Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Sounds great, but what does it have to do with this thread?
I’m completely lost with the whole discworld thing.
42, I guess that’s to say nothing of what they’re doing during chazaras hashatz…
Honestly, I never even heard of discworld, and I do not understand what about my post would make you think so.
Another Chakira:
The smallest measurable unit of time is reputed to be the amount of time between when a traffic light in NYC turns green and the car behind you honks.
I always thought it was the amount of time between when the chazan finishes chazaras hashatz and some fool shouts yisgadal on a non-Tachanun day.
Are these actually one and the same, or is one in fact shorter than the other? Does there exist equipment sophisticated enough to measure?
Amen.
In any case, most people are more than astute enough to realize when others are talking about them, even if it is in another language. This makes it even worse.
The Gemara says that a person who looks at the hands of the Kohanim during birchas kohanim loses 1/500 of “ma’or einav” (commonly understood to mean eyesight).
Although the Shulchan Aruch rules that one may not touch a raw egg on Shabbos because it is muktzeh, nearly all commentators explain that this is because touching a raw egg is guaranteed to cause it to move.
IF the story is true, it would demonstrate that the Chofetz Chaim was of the opinion that it is in fact muttar to speak L”H about oneself, albeit perhaps not a good idea.
The Mishna Berura describes the procedure of the three steps back and the bowing towards the right, left and forward quite carefully.
As long as people continue to perpetuate the myth that abusive Rebbeim (as described by TLIK and Syag, among others) are commonplace, the real solutions to the problems of kids at risk and OTD will remain elusive.
The assertion that there are “schools which boast…” (I dare not repeat such words) is slanderous. It is a most egregious example of motzi shem ra, and should be removed from the post.
As a Rebbe, I am greatly offended by the cavalier and careless manner in which I and my colleagues are so often maligned.
The vast majority of today’s Rebbeim would never imagine the sort of abuse that has been described here as being possible. Personally, I have a hard time believing most of these stories. They are simply not realistic. The picture of a Rebbe who had invested so much into one student’s spiritual growth acting like an animal is completely incongruous, to say the least. That story sounds like something out of the pages of certain magazines which love to exaggerate and distort issues of abuse in the classroom and the home, ??? ?????? ??????.
It’s a good thing this is an anonymous forum; otherwise, I would not be able to say the following, for fear of the appearance of self-serving arrogance:
The Rebbeim in classrooms today are warm, caring, loving individuals whose concern for their students is very nearly equal to that for their own children. They live and breathe their talmidim’s welfare 24/7. They NEVER resort to corporal punishment, and rarely (if ever) say more than a harsh word to a student, and this only after many, many attempts to diffuse a situation before it gets that far.
This is not to say that every Rebbe is perfect every day. When I have made mistakes in the management of my classroom, I have acknowledged as much to the class. I am not proud to say that this has happened once or twice over the years (and no, it never came near anything that anyone would label “abuse”). I am proud to say that when it did, I candidly admitted my mistake, and apologized publicly to the boy whom I had treated without the proper respect.
Yes, as a Rebbe, I treat my students with respect. As the Rambam rules.
I know many Rebbeim, in my own school, in the other schools in my community and in other communities throughout the country. All of them fit the description above. None of them would ever imagine abusing a student, physically or verbally.
This is not to say that there are no bad apples; it is to say that the bad apples in today’s chinuch system are very few, and very far between.
We all care. We are your friends, and stand with you in your hour of need (to the extent that this is possible in an anonymous forum).
For what it’s worth, we share your pain.
I don’t remember offhand where I saw this, but I recall some Meforshim proving from the story of Shlomo, Adoniyah and Nassan (as well as from the story of Miriam waiting to see what would happen to Moshe in the river), that a Navi has a mandate to see to the fruition of his prophecy. Having announced in the name of Hashem that Shlomo would be the next king, Nassan was required to take the necessary steps to ensure that this would in fact happen.
You’d better be careful if you don’t know where you’re going – you may never get there.”
(another Yogi Berra classic)
The only word for people who seriously go for this sort of thing is “asinine.”
