Religion & Beliefs
Make Your Own Tallit
By Tamar Fox / April 30, 2007
I have to admit that I kind of like a plain cotton white tallis with dark blue stripes. On a dignified man, the old classic still rocks. But I think it looks silly on me, and on most women. And I absolutely detest that sad thin silk thing that hang like a limp boa around your neck during davening. I don’t care if the silk is painted to coordinate with your kippah—it’s tacky. 
And it turns out, a tallit doesn’t have to be white. A tallit just has to have four corners with tsitsit. Most people prefer to have an atarah, an embroidered band at the head of the Tallit as a sign not to switch its upper side with its lower side, and so that the front tsitsit won’t be in the back and vice versa. Lots of people embroider quotes from Tanakh on the atarah, or decorate it with beading, but this is completely optional. If you know a kid about to have a bar/bat mitzvah, a cool and meaningful gift is to make them a tallit. Make it, not buy it. Take them on a trip to a fabric store, and find something they like. If they’re obsessed with the Red Sox, there’s no reason why it can’t be a Red Sox tallit—except maybe that it won’t seem so awesome thirty years down the line. More classic/sophisticated fabrics like wool, linen, and raw silk can totally work, and will generally withstand the test of time. Ribbons can be stripes, but you don’t actually need them, so it becomes a taste thing. In the corners you want a reinforcement of some kind for the place where you’ll be tying the tsitsit. This fabric can be in another color, and often you make the atarah and the corners from matching fabric. If you want the edges to be fringed make sure to choose a fabric that can be fringed (silk, for instance, doesn’t really fringe, but raw silk does). The actually construction of the tallit requires very minimal sewing. Cut it into the size you want, hem or fringe the edges, and sew on the corners and atarah. Make small reinforced holes in the middle of each of the four corners, and then get your tsitsit. Tsitsit must be made out of special string, which you can find at most Judaica stores, or online. Most places will have two options. You can get all white strings, or mostly white with one blue string for each corner. The reason for this has to do with the mitzvah of tsitsit. We’re commanded to put tsitsit on any four cornered garment, and told that the color of the thread should be techelet-blue – like the color of the sky, which is a symbol of purity. According to the tradition, its color was extracted in the past from the blood of a certain snail. Some people say the new blue strings count as techelet, and some don’t—it’s up to you.
Either way, tsitsit must be tied a certain way. There are a few different traditions, so you can ask someone in your community, or you can check out the great and extensive guide online at tekhelet.com. It’s really simple, and way way cooler than those crappy ones hanging on the tallis rack at shul. Get thee to the fabric store!
POST A COMMENT
Pingback: Tallits Bring Out the Worst In People » Mixed Multitudes – My Jewish Learning: Exploring Judaism & Jewish Life
There is no way that the asshole anon is serious, "he" has to be trolling. There is no way someone can be this unreal.
Can you send me a more detailed set of instrucyions for making a tallit please?
Thanks for the information on how to make a tallit! I’m so picky I decided I’ll probably have to make my own. I wanted something more traditional than most female talliyot, but not to the point of looking like a male’s tallit.
The Talmud and Tanakh do not outlaw a woman from wearing tallit. There’s nothing saying women can’t wear them. They only didn’t wear them in the past because they weren’t supposed to wear men’s clothing, and it wouldn’t really work to have a rectangular dress-like garment.
However, talliyot aren’t masculine or feminine, really, they’re just an addition so we can continue wearing tzitzit. Therefore, women have less of a reason not to wear it.
And honestly, I don’t see why it would be such a big deal anyway. I don’t have to marry you, Angry Anon, and you don’t have to marry me. So who cares what you think, or vice versa?
I have consulted the Runes of the Almighty Clitoris and they have passive-aggressively shunned Anonymous.
It's not funny anymore. I sincerely apologize to you and the Jewcy community for egging you on. I should not have done so.
But I am asking you to stop making attacks on Monica or other women on this site. Even if an I.P. block doesn't work, the site administrators can still log whichever I.P. address(es) you are using. And these can be used to report you to your Internet service provider, or the F.B.I. Cyberstalking and cyber-harassment is a criminal offence.
Please. I implore you without any mockery or irony. Just stop. If you do not, I will ask Craig to log and report all of your I.P. addresses. Your right to freedom of speech ends where it impinges on the safety of others.
Â
Monica can call me ‘creepy’, which very clearly has a connotation that I am ‘sexaully stalking her’ ( which is typical of her kind, and I can assure you I am certainly not interested in whatever it is that constitutes ‘sex’ for her ), but if I respond to it, it gets erased? And furthermore, her slanderous comment remains? you people are full of yourselves. The only think you can hope to accomplish this way is to inflate your own egos.
a big part of this moral corruption amongst the Jewish community in America( and in America in general) is sexual immorality.
one of the pillars of feminism is the barring of ALL DISCRIMINATION of women (the word slut or whore is completely banned). This tactic is designed to prohibit men for qualifying the status of women. Women, however naturally seek the approval of men, they do this subconsciously. Some women will actually try to simulate manhood by donning the symbols of masculinity, which can sometimes temporarily act as a surrogate for male approval( ie. women wearing tallit ).
men, have generally got with the program, but they do not understand how it has negatively effected women. Women naturally want to keep their reputation in shape, but are lacking the framework to do so, because under these new social mores, complete whores have the same social standing as those girls who do keep their purity. Many girls just ‘give in’ during college out of utter frustration, and afterward become much worse in their level of corruption( both physical and spiritual ).
Dan, much like Kurtzman, you’re full of shit. I am arguing in a totally rational manner. I’m just bringing up issues that are so volatile to some people they cannot even psychologically deal with the fact that the sentences that I am composing could even exist. Believe me, I’ve dealt with all of this before… you claim I am stupid, banal, and irrelevant, but you still respond, you attack my character, or you call me insane, or when I raise something particularly caustic to your feeble moral framework, you ERASE and CENSOR. This is why I prefer listservs.
I bet you all fancy yourselves as reasonable, enlightened beings. You are everything but that. So Dan, punch away, you’re wrestling with a phantom.
I have never met this person, nor will I ever, and if I do, I doubt I will recognize him unless he introduces himself as Jezebel's Husband. I can't take his insults to heart and have any self respect. Granted, I haven't been on the recieving end of gay-bashing or being called a whore, so maybe I'd feel differently if I'd been insulted more seriously than by being told I have an inferiority complex.
I'm willing to deal with a little bone to get to the marrow (because I still believe he has something worthwhile to say, he's just having trouble saying it), but, as I said, I'm not going to babysit him through the process of rational debate if it's a skill he lacks. If that's the case, I'm done here.
If you don't want to have anything to do with that, that's fine. I'll accept the consequences of my actions. I can always choose not to respond if I see no value in continuing the conversation.Â
He's clearly severely emotionally disturbed.
