August 9, 2012 4:47 pm at 4:47 pm #891421
Cv’sh that you would be from a mo background??
I think that says it all.
I think perspective and reason is lost on you. I only hope it’s not lost on others.August 9, 2012 5:39 pm at 5:39 pm #891422
Choppy: Actually, this was a not Frum woman. Apparently those pants were considered very stylish a few years back.August 9, 2012 5:50 pm at 5:50 pm #891423MorahRachMember
C’v you are from a mo background? That is one of the rudest comments I have seen on here. C’v I raise my kids to be so closed minded and to think so low of a fellow Jew.August 9, 2012 6:23 pm at 6:23 pm #891424ovadiayosefrocksParticipant
Rav Ovadia says that you need strict modesty!
PLEASE NOTE There is a picture of Rav Ovadia Yosef and his family which was recently published on YNET. The article is not written in a respectful manner. This post is to defend Rav Yosef against the claims of the article. The claim is made that Rav Yosef’s wife is not dressed according to the laws of modesty. I just want to point out that there is no question that the standards of tznius have changed to be much more machmir. But her hair covering is halachically correct according to the Chasam Sofer and Rav Moshe Feinstein – and obviously according to Rav Yosef. Thus this is clearly an example of shifting standards of halacha but the bottom line is that she fullfilled the halacha and standards of those days – even though such is not be acceptable today. It also is not possible to rely on this to ignore todays standards.August 9, 2012 6:25 pm at 6:25 pm #891425yichusdikParticipant
Ladies, I don’t know if he is spiritually prepared to take such tochecho from members of the gentler gender.August 10, 2012 1:02 am at 1:02 am #891426
A loose pair of pants – even very loose – has the great disadvantage that the contours can be seen when a woman is taking strides – when walking – and can also be seen when standing and when she is seated.August 10, 2012 2:21 am at 2:21 am #891427
Ready now: You are mixing concepts and arguments like nothing else. My Rebbe told me that the reason women can’t wear pants is because it shows the separation of the legs. Which is fine. So I would be uncomfortable saying that a girl can wear even very loose pants. But when most of the Poskim talk about it they say that the issue is that it shows the form of the legs, not just the separation. So if they were loose enough to not show the form at all then there shouldn’t really be a problem. And if the Poskim say it’s not a problem, then that means that a normal guy wouldn’t think anything improper if he just sees her. It’s nice to bring up additional concepts to worry about, but if the Poskim weren’t worried about it then why are you?August 10, 2012 3:26 am at 3:26 am #891428shlishiMember
The poskim are worried about it.August 10, 2012 4:17 am at 4:17 am #891429
Sam 2 said:
A) please, tell me, (other than calling them nasty and immodest), what is wrong Halachically with loose pants?
B) My Rebbe told me that the reason women can’t wear pants is because it shows the separation of the legs. Which is fine. So I would be uncomfortable saying that a girl can wear even very loose pants.
Shlishi agrees the Poskim are worried about it.You Sam 2 was the one who asked for additional concepts,- but maybe it will help the ones who really want to learn.August 10, 2012 4:36 am at 4:36 am #891430
Ready now: You entirely missed my point. I was trying to, in a very nice way, say that my Rebbe’s reason is not the one the Poskim bring down.
And Shlishi, please bring me any source at all that says that the issue is that it shows the separation of the legs and not that it’s form-fitting.August 10, 2012 5:42 am at 5:42 am #891431
I will say it to you in a nice way,Sam 2, your Rebbe’s reason is the Poskim’s reason ,however, you can’t see it just at the moment. The reason women shouldn’t wear trousers is because the Torah says so in several different ways so all Yidden should understand it in a split second.
Sam 2,keep trying – you should succeed. Hope your Shabbos is a good one.August 10, 2012 3:51 pm at 3:51 pm #891432
yichusdik -“Ladies, I don’t know if he is spiritually prepared to take such tochecho from members of the gentler gender.”