[Visiting a patient in the hospital, two days after the removal of a brain tumor] “So…how big was it?”
hashtag-
Depends who you ask…this is a long standing debate between Merriam-Webster and Dan Quayle.
Lesson learned: “Patching” does not work (at least not for these children). I am not fanatically opposed to corporal punishment (AT HOME – obviously absolutely unacceptable by anyone other than parents!), but it needs to be very well thought out. In most cases, the best reason not to use corporal punishment is that it is ineffective. This is because it is usually not the result of a proactive and thought out parenting plan, but a reactive way of trying to force children to act in a certain way.
I don’t see what there is to be gained by responding to this incident in a vacuum. The three year old probably has heard, “if you…then I will…” countless times from his parents, and is simply following their example. Let this one slide. The focus needs to be on cultivating the appropriate respect on the part of the parents.
This father needs to engage in a long-term plan to reestablish his parental authority, without resort to hitting his children. Don’t pretend to have all the answers; read some parenting books, develop your personal method of parenting, and be relentlessly consistent about its implementation.
Care to elaborate on that?
This is not about mussar. It is about when and how we allow situations to develop which present us with a choice between two evils.
Generally speaking, people make compromises and “choose between the lesser of two evils” only when, fundamentally, they consider both “evils” acceptable choices. This was the point of the analogy to a lawyer. For the lawyer, this choice simply does not exist – he must be on time, and he must wear a tie.
Here is another analogy: A bachur in yeshiva may want to choose the lesser of two evils: Skip breakfast (thereby compromising his ability to learn) or come late to seder (so he can eat). The fact is, he should wake up earlier. Several years later, the same individual (now married with children, and not afraid he might be asked to do gelilah) will never have a problem waking up on time for the early minyan. All that changed is whether his new situation allows for the choice to exist.
Obviously, there are exceptional cases where it is impossible to avoid such a situation; these, however, are few and far between. Most often, the choice only arises because the person’s value system allows this to happen. ????? ?? ?????.
If a Rebbe comes late or without a tie several times in his career, that’s probably due to circumstances beyond his control. [Incidentally, in such a case, I would probably go without a tie]. If it happens often enough that he wants to know what to do next time, that’s probably because one or both of these things is not important enough to him.
Not mussar; just objective analysis.
oyyoyyoy-
My response was not meant as mussar. The point is that if it is not an option to be late, and it is not an option to come without a tie, he will figure it out. The answer to the question really is that these are both not acceptable options.
One more thing – Does this Rebbe then go and give his talmidim the classic “Omeid lifnei haMelech” speech on how to present and conduct themselves during davening? [You know, “If you would have a meeting with the President…”]
ivory –
It’s obvious from the question that he is the type of Rebbe, going to the type of place, where he would normally be expected to come on time with a tie…
He should go early with a tie. How should a lawyer show up to an important court case – early without a tie, or late with one?
One of the premier mechanchim of our generation put it this way –
“When it comes to a Rebbe’s timeliness, the rule is:
Better never than late!”
I think it is obvious that a Rebbe must project the respect he has for his students and his position, certainly no less so than any other professional. You need to be on time. You need a tie.
Personally (linguistic preferences of English Language teachers aside), when someone quotes a Maharsha (or most other meforshim), I check the source to see whether I understand it the same way. I encourage you to do the same.
The reconciliation with common practice is my own; I did not see anyone address the issue. If you find someone who does, please let me know.
I do not know whether Gedolim are or were careful not to daven mandatory tefilos at mekomos hakedoshim. In case not, I would venture to say that it is no worse than any other trip. The problem, then, would exist only in case of traveling specifically for purpose of davening a mandatory tefila at that place. This is a bit contrived, I know, but at the moment I do not see another way out.
If you recognize the truth of the Torah, you know that it really is not a choice. You are Hashem’s creation, His slave. You owe Him your existence, and He demands your compliance with His Law.
This is the reason to serve Him ??? ?? ??? ???? ???. You are to serve because that is who you are; you are to have a slave mentality, which means that you are not to have the capacity of thinking about personal gain. There is to be no such thing as personal gain in your world.
