Letter about sheitels

Men don’t know women and women don’t know men. That’s why there are all these assumptions and theories. Fact one: there is no love and nothing that is connecting women and men now. That’s why You have such a movement like yotzim besheela. Because You lack comfort and mercy.
Fact two: its called shma Israel. LISTEN to your wife. Like G-d said to Abraham. Nekuda.

Avrum. You seem to be using the pasuk any way you want. It was an _action_ that was done by sotah to embarras the woman. Saying now woman have to cover their hair because a pasuk says something not exactly outright sounds exactly like your using the words to serve an agenda. I can also chop up any sentence and take one word or one letter and make it fit to whatever belief system I have. Talk about making anything serve your own purposes lol. Who’s doing that me or you. I like to read things _in context_ and live in reality. Hi

Ujm so?

Emesdik even if a married woman is supposed to do this and sapposed to do that your opinion makes sense I’m not negating that but. I think your just projecting your anger at yourself into them. Chill. Thoughts are not action. Second the yester hara problem is more to do with the fact that monogamy isn’t a mans nature. Maybe ask your rav if you can take another wife cuz otherwise it will lead to sin

Ujm so put blinders on when you go out then and don’t be human

Ellie7:
You wrote:
“The vibe of the whole letter is placing men’s issues squarely on women’s shoulders. You’re turning women into the bad guy and framing men as poor, innocent bystanders.”

Not sure how you came to that conclusion. It’s not “good (men) vs. bad (women)”. It’s that some women are doing something improper, regardless of whether or not they realize that it is improper.

“The way you describe the first type of man, especially-‘The Struggling but Sincere’-made me cringe. Why don’t you think that most women-even in the long, lace sheitals aren’t struggling but sincere? Why do you assume they aren’t trying their best? Why are you viewing them as an evil entity out to get men?”

Again, he’s not criticizing those women as “bad” and “out to get men”; the women, too, could certainly be “struggling but sincere” and “trying their best”. But, again, he’s raising awareness that those women may not realize that what they are doing is problematic.

“You can’t blame women for men’s issues. Yes, perhaps in an asifa for women this can be emphasized-without placing responsibility for men on their shoulders. No one bears responsibility for another’s actions. Period.”

I’m curious from which rabbi or BY school you learned that “hashkafa”. There is actually a straight-out mitzva in the Torah of “Lo saamod al dam raiecha”. According to your “hashkafa”, if you see someone at risk of drowning and you are able to help but choose not to save them from drowning, then that’s perfectly fine. But the Torah says otherwise. In fact, ironically for this discussion, if a man doesn’t save a woman at risk of drowning, then he is called a chassid shoteh.

There is also “lifnei iver lo sitain michshol”. Etc.

So, I think this is the crux of your issue. You are claiming that, as a woman, you are entitled to wear any sheitel you want (and you noted that you do wear a sheitel that is more tzanua than some out there) and not be considered wrong for doing so. Even if secular “culture” implies that, liHavdil, the Torah very much disagrees. So, yes, women do need to be aware of what they are doing and the effect of that on men (and other women, too, like being machshil them via peer pressure or negatively affecting their marriages, etc.).

Please try harder to view this from the Torah’s perspective. That should help with the anger you feel about this issue.

none2.0,

“You seem to be using the pasuk any way you want.”

Absolutely not! I only interpret it that way because we have a tradition brought down and codified in the gemara. I’m not going to deviate from that.

“It was an _action_ that was done by sotah to embarras the woman.”

And where in the pasuk does it say it was done davka to embarrass the woman? That’s not a plain reading either, it’s an interpretation. And where does this interpretation come from? The same place mine did! So the interesting question is why do you take chazal’s interpretation for the reason her hair is uncovered as an axiom, but reject everything else chazal say about it?

“I can also chop up any sentence and take one word or one letter and make it fit to whatever belief system I have. Talk about making anything serve your own purposes lol.”

No you can’t. The rules for interpretation come from our tradition and have strict parameters. For example, a gezeira shava is a way to derive a halacha for one case based on similar or identical words used in a separate, seemingly unrelated case. But we can’t just make up our own gezeira shava. It’s only valid if it has a mesora.

The rules come from tradition blah blah. Do you think for yourself. And who made those rules to apply to everyone. I still have a brain and my own thoughts. do you have yours?

none2.0,

“The rules come from tradition blah blah. Do you think for yourself.”

Yup.

“And who made those rules to apply to everyone.”

Hashem your G-d and the King of the Universe, who happens to not be what you see in the mirror.

*hair

none2.0,

“You have no idea how liberal your way of thinking sounds. Let’s use for example liberal speak. They use the words “red herring” they say there’s a “specific way” to interpret certain things that if someone is doing XYZ even if it makes perfect sense they are just using a straw man…..you don’t see the pattern your using”

This whole section makes no sense. What are you trying to say? Just a bunch or random stuff you think will bother me?

“What about reading the plain text and understanding it in context.”

That’s the very first step of learning. And based on your prior posts, you’re not capable of it.

“I’m ok with everyone’s interactions but I have my own too.”

You mean interpretations, and no, you are obviously not ok with everyone’s. Otherwise you wouldn’t be trying to insult me by saying I can’t think for myself, or whatever weird stuff you wrote above.

“And how do we know who’s is the truth. Not which authority tells me “how” to interpret things but whatever is of sound mind. Does that make sense. Thanks”

Yeah it makes sense inasmuch as I know what you’re trying to say, but it is stupid. You wrote somewhere that you’re not advocating for moral relativism, but your contention here is the textbook definition of moral relativism.

none2.0,

“ופרע את ראש האישה can roughly translate to loosen or uncover her [*hair]. You need an authority figure to tell you how your allowed to translate something….sounds like manipulation to me “

ראש means head.