Their Mussar is misplaced. I was talking about people who aren’t Shomrei Torah OoMitzvos, even though they consider themselves part of the MO community.August 10, 2012 4:58 pm at 4:58 pm #891433rabbiofberlinParticipant
I try to avd getting entangled in matters that people have very set positions but the chatter over the past days have impelled me to add the following: All the “reasons’ given for women not wearing pants are after the fact, in other words, they try to justify an issur and it has nothing to do with beged ish. The plain facts are the following: if the pants are made for women, there is no beged ish problem involved. As far as all the other reasons- please look into the Bach (I would hope that the Bach is enough of a possek for some of you…) and he discusses women wearing pants on cold days in the market and he allows them!! so, please, if you can’t accept the Bach,say so. All that said- btw- clearly there should be an element of Tsenius even when wearing pants.August 10, 2012 7:04 pm at 7:04 pm #891434
It sounds so much like you are maligning the whole mo community. Although my hashkafah is more right wing, I wouldn’t put down the whole community. I think every community has mailos. Some say nix Lubavitch because of the whole meshichist issue, but ignore the enormous chassadim the Lubavitch do that others wouldn’t. Mo may not be perfect, but I wouldn’t give the impression that it’s members are not orthodox. I think it’s really important to be accurate as much as possible here, as there are people reading this who’ve never met or spoken to a mo person and make some very inaccurate assumptions that cause a terrible divide in the community.August 10, 2012 7:50 pm at 7:50 pm #891435
Rob: Even if they’re made for women, it could still be Beged Ish. It depends upon what the prevalent custom is as to who wears that type of clothing.
Ready now: In what several ways does the Torah make it clear that women didn’t wear trousers? In fact, Pashtus is that there is a Takanas Ezra that they have to (at the very least under their skirts).August 12, 2012 5:00 am at 5:00 am #891436
mommamia22 -“It sounds so much like you are maligning the whole mo community.”
Because you jumped to conclusions -I am not required to defend myself on them. I made myself clear -I’m against people who consider themselves MO, but pick and choose which Halachos they want to keep.August 12, 2012 7:31 am at 7:31 am #891437
You said “cv’sh that you would be from a mo background”.
You did not say “cv’sh that you would be irreligious stating that you are from a mo background”.
I understood your words well enough. Whether you meant to say the exact words you wrote might be another story.
You did not make yourself clear, as evidenced by the outraged reactions and responses you got.
You also state that a good % of the mo community is not frum. You did not specify initially that you meant the uws.
You pride yourself on your scientific mind, but you failed to use it here when making a global statement without evidence to back up your claims.August 12, 2012 1:31 pm at 1:31 pm #891439far eastMember
Health- so you are “against ” people who aren’t good enought for you? Maybe you should start workIng on yourself before you criticize other JewsAugust 12, 2012 3:30 pm at 3:30 pm #891440
mommamia22 – “You said “cv’sh that you would be from a mo background”.
You did not say “cv’sh that you would be irreligious stating that you are from a mo background”.”
Exactly; because even the Frum ones are in the Geder of “Oiy L’Rosha V’oiy L’schaino.” So I would not want to live or grow up in such a community.
“I understood your words well enough. Whether you meant to say the exact words you wrote might be another story.”
I said what I meant and meant what I said.
“You did not make yourself clear, as evidenced by the outraged reactions and responses you got.”
Oh, I did make myself clear, but you jumped to conclusions that I said what I did without good reason.
“You also state that a good % of the mo community is not frum. You did not specify initially that you meant the uws.”
While you have Non-Frum people part of every MO community – I was talking about the UWS. I would Not have to specify which community I was talking about because this is the Topic’s subject. Sorry that you don’t read the OP.
“You pride yourself on your scientific mind, but you failed to use it here when making a global statement without evidence to back up your claims.”
