Are You A Tu B’Av Virgin?

Today is the fifteenth day of Av, a day with very little significance. There aren’t any miracles that are supposed to have happened on this day, it’s not mentioned in the Torah, or anywhere else in the Bible. The first mention of Tu B’Av comes in the Mishna, where it’s written in the fourth chapter of Taanit:

Rabban Shimon Ben Gamliel said: There are no better days for Israel than the fifteenth of Av and Yom Kippur, because on those day the daughters of Jerusalem went out in white garments…and danced in the vineyards. What did they say? They said, “Young man, raise your eyes and look at what is clear to you. Don’t look at her form, look at her family [i.e. her family’s good standing in the community].”

This Painting Is Called the Loss of Virginity: maybe she left it on one of those mountains. Or maybe the lion cub stole it.
Maybe this doesn’t turn you on, but the fifteenth of Av has been appropriated as a kind of Israeli Valentine’s Day with the giving of flowers, chocolates, and probably lingerie, too. Here’s myjewishlearning.com:

In recent decades Israeli civil culture promotes festivals of singing and dancing on the night of Tu B'Av. The entertainment and beauty industries work overtime on this date. It has no formal legal status as a holiday-- it is a regular workday--nor has the Israeli rabbinate initiated any addition to the liturgy or called for the introduction of any ancient religious practices. The cultural gap between Israeli secular society and the Orthodox rabbinate makes it unlikely that these two will find a common denominator in the celebration of this ancient/modern holiday in the foreseeable future.

Sad, I guess. Anyway, I was thinking about Tu B’Av and what its possible implications are this morning, and as I looked over the text I noticed that it says ‘bnot yerushalaim’ the daughters of Jerusalem, where one might expect it to say ‘betulot’ virgins or maidens. These chicks are going out to find husbands, but it’s not specified that they’re virgins. Interesting, no?

I have to preface this with an admission that I have done no research at all as to the consistent or inconsistent use of those two terms in rabbinic literature, so I can’t be sure that bnot yerushalaim doesn’t imply a level of purity or viginity. That said, I’d like to think the choice of words is significant.

There’s a lot of talk these days about how special it is to give your virginity to someone, as opposed to just losing it (someday I’d like to write something about how wrong both of those expressions are, as if virginity is something you can wrap up and put under a Christmas tree, or something you can forget at a coffee shop when you leave in a hurry). I mostly think this is wishful thinking. For women, anyway, the first act of intercourse can be both physically and psychologically painful. I think it’s a mistake to place so much emphasis on something that’s likely to be traumatic in even the best scenario. Which isn’t to say that I advocate getting rid of one’s virginity as soon as possible, I just don’t really see how the hymen itself is of much value to anyone.

In fact, according to a source I found online, it’s of no value halachically. Over at the MO Woman blog there’s a post on the recent craze over ‘revirginization’ and whether or not it would in any way reinstate a woman’s betulah-ness. The verdict: Nuh-uh.

The halachic status of betulah (virgin) has implications for the monetary amount written into the marriage contract and for the ability to marry a kohen gadol. This status implies that a woman has never had intercourse; it is not a comment on her hymenal tissues. A woman born without a hymen, or whose hymen has been stretched by the natural processes of maturity (or by tampon use), is still a betulah. On the other hand, a woman who has had relations or anal sex but still has hymenal tissue in place, is not. (For further discussion see: Rav Yoezer Ariel. Taanat Betulim Bezman Hazeh. Assia 15 Kislev 5766.) Thus, a woman who undergoes this procedure will not regain her status as a betulah. Whether she would nevertheless, need to observe a period of niddah for potential dam betulim would appear to depend on opinions within the rishonim as to the purpose of this practice.

Which brings me back to the original Mishna in Taanit, and it’s assertion, “Don’t look at her form, look at her family [i.e. her family’s good standing in the community].”

I don’t think we should choose our partners based on their families or their families’ social status, but I do think that ultimately our choice should come from an understanding of a person’s background. These days, even virginity is subjective, and I like the idea of a seduction that is overtly sexual—what with the white dresses and the dancing—but that says, “There’s more to it than this.”