July 14, 2009 8:11 pm at 8:11 pm #651418Josh31Participant
With Joseph’s reasoning 10 highly motivated individuals can set a tough standard of Minhag Hamakom and leave everyone else in the “dust”.July 14, 2009 8:34 pm at 8:34 pm #651419
Josh, Which reasoning specifically led you to that misinterpertation?July 14, 2009 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm #651420
GAW, that is my question. How does one define minhag hamakom? Certain places its fairly obvious, but like the syrian community doesn’t seem to be as clear. And what about a place like Brooklyn (Flatbush/Midwood)? There isn’t one clear minhag hamakom there, especially if you are part of a sub-community.
BTW, your response to Joseph was far superior to mine 🙂July 14, 2009 9:16 pm at 9:16 pm #651421
PY: I am curious how you are such a buki on what the average NYC subway rider doesn’t wear? I often travel the subway twice daily, and am not as familiar with the female riders dress choices as yourself.July 14, 2009 10:03 pm at 10:03 pm #651422Josh31Participant
Joseph, all you need to do is declare those who do not follow your chumras as been lax in an area of Halacha, and suddenly they do not count towards determining Minhag Hamakom.
Since the fall of 2004 the evolution of chumros in the right wing has been breath taking in speed.
New chumros about womens stockings are taught as if they are Halacha LeMoshe M’Sinai.
Our daughters recall that their pious grandmothers did not abide by such chumros, and suddenly they will not listen to anything about Tznius.
One Baal Toseif can uproot the whole Torah (r’l).
Now I understand why one error posuls an entire Sefer Torah.July 14, 2009 10:17 pm at 10:17 pm #651423
“My “sect” isn’t lax in any area of halacha. You’ll need to speak to someone who speaks your language.”
Technically, Joseph is correct. The Websters definition of “LAX” (one of them anyway) is
“deficient in firmness : not stringent”.
Surely nobody here would claim that Joseph lacks in stringencies. He is anything BUT lax.July 14, 2009 10:24 pm at 10:24 pm #651424
Joseph, Avraham Avinu’s meseches Avodah Zara had 400 chapters 🙂July 15, 2009 11:22 am at 11:22 am #651425
Not wearing socks or hose in public is grub and prust, plain and simple (sorry, Ames and Shaatra, I’m working on 10 different things right now and can’t come up with how to say that in any language except Yiddish…maybe uncouth but that does not convey the same meaning). And in the case of women who spend money so that they can show off their pedicured feet in open shoes, it is hepech everything tznius and Yiddishkeit are all about even if there is some way of allowing it al pi baseline halacha.
That applies for men and women except in certain situations such as some sports or the beach perhaps. Taking out the garbage or running a quick local errand in house shoes with no socks is understandable and if this is mutar then so be it, but presenting yourself that way in general is not what we should be striving for even if there is a way around it.
Regardless of the technicalities of any particular halacha or minhag, do we want to be grub and prust?July 15, 2009 12:32 pm at 12:32 pm #651426
Dear A600. Thank you for sharing with us your views and feelings and stating publicly that while thousands of torah observant women are within the bounds of halacha, you feel they are “grub” and “prust”. Thats fine, its your opinion and your entitled to it, just remember that thats all it is.
I’ll ask you the following. Is a $4000 shaitel that one can not tell is a shaitel also “grub and prust” according to the poskim who permit the wearing of a shaitel?
What about planning to daven mincha at a rest area on the thruway instead of shul? Is that grub and prust?
You get the point. If people are within the bounds of halacha, leave them be, unless you are their Rav or otherwise have a kesher with them and legitimatly can inspire them to take on chumros.
The more i think of it, i find it quite grub and prust to knock people who do not adhere to the chumros of you, your family or community..July 15, 2009 1:49 pm at 1:49 pm #651427
Those are the standards of proper dress even in the secular world, especially here in Europe. If Torah men and women are living up to only the lowest common denominator in dress standards, then what kind of a message does that convey?
I once dealt with a self defined “Orthodox” so-called businessman in NY who walked around his office in shorts and flip flops (no, it was not a software or Internet firm where this kind of thing is considered cool). That was an immediate tipoff to me that he was a disrespectful, rude, silly jerk, and right I was.
