Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I disagree apy. If it were a small problem you would be correct that we should call the person’s Rov or Rebbetzin. But the problem is two-fold; 1, it is a very unfortunately a massive widespread problem (not affecting b”H MOST frum people, but nevertheless all too many) and 2, many people don’t have a close enough connection to a Rov or Rebbetzin who will proactively seek to individually remedy the problem.
And I do believe the kol koreh’s do have a positive effect on the public. True, not everyone will take heed. But if even a FEW people do change as a result (and it WILL help with some), it is well worth the effort.
girlsarb – Not because maybe theres someone staring, but because that’s what Hashem said. And even if someone inadvertently sees it, as the person just happened to look in that direction and wasn’t looking or staring at anything at all, it is a major problem. But the reason is because of what Hashem wants.
Knees being covered at ALL times — including getting into/out of car — is the halacha for everyone, not a custom.
Shrek: You have some hangup about the name being a legitimate issue of concern?
girlsarb – that’s true but not an excuse for there to be what to turn away from. The skirt should be long enough to cover the knees, when it rides up, when getting into or out of a car, as well as any other situation that we find ourselves in during the course of the day.
If you don’t like what the R”Y said, it doesn’t become a legend, urban or otherwise.
Huh? Dunno what’s in Monsey’s air today. Got nuttin against noone. Peace sister.
oy, c”v adorable! i really like you :)))
Goq, APY is not whining; she is (happily) doing something about it!
The point is that the knee should be covered at all times, including getting into or out of a car. Some people may get away with 3″ and some may need even more than 4″.
Whether its 4 inches, 6 inches, or 3 inches, it has to be longer than just-just covering, in order that it be covered in all positions (like getting into/out of a car as someone mentioned.) So how else should that point be conveyed? 4 inches is often itself insufficient to keep it covered when getting into/out of a car, for most women and girls.
It’s a well known story that msseeker mentioned. The R”Y said he would hire protestors to protest the State, if the protesters hadn’t come on their own.
apushtayid: What interpretation? popa paraphrased the Ralbag. And Rabbi Cohen quoted the actual words of both the Ralbag and the Baalei HaTosfos.
Wolfish: In response to your remarks on my comment (that you quoted), I fully concur with what gavra said in response.
“i can totally sympathise with that. I wear knee length and try to be very careful generally, but when it comes to getting out of a car, the skirt always hikes up. But i dont think 4 inches is the answer”
What answer other than longer skirts do you contemplate for the problem of the skirt hiking up??
“I personally don’t like anything that tells people what to do, how to act,what to say, where to go, what to do, when to do it or in general gives mussar to others, that is anonymous.”
So you are against the Chofetz Chaim Shmiras Haloshon reminders we often see?
What’s that have to do with the Ralbag and Baalei Tosfos mentioned here? They are not out of the mainstream on this issue amongst the mforshim. They are saying the same thing other commentaries say; in fact I don’t know of any mforshim who say otherwise.
Be very careful of infatuation, as “Rabbaim” suggested.
y.p: What’s so difficult to grasp? There is an explicit law passed by Congress that states that work, including photographs, of the U.S. Government are free to be manipulated and published by anyone. It’s as simple as that. Classified material has nothing to do with this discussion; the photo was taken and distributed by the White House. The WH does not, and by law cannot, distribute classified material.
cherrybim – it is obviously addressed to those already wearing it above the knee before reading the sign.
apushatayid – So allow me please to rephrase:
Are you amused with what the Ralbag and the Baalei HaTosfos said, or are you amused that it was said out loud?
Furthermore the WashPost author is accepting that fact and just noting who to credit as having pointed it out. And additionally, even if it is unclear as you would like to lead people to believe, you then cannot hold against someone for doing something you are unclear there is anything wrong with.
y.p: It’s not merely a “blogger assertion”. It links to the U.S. Code (on the Cornell website) where the exact law is cited and spelled out verbatim.