The only reason Monica and I toyed with him was that he kept on returning and returning to make personal attacks on Tamar and others who tried to engage him rationally. Now I can't speak for Monica, but my intent was that he'd finally see no one was taking him at all seriously and he'd finally leave the site forever. And it looked at one point that he was actually going to do that. But he keeps coming back, seemingly even after an attempted IP block. Also, may I remind you that he personally insulted you, Dan, on more than one occasion. Don't treat him like the rational, sane human being he clearly isn't.
And to Yezevel's Husband or whoever you are: all kidding aside, please get professional help for your rage and bitterness before you hurt yourself or someone else. Seriously.
I thought he'd been banned. Something must've gone awry. He is creepy and scary, and he obviously thinks I'm someone else, or wants to imagine me as someone else for some freaky reason.
"for someone who is baseless, bilious, substanceless, clueless, sexist, idiotic, stupid, illiterate, uneducated, etc. I sure do raise a lot of issues don't I?"
No. You presented one interesting issue, which is how the orthodox world percieves the rest of us and why. Call me an egotist, but I was the one who raised it. You were too caught up in your own insults, which God knows what you were trying to accomplish with them, to actually bring up the real issue. See above post.
I don't agree with you, and I never did. I feel no shame in saying that outright. I'm very proud of my identity, and I have no problem saying what I believe and what I don't, whom I agree with and whom I don't. This has nothing to do with an inferiority complex (I'm completely confused as to what I, or the others here, feel inferior to) or the tenets of feminism.
You took my quote completely out of context. I refered only to the post you made at 3:07 AM, which contained a well-reasoned, thoughtful discussion of what you believed and why you believed it. I do not agree with your arguments, however, as you will note from my response (and further attempt at intelligent discussion), and I certainly do not agree with any of the bile you've spewn over the past few pages about people's personal lives and choices, something which no Godfearing man can claim as right action.
If you want to continue what has the potential to be an eye-opening discussion for both of us and many of this thread's observers, I ask you to please post in the spirit of that post you made at 3:07 AM. But if you can't formulate a logical, thoughtful argument, I'm not going to babysit you through the process.
I offered you a voice of understanding and a platform for you to explain yourself in a manner that would be edifying for all of us. You abused that, you abused me, and I find that dispicable. That is not how a Jew acts.
for someone who is baseless, bilious, substanceless, clueless, sexist, idiotic, stupid, illiterate, uneducated, etc. I sure do raise a lot of issues don’t I?
“I by no means am defending Jezebel’s Husband for anything he said prior to his 3:07 AM post, but in that one, he DID respond with a thoughtful post that had real potential to become an intelligent discussion.”
Dan, thanks for you support. I certainly understand how difficult it is to do so, even your conciliatory gesture is a rather brave thing to do under you real identity. Even me thanking you might even effect your reputation, so officially let just say were not in agreement. ;)
Men have to get rid of this inferiority complex we pick up at Universities, Dan you should feel NO SHAME IN AGREEING WITH ME. Feminism makes no sense, for either sex.
Did you know that Gloria Steinem worked for the CIA?
http://www.namebase.org/steinem.html
I by no means am defending Jezebel's Husband for anything he said prior to his 3:07 AM post, but in that one, he DID respond with a thoughtful post that had real potential to become an intelligent discussion. Instead of responding to him maturely, others here continued to bait him, instead of responding to his clearly stated side of the discussion.
Michael, you knew you weren't going to get anywhere with him on the sexuality issue anyway. While I would approve of your methods for every other one of his posts, which had no worthwhile substance to them, once he came up with something ACTUALLY worth talking about I'm a little upset that you would continue egging him on. It's interesting that, for all the anonymous bashing, even the longtime registered users can come up with the same crap that anonymous posters who also happen to be idiots (since the two don't automatically go hand in hand) do.
I was actually interested in talking to this guy, once the conversation became civil. It's not often a liberal Jew gets to have a debate on Torah with someone on the far side of the traditionalist end of the spectrum.
BIG EDIT: Never mind. I retract the whole thing. Jezebel's Husband, I liked you better when you wanted to talk Torah and Judaism, not make unfounded claims to know people's personal lives or that they are unhealthy and unethical.
remember Kurtzman, you banned me FOR ASKING QUESTIONS. The last post made no claims as to Monica’s sexual reputation.
and you claim to be on the side of free thought? I don’t think so. You’re on the side of pleasing the mob.
Jezebel’s Husband’s Wife: you just proved my initial point by erasing my post. You feminists like to think you are for free speech. But you’re only for free speech that appeals to your agenda. Start to talk about the actual ugly side to feminism; the fact that the ‘liberated woman’ never finds love, never finds satisfaction. If I look like such an idiot, why would you erase what I wrote? Perhaps it is not me who looks like a fool.
go to a bar, go to a college, they are filled with women who will sleep with anyone at the drop of the hat. The market price for a piece of poontang has plummeted since the 70s. But when you use the term slut or whore, its anathema. So where are these great fantastic liberated women that feminism is fighting for? “Women I can’t have?” I can have all these women. they are cheap. dirt cheap. their organs of reproduction are public property, a public amusement park. I owe these women nothing after sleeping with them. they are worthless.
ill tell you something, I know everything about Monica’s private life. It’s written between the lines, if you live with God you can see through peoples lies. If she had a good and sound reputation, she would have no reason to adopt the beliefs that she does, because these things only bring misery to herself, but it does buy her a sort of short-term satisfaction. You girls kid yourself into thinking some great guy is just going to stroll into your life. What guy would even want to interact with a group of girls who allow such nonsense talk? He might think you are crazy or deranged. You will never meet this man in your current state. You may never meet him.
Michael, I don’t care what your ‘orientation’ is, honestly you appear to be very confused. Sodomy is neither healthy nor ethical.
I thank you for taking the time to write a constructive, thoughtful post (I still wish you would apologize for the others you insulted, since you clearly can make your point in a manner that isn't bilious). Now the real debate can begin, and I'm sure some of us will learn a few things.
I partially agree that the problem we're facing is the definition of Judaism. Judaism is significantly more than a list of 613 things we can and can't do, and the myriad "fences" the Talmudic rabbis built around them. That's halacha. "Judaism" is a much more amorphous concept. It's a religion; it's a people; it's an ethic. Religion is about how we, as imperfect human beings, connect to God. For some, it is through prayer, for other through meditation, for others through performing commandments, and any combination of these and other methods. Tell me, do you stop and think about God every time you kiss a mezuzah as you walk through a door? Do you remember God's presence when you decide whether to eat a milk meal or a meat meal for lunch? In this sense, I believe much of the commandments that fall under the categories ben adam l'atzmo and ben adam l'makom are related to how one connects to God. But Judaism is also a people, a community, and so we are given commandments ben adam l'chavero. They're not arbitrary, as you make them sound, chosen by God either for some divine purpose unknown to us or on a whim to give some small percentage of the world reason to worship him/her/it (the Hebrew may use masculine pronouns to refer to God, but Hebrew, like all languages with only male/female gendering applies arbitrary genders to every other non-gendered noun). Recall Hillel's famous teaching, not to treat another as oneself would not want to be treated. So, I cannot accept halacha as an arbitrary rule set that describes who is and who isn't a Jew. According the Kabbalists, Torah has four levels of meaning; the literal sense is the first, most simplistic sense. Rather, I see Judaism as a set of guidelines about how to live in a difficult world; one which makes us constantly question the nature of God, one where community is a constantly changing, sometimes threatened, yet massively important convention, and one where we're faced with difficult questions about how to act.