If you (like nearly all other people) are not yet at the level where you can completely identify with this ideal, you are encouraged to serve Him ?? ??? ???? ???.
I suspect you understood exactly what I meant; nevertheless, I don’t mind explaining.
Fact: Many people credit Kiruv organizations with introducing them to Judaism and making them frum. (Although I am not, and never have been, employed by any such organization, I know many such people personally, just from my own community; if you don’t, feel free to do some research). It is simply not true that no one ever became frum because of a kiruv organization.
Yes, what you say is true, that Hashem gives everyone their opportunity to recognize the truth. Why do you think that the organization’s efforts were not the way He chose to reach out to these people? Why do you assume that, had they not been receptive to the organization, they would have been given another chance, and that they would have capitalized on it? In any case, we are not allowed to operate on the assumption that “Hashem takes care of it” when it comes to helping others. We are to assume that our efforts are necessary and critical, even as we recognize that ultimately Hashem will see to it that everyone gets what they need.
Plainly put, we can not think about “how would it have happened, if it had not happened the way it did.”
The assertion that “no one ever became frum because of a kiruv organization” necessarily discourages people from contributing to kiruv organizations. This would obviously compromise the organizations’ ability to bring back as many people as they otherwise would be able to do. Therefore, the assertion is an attack on the neshamos of those who would potentially be excluded from kiruv efforts because of lack of funds.
???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ????? ??
This is more or less how Rav Chaim Volozhiner explains the Mishna (as I remember it):
Obviously, we are required to serve Hashem whether we like it or not. As our Creator and Master, He has total rights over what we do, and we must obey.
If a person can not motivate himself to serve Hashem without thought of reward and punishment, then he should serve based on that motivation (????? ????? ??? ????).
This is not someone who can rightfully be called an eved at all. Hopefully, be’ezras Hashem, he will eventually reach the level of serving simply because it is what Hashem “wants” (????? ??? ???? ?? ????).
On a deeper level, one may argue that Hashem “wants” to reward us, so serving with thought of reward should qualify as lishma.
In fact, this is true, but only if the thought of reward is purely intended to satisfy Retzono Yisbarach. For most people, this is not possible.
There were some “Avadim” (slaves who served because it satisfied their Master’s Will) who were able to incorporate thought of reward into their service in this way. Outstanding individuals such as Moshe Rabbeinu, Avraham Avinu and David Hamelech were ????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???.
The Mishna cautions us not to try to emulate their example, since for most people it would be counterproductive. Of course, we should strive to be Avadim (slaves, who serve not out of any thought of personal gain, but because they must obey their Master), but we should be content with the status of ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???, which is the lower of the two.
Learn the Maharsha that I referenced in my earlier post in this thread. Of course we know that people travel (including, by the way, Avraham Avinu, the paragon of Kove’a Makom L’tfilaso). The point is that by having a set place to daven, one expresses the fact that HKBH is All-Powerful, and above any sort of influence whatsoever. This is why the Gemara says “Elokei Avraham Be-ezro.” The G-D of Avraham (who was the first one to teach about the omnipotence of Hashem) will help a person who davens in a way which expresses this idea.
Traveling out of necessity is one thing; traveling so as to daven in what is considered a particularly auspicious place undermines the message of Avraham Avinu.
Again, I want to stress that this is not me talking – it is the Maharsha.
[It would seem that this applies only to mandatory tefillos, as we know that all Gedolei Hadoros were (and are) in the habit of davening al kivrei Avos and at the Kosel.]
I said catch yourself, not trick yourself…
Cherrybim –
“Show me one person who became frum as a result of a kiruv organization/project who would not have done it without the organization’s involvement. That person does not exist.”
Of course, it is impossible to know with certainty that a specific individual would never have become frum had they never had contact with a particular organization.
That said, there are many people whose original contact with Judaism was through a Kiruv organization, and who credit the organization with starting them back on the path to being Frum. Many of these completed the journey with those same organizations.