Here in Europe, not wearing socks altogether is considered OK only among teenagers and women who are frankly advertising themselves in public, if not for money in the form of at least a paid for date, then just for attention from guys. Doing that for attention appears to be the essence of “naval birshus haTorah”, plain and simple. Doing it for comfort has its place, maybe in the mountains or at camp for both genders, but is it how we want to present ourselves in most settings?
And men dressed that way are usually students who will outgrow it as soon as they start working for a living.
Those shaitlach are another issue altogether and a psak halacha is needed.
As for davening mincha at a rest area, especially if minyanim are organized, that is elevating the rest area to a mokom kodosh and is therefore admirable. I davened in a mall when I was once caught off guard by early mincha times in a northern city, and that was the exact feeling I had when I did it.July 15, 2009 2:06 pm at 2:06 pm #651428
A600, is that another one of your jokes? Sometimes I have trouble deciphering them…
I guess you are calling the imahos “grub and prust” right? Since they wore sandals?July 15, 2009 2:39 pm at 2:39 pm #651429
We all know that what was considered acceptable dress in any other historical time period has NO bearing on what is accepted today.
Were socks even invented during the time of the emahois? Certainly, KitchenAid mixers were not around during that time, yet we have adopted them and elevate them by using them to make kosher food and especially, from what I understand, the dough for the challah which is an integral part of kedushas Shabbos.
The whole purpose of Judaism is to elevate one’s self and one’s surroundings by serving Hashem. We show that we are doing this by our manner of dress, and while when something is not outright ossur there is no reason to forbid it at the right time and place (in this case camp, the mountains, running errands), we have to
Keep in mind also that in earlier times (just as it still is where I live, as non-Jews here, while respectful, basically get rowdy and drunk once the sun goes down), there was little attractive to us in the way our neighbors lived. So, we kept to ourselves, and whatever our level of observance was given the conditions in which we lived, it was clear who we were and who they were.
Now, let’s face it, in the US and the rest of the Western world, the lifestyle of an educated non-Jew is not repulsive at all. We can interact with our neighbors on the street, in the workplace, and in general, and find that we do have things in common with them on a professional and even a personal level.
However, Hashem made us different from them and especially when we are in a situation where the surrounding non-Jews are not “lowlives”, we have to strive even more to show that we are different, and that we are mamleches kohanim vegoy kadosh.
And that means looking the part in ways where we show that we are acting the part. Copying the lowest common denominator in clothing style while remaining within baseline halacha is OK, but does it really communicate the message we want to communicate? Covering feet is a minor detail, but when we look respectable, and stand out for looking respectable, we are making the statement the Torah wants us to make.
See my story about “Is he a Jew?” in the closed thread that discusses dress to better understand what I mean.
BTW this is my last post until 9 Av, not because of this thread but because I went against what a rav told me about certain types of humor during the 9 days by posting my joke about contact lenses as well as the request to Google a humor blog that I am suspected of being linked to in other threads.
When I am on here I am tempted, so I am off and the site is back in my filter until 11 Av, although hopefully Moshiach will be here first and then I will be able to perform with Lipa and the Pester and the Yarmer and while we’re at it, Pinky Weber, at the biggest event of them all in Yerushalayim!July 15, 2009 2:46 pm at 2:46 pm #651430
Major error. See everyone 12 Menachem Av. 11 Menachem Av is actually Shabbos (Shabbos Nachamu):).July 15, 2009 4:14 pm at 4:14 pm #651431000646Participant
600 KILO BEAR,
I dont know how it is in whatever part of Europe you are in, but I have seen pictures of president bush’s wife, sarah palin and michelle obama wearing opend toed shoes. I really dont think they were “advertising themselves in public, if not for money in the form of at least a paid for date, then just for attention from guys.” (although i cant really prove that they werent, I do think it is still safe to say that this wasnt their intention).