I don't believe that God wrote the Torah verbatim. I believe that one or more humans, prophets (though more in the Maimonidean sense than in the Biblical sense), inspired by God, wrote their inspiration. That Torah is divine is unquestionable to me, but that it is a flawed creation of man as well is something I must also live with. This is why I can believe in God, believe in Torah, and still understand the historical reality in which laws forbidding gay sex were designed to separate Jews from the orgiastic practices of the Hebrew's idolatrous neighbors, but in the modern world that homosexual love is just as true and pure (and idol-free, for Jews) as the heterosexual variety. This certainly separates us from the get-go, but I still think that if we all call ourselves Jews there is something meaningful to that alone: a respect of our collective history, culture, and tradition, even if we don't agree with every pronouncement handed down to us.
I'm only 20 years old; I'm no expert. This is just what I believe, and I sure hope I'm wrong about something, because how boring would my life be if I had nothing to learn ad mea v'esrim?
I unpublished the "You will stand naked before God" comment that Michael responded to, and blocked Jezebel's IP for 24 hours. Dan Garwood and others gave him plenty of chances for a real convo, but all he seems interested in doing is insulting someone he knows nothing about in creepy, personal terms.
Ugh, REALLY going to sleep now.
Let's keep your sexual fantasies about God out of this, okay Jezebel's Husband?
By the way, what sort of Torah-true, God-fearing individual has a wife named after a Phonecian idol-worshipper? Can we call you "Ahab?"
Oh, and in your ravings about Kinsey and his alleged Nazi affiliations, you must have missed the part where I said I don't actually have sex with men. Also, you're apparently too humour-impaired to realize I wasn't propositioning you for real. May I please be excused from Gehinnom, milord?
This is your wife, stop stalking girls that you could never have.
Note to Monica: Get yourself a restraining order.
Wow it’s an all out brawl in here. Bring out the boxing gloves. Come on people! Is this Jerry Springer or Jewcy.com?
The problem here is over the definition of Judaism. They want Judaism to encompass things that it does not. Judaism is about things you are supposed to do and things you are not( homosexuality IS NOT acceptable under the laws of the Torah ). If you are one of the people who believes you can be Jewish without the Torah, just take a look at history to see where these communities are headed. If you want to believe in Kinsey, then you don’t believe in the Torah, because Kinsey didn’t believe in the Torah (he was associated with Nazis though).
In this sense people like Monica are serving to confound the meaning of Judaism. But I really do believe in God, and I believe that knowledge is bestowed by God and God alone, so in a sense they really do have no effect on the ultimate result. I have a feeling that Monica will( or probably already does ) get exactly what she deserves, a very clouded view of the universe.
The goal of Jewish learning is knowledge of God’s existence. Conforming the laws and observances to suit your own personal ends is retarding the aim. Why am I doing this? I guess this is what God wanted me to do tonight. Maybe he wanted Monica to learn these things, who knows. I surely don’t. ultimately, its about personal knowledge. but no man is an island.
Now God wants me to eat some Hummus that I have in the fridge.
"Stop sleeping around"? What are you talking about? Who are you talking about? You know nothing about my personal life. I would love to know this other Monica you keep referring to — she seems to have a much cooler, and much more scandalous, life than mine.
Ignorant? Prove it. Prove me wrong.
Annoying? Because I'm right?
Look, I understand where you're coming from, I really do. You believe that God gave Torah to the Jewish people, perfect and complete, and so we should live by the 613 Commandments contained in it. This is a perfectly acceptable and respectable belief. In fact, it may even be true, as I know you will say it is. But that doesn't give you the right to browbeat others into sharing your belief, nor does it give you the right to insult others based on their failure to uphold those beliefs. Devout Christians try to make everyone accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior because they truly believe those who do not will spend eternity in hell. It doesn't matter that I don't believe in Jesus, I get hell anyway because Christian A knows I will. Are you the same way?
Since I claim understanding, I should apologize for the sarcasm of my previous post; I will if you will also apologize for your reckless insulting of the other thoughtful, Godfearing (even if it isn't the same way you fear God) people trying their hardest to be good Jews. If you want to teach Torah, by all means go ahead, I, for one, will appreciate the effort and do my best to learn, but you should remember that we don't all start with the same background you have. Hillel is considered one of the greatest Jewish teachers of all time, a large portion of which was due to his renowned patience.
If I and others are wrong, please tell us, using solid evidence (Torah counts), but please avoid anecdotal and unfounded accusations against us.Â
Kurtzman, are you with Jews For Jesus? There are several ‘Yeshus’ in the Talmud… which one do you claim is Jesus?
Monica, Just shut up please. No amount of arguing, university accreditation, or legal statute is ever going to change anything. You will not be truly satisfied until you have children with a moral, ethical man. You are already far past your sexual prime, so I advice you hurry up. Until then, you will just rant off out-of-context quotations from the talmud with a little “Buber and Levinas” thrown in for added excitement. Secondly, stop sleeping around, this pleasure is reserved for married men and women. Possibly, you might actually do some good in your life.
Other guy, I’m not going to bother responding to you. You’re a combination of ignorant and annoying.
…as gayness, claims Angry Anon. Â And yet he has no problem claiming outright, sight unseen, that a particular woman is a whore. Â Too funny!
As for the supposed "lifestyle" I have "chosen,"  when I said I was bi, I was referring to my orientation.  That's not something one "chooses."  It just so happens, however, that I have chosen not to have sexual relations with men, since, Kinsey-scale wise, I lean more towards preference of women most of the time.  There's choice for you.  And by the way, "bi" does not equal "gay."  Two separate orientations.  Dust off that Cheetos bag and read some non-haredi books on human sexuality, pal.  Better yet, go out into the world and actually meet people who are different from you, even women.  You might learn that life isn't all black-and-white.
I'm just not sure how an analysis of my character or private life (which is, if truth be told, embrassingly conservative) became the goal of this discussion. My initial comments pertained to the Genesis quotation, which seemed to me to insinuate what amounts to a violent misreading of Torah.
I commented on why I love Judaism so much, threw out a little Buber and Levinas, and then it got ugly. I'm not sure why you chose to zero in on me in particular, but I imagine that it is because something I said — intellectually, theologically, whatever — feels threatening. You can hate women, including me, all you want, but that does not make them whores or STD-carriers or anything else that is vile and reprehensible.
Finally, nothing was said about your "sex life" (by me, anyway) until you attacked Michael Nehora's: "because these countries are filled with asses like Michael Nehora who are willing to say anything to gain access to a vagina."