Your assertion that no such individual exists is flat out wrong, and is a dangerous attack on the neshamos of thousands of as-yet not frum Jews.
Just wondering…
Did my own previous posts in this thread also sound like the infamous Joseph?
Gavra –
I must acknowledge that (due to my own ignorance) I misunderstood your previous post.
I thought that you were avoiding the issue by acting as though my argument did not deserve a response.
In fact, you were ignoring me under the (mistaken) impression that I was a well known troll, who in fact would not deserve a response.
See how far a little bit of ignorance can go? 🙂
Gavra –
I don’t know who Joe is or why you thought that I am he; I most certainly am not.
I noticed that you don’t have a response to my point. Offhand dismissal of a cogent point is a favorite technique of successful debaters, but it does not prove anything.
I don’t know to which Israeli Rosh Yeshiva it is that you refer; nor did you deign it necessary to provide any context to the statement he supposedly made. All I can say is that I never heard any such divisive rhetoric from my own Rebbeim (in well known Yeshivos, none of which are mentioned in your most recent post). On the contrary, many of my friends from Yeshiva are now working as lawyers, doctors, accountants and in many other occupations. Some are selling insurance or mortgages; others are laying tiles and fixing pipes. Some spent several years in Kollel before finding a job; others spent only one or two years in Beis Medrash after High School.
Far from being considered “second class citizens”, all of them are highly respected in their communities (and most live in Lakewood) as B’nei Torah with great integrity and commitment to values. All this with the encouragement and support of their Rebbeim. Some of them happen to be their Rebbeim’s own children, whose fathers pushed them “out of the Beis Medrash” with both hands.
The fact is that there is a lot of ignorant and hateful talk which gets in the way of the truth.
We can have a debate about the issues, but not with inflammatory arguments. That’s not a debate, it’s a fight.
Lior –
I always thought a red herring was a completely unimportant detail which is brought up to obfuscate an issue. The claim that “in certain circles” it seems that they believe the entire nation should be in Kollel is far from a red herring. It is a deliberate and vicious misrepresentation of the position of the Gedolei Yisrael who are the leaders of said “certain circles”, which is intended to undermine the authority of Torah leadership.
The only way I am able to give the benefit of the doubt to those who spew this vitriolic rhetoric is to assume that they have been misled by others as to the belief system of “certain circles”. It is possible that they do not consciously intend to undermine the Gedolim; they do not realize that the reason this claim appeals to them is that by undermining the authority of Torah leadership, it frees them from what they perceive to be a restrictive lifestyle.
In any case, it is a dangerous assertion which necessarily alienates a great number of people. No wonder the resentment…
Any gabbai who insists on people davening exactly according to halacha will end up being the chazzan about 85% percent of the time, and gritting his teeth for (almost all of) the other 15%…
Perhaps you can improve the situation somewhat by getting people to learn the halachos of tefillah. I think you are best off focusing on the most important issues (such as kavod hatefillah, amein yesoma/chatufa and other cut and dried halachic issues) before even mentioning things like fast vs slow songs (which, after all, is a matter of taste – us pure Litvaks prefer to sing Hallel to the tune of Eicha :).
Streekgeek-
(from the Merriam-Webster dictionary)
blissful (adjective):
1: full of, marked by, or causing bliss
2: happily benighted <blissful ignorance>
Which brings us to answer the philosophical question, as well.
benighted (adjective):
1: overtaken by darkness or night
2: existing in a state of intellectual, moral or social darkness: unenlightened
[example: the poor benighted souls who do not know the joys of reading]
“Ignorance is bliss” does not mean that the ignorant are blissful in the first definition. It does not mean that they experience “complete happiness” (which is the definition of bliss). It means that they are happily unconcerned with their problems because they are simply unaware of them.
Would you say that a person who is suffering from cancer but does not know it is experiencing complete happiness?
Both of the individuals you describe are in a position either to experience complete happiness or not. This is a matter of personality and perspective. If the question was whether complete happiness which is founded on ignorance of one’s true situation can be considered complete happiness, I think there is little doubt that this happiness is fool’s gold.
