same criteria, you dispute the accuracy. You can’t have it both waysDecember 11, 2016 2:51 am at 2:51 am #1204596
Sure I can – if mine are positive and his are negative.
He was making negative generalizations (as I understood his statements) and I was attacking those negative generalizations. Not a problem – actually both a Mitzvah and a chiyuv.December 11, 2016 4:00 am at 4:00 am #1204597
LU -“Sure I can – if mine are positive and his are negative.”
Stop with your hypocrisy!
For example from your previous post:
“Health – most people who are learning don’t use Internet at all. Anyone who does use Internet is automatically exposed to bad things.”
I don’t think that’s true, especially if it’s filtered.
So tell me – do you think that your post is a negative generalization or not?!?December 11, 2016 4:31 am at 4:31 am #1204598
Health – My statement was a positive generalization since I do think that not using the Internet is a positive thing.
I realize that you don’t think that what you said was negative. I haven’t had a chance to show you why I considered it negative (that will take more time because I have to go back and find the precise quotes), but meanwhile I was responding to lesschumras and explaining why I didn’t think there was anything wrong with my statements.
And I wish you would find a nicer way to express yourself. Instead of “Stop with your hypocrisy!”, it would sound better if you wrote, “It seems to me like you are contradicting yourself”, or something like that. And the exclamation points make things sound more negative, imho.December 11, 2016 4:53 am at 4:53 am #1204599
LU -“Health – My statement was a positive generalization since I do think that not using the Internet is a positive thing.”
But posting this – “Anyone who does use Internet is automatically exposed to bad things.”, is doing just the opposite of positive, which is being Negative!December 11, 2016 5:34 am at 5:34 am #1204600
Anyone exposed to the Internet can also be automatically exposed to good things.
If the tabs are set to good pages, such as Torahanytime shiurs, emails with only permissible communications, Skypes with family, Daily parsha readings, the Internet is used in a public place and/or moderated way by another party, then why does it have to be bad?
Anyone who doesn’t use the Internet can also be exposed to bad things.
I learned that I was so much safer after getting my smartphone. I used to ask random people for directions when I got lost. I relied on and trusted on aquiantances for information because I didn’t have the portable means to do it myself.
Now that I have the Internet at my fingertips, I am less exposed to dangers and risky people because I can get the information more safely and directly.
I know posters are more talking about the dangers if going to certain sites, but even if one doesn’t use the Internet, that person may be more dependent on individuals who may have other interests that may not be as good, even if they are peers.
If someone wants to be only good on the Internet and does histadulus, wouldn’t Hashem help?December 11, 2016 7:11 am at 7:11 am #1204601WinnieThePoohParticipant
Abba_S, according to the article, it is even more than the woman is more independent and capable of taking care of herself, so she does not have to be stuck. It is that when gender roles are changed- also for the husband who has lost his ability to be the “mashpia”, confusion and dissatisfaction results, and the relationship suffers.December 11, 2016 8:02 pm at 8:02 pm #1204602
Health, it was a negative statement about Internet, not about people.
My whole point was that Internet is something that exposes people to bad things even if they are big Yarei Shamayim who don’t want to see such things. I believe I gave the examples of friends of mine who are big Yarei Shamayim who have to use Internet for work and ended up seeing things they didn’t want to.December 11, 2016 8:43 pm at 8:43 pm #1204603
LU -“Health, it was a negative statement about Internet, not about people.”
Why do you keep posting your delusions? “Anyone who does use Internet is automatically exposed to bad things.”
That statement was about people, not the internet!
Did you miss the word “Anyone”?!?December 11, 2016 9:00 pm at 9:00 pm #1204604
1. Anyone means all people – that means it is a reflection on the Internet and not the specific people.
2. I keep posting it because you keep asking questions about my statement so I am being polite and responding to your questions. If you stop asking questions, I will stop answering them.
3. If you disagree, I would appreciate it if you could tell me so politely instead of referring to my opinions as “delusions”.December 11, 2016 9:07 pm at 9:07 pm #1204605
In terms of the fact that Internet causes exposure to bad things, the reason you disagree may be because you have a different interpretation than I do as to what “negative things” are. I am referring to ANYTHING that it is better for a Yid not to see if it can be avoided.
For a man in particular, any picture of anyone who is not dressed according to halacha is something that he is supposed to avoid seeing if possible.
Reading anything that is written by someone who does not have Torahidk hashkafos is a negative thing (I’m not saying that you can’t learn something from it, but it definitely has a negative aspect – you are exposing yourself to non-Torahdik hashkafos and it is better not to be if one can avoid it. It is certainly better for a person’s Ruchnius to be immersed in Torah all day if he can be.)
I know that using Internet usually exposes people to bad things because I know this from my experience, and from the experience of friends who were trying to avoid such things.