Not everything is about sex. Not everybody is preoccupied with sex 24/7.
"Are you Jewish, are you not?"
Gosh, hard to say. Questions of identity are so complicated these days. I've got a Jesus thing, though. Hey, the figure Yeshu ha-Notzri who shows up in the Gemarrah…do you think that was really Jesus? Or was it someone else?
Oh, and re: ad hominems, yes, I know that you were getting some, too. But nobody devoted a lengthy post to graphic, angry descriptions of what a pathetic eunuch you were. That would have been comparable to yours, I think.
'Night!Â
I'm not sure I should even bother, but maybe I can inject a little rationality into this absurd argument.
Our Angry friend insists on the following:
1. Traditional, literal interpretation of Torah
2. Women are, and should be, inferior to men in just about every way (the exception, of course being that they should be better at giving birth, and, I would guess, that they should also be better cooks, should wash and fold laundry better, and probably clean windows better than men; these skills, of course, are not learned in university, so women have no reason to attend higher education)
3. Women who do not conform to this standard are promiscuous, and, as the result of this promiscuity, are wracked with guilt to the point that they become apologetic to gender egalitarianism – an evil if there ever was one. The other effect of such promiscuity is that any woman who isn't shomer negiah has some STD. HPV seems to be his favorite. On a related note, women give blow jobs to men to get what they want. Also, women who aren't submissive to their husbands get divorced.
Now to analyze:
1. No problem with this in general, but orthodoxy doesn't give you a monopoly on spirituality. Though I don't agree with this conception of Torah, I still respect your right to practice Judaism in this way. But, when you try to tell others that their expressions of devotion to God and the Commandments is wrong, you're going to ruffles some feathers. It seems like this surprised you. If it did, I'm wondering what bubble you've been living in your entire life. Indeed, maybe you're right that such literal interpretation of Torah is the only true expression of Judaism, but if that's the case, why so insecure in your arguments that you have to resort to insults and attacks on modern lifestyles, rather than explaining, with evidence, why your practice of Judaism is right?
2. For most of us, I don't need to explain the absurdity of this claim. For our Angry friend, I see no reason to try to explain it, because all other attempts, either humorous, sarcastic, angry, or straightforward have been lost on him. The concepts behind gender equality derive from basic philosophical principles that drive modern society. Even if you do subscribe to a literal interpretation of the passage giving man dominance over woman, I find it inconceivable that you would afford as few rights to women as you do. There is plenty of room for philosophy in the gaps left by literalistic ideology.
3. Also unnecessary to address, but for the benefit of our Angry friend, I will note that there is no logical connection between failing to live by tzniut and sexual promiscuity. You may say you don't need logic, since God is on your side, but unless you show me where God tells a prophet that women who show their elbows are sluts, I'm not going to concede this point. And don't tell me God spoke to you either; you certainly don't have the qualities of a prophet, just ask Maimonides. Furthermore, there are is a large portion of women who don't live by tzniut who also don't have STDs. I know, I'm amazed too. Next up: sexual favors in return for other favors. Still happens, but I'll let you in on a secret, Angry, most feminists won't come close to a man who demands sex for university admissions (they tend to get arrested, anyway), so I'm reasonably comfortable assuming their grades and SAT scores were the only things getting them into college. And, since you're so quick to peg all the women posting here as feminists (and the men as having "manginas"), you can't have it both ways. Are the prostitutes or feminists? Pick one. As for feminists getting divorced, well, my mother is still married, and so are all her girlfriends she attends the Hillary rallies with. (In case you're confused, an argument is considered invalid if a true example contradicts it.) Oh, and I'm sure you know that Jewish law allows a woman to demand a get from her husband if he doesn't sex her up often enough, so who is it who really needs to provide sex to get what he wants?
I also enjoy the delicious irony of you stating your opposition to abortion. Either you're a non-Jew, or you're ignorant, since traditional Jewish belief (which you love so much) claims that a child doesn't receive a soul until eight days after birth and the pikuach nefesh concept makes it really easy to decide who gets to live when a fetus endangers a mother's life. But that's just a side note. As I said above, you can believe what you want, just don't tell me (or anyone else) what we should believe.
Indeed, if you love Torah as much as you imply, why not take some time to contemplate that God is compassionate and merciful. Maybe you could learn a few things from the Role Model of Role Models.Â
“I know you were being teased, but that’s not equivalent to a lengthy diatribe calling someone a “filthy whore” over and over again in different ways. This has nothing to do with the biases of gender discourse: malicious personal insults are about the only thing we’ve unpublished so far on this site, and they’re not helpful in any discourse.”
Kurtzman, you’re full of shit. The girls both initiated and deliberated on various ad hominem attacks that addressed my sex life. They did it over and over again. Meanwhile, I raise an analysis of Monica’s character, and suddenly I have breached all discernible decorum (probably because I was right on the mark without even knowing her personally). This asymmetry and double standards can only result in one thing- no readable content, because any self respecting person is not going to put up with that. have fun with your web site buddy.
“Sweet Jesus”? I just have to say at this point… What the fuck is this shit? I’m beginning to think you’re all just a little bat shit insane. The women appear to be a bunch of polluted whores, and the men are homosexuals or little pussy-crazed lunatics in search of their next victim. Are you Jewish, are you not? I don’t even think you know or care, but you do seem interested in destroying the foundation of tradition that we currently understand to be Judaism.
Yezebel's husband, no, it's not. But there's plenty of both here, and I do happen to be a straight-boy fellow traveller of the international gay agenda. Wasting your moral energy on who people sleep with is a perfect averah, so far as I'm concerned.
I know you were being teased, but that's not equivalent to a lengthy diatribe calling someone a "filthy whore" over and over again in different ways. This has nothing to do with the biases of gender discourse: malicious personal insults are about the only thing we've unpublished so far on this site, and they're not helpful in any discourse.
Can't you criticize the impact of feminism on women's lives without making a mean-spirited case study out of the person you're discussing it with?
hold on here… is this a site for Gay and Feminist Jews?
Sweet Jesus, you're a real piece of work, Anon. But as an advocate of the rights of sexual minorities, I have to say that it's too charitable, almost condescending when you claim men who have sex with men are "beyond reproach." Sexual minorities put their pants on the same way you do, and are subject to all the same human weaknesses. We're not perfect.
I have to go to bed. What in God's name will this thread look like in the morning?
“Anon, I unpublished your last comment because it amounted to three paragraphs of graphic sexual insults.”
uh, Joey there is much more than 3 paragraphs of sexual insults directed at me. Which goes to show how completely biased ‘gender discourse’ is. Apparently we can insult and belittle men for ‘not getting enough pussy’, but should we DARE to criticize the character of a feminist… time to ‘unpublish’ (censor). the fact is, I am willing to wager that the claims I have made are not so far off the mark. Its like were living in a bizarro world or something. Everyone knows what people like Monica do, because they encounter them everywhere. But were not allowed to discuss it. Why not?
there were approximately 1.2 million abortions in America in 1996. The figure has not changed significantly for more recent years. The feminist enterprise is nothing short of a lie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJzSiAPXTiQ
“And if you’re implying I’m gay…well, you’re close. I’m bi. Does that get you hot?”