If the question was simply who is having more fun right now, I suppose that could be the ignorant and blissful individual. However, I would hardly consider that a philosophical question.
SDD:
I know it’s a little bit off topic, but before you belittle it, the “no-marking-tests-with-a-red-pen” attitude is currently the prevailing attitude among mechanchim, and with good reason. Not that there was a problem with how our Rebbeim dealt with us; times have changed. Society has changed. Children today are different from children a generation ago. Why the dismissive attitude?
The problem with dictionary definitions is that they do not always convey connotation. I personally do not think that in this case there was a problem with the usage of those terms, but it is important to consider the full meaning and flavor of a word, and not just to go with the dictionary.
Eftachbchinor –
Perhaps things are different for a woman teaching in a girls’ school. As a Rebbe, I am painfully aware of the need to maintain a zero-touch policy. I work very hard to communicate my love to my students without touch, but there is no way to compensate completely for the lack of touch. Nevertheless, in today’s world there is no other way. One never knows when some witch-hunting warmonger will attempt to use each pat on the shoulder as a weapon to destroy a Rebbe’s life, and ruin his students in the process. These people have little time or concern for what is right; they care only for what gratifies their need for revenge against some real or imagined abuser.
The sad reality is that there are people who assume that the only reason a person would want to teach is that he is a pedophile.
Hashem yishmereinu!
1) Respect your children. Talk to them in a way that communicates high esteem. This does NOT mean empty artificial comments. It means talking in a way that shows you recognize and appreciate that they are not your little robo-slaves, that they are intelligent and capable people, that they are mature enough to make decisions for themselves. Respect and responsibility go hand in hand – give one, and they will accept the other.
2) Offer choices instead of making demands. Never give a choice you can’t live with (i.e., “You can either wear that skirt or go to school with no skirt”). Allow the child to make the decision, in your time frame, but with no added pressure or advice. Show by your attitude that they are in control of this decision, and either way is fine with you.
(Read Parenting with Love and Logic)
Sam – I wish I could agree that “noone” complains about Community Kollelim, but that is sadly not the case.
JF – As a proud alumnus of multiple Community Kollelim, I am appalled at the situation you describe. I think that in the Kollelim of which I was a part, as well as in the Kollel in my current community, your husband (and you!) would have felt quite welcome. These are well known “Lakewood Kollelim,” where the Kollel members learn together two sedorim each day, and night seder is reserved for learning with the community.
Shiurim, chavrusas, social gatherings and other community events, as well as good old fashioned hospitality, should be the bread and butter (and meat and potatoes) of any Kollel that portrays itself as a community Kollel.
You sound like exactly the type of family that any Kollel would love to have as part of its community.
It is important to note that this conversation does not apply equally to all kollelim.
Many kollelim (most notably, nearly all of the ones in what are colloquially, [and rather small-mindedly] referred to as “out of town communities”) actually pay a significant salary. While rarely enough to live on without supplementary income, this salary is definitely on par with that of many other jobs.
In my community, the most needy families (which put the greatest burden on the community) are not the kollel families, but families of unsuccessful businessmen.
What I have observed firsthand, and heard from longstanding members of various communities which are fortunate enough to host kollelim, is that a kollel is a tremendous positive force within a community in a myriad of ways. While it is obviously true that the kollel and its members rely heavily on the rest of the community for support, any fair minded individual should recognize that it is a symbiotic relationship.
Finally, I will mention that although I have had this debate many times, I have never heard this complaint from someone who did not have a personal enmity for “black hatters.”
PM and JF: My point was simply that often our feelings about (and response to) the actions of others are colored by our own perception of reality, which in turn is largely controlled by our personal attitudes.
I was not “demanding” that people have a certain attitude; I was suggesting that people work to develop that attitude for their own benefit.
Nothing “wrong” with calling up an older single as “habachur…”; My feeling was that he would feel uncomfortable, as if his single status were being highlighted.