As far as wearing sandals or opend toed shoes in a casual setting you yourself admit that it is not considerd grub and prust even in whatever part of the world you are in.July 15, 2009 7:55 pm at 7:55 pm #651432
Thank you for your senseful posts, and looking forward to your post Tisha B’Av return to posting from Yerushlayim Ir HaKodesh.July 15, 2009 10:05 pm at 10:05 pm #651433bein_hasdorimParticipant
After reading some of the posts here, I reconsidered,
wont touch this thread with a ten foot pole!July 15, 2009 10:51 pm at 10:51 pm #651434
A600, or should I say 300 (my opinion of you keeps dropping with every posting of yours).
Halacha defines how people should dress. If people are dressed within the guidelins of halacha, no matter then no matter how little you care for their mode of dress, you have no right, according to halacha to call them “grub and prust”.
So, your’e all for elevating a makom? Then the next time your shul collects money for renovations, tell them you’d rather daven out in the street, you want to elevate the Makom. (Clearly – i am being dan likaf zchus – you misunderstood what i wrote about this, but it has nothing to do with tznius so will leave it).
Again, nobody is asking you or advocating that you dress in a way you feel is “grub and prust”. On the other hand, calling those who are within the bounds of halacha, as guided by their poskim, grub and prust, is definitely grub and prust and falls outside the bounds of halacha.July 15, 2009 11:12 pm at 11:12 pm #651435
Kilobear, first of all, I had tried to post an apology to you about my overly harsh language in an earlier thread, but by the time I did, the thread was closed. If by getting upset about ahavas yisroel causes somebody to feel bad then I have defeated my whole purpose.
Second, I personally agree that one should wear socks, and make sure my daughters do. I also do not wear jeans, and feel funny when I see in some shuls the one giving a shiur between mincha and maariv is wearing jeans and a T-shirt. Nevertheless, these people are machshiv Torah and it sends a positive msg when the teens in shul see a “cool guy” who is teaching the words of the Mishna Berurah and expounding on his sevaros. They see that one can be just like them and still be involved in learning. So there are two sides to everything.
But my complaint about the tznius book, is that dignity is a personal matter, and you don’t legislate it or start making up all kinds of rules that have no sources behind them such as how blue or green socks reflect light a certain way. One should not micromanage tznius to the point that it looks like OCD disorder. It should be mentioned that we must dress dignified and befitting, and zehu. Girls aren’t morons who need to be spelled out every single detail. This stifling set of arbitrary rules filling the book many of which have the most tenuous source if at all, will do nothing but turn off people or cause fights by people who think they really are halacha.
Another example of a source is that tight garments are forbidden because of the pasuk in shir hashirim which says chamukei yeraychayech, from which Chazal darshen mah yerech bsayser, af divrei torah bsayser. (And since it doesn’t say mechuseh, the author concludes the form can’t show.) The drasha has nothing to do with tznius of dress. It has to do with keeping sisrei torah secret. (Otherwise it would be a bah lelamed, vnimtzah lamed.) It is saying that the metzius is that the yerech is bsayser, so therefore we must keep divrei torah bsayser. An analogy is dadecha yirvucha bchol es, mah dad zeh kol zman shatinok memashmesh bo motzai taam, af divrei torah kein. It is not a chiyuv on the tinok, it is using a metzius to learn the nimshal.
Lately it is fashionable to use shiur charts on pesach. Now a kzayis is certainly a halacha with many sources written about it. However, I gurantee you that previous generations and even the gedolim of those times did not use them even for this mitzvah d’oraisa. They ate matzah bsimchah but did not get OCD over it. Whatever they ate was good enough. They estimated the size of an olive or beitzah and that was it.
Tznius by definition means being private. To write a whole book on your opinion of how girls should dress in the most excruciating detail seems to be the exact opposite of tznius.July 16, 2009 10:50 am at 10:50 am #651436
I just want to say that I used what turned out to be understood as very harsh language when I said grub and prust. When I use those words in Yiddish or “heimish” speech, especially to describe something abstract like a style of dress, they don’t convey the contempt that people perceived in my posts. Maybe the closest word I can think of to what I did want to convey is the Ivrit “rechovi”, or the English “common”. Prust is from or at least reminds me of the Russian “prostoy” which means simple, as in simple folk. Whatever it is, I certainly did not mean to convey that it is the equivalent of something which is truly unfit yet perhaps not specifically ossur, like listening to gangsta rap that does not actually contain gutter language.