Michael, your choice of ‘lifestyle’ clearly show that you:
1) have zero regard for the written laws of Judaism
2) have zero knowledge of the written laws of Judaism
Personally, I hold the opinion that a man who gratifies his sexual urges with another man is beyond reproach. You have made a choice in life that closes you off from knowledge and peace with God. The possibilities for repentance in your case are so painful that death is typically a better option. One day you will have to face this.
and finally, I did not directly imply that you are gay (I honestly would never assume such a terrible trait of a person), but your adamance clearly shows you have an agenda above and beyond that of the ‘panting sex crazed moron crowd’. But your information establishes for me that my vision is crystal clear.
regarding the ‘panting sex crazed moron crowd’, what you girls don’t understand about them is that they are not looking to do you any good whatsover. They are looking to ‘score’ and further pollute your body and your reputation. In return for this privilege they will compromise their inherit sense of values and morals, often causing detriment to their own friends and allies. Some of them never grow out of this stage, and continue the downward spiral until late adulthood until all of their relationships have eroded. Often times these people claim they are ‘artists’ which is an excellent cover for being a complete a total reprobate. Girls, these people will never, ever do anything good for you, but will rather expand your own ignorance and self-centeredness, making you even more susceptible to bad decisions, for which you are personally liable.
I've had my fun. Â :-)
Anon, I unpublished your last comment because it amounted to three paragraphs of graphic sexual insults. They can be summarized as "Monica, she's no eishes chayil!"
"I have read Levinas (en francais)… probably much more than you have. but I don't go around waving his books as a means to gain credibility."
You can express whatever opinions you want about feminism, women's role in Judaism, the difficulty of being a traditionalist in a left-wing university department, whatever. But take the egregious, puerile personal attacks somewhere else.
But yeah, everyone should take it easy.
ok… since this bitch Monica has the right to criticize on a personal level and I do not, I am done with this web site. I think you will find that level of information here will be fairly low as you obviously do not even uphold the basics of free speech and equal rights.
I can tell you that what I had mentioned in the last post lies at the basis of the type of thinking that Monica holds to be true. They are all suffering from serious guilt of having slept with far too many men( I am guessing she is also amongst the %30 of American women who have HPV ), or possibly worse things like having an abortion. At Monica’s age she has no doubt encountered the reality of it: no man will love her. She has accepted this at a very deep level and she compensates for it by trying to ‘transform her life’. Its not changing monica, you have to live with the reprecussions of your own actions. Blog all you want, the world will not adapt itself to your mistakes.
Angry Anon, you should throw in the towel now, man — Michael Nehora is clearly kicking your butt.
Is, dude, is. Â She's still very much alive, thanks.
And if you're implying I'm gay…well, you're close.  I'm bi.  Does that get you hot?
“How ’bout it…tiger? Secure enough in your hunky hunky masculinity to handle a real man…gina?”
tell me about your mother, Michael… I am guessing she was a rather domineering woman wasn’t she?
Sure, sure. And I'm the Boston Strangler.
You haven't even been to university, have you? Or read anything more demanding than the ingredients on your bag of Cheetos.
Keep it going, dude. You're only digging yourself in deeper.
You're hilarious . . .
No, you have not read Levinas, or your life would have been transformed. You would be a better person because of it. You should come to our Levinas conference next month, though. We would love to have you!
…to a vagina, he can always use mine.
How 'bout it…tiger? Secure enough in your hunky hunky masculinity to handle a real man…gina?
But why does Michael Nehora need "access to a vagina" if he is a "mangina"?
Clearly, however, you have no access to a vagina or you would not be so hateful. Like I said, a little bit of Levinas would do ya some good . . .
“We really can’t figure it out, despite our combined education of 44 years.”
hold on here, just because you share your brain with your roommate doesn’t mean you get to add up your education* to prove your point.
* here I use the term loosely, because in America and most Western nations, women can attend school indefinitely and study useless topics all at the taxpayers expense. Why? because these countries are filled with asses like Michael Nehora who are willing to say anything to gain access to a vagina (see John Kerry).
Now I now what to put on my business cards. Â Thanks, dude!
hold on here. as entertaining as it is to be having this pseudo-discussion with a jewish cum tramp and a pathetic mangina-llectual (Monica and Micheal respectively)… the feminists are claiming Levinas and Buber as their own? Why not dig up their graves and castrate their corpses? Obviously Monicas feminist indoctrination camp( sorry… University ) has decided that Levinas and Buber have validated Jewish feminism for all posterity. What a freakin’ shame. There should be laws against this kind of thing, and luckily in ancient times, there were. Women naturally want to contort history and spread lies in order to cover their shame, so at various points in history reading was forbidden by women. These periods also coincided with great wealth and prosperity.
by the way Monica, I am certainly not here to reason with you… but I am gathering an accurate picture of what is currently festering in the cultural petri-dishes of country’s universities. Ewww….
So, dear Angry Anon, maybe you can help my roommate and me out with a syntactic question. Does the stress go on the first syllable of "cuntocracy" or on the second? In other words, is it CUNTocracy, or cunTOCracy? We really can't figure it out, despite our combined education of 44 years. Plus, we plan to pledge into the Order of the Cuntocracy later this month, and we don't want to embarass ourselves by shamelessly mispronouncing such an important term. All hail the rise of the Cunt.
Yours,
Monica and Roommate (we'll call her AER for now)
Nice try, Monica, but somehow I don't think our Angry Anon friend has the capacity actually to read Buber and Levinas. Â Or anything other than Hustler.
Isn't this guy great?  I know, I know; don't feed the trolls, but this over-testosteroned fella is so over-the-top he's actually funny.  Hello, Jerry Springer?  Got someone for you…Â
that time of the month again huh?
“I love Judaism for many reasons, but for two in particular”
1) I can change it into whatever I want! And I automatically get credibility by inheritance. Ain’t it great!
2) blah blah Levinas blah blah Buber blah blah.
Easy, tiger.
I love Judaism for many reasons, but for two in particular: first, it is a dynamic religion, evolving and adapting itself to the needs of the contemporary era ("turn it and turn it," say the rabbis, "for everything is contained in it"); second, and perhaps most importantly, it is a religion that values, above all else, the ethical relationship — the way we treat and respond to all human beings. At its finest, Judaism insists on our "infinite responsibility" to the Other, the importance of the face-to-face, the I-Thou (on these ideas, see Emmanuel Levinas and Martin Buber, respectively).
Oh, and by the way, I'm sorry but the passage you quoted above is not a "fundamental commandment"; it's not a commandment at all. "Love your neighbor," however, is a commandment. Just thought I'd toss another pearl your way.
craig, anyone ever tell you that you look like a muppet?