Regarding filters, many people who work are not able to use good filters for their jobs. That is why my friends ended up seeing things they didn’t want to see.December 12, 2016 1:47 am at 1:47 am #1204606
LU -“1. Anyone means all people – that means it is a reflection on the Internet and not the specific people.”
Not at all! It’s a reflection on everyone.
This includes Frum Yidden, in spite of your denial!
“In terms of the fact that Internet causes exposure to bad things, the reason you disagree may be because you have a different interpretation than I do as to what “negative things” are. I am referring to ANYTHING that it is better for a Yid not to see if it can be avoided.
For a man in particular, any picture of anyone who is not dressed according to halacha is something that he is supposed to avoid seeing if possible.”
With filtering – you can avoid all pictures – if you so prefer!
“Reading anything that is written by someone who does not have Torahidk hashkafos is a negative thing (I’m not saying that you can’t learn something from it, but it definitely has a negative aspect – you are exposing yourself to non-Torahdik hashkafos and it is better not to be if one can avoid it. It is certainly better for a person’s Ruchnius to be immersed in Torah all day if he can be.)”
Who says? You can learn many things, like medicine, and there is no negativity, even if written by Goyim!
Also, Chazal say Torah without Derech Eretz won’t be able to continue.
(There are exceptions.) But according to you Chazal should have never said such a statement!
“I know that using Internet usually exposes people to bad things because I know this from my experience, and from the experience of friends who were trying to avoid such things.”
So you’re basing your opinions’ about e/o because of a few of your friends?!?
“Regarding filters, many people who work are not able to use good filters for their jobs. That is why my friends ended up seeing things they didn’t want to see.”
So the solution to that – is only to take a job where they have good filters, eg. in a Frum company!December 12, 2016 4:51 am at 4:51 am #1204607BigGolemParticipant
It seems that most on this thread believe the main culprit is bad stuff on the internet. While it’s no doubt a factor, to say it’s the main or only cause, is much too simplistic. It’s also another way of saying it’s all the guys’ fault, which is entirely unfair.December 12, 2016 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm #1204608
Health, by now you must realize that LU bases all of her generalizations upon a handful of acquaintances.
LU , are all of your friends such shameless gossips that they share with you the intimate details of their divorces? Do they say ” LU, noone else knows, but despite my sterling reputation, I secretly surf inappropriate websites” ? Of coarse not. Then why do you keep making sweeping assertions based upon your circle of acquaintances?December 12, 2016 1:14 pm at 1:14 pm #1204609☢️ Rand0m3x 🎲Participant
She said they were exposed to things they hadn’t wanted to be,
not that they were secret shmutz addicts. There’s a difference.December 12, 2016 2:41 pm at 2:41 pm #1204610Avram in MDParticipant
LU, you constantly make broad, sweeping claims…
by now you must realize that LU bases all of her generalizations…
Pot calling the kettle black?December 12, 2016 2:55 pm at 2:55 pm #1204611
Avram, no, it’s not. I’ve asked her repeatedly to back up her sweeping assertions, which are routinely ignored. I’m not generalizing g; I’m asking how she knows the actual , private details of the divorces that she based her generalizations on. How does she know that none of the men in kollel don’t secretly surf the internet? Does LU realize that they won’t tell her?December 12, 2016 3:22 pm at 3:22 pm #1204612Avram in MDParticipant
Avram, no, it’s not. I’ve asked her repeatedly to back up her sweeping assertions, which are routinely ignored.
Hogwash. I’ve followed this thread too. At the beginning of this thread, lilmod ulelamaid was quite careful to prepend her statements with phrases such as “I think”, or “Maybe”, and occasionally added statements such as, “I might be wrong.” And she was respectful of others’ opinions. She did make an assertion right before your first post of seeing a correlation between short courtship and healthy marriage, which you could totally have questioned. But instead, you launched this invective:
Lu, are you Joseph? You keep justifying your opinions by using the ambiguous “many people”. How many is many and please cite use actual stats ( and cite your sources ) to support your claims
That request didn’t even make sense based on what she wrote before. In a thread full of personal opinions, why are you singling out lilmod ulelamaid for this harshness and extra-stringent standard?December 12, 2016 5:40 pm at 5:40 pm #1204613
LU, while I do not intend to get into a discussion of the dangers of the internet, I think that by highlighting it in this context, it is a bit of a cop out, looking for an external rationale instead of looking at the husband and wife and what they are or are not doing to strengthen, enhance, and safeguard their marriage. Again, it all comes down to communication.
And it doesn’t have to be “dangerous” internet interactions. If, for example, a spouse is habitually on the YW Coffee room, lets say in the evenings instead of spending time with their other half, that indicates they are not communicating, and one spouse is seeking something they aren’t getting in their relationship, even if it is simply intellectual stimulation. The internet is one way this could happen, the phone another, the back porch another, or staying longer after maariv another. Its the communication, or lack or strngth threof that is the challenge, not necessarily the internet.