Also, I may have said that a particular mode of dress is grub and prust but I did not say that those who dress that way are. “Do we want to be grub and prust” was bad wording as what I meant is “do we want to appear or be perceived as grub and prust”. I had ten windows open when I wrote that and I should have been more careful. We all need to grow in some way, and this is just an area where there is a potential for growth.
If the topic is still open when I return I will comment more clearly on Sunday 12 Menachem Av, but bekitzur what I did want to convey is that while baseline halacha is of course fully mutar, there is a matter of elevating ourselves and our surroundings that is best accomplished by going a bit further, especially in these times when (y)our neighbors are not “die shkootzim in Ookraina” (MBD: A Shabbos in Mezhbizh, lyrics like that could only be and indeed were written by Lipa Schmeltzer) and we have to always remember that Hashem is “hivdilanu min hatoyim” even if these toyim are people who are not out to kill us and who we interact with pleasantly in the workplace and as neighbors.
Just by virtue of having been on Har Sinai, we are more than Sarah Palin, Michelle Obama, and Laura Bush will ever be, and we should proudly show it. (One of those three, namely the one who wears 500 dollar sneakers, is frankly a disgrace to her position, and another is a populist politician who appeals to the simple voter with her mode of dress and presentation). And when the non-Jews around us do generally act aidel and civilized, or at least appear to, we should go one step further and act and look more aidel and more civilized.
But all of this is possible only if we internalize the reason for why we are going the extra step, which is that we are mamleches kohanim veam kadosh. Kadosh means special, or as our friend Lipa sings – geantzigt iz der Yid – geantzigt, set apart, special, from an (more standardly pronounced ein), meaning one. In numbers as well as in mission, we are like one among the many – we are what, 14 million among 6 billion, and look how we are noticed!
And once we internalize it, we’ll dress the way we do to reflect who we really are inside instead of because of societal pressures or, chas vesholom, out of fear of ending up like the fictional Revital Avraham (or the most definitely real…I mean most ridiculously fictional Shprintzy Landau).
Then, we will do it besimcha, and when we can’t do it for whatever legitimate reason, such as heat or having a sack of garbage in our hands, we’ll feel the difference and appreciate even more that we can do it in more usual situations.
Otherwise, indeed, all we see in front of us is a dry, technical book of rules that sometimes seem stifling, and that we rationalize away as being for a certain community and therefore not for us. That indeed could be the case with Rav Falk’s book, and maybe it was meant to be or should have been presented more like the guides Rav Blumenkrantz AH issued over the years, but regardless of some of the technicalities, once we (men and women) know WHY we should present a certain image, we will go out of our way to do it.
Anyway, oy, vey, again with Miss Landau and if I don’t stop thinking about Lipa lyrics during the Three Weeks I’ll succumb to the yetzer and turn on the music :(. Gotta go, see everyone 12 Menachem Av in Yerushalayim Habnuyah.July 16, 2009 3:07 pm at 3:07 pm #651437
Different people choose where to start in the elevations. Some start at the bottom, with socks. Others start at the top by being careful with how they cover their hair. Others choose other areas of life/halacha to start their aliya altogether.
Rabbonim should mandate adherence to halacha to the klal. Individually they can advise, prod and discuss chumros. Chumros can not be legislated. Once they are universally accepted, thats something else.July 16, 2009 3:26 pm at 3:26 pm #651438
“being careful with how they cover their hair” is another chumra?
Gee, I always assumed that was plain halacha.July 16, 2009 5:02 pm at 5:02 pm #651439
I’m not a Posek. I am not a woman and I have not read any of the tznius “how to” books that are on the shelves in the stores to be all that familiar with all the specifics. However, it was stated here, several times by a number of people that “some amount” of hair may be exposed at least according to some poskim. Also, “how to cover their hair” covers the actual covering. Sheitel, sheitel with a little hat on top, snood, tichel, you get the point.July 19, 2009 3:21 pm at 3:21 pm #651440
The issue of tznius has many madreigas. Not all of us are on the higher madreigas. That being said, tznius also has core basics. That is something we must all strive to minimally meet. In many communities, the basic level of tznius is above the technical minimum. In such communities, it is necessary for all to follow such community standards.