Are you upset with what the Ralbag and the Baalei HaTosfos said, or are you upset that it was said out loud?
Shrek: It needs to be covered in all positions (sitting, getting up, into/out of car, etc.), so its gotta be longer than just-just.
Btw, if the signs were encouraging shmiras haloshon instead of tznius, why would some of the people getting upset now then not be as upset as they are here?
Wolfish: Its a natural reaction for normal men. So it has to be acknowledged that it occurs and steps taken to reduce its potential. That’s all I believe DQB’s point is.
yid.period:
Read the Washington Post blog post about Der Zeitung issue from the “Correction” section. The relevant portion reads:
Even if only 10 people out 10,000 change after reading the sign, it is worth it. Even if only one person changed.
(Obviously it should only be placed where it is legal.)
Patents yid.period? What’s patents have anything to do with this discussion? This is a copyright issue, nothing to do with patents. And as reported in the Washington Post and elsewhere, it is clear and unambiguous Federal law that the U.S. Government works, including photographs, enjoy no protections.
ursula momish: Great point.
y.p: There was no legal effect to the attached disclaimer. The law specifically and explicitly allows publishing a manipulated government photo. Read the Washington Post blog report of the Der Zeitung story. It also makes the point it was totally allowed and legal.
yid.period: The law is straightforward. From USA.Gov:
Copyright and Other Rights Pertaining to U.S. Government Works
A United States government work is prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government as part of that person’s official duties.
It is not subject to copyright in the United States and there are no copyright restrictions on reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, or display of the work. Anyone may, without restriction under U.S. copyright laws:
-> reproduce the work in print or digital form;
-> create derivative works;
-> perform the work publicly;
-> display the work;
-> distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.
Again, this is a government photo, not a private one or news agency (i.e. Associated Press), that the public holds full rights to without any copyright. Anyone by law may alter it. The disclaimer attached to the photo has no legal effect.
The photo was taken by the government and the gov’t by law can’t hold any copyrights and anyone is allowed under the law to alter it and publish it. The disclaimer on the photo has no legal effect.
I don’t think the Ralbag was merely commenting on the sociological conditions of his time. For one thing he is citing Chava. For another he is discussing the reason for tzitzis, and the reason wasn’t because of his contemporary conditions (as the halacha long predated him.) And for another, his discussion isn’t the contemporary sociological conditions.
U.S. Government photos, such as the one in question (i.e non-classified), are by law in the public domain. Thus anyone can legally alter it however they wish, notwithstanding the disclaimer the White House attached which has no legal application.
Popa, I think some posters are being hypersensitive because expectations and secular societal practices have changed, especially in regards to male/female interactions. I once learned a Rambam based on a gemorah (and I’m sure other meforshim too say the same) in school that says a wife is obligated to serve her husband by making his bed, washing him, and in general do what he asks her. Try explaining that today and some people will get all offended. I think a large part of the reason is because many people never learnt of these duties. I always felt education is the key to understanding.
What’s new about this compared to 40 years ago? Somehow it works.
Thank you. I just noticed that a couple of minutes ago. All his posts have been deleted, he has been blocked, and his account info was sent to his mother and his mashgiach.
How can halacha take a position on photographing the sun? Photography is a rather new phenomenon.
“then I’m insulted you are suggesting that I might be a “she.””
Is being a woman an insult?
Why in secular culture is Mother’s Day such a big deal, but Father’s Day is not nearly as big a deal?
“Do You Show Gratitude To Your Parents? If Yes, How? How Often?”
Of course; every day. How could a Jew do otherwise or this even be a question???
Doesn’t the legislature need to make any changes in the budget, to reverse this?
It’s done AFTER Shabbos, not during.
Why are men Jewish?
It’s a mitzva and a minhug.
always: Was your husband a widower?
Snopes has a strong liberal bias.
“A rav once told us we should take 3 vacations a year:”
I’d like to change rav’s, who is this rav!? Does he only cater to the ultra-wealthy??