There is no question that we should always strive to be more considerate of the sensitivities of everyone around us. At the same time, people with sensitivities would benefit themselves by remembering that the people around them are not angels.
Having learned in a Yeshiva in Givat Shaul, I used to daven at Zupnik’s Shteiblach quite often. I remember the last surviving “Diskin Yasom,” then a man of over eighty years old, being honored (and accepting…) with gelilah on a regular basis.
For what it’s worth, as a former gabbai, I must say there is no malice intended, and I certainly hope that I never offended anyone in any way, either by not extending a kibud, or by extending “the wrong” kibud. I think (and hope) I speak for all gabbaim when I say that a gabbai views his position as an opportunity to be m’chabeid other Jews, not chas v’shalom the opposite!
For the record, I believe that most (all?) gabbaim make every effort to deal with “older singles” as well as all people in a sensitive way (i.e., I would never call an older single, “habachur…” – he would be the same “Reb…” as his friends from high school). Keep in mind that by no fault of their own, older singles (and younger ones for that matter) have fewer occasions which entail receiving kibbudim than married men do. This may in fact be the origin of the minhag to offer gelilah to singles; there was a motivation to make sure that they would not be overlooked.
I agree that in general people “gotta relax.” Just knowing that everyone around you is (usually) trying to do the right thing in the best way they know how should help you realize that no slight was intended.
I am more than happy to haggle over the specific details of the mashal (see below), but simply by entering into the conversation, I think you have conceded that the song is not “questionable.” The point of the song was to illustrate the struggle of internet addiction, and the unlikely combination of fortuitous circumstances and Gevura that would be required to win the battle. I think the message is correct and the point was well made.
To the extent that it is necessary to discuss (are we really nitpicking the lyrics of a Destiny song?), I think that the situation in which Moishe found himself allowed for no other solution. As eftachbchinor points out, sometimes it’s necessary to take drastic measures.
I agree that in a less pressured situation it would be reasonable to cancel your internet service, or even just call TAG; Moishe, however, has only a moment to make a choice that can save his life. I think he makes the right call, don’t you?
If I were suddenly to realize that I am allergic to peanut butter, I would immediately throw out any and all vestiges of the (delicious) stuff from my house. The problem, of course, is with me, not with peanut butter; however, this is a necessary precaution.
There is no question that the problem is with the user, not with the PC. What is a user with a problem to do? I think Moishe Online has it right; in his circumstances, throwing the PC through the window was the necessary course of action (and it sure beats throwing the user through the window…).
147-
The fact that the decision was made that a divorce is necessary does not mean that it is not a painful ordeal.
Divorce, in many cases, is like amputation; required, but still plenty painful.
There is absolutely no contradiction in a divorced person grieving over what they have been through. In fact, I daresay that this is the more normal condition.
YaacovDovid –
Take heart. There IS light at the end of this (very dark) tunnel. Enough of my friends and family have been through this for me to say that BubbieTex knows best – don’t rush into something that could put you in an even worse situation…
Maybe he meant ??? with a ??? ??????, as in ???? ?? ?????. The “guest” (in this interpretation, the ???? ???? collecting ????) hopes to explain to the ??? ???? in a convincing way why he should contribute to this particular cause. The ??? ????, for his part, is warm and welcoming, as in the ????.
Randomex: I thought you weren’t going to come back 🙂
I agree wholeheartedly…that is exactly the attitude we should have towards any and all speech which could reasonably be expected to make other people uncomfortable.
Randomex: Thanks! I didn’t think my post deserved such careful dissection.
To respond to your points:
Sorry about the “them”; I sometimes mix up me pronouns 🙂
For the record, MR (Mentally Retarded) is still very much in use as a medical diagnosis. Although it often presents together with DD (Developmental Delay), the two are not synonymous. MR, DD and MR/DD are three separate diagnoses.
People who make use of rhetoric in debates do not typically discriminate; they use retarded as well as stupid, crazy, asinine and many other words which have the general meaning of lack of intelligence.