If someone is not yet on the madreiga of following the necessary levels of tznius, at least they should provide the courtesy of not promoting such sunken madreigas. Strive to raise ones on level, while respecting the correct (or elevated) levels of others who are moser nefesh to meet or exceed the proper code.July 20, 2009 1:30 pm at 1:30 pm #651441
I honestly don’t believe that someone who wears socks is keeping a higher madreiga of tznius than me. My rav says that there is no halachic issue regarding a naked ankle and therefore I am following halacha. Someone choosing to do a more stringent approach is just that – more stringent, not more halachically sound.
I believe someone who is more strict regarding lashon hara, ahava, bikur cholim etc are on a higher madreiga. Bein adam lachavero mitzvos are much harder to fulfill all the time. Someone who can master doing things like that, with a smile and helping in a way that actually helps the other person (not just appears to help), definitely is a better person than I am. I have not mastered that yet.July 20, 2009 2:10 pm at 2:10 pm #651442Feif UnParticipant
“In many communities, the basic level of tznius is above the technical minimum. In such communities, it is necessary for all to follow such community standards.”
No, it’s not. People must keep the halachah, and that’s it. If they choose to be more stringent, that’s fine, but you’re not required to follow chumros just because everyone else does.July 20, 2009 3:55 pm at 3:55 pm #651443
Feif Un: You are very wrong for obvious reasons.
SJS: Give credit where credit is due. It IS a higher madreiga.July 20, 2009 4:31 pm at 4:31 pm #651444
Three more examples of where I believe R. Falk’s book veers off the halachic path into the area of personal opinion.
1)He discourages very long skirts. Obviously these are more tzniusdik, rather than less, but he happens not to like that look, so he finds some problem with it.
2) He discourages denim skirts. I wonder where in Shulchan Oruch that is mentioned, since it wasn’t around then. In addition, it is one of the most opaque and least clingy materials, possibly giving it an actual advantage in tznius.
3) He sets limits in how much or how big jewelry one can wear. He is then faced with a problem that frum sephardic women have always worn huge amounts of very large sized jewelry and ornamentation. He says in response that for sephardim it is fine since that is the norm. Now, as far as I know, sephardim have the same halachas as ashkenazim, except where the Rama argues with the Mechaber. I am not aware of any such machlokes on this topic. The bottom line, whatever you and your family feel is right for you and are comfortable with is OK.
How can an author interject personal opinion into a halacha sefer? Note, even if there is a source from some aggadta on this or that point, the halacha does not follow every obscure aggadta. Only halachic gemaras which are brought in shulchan oruch are binding.
Of course one can be as machmir as one wishes. The problem is that when chumras are taught as halacha it causes people to look down on others, and violate onaas devarim and loshon hara which are far far more severe violations. In addition, it stifles people from doing what is comfortable to them and makes them start hating the religion. Chumras are one’s own personal business and should be kept private. In fact, there is a halacha that if one takes it upon himself a private fast day, and tells anybody about it, it is a terrible aveira, and shows it is only for kavod.July 20, 2009 4:54 pm at 4:54 pm #651445tzippiMember
Interesting debate here. I for one am not G-d’s accountant.July 20, 2009 4:56 pm at 4:56 pm #651446
For those of us who do not think it’s obvious, can you please state the reasons (as to Feif Un)?
Torah He V’lilmod A’ni T’zarich.
SJS: One who is more Machmir (in general) is keeping to a higher standard/madraiga, if it is being done for Kavod and Yiras Shamaiym, not to keep your membership in the “Chumrah of the week” club.