I mean, I'm no prude and am not shy about using profanity, but do you really have to overload every single one of your posts with toilet language? It only makes you look uneducated. Good thing for you we no longer recite the morning blessing, as recorded in the Talmud, which ends "who has not made me an ignoramus (???)." Â Also, it's hard to take seriously your claim that you're some sort of pillar of Torah-true Judaism when you use such language constantly. Â What would your rav think?Â
I'm the only one who is allowed to make intellectualized puns here. That's also a bannable offense. Just FYI.
you have got to be kidding me. You are dispelling an obvious, and fundamental commandment as ‘prophetic’? Your explanation is more like a discombobulation (discomBabelation) of terms that the average reader is going to shy away from. But your intellectual intimidation tactics don’t work on me… the problem is that you have been given the semblance of credibility in the first place. Because whatever the hell it is that you are expounding here, its not Judaism. I am actually surprised that you are not suggesting we remove that portion from the Torah altogether.
“But, I fear, pearls to swine . . .”
those aren’t pearls darling, they’re your birth control pills.
“BLESSED ART THOU, O LORD OUR G-D, KING OF THE UNIVERSE, WHO HAST NOT MADE ME A WOMAN.”
Right, anon ("Unto the woman he said…") – that's one example of how the Hebrew bible is prophetic (anticipates the future, whether it is an "ethical" future or not) rather than apocalyptic (orchestrates/chooses/dictates what will happen in the future). Torah abounds with examples of what not to do, of how not to behave, of how it looks not to have an ethical relationship. What you've cited is not an example of Torah's admonition to treat women (or anyone, for that matter) as less than one's equal; it's a prophetic rendering of a world that has lost sight of the ethical relationship with the Other.
 But, I fear, pearls to swine . . .
“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” -the jew book, also known as the torah
I hesitate to even engage in this discussion because the anonymous user who began this thread is clearly beyond redemption. However, in regard to his statement that there is no historical precedent, I feel the need to set the record straight. The Gemara in Menachot 43a specifically mentions that R. Yehuda (HaNasi) would place tzitzit on the corners of the garments of the women of his household. Although this was not widely practiced, it clearly happened. The Rambam also addresses the issue and rules (as is the sephardic custom regarding optional mitzvah activities) that a sephardic woman should not make a blessing. If Maimonides addressed it, I assume it happened. Any voluntary engaging in mitzvah observance should be praised, not vilified. Furthermore, I would hesitate to call the codifier of the Mishna a member of a “cuntocracy.”
Tamar, may you continue to be zochah to fulfill more mitzvot.
"Collecting a wide variety of opinions is the beauty of this 21st century form of communication."
Agreed, Peter. The glory of the internetz is in the endless variety of POVs it offers up on any issue. To be honest, even our vaginophobic shul-going Anon was making some points that–though they'd put him in the minority on this site–would have been a worthwhile contribution had he not obscured them under pointless vulgarity, personal attacks, and then some sort of batshit freakout.
I am really feeling the love for all us anon’s – thats so special
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
At the behest of the administration, I have just completed a modification to allow Anonymous commenters to include a name along with their post. At least then we don’t have to be all, “Anon from 5:42″ or whatever. So yeah. You can use that now.
I'm okay with anonymous commenters. I have no interest in having more information about/from our vagina-hating buddy. I do think it's sometimes hard to distinguish between one anon and another, though, and I find that mildly frustrating, but not hugely problematic. The Torah and gemara actually advocate for anonymity when public knowledge of one's identity would be embarrassing, and it clearly would be with our Citizen of the Cuntocracy. If I was him I wouldn't want anyone knowing my real name. For one thing, it would just encourage all those pesky women who won't leave him alone because of his courageous SELF RESPECT.
I think this is very helpful.
"I understand that Jewcy would have no problem with gentiles who are regular readers creating accounts (correct me if I'm wrong)."
Emphatically, yes. I hope that non-Jews aren't hesitating to register because they're uncertain whether this is "their" place. As we say at the top of our e-mail blasts, Jewcy is "Jewishly-inflected, [but] catholic in its interests." We consider ourselves part of a larger "Jewcy" demographic in the Anglophone world, not at all limited to people who identify as Jewish.
If your understanding is wrong, it's only in that you sort of suggest that we might want non-Jews to register as part of the user community only if they showed a greater level of commitment than we would expect from a new Jewish Jewcy user. Strongly-identified Jews, people with some Jewish connection who don't identify as Jewish, or people with no Jewish connection whatsoever–if they're interested in the site, we're happy to have them aboard and registered.Â
I’m not sure if a ban on anon posting is even being seriously considered, but I’ve seen it suggested on and off, and picked up on a general ‘anti-anon’ tone (Craig’s recent comment to an articulate anon was something to the effect of, ‘finally, an anon with some sense’)–and to me, that seemed a little off-putting. (Sorry to single out Craig here–whose comments I generally very much appreciate.)
One reason is that some of the anons are probably not creating accounts simply because they aren’t Jewish. They wound up here for one reason or another, and come back for the writing or the debates or what have you, but hesitate to become card-carrying members of a community they’re not sure they’re ‘supposed’ to be a part of. Granted, I understand that Jewcy would have no problem with gentiles who are regular readers creating accounts (correct me if I’m wrong), but I would bet that factors into the hesitation for some. I think it’s important to hear from these folks too. Although a few of the comments here and there suggest otherwise, I don’t think Jewcy aspires to be a closed community…
Probably a better discussion for “how to improve the website”. Sorry to drag the conversation so far away from ‘cuntocracy’–though it never seems too soon to close the door on that one.
I once sided with the "ban anonymous posting" side but on reflection I can see there's a place for posting without an account. Â Example: Â a recent comment, on the mikva article, from a religious Jewish woman who explains why she dreads going to the mikva. Â It's not hard to understand why she'd want to remain anonymous, or at least not to post a photo of herself.
And much as I hate to admit it, Angry Dad–er, I mean Angry Anon–has a point about possible endangerment of one's career from posting under one's real name.  To this I would add the danger that some kook who really really takes issue with a comment might decide to harass and even threaten the commenter by phone, or worse.
So yeah, I'd say keep the "anonymous posting" option.  Practising basic civility shouldn't require a login, in any case.
Re: one of the above commenters, we've got no problem with anonymous comments, we've made the decision to allow anonymous commenting because we want to keep the barriers to participation low and encourage the broader range of opinions that anon commenting always brings (though a comment that reads in toto "Keep your hairbrained whore bullshit out of my shul" is content-free enough and personal-insulty enough to warrant snarky replacement text, possibly.) Are some of the Jewcers rethinking anon commenting?
Anonymity isn't the issue, anyway, dear Anons…will the vaginocrat Gestapo have any better luck ferreting you out as registered user Jester479 than as Anonymous? Pseudonymity's as safe as anonymity, but it does help us keep track of who's saying what. Registration improves discussions, but it doesn't out anyone. And no more math problems!