Even without a scientific mind but just with a little sense people can post their opinions based on logic instead of emotions. It seems that some have trouble doing this!August 12, 2012 5:25 pm at 5:25 pm #891441mewhoParticipant
if your friend would move to flatbush then everything would get better.August 13, 2012 7:06 pm at 7:06 pm #891444SayIDidIt™Participant
I would like to defend MorahRach. She was not saying that girls/ladies are lovely heng pants. All she was saying is that her friend was not wearing torn up/faded jeans but colorful and lovely ones. In no way was she saying ladies should wear pants. When she saw her friend in pants, she was shocked.
SiDi™August 13, 2012 11:24 pm at 11:24 pm #891445
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef did not say that women may wear trousers. He allowed a small group of girls to wear trousers temporarily until the girls could find longer, modest skirts to wear-a matter of days.
Takanas Ezra said that women must wear underwear under their skirts just as men do.
Yad Haketana – as quoted in the Darkei Teshuvah 9, and Divrei Chaim vol. 2 s. 62. , also Yabi’a Omer ( this by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef ) ibid – also – NO trousers to be worn by women.
Once again there is nothing lovely in trousers for women, whether brand new , or colorful or old or torn.August 13, 2012 11:57 pm at 11:57 pm #891446
Ready now: Where is this Rashba?August 14, 2012 12:18 am at 12:18 am #891447
Once again there is nothing lovely in trousers for women, whether brand new , or colorful or old or torn.August 14, 2012 12:42 am at 12:42 am #891448
Ready now: You are being slightly disingenuous as that is not the precise case the Rashba is talking about. It’s a good Mareh Makom though. Unfortunately, the Shulchan Aruch (YD 182:1) rejects this Rashba, and the Rama rejects it so strongly as to say that what the Rashba Assers is even Muttar L’chatchilah. So bringing it down for a P’sak is just misleading.August 14, 2012 11:32 pm at 11:32 pm #891450
The question was asked where is the source for the Rashba (3 posts above) and it was given (2 posts above). Argue, if you must with Rabbi Jack Abramowitz about Rashba if you wish. We know who will prevail.
Written so eloguently by Rav Ellison in “HaTzneah Lechet”, page 192 note 138 is the following:
The poskim do not allow women to wear trousers.August 15, 2012 12:35 am at 12:35 am #891451
Ready now: I think I will say something to Rabbi Abromowitz when I get a chance. There really is no reason to quote a Tshuvas Harashba L’halachah L’ma’aseh once it was completely rejected by the Shulchan Aruch and Rama. We don’t Pasken like that Rashba.
I’m not trying to say that pants are Muttar to wear. It’s clearly been accepted as something that isn’t done the vast majority of the time. I was just trying to prove that your comment that “all pants” was not 100% accurate as some Poskim are Mattir very loose pants (which many rely on in outdoor situations where a skirt will not be enough-e.g. rock climbing). It is also clear, though, that from the accepted P’sak of the Shulchan Aruch there is no issue whatsoever of Begged Ish for a woman to wear pants. That Rashba is a good Mareh Makom, but it was completely rejected L’ma’aseh.August 15, 2012 1:49 am at 1:49 am #891452
Shulchan Aruch says no trousers for women and Rashba was not rejected.August 15, 2012 3:32 am at 3:32 am #891453
Ready now: Where does the Shulchan Aruch say that women can’t wear pants? The question wasn’t Shayach until much less than 100 years ago. And I brought down where the SH”A says the exact opposite of the Rashba without even mentioning it (YD 182:1). Saying that the Rashba wasn’t rejected is just false.August 15, 2012 10:44 am at 10:44 am #8914542scentsParticipant
According to the poskim in kesubos, wearing pants is against Daas yehudis.
Even if there is no mekor to this idea, because the women don’t do it, it becomes Daas yehudis.August 15, 2012 2:06 pm at 2:06 pm #891455
2scents: That is true. I don’t disagree with that (except maybe to make exceptions for outdoor activities where a skirt wouldn’t suffice and only then if the pants are very loose; I’d have to look over those sections of Even Haezer before saying that with any confidence though).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.