Think of it as being similar to those who would rather pay that take a Shevuah, since the concept of taking a Shevuah, even if it is true and allowed/suggested according to halacha, is none the less very “Chamur”. That is a “Madraiga”.July 20, 2009 11:13 pm at 11:13 pm #651447
It IS a higher madreiga
Yes, and that’s possibly what Odom Harishon thought, too, when he told his wife that they were not allowed to TOUCH the Eitz Hadaas, when in fact the only thing Hashem told them was not to eat its fruit. Maybe he thought that it was a higher madreiga to keep his wife from aveira by telling her that, but it had the opposite effect. Often, so do the chumros of various halachos, that end up alienating otherwise frum people who are made to feel whatever they do is not kosher enough or frum enough. Just a thought to consider from another point of view…July 20, 2009 11:37 pm at 11:37 pm #651448
oomis: See what gavra wrote to SJS. He made some good points addressed to your comment.
gavra: One of several reasons that comes off the top of my head is “minhug hamokem.”July 21, 2009 1:34 am at 1:34 am #651449
FTR, I always believe in following the minhag hamakom when it comes to dress. Even were I to not follow certain standards (i.e. the wearing of sox at all times), if I were in a neighborhood where most women did dress that way, I would as well out of respect, so as not to offend them, but not because I believe it is a higher madreiga, because I don’t. I am very big on the idea of not offending a “host” when I am in his “home,” because I have the choice to not visit his home if it were truly that difficult for me to show respect for his personal traditions by following them while there.July 21, 2009 3:00 am at 3:00 am #651450BemusedParticipant
I agree with that point of not offending a host.
I had another thought as well:
Tznius, beyond the basic halachos, was really left to the individual (community?) to determine how to dress with modesty (both genders, btw), and this varies significantly, by community, family, etc. Part of tznius is taking precautions to avoid attracting undue attention. In a community that wears socks, for example, bare ankles may attract more than typical attraction because of it’s difference from the norm. Therefore, it might be considered part of tznius to avoid wearing bare ankles when visiting a community which does not.July 21, 2009 4:14 am at 4:14 am #651451
Therefore, it might be considered part of tznius to avoid wearing bare ankles when visiting a community which does not. “
Exactly. So this begs the question – if chassidim are in a neighborhood where people wear a more modern style of dress (not untzniusdig, just not chassidish), if they wear their usual garb are they being untzniusdig ( strictly by the definitions that have been floating around here)because it makes them stand out and calls attention to them, especially by non-Jews? I think that much of this issue depends upon whose ox is being gored, i.e., whose perspective is being challenged.July 21, 2009 4:25 am at 4:25 am #651452BemusedParticipant
I don’t know, oomis, it’s a good question.
I would love to hear someone’s knowledgeable response on this (key word knowledgeable, folks, not an emotional condemnation of all “chumros”).
The question wouldn’t stop me from following the tznius concept as described in my previous post, but your question makes a good topic.
Is there a difference between an attraction to one’s literal person, such as ankle skin, as opposed to attraction to one’s mode of clothing? If so, what would be the differences?July 21, 2009 1:40 pm at 1:40 pm #651453
Gavra, it may be a different madreiga, but I wouldn’t say higher. Especially, if your rav tells you you MUST wear socks, then that is your minimum. If I am also keeping the minimum, then we are both technically at the same level, even though we are keeping different things.
And I don’t think people who follow different paths are better or worse. Do I think a chasid who wears a bekeshe and streimel is better? Nope (especially because I think they miss the boat on understanding WHY the founders started wearing those garmets. But I digress). Nor someone who wears a black hat and jacket. I don’t think a woman who shaves her head before covering it is any better than one who covers her head/hair either. So long as you are following halacha, you are following halacha.
I think there is a difference between being respectful to your hosts (minhag hamakom)…I try to, or avoid situations where it becomes a problem. When I go to Lakewood, if I am not wearing socks, I don’t go into the downtown/stores area. I stay at my sister’s house.July 21, 2009 2:01 pm at 2:01 pm #651454
Respectfully disagree. Lifnim Me’shuras Hadin is a higher Madraiga than Din itself. The streimel is not a good example, as YOU have no reason to wear one (if you’re not a chassid) and be “lifnim”. One always can be more Tzanuah by following the “suggestions” of our chachomim (as long as it doesn’t get to the point of Chosid Shoyte), even though they are not required as halacha per say.