But it's your call, obviously. If we don't want anonymous commenters, then we have to disable anonymous commenting, which I think would be throwing out way too much baby with the bathwater.
umm, it’s “harebrained,” and refers to the small brain of a rabbit. although the idea of a hairy brain is also funny.
i like furious anonymous guy. jewcy should invite him to write a piece on why he feels judaism should be stagnant and not evolve with the times, which has been a jewish tradition since abraham.
incidentally, these anti-spam math problems are getting really difficult.
is that someone would get into such a tizzy over the thought of a woman wearing tallit. Essentially Anon.'s argument is based in the idea that people are arbitrarily making changes to the religion. However, I would point out that a few thousand years ago we also would have stoned a woman to death for committing adultery. CLEARLY we all make changes to reflect social conditions, is just a matter of what those changes are.
Though I should be cafeful, there is a possibility that Mr. Mysogny would have no objections to such an idea.
And before you play the "more Jewish" than thou card Anon., you are going to be barking up the wrong tree on someone who is shomer shabbos, kosher and kippah-clad. That may be the truly sad part; people like Anon. project such irrationality that inevitably it leads many people to presume that such thoughts are common (perhaps why I get strange looks on the street with my kippah and Chuck Taylor combination). I don't know what happened to Anon. at some point in his life (clearly he was humilated, heart broken or something) but I feel sorry for him that it has created such an angry person. That is certainly no way to live life.
Aw shucks, guys, thanks. Â :-) Â As for where I was, let's just say barukh dayan ha-emet. Â I can elaborate further via private message for those who wish, but due to the frequent trolling on this site, you'll understand if I choose not to reveal too much of my family life for public consumption. Â Good to be back, though.
Good grief, every ‘anon’ poster does not identify with the ‘cuntocracy’ raver. Why not just paste a comment from the post you’d like to reply to into your post? That should eliminate confusion, and it’s a simple strategy used on web forums everywhere. If you respond to all anon posters ‘as one’, you’ll be pretty much treating half of Jewcy’s participants as if they’re irrelevant. If Jewcy chooses to do away with anon posts, so be it–people can create pseudonyms, as you point out–or the conversation can dwindle to one between ten regulars. But at the moment, a large percentage of comments are coming from people who identify as ‘anon.’ Rather than complaining about this, change the rules, or simply find a way to respond to what they’re saying. We’re responding to ideas after all, not names.
Michael Nehora returns! Where were you, Simon Peter?
You were missed Michael Nehora!
Poor, poor woman-hating fellow. (Notice I'm not calling him by the word synonymous with "incognito," just to make everyone happy.) He clearly speaks from a place of deep personal trauma. Perhaps a woman date-raped him when he was a teenager, and when he took her to court, the defence lawyer got her acquitted by digging into his sexual history and painting him as a promiscuous slut who was "asking for it" by dressing so provocatively. Or perhaps he experienced sexual harassment at work, with his women colleagues constantly grabbing his balls lasciviously as they walked by, or his woman supervisor informing him that if he wanted a promotion, or to stay employed at all, he'd better put out. Or perhaps he was fed up with being paid only three-quarters of what women in an equivalent position are paid, and with his country's refusal to ratify the Equal Rights for Men Amendment.
By the way, I'm a man. I don't have a "mangina." I enjoy my masculinity, as do the women I've had relationships with, and am neither embarassed nor apologetic about being male. There is no war between the sexes, except in the minds of a misguided few.
All I have to say is : KEEP YOUR STUPID HAIRBRAINED WHORE BULLSHIT OUT OF SHUL.
To respond to anonymous above: my problem with anonymouses, is that you cannot know which one you're referring to, as this reply may suggest. You can perfectly well create an account using a pseudonym. But are you happy to share the same 'name' as the other(s) anon above? I wouldn't be. Speaking of which, methinks there are three possible options at this point: (a) ban anons; (b) edit the posts so that grossly derogatory or overtly personal attacks, especially those of a discriminatory nature do not appear on the site; (c) since none of the other two is my choice, here's what I've got left: since as I mentioned I think it's pretty easy to use a pseudonym on this site if you'd like to conserve anonimity, and since I think that anyone who doesn't mind sharing a 'name', be it generic, with the author of some of the above anonymous posts, is not reticent to said poster's views, I will feel free to treat all anonymous posters as one. I'm expecting vast energy savings as a result of this measure and I invite all Jewcy radicals to follow me in this amazingly daring action!
“Totally going to use that line in my bio and CV. Thanks Anonymous!”
remember the part about leagues of panting sex crazed morons that Laurel Snyder finds interesting? You can put your membership status on your CV as well. Honestly, I’m surprised that Laurel got past the math problem required to post to this site. Meanwhile Izzy Grinspan is amazed at how nice everyone is when you become a ‘sexually liberated woman’. Yeah Izzy! Life really is that easy. Being a liberated woman is great! give it a few more years and a case of HPV and well see how generous men really are.
i love angry anonymous. i bet he looks hot in a sheitel when he benches licht.
Totally going to use that line in my bio and CV. Thanks Anonymous!
I'd just like to remind everyone that, while Jewcy is an open forum where you can discuss tons of things, from Cuntocracy to Cummunism (although we shy from Repube-lickin'ism), it's probably not okay to go all apeshit with the personal insults. So calm the fuck down, please. Thanks!
“Me thinks that Anonymous needs to get laid.”
me thinks that Adam Shprintzen can’t get women any other way than selling out men to bullshit feminism. YOU ARE A SHMUCK! See you at the Hillary rally, jackass.
Me thinks that Anonymous needs to get laid.
porn huh?
http://www.themanitoban.com/2002-2003/0115/features_index.shtml
your cunt is tired? thats because it knows it can’t win. You can’t offer me a blow job online so all your typical persuasion strategies wont work. You actually have to reason, an activity that, as a woman you are ill-equipped for.
Trying using that word TO a woman and see how positive she finds it. Your porn mags don't count as "popular literature.
And now I'm done engaging with this thread. It is making my cunt very tired.
xoL http://jewishyirishy.com
hey ladies… why is it that words like ‘phallocracy’ are perfectly legitimate in a university setting, ‘Cunt’ is used widely in popular literature; even bearing a somewhat positive connotation, but the word ‘cuntocracy’ is derogatory, sexist, and blahdifrekinblah. you girls are a combination of stupid, spoiled, and clueless. have a nice day!
“I only take issue when the anonymity becomes a shield for saying things like “cuntocracy”.”
I hear that. I hesitated to make the case in this particular thread, since the anon in question was spouting such garbage. But given that over half the comments are usually ‘anon’, I’d seen the sentiment a surprising number of times on this board recently. My point is just that privacy SHOULD be an option. People have a lot of reasons for not wanting their names out there, most of which are not so they can say ‘cuntocracy’ behind a ski mask (although obviously on the net, that comes with the territory too). Some might simply want to test drive a web community for a bit before creating a profile. Others might just not want their names/thoughts handily searchable on the web.