It is inherent in close knit and insular communities to look outwards for reasons for challenges. That is what keeps them insular. Often enough, that is a good thing. But when it comes to the single most important relationship that an individual can have in their life, it is a disservice to avoid the obvious.December 12, 2016 8:28 pm at 8:28 pm #1204614
Yichusdik – I was not the one who said that Internet is the reason for divorce. I actually did not think it was the culprit in most cases that I know of, but I was willing to be open-minded and acknowledge that it is possible that those people who are saying that Internet is the major reason for the extreme surge in divorce are right. I do not know enough to know if it is or not, and I am willing to acknowledge even though I haven’t seen that.December 12, 2016 9:22 pm at 9:22 pm #1204615The little I knowParticipant
I am keenly aware of the dangers of the internet. Yet, it gets the blame finger for quite a bit more than it should. I have heard the street, as well as noted rabbonim and roshei yeshivos claim that the internet is the cause for today’s OTD population. This is clearly false. There were problems long before the existence of the internet. Ask anyone who works with the OTD population – the kids were going “off” before their internet use. They were on their way “out” and found the accessibility of the internet one of the vices that would accept them. (OTD patterns are almost always to be blamed on REJECTION.)
I am not easy going about the need to filter and place limits on internet access. The Gedolei Yisroel do not need, but have my support for the takanos to accomplish this. And the boundaries are there to protect all of us from a whole lot of toxic experiences. But it is not the cause. It becomes the next step.
If a husband or wife turns to the internet to replace connection with a spouse, we have a bigger issue of the relationship to address, not the internet itself. There are lots of danger zones out there, and the internet is one of them. Why would someone run there if they were happy here? That’s the marriage issue that needs attention. Stop childishly blaming everything on the internet.December 12, 2016 9:27 pm at 9:27 pm #1204616
LU, it seemed so from your post(s). my mistake.December 12, 2016 11:02 pm at 11:02 pm #1204617
Yichusdik – thanks for the admission. We can add you to the list of people who can admit when they are mistaken. 🙂
When you have these threads with all kinds of tangents, it can be complicated figuring out what the context of each post is.December 12, 2016 11:56 pm at 11:56 pm #1204618
TLIK -“Yet, it gets the blame finger for quite a bit more than it should. I have heard the street, as well as noted rabbonim and roshei yeshivos claim that the internet is the cause for today’s OTD population. This is clearly false.”
It’s a scapegoat! There are so many problems, but they’re all swept under the carpet!
If I’d start listing them – no one would believe it.December 13, 2016 1:59 am at 1:59 am #1204619Sam2Participant
LU is a woman? For some reason I always assumed otherwise.December 13, 2016 2:44 am at 2:44 am #1204620
Sam2 – join the club. When I first joined CR, everyone thought I was a boy until I disillusioned them.December 13, 2016 3:03 am at 3:03 am #1204621
“I have heard the street, as well as noted rabbonim and roshei yeshivos claim that the internet is the cause for today’s OTD population. This is clearly false.”
That sentence sounds inappropriate to me. You don’t say “Noted Rabbanim and Roshei Yeshiva say….” and then follow it with “that is clearly false”.
It also makes no sense. If the Rabbanim say it, it can’t be “clearly false”. The fact that something is clear to you but not to Rabbanim makes it “clearly false”? That is inappropriate and illogical and kind of gaavadik. If the Rabbanim are in fact saying something that appears to you to be clearly false, maybe you should try to figure out why they are saying something that seems to be clearly false. Maybe they know more than the average person does. Or maybe they didn’t mean what you thought they meant.
In terms of your assertion that it is clearly false because kids were going OTD before the Internet, it may be a question of numbers. There have probably been kids going off since the world was created, but the question is how many. There seems to have been an explosion in recent years, so it can be because of the Internet. I did hear recently from someone in the field that what is happening today is that as a result of the Internet, kids go from at-risk to OTD much faster (because of the online support and encouragement).
Btw, I am just responding to your statements as you made them. Personally, I don’t think that the Rabbanim are saying that Internet is the only cause of kids going OTD. The Rabbanim that I know that are dealing with the issue are clearly aware that there are many factors and that is not the factor they are targeting.
