My friends tell me "You have to pick a Rabbi, and then listen to everything he tells you."
I reply" Ok, what if I think he's wrong?"
Friend A responds with "It says in (I dont remember where it was, sorry) that if a Rabbi says your right hand is your left hand and that your left hand is that your right hand, you still have to listen to him, because when a Rabbi is wrong it says in (ofcourse I forgot cause I don't particularly care) That if the rabbi is wrong, Hashem will change the nature and make the rabbi right."
Friend B adds with "Also, if you understand that the rebbeim have your best interest in mind, and are not out too hurt you, you'll realize that if they seem to be wrong, they really aren't."
I've had many debates over this issue way too many times too count. So here I would like to recap some of the arguments I usually tend to use.
I usually respond to friends A & B with something like "You're both wack"...after they realize that YES I had directly slightly offended them, I continue:
"What separates Judaism from Christianity?" (aside from stuff like Jesus and the concept