“But I can’t help wishing people like this would step out from the shadows…”
Are you fucking kidding me? Why not try and repeal 20 years worth of ‘hate speech’ legislation that can put me in jail for saying something that may irk the ‘fairer sex’. You are absolutely out of your mind if you don’t think staying anonymous is a good idea. But all it really takes is an act of war and believe me, all you whiny vagisil warriors will shut up real quick.
I have learned the hard way, through experience, that reasoning with feminists gets you absolutely nowhere.
all you girls clearly have the spoiled ‘daddy’s little girl syndrome’. Guess what daddy’s little girl is also a pain in the ass for her husband and is very likely be be a divorced daddy’s little girl when she hits 30. Have fun cunt bags!
And I am grateful. But I can't help wishing people like this would step out from the shadows…
xoL http://jewishyirishy.com
mostly its just is starting to sound ‘whiny’ with the anon post bashing. its the nature of the beast DUH! so stop complaining and appreciate that at least its being read.
…is the same.
I only take issue when the anonymity becomes a shield for saying things like "cuntocracy". I doubt very seriously that this poster would have used such language if there was any accountability in place, if his employer, say, might stumble upon such language..Â
I often forget to log in myself… no harm in that. And for most comments, it doesn't make any difference. But if you're slapping someone in the face, you shouldn't wear a ski mask.
xoL http://jewishyirishy.com
agreed! no need to make get in a tizzy over the fact that people comment as anon’s, relax a little – i have an account i just don’t feel like logging on!
“The leagues of panting sex crazed morons are infinitely more coherent and interesting than you.”
sure if you are looking for someone that tells you what you want to hear in return for a blow job. But you wont understand this until you hit about 30, when you will start whining about wanting a ‘traditional man’. I should know, women won’t freakin leave me alone, they detect that I have something most men don’t: SELF RESPECT.
if you are trying to suggest that at some point in history, women wore tzitzit, you are not only a reprehensible shrew, you are also an idiot.
what makes you think that you can just make up your own version of judaism? you are insulting your own ancestors, and the tradition that you claim to advocate.
as I had mentioned earlier, this insane contortion of jewish tradition has its basis in a deep sense of inferiority. I can assure you though, that wearing a tallis will not cure you of this psychological problem. Perhaps truly getting in touch with your feminine instincts will. AMOF, all of feminism has its basis in this sense of inferiority- because all of your actions are about confounding the symbols of manhood. because that is really what you are after… deeply, you know you cannot be men, but you can try to look like them so that you might confuse people into thinking you are a man. But you will never be a man, and the sooner you realize that the better off you will be.
…are infinitely more coherent and interesting than you.
But what really makes me laugh is your outrage at the tallit as a fashion statement. Originally, there were no tallitot–people just had tsitsit on their regular (presumably fashionable) clothes. Then when four cornered garments went out of style, tsitsit were in danger of being forgotten. So in the Middle Ages Jews took it upon themselves to wear something with four corners that would require tsitsit. Combining fashion and religion was pretty much the whole point. The rabbis didn't say that people had to go back to wearing clothes with four corners, they just had to add this new thing, a tallit.
Also, I am not an Administrator from the University from Maine, nor am I Andrea Dworkin. If you have a problem with them, why don't you take it up with them?Â
I don’t agree with what the anonymous poster here had to say–quite the contrary, actually I find it repugnant–but what is Jewcy’s beef with anonymous posts more generally? I realize you are an online community in addition to a journal, but particularly as a journalistic enterprise, it seems silly to spend so much time bashing outsiders for being ‘anon’ rather than engaging the remarks (when they’re worth engaging). Not everyone is interested in posting comments under their actual name. So what? The point is to debate honestly, no? As often as anonymous posters waste time with stupid remarks, those who do have IDs waste time fawning over each other and trying to make sure they don’t step on toes, are in agreement with their friends, etc. And setting up an ‘ID’ online is by no means a guarantee of an authentic identity.
I stumbled on this site initially and now read it regularly since I admire a lot of the writing and am interested in the debates. I would assume many of your readers are like me. Constant ‘anon’ bashing really just alienates people and discourages participation from those who aren’t card-carrying Jewcy members. If you want to just talk amongst yourselves, why take it to the worldwide web?
Despise you so much?
“All men are good for is fucking, and running over with a truck”. – Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator
misogynist websites? In case you haven’t noticed, and I’m sure you have, marriage law in the US has changed drastically in the past 20 years, making marriage completely untenable for men. This web site is highly informative.
The fact is though, I don’t need to school you. Just take a look at one of your feminist sisters in the later stages of life and tell me just how ‘liberated’ she is. Here’s whats in store you : http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/04/15/andrea_dworkin_narrowweb__200x266.jpg
the feminism thing works for you now, because you are still young and can command a measure of control of the leagues of panting sex crazed morons who attend university (and believe me, its not hard to do). Once that is gone you are likely to evolve into a venomous bitch.
The fact that you are turning a symbolic item like a tallis into a fashion statement tells me everything I need to know.
I'm pretty sure using words like "cuntocracy" and linking to misogynist websites will do more damage to your career than any legitimate arguments you have to make, gentle Anon. It's kind of hard for our half of the species to take seriously anyone who seems to categorically despise us so much.
I’m not interested in credibility, I’m interested in content, and thanks to the ruling cuntocracy, I can’t say what needs to be said about insulting jewish tradition in the name of ‘equality’ without damaging my career. So nuts to you (pun intended).
And francois, I’m sure your comment really scored you points with the ladies. Are you aware of the term ‘Mangina’?
http://www.dumpyourwifenow.com/2007/04/06/are-you-a-mangina/
“Can you imagine Maimonides having a point of contention with someone, and instead of working it through, engaging it, arguing it…”
sounds like the Women’s Studies department at my college.
Anyway, if you are interested in Jewish TRADITION, rather than mocking it, you might understand that its about the nature of man and woman. Its in the first few chapters of the Torah, maybe you should give it a read some time, or shall we ‘update’ that as well? What does Amraphel mean again?
…are always anonymous.
To Mr. Anonymous: what are you afraid of, in revealing your identity? Don't you realize how little credibility you have when you refuse to claim your thoughts and feelings? It's like a hit and run.
There's got to be something somewhere in some talmudic Jewish text you respect… that says that if a man canh't stand behind his ideas they aren't worth speaking… or something…Â
Can you imagine Maimonides having a point of contention with someone, and instead of working it through, engaging it, arguing it… just posting an anonymous note on their door and running away?
 xoL http://jewishyirishy.com
A man wearing a kilt is ridiculous. It stems from a deep inferiority complex. Ask any tree-throwing, claymore-wielding Scotsman.
Brother, please. We all know you're just jealous of my rockin' satin tallit.Â
the concept of a woman wearing a tallis it absolutely ridiculous. It stems from a deep inferiority complex.
Wanna post your own comments? Gotta log in first!