Of course, there are trade offs by being more tzanuah (Shalom Bayis, for one (I would be mad if my wife shaved her head)) and a Rav and your husband should always be consulted.July 21, 2009 2:16 pm at 2:16 pm #651455
GAW, we also have to worry about baal tosef. It works both ways.July 21, 2009 4:55 pm at 4:55 pm #651456
Exacly my point. It should be done knowing it is NOT Halacha, rather a chumrah or Lifnim Me’shuras Hadin. That way there is no issue of Bal Tosef.July 21, 2009 5:03 pm at 5:03 pm #651457
OK GAW, I understand your point. I am not 100% sure I agree completely though. I guess because I would rather see people work on their interior than exterior – I think as a society we focus way too much on our exterior. No one can work on everything at once…July 21, 2009 5:04 pm at 5:04 pm #651458
I learned from Reb. Zahava Braunstein z”l that the mitzvah of Tzinus is to woman as torah learning is for man. Do we not want to keep it to the best of our ability. I am really hurt when i have to look twice at a lady to see if she is Jewish or not. This is only because of the way she dresses. Today when we are coming into Av lets consider are our clothes attracting others Especially to look at us again??July 21, 2009 5:48 pm at 5:48 pm #651459
Most orthodox Jews (especially women) can spot another frum woman a mile away. I can always pick out a frum Jew on the subway with a glance, unless the person is not dressed tzanua at all. I think most people here are debating on the “borderline” not the people who completely discount tznius…
Although a friend of mine relayed this story to me: At Columbia, the kosher cafeteria is in the Barnard area. The Jewish guys all go there for food. Once, a friend of hers started talking to a nice woman on line. She was wearing a long skirt and sweater set. They sat down to eat their meal together, and she took off her cardigan. He was shocked until he realized she wasn’t Jewish – just someone who decided to eat some of the kosher food that day. I thought it was kind of funny 🙂July 21, 2009 6:46 pm at 6:46 pm #651460jewishfeminist02Member
When my mother taught in public school, she once had a student who always wore long sleeves and long skirts and asked if she was a frum Jew. She wasn’t– she was a born-again Christian. 🙂July 22, 2009 7:28 pm at 7:28 pm #651462
I think we have to remeber that tzinuis is not only in clothes but in our whole behaviour. Don’t talk loudly in the street, don’t have a loud telephone conversation, don’t eat in the street, etcJuly 22, 2009 8:50 pm at 8:50 pm #651463
estherh, you are so right.July 23, 2009 1:55 am at 1:55 am #651464
On 2 different days you wrote.
“I am really hurt when i have to look twice at a lady to see if she is Jewish or not. This is only because of the way she dresses.”
“I think we have to remeber that tzinuis is not only in clothes but in our whole behaviour. Don’t talk loudly in the street, don’t have a loud telephone conversation, don’t eat in the street, etc”
If I may. Does it hurt you when an obviously Jewish woman (from her dress) talks loudly in the street, has a loud conversation or eats in the street?
What hurts you more? The need for a 2nd look to determine if a woman is jewish or the behavior you describe above from an obviously jewish woman. just curious. Not being judgemental or argumentive.July 23, 2009 5:35 am at 5:35 am #651465JewessMember
I’ve had people ask me if I’m Jewish or not, even when I’m all covered up. I don’t get it.July 23, 2009 5:41 am at 5:41 am #651466JaxMember
Jewess: jews or goyim asked you that?!July 23, 2009 5:48 am at 5:48 am #651467JewessMember
Both, but I find it weirder when Jews ask me. I guess I expect them to know better than that.July 23, 2009 3:02 pm at 3:02 pm #651468
I am really hurt when i have to look twice at a lady to see if she is Jewish or not. This is only because of the way she dresses.”
“I think we have to remeber that tzinuis is not only in clothes but in our whole behaviour. Don’t talk loudly in the street, don’t have a loud telephone conversation, don’t eat in the street, etc”
Both the above hurt me I don’t know what bothers me more. I do wonder what’s wrong with a lady who dresses in such a way that everyone looks back at her as she passes. It does bother me when I hear 2 ladies talking loudly in the street or having a loud conversation. Why attract uneccessary attention. What happened to modesty?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.