Perhaps the comments you heard were in the context of giving mussar about internet and they were just pointing out that there are kids who go OTD because of it (and not that it’s the only cause).December 13, 2016 4:36 am at 4:36 am #1204622mw13Participant
No, the Internet is not the cause of all evil in the world. However, it does make accessing all the evil in the world much easier…December 13, 2016 4:50 am at 4:50 am #1204623
mw13 +1December 13, 2016 10:14 am at 10:14 am #1204624
In terms of your assertion that it is clearly false because kids were going OTD before the Internet, it may be a question of numbers. There have probably been kids going off since the world was created, but the question is how many. There seems to have been an explosion in recent years,
It depends on how you define OTD. Is smoking OTD? Kayin killed Heval in a fight is that OTD? As far as there being an explosion in recent years. about 50 years ago about 25% of yeshiva graduates went to college and went off the derech so actually fewer people are going OTD. The internet just makes it easier an more accessible to get things that will encourage people to go OTD. While before you would need to go out and search for it, the internet brings it straight to your home.December 13, 2016 8:21 pm at 8:21 pm #1204625twistedParticipant
Opinion and anecdote: As one seeking a zivug sheni, and for reasons unusual, I cannot use shadchanim, rather certain match sites. From my perspective, there is an inexhaustible supply of divorcees, and this is in the young grandfather and young grandmother cohort. I can’t really tell the sub-category rate of not recently divorced among them, but I sense that they are many. The most terrifying prospect for me is to become unstuck from being “stuck in my ways” and this is probably a common thing. It makes the ‘too picky” 23 year old look flexibleDecember 13, 2016 8:36 pm at 8:36 pm #1204626
What is an example of being “stuck”?December 14, 2016 2:04 am at 2:04 am #1204628
Avrum in MD – +1! Thank you very much for sticking up for me! Sorry I didn’t comment earlier. I was actually busy writing a long post to LC that got deleted when my Internet decided to crash just as I tried posting it.December 15, 2016 3:55 pm at 3:55 pm #1204630☕ DaasYochid ☕Participant
Avram in MD: +1December 16, 2016 12:41 am at 12:41 am #1204636
DY: “Avram in MD: +1”
DY +1December 16, 2016 2:35 am at 2:35 am #1204637HASHKAFAHMASTER613Member
hashkafakly it is quite simple- more tv and movies (narashkeit) = more divorce. we think marriage is always good and adventurous and always easy when in reality it takes work. Goyish music doesn’t help either.December 16, 2016 3:47 am at 3:47 am #1204638
So if you want to have a good marriage, all you need to do is to avoid tv, movies, and goyish music, and you’re all set!
Sounds simple, since I already avoid these things. But, wait, what if I watched tv as a child and teenager? Is my marriage doomed?December 16, 2016 3:53 am at 3:53 am #1204639
What is an example of being “stuck”?
Being stuck is staying with the status quo. For example a ex husband or wife who can’t get over their ex spouse and are not ready to move on with their life.
hashkafakly it is quite simple- more tv and movies (narashkeit) = more divorce.
While the outside society is a factor in the rise of Jewish divorce whether it be TV or internet ,fathers no longer supporting the family I think is a bigger factor. Woman realizing that they can support the family on their own together with the fact that divorce is socially acceptable encourages more divorces.December 16, 2016 4:42 am at 4:42 am #1204640
By stuck I thought maybe twisted meant like having fixed habits maybe.December 18, 2016 1:16 am at 1:16 am #1204641
LB – I think you are right. That is how the phrase “stuck in one’s ways” is usually used. If Twisted had said “stuck” without the “in one’s ways” then Abba would probably be right.December 18, 2016 11:41 pm at 11:41 pm #1204642
LU: You are never doomed.
You may, however, be prone to knowing how to finish these lines:
It’s shake n bake, and I…..
Break me off a piece,….
Easy breezy beautiful….
If you’re good to your car,…..
Trix are for….
I feel like _______ tonight
The best part of waking up,….
They’re Grrrre____! [cereal]
Snap, crackle, and….
Pardon me, would you have any…..?
B”H your husband will find this knowledge quite endearing.December 19, 2016 12:41 am at 12:41 am #1204643
LB -“Trix are for….
They’re Grrrre____! [cereal]
Snap, crackle, and…”
OK, you got me on most of them.
Trix are for kids.
They’re Grrreat! Frosted Flakes.
Snap, crackle, and pop. Kellogg’s Rice KrispiesDecember 19, 2016 1:15 am at 1:15 am #1204644
Health: These are from commercials that I heard/watched incessantly in the 90’s growing up. They are embedded in my memories of youth.
I mentioned them because LU is close to the same age as I am and figured that she may be familiar with them as well.
I did not have cable growing up. If I did, that may have changed things.
Either way, depending on your background and years of watching, your tv commercial memory bank may have different brands and jingles.December 19, 2016 2:37 am at 2:37 am #1204645
LB -“Health: These are from commercials that I heard/watched incessantly in the 90’s growing up.”
The reason I posted is because I want the answers that I don’t know!
So I’ll wait for your reply. You piqued my curiosity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.