"From behind a barrier"

[Judith R Cohen <judithc...>]

First, I had an off-list message from someone yesterday telling me I was
being "flippant" and that my and other women's messages on this list
were a disgrace, or something of the sort. I assure everyone, nothing I
say here is flippant, quite the contrary. Clearly, Trudi, Shirona,
myself, and occasdionally others DO care enough to keep writing in about
this even though it seems such a hopeless case.

> Why hasn´t anyone written about the hard fact,
> that a woman singing in public is for many men
> a turn-on,

FIne. A good male singer is a turn-on too. Let's ban male singers from
singing, religious or other music, anywhere where they MAY be women who
MAY become aroused by it? 

I know, I've heard the answer, "women are more resistant than men". It
goes right along with all the other twisted rationalizations men use to
justify their repression of women.

Women are exempt from davening not because it would be a turn-on, but
because, as far as I could see, the sages in the practical aspect of
their wisdom realized they wouldn't have their nice meals all prepared
when they came home from davening if the women davened as much as they
did.


> It does not require all of the Jewsih community to throw out
> the Shulchan Aruch.
> 
Disagreeing strongly with one aspect of a work written by human beings
does not imply that "all the Jewish community" or any one member of it
is  tossing out the entire work. 
> from behind a barrier?

IN your DREAMS. When men teach from behind a barrier, I'll think about
it.

In any case, what could be more erotic than a suggestive barrier,
allowing these arousable men to imagine a seductive beauty behind a
voice which perhaps belongs to a face and body which might be highly
unlikely to arouse this lust?

And again, and again, and again, if this state of arousal in all these
orthodox men is so near the surface, and in those who made and who now
interpret the law and halakha, shouldn't we women who seem to be less
susceptible be taking over the law-making and keeping function?

But thr worst I've read so far is:
>  the right of 
> >Rabbis to interpret the Torah, even at the risk of misunderstanding of God's 
> >intention. 

WHAT rihgt?
Who gave them the right to do this? and who gave them the right to do at
"at the risk of misinterpreting GOd's intention"???? Really? Really,
really, God said, "go ahead men, it's your call, interpret however you
please even if you get it wrong"???????
where does it say this?

Miriam, where are you when we need you?! Get out that tof and start
singing! and not from behind any barriers, either.....


not flippantly at all, not for one single minute on this issue, Judith

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+