In response to the point of an earlier post that the problem with retarded is offensive intent, I was simply pointing out that the offensive intent in the use of the word retarded is no more or less than in the use of any other insult. I have already made clear my opinion that no offense should be taken by the clinically retarded or their families.
I do think there is a clear difference between the meaning of “hurt” and that of “offend”, especially when you consider connotation.
Even in the definitions you cite, this is somewhat apparent.
To offend, as you say, is to insult. To hurt, as you say, is to cause [somebody] emotional pain.
By hoisting my trophy high in the air after winning a major competition I may hurt the recently vanquished, but I can not be said to have offended him.
My point in this context was that although I do not believe that retarded is an offensive term, its use nevertheless can be hurtful to those whose lives are drastically affected by clinical retardation, and that we should be considerate of this fact. I think that my original analogy to the word cancer expresses this rather clearly.
Ubiquitin – There is a clear difference between using the word retarded (which actually does mean a lack of intelligence), and imposing that meaning onto the name of an individual. The former is a legitimate (albeit unkind and potentially hurtful – see above) use of language; the latter is highly offensive.
One last thing: This entire thread should be recognized as an academic argument. Whether or not a particular term is offensive is completely beside the point. As Randomex points out, our mandate is to conduct ourselves in a refined manner. ANY term used in an insulting way is unbecoming to a member of the Am Hanivchar. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not okay to insult other people. Regardless of the particular words used, this is most certainly prohibited by Halacha as Ona’as Devarim. If you disagree with someone, you should be able to find a civil way of expressing this fact.
Not all offensive intent is created equal.
The use of a term such as retarded to refer offensively to another person (usually to someone with whom I disagree, but can not effectively explain why they are wrong) actually should not be offensive to the clinically retarded any more than the use of the term weakling is offensive to the clinically weak.
The intended offense is not to the “real” retarded – it is to the person whose arguments I find so preposterous that I would label them (him?) so irrational as to be “retarded”.
The fact that some people who have clinically retarded relatives can be hypersensitive to the use of the term nevertheless does not confer “offensive word” status on the term. (Notice “some people” – I have close family members who are clinically retarded, and have no problem with the way the word is used).
I think we all agree that the word cancer ( as in, “talking in shul has spread like a cancer”) is not offensive. At the same time, I think we all appreciate the value in choosing a different word when cancer patients are nearby.
The only question is, to what degree must we be wary of the possibility that an affected individual may be hurt (not offended!) by its usage in a particular setting? (in the CR, this is very likely…)
This is very different from, for example, the N word, which has evolved into an offensive term with a very negative connotation.
Just ask Joe Biden about such words.
As an aside, I do think that rape is the correct translation of me’anes. As PBA pointed out, although the definition of “minor” is different in Halacha from US law, the definition of “consent” is about the same. We find many times (as in Parashas Ki Savo) where explicit terminology in the Torah is masked as an expression of the refined mode of speech which we are expected to employ. I do not think there is anything “wrong” with using the word rape, but that it is uncouth in mainstream “yeshivish” culture (there you go using offensive words again…).
As a Rebbe in an upper elementary classroom, I would never use the word rape. I want to model what I consider to be refined behavior. I do not shy away from teaching any topic, but it is important to teach at all times with the goal of training students to be B’nei Torah.
Chofetz Chaim defines Avak Lashon Hara as a statement which can be understood in a way that it would be lashon hara.
I think this explains the Gemara which famously says that
???? ???? ???? ???.
No matter what you say, somebody, somewhere is going to be insulted.
Just be considerate of people who have reasonable sensitivities based on their personal situation, and don’t worry about the people who take umbrage at the use of any term which could conceptually be viewed as offensive.
????? ???? ?????? ?-??? ????? ????? ???? ????”?
This is the reason not to go to Uman.
Makom Kavua is worth more than anything else.
The ???? is quoted by Meforshim to the Ein Yaakov (on the above referenced Gemara in Berachos) that although Avraham Avinu had already discovered that the entrance to Gan Eden was at the Me’aras Hamachpeila, Yitzchak Avinu davened at Be’er Lachai Roi because that was his Makom Kavua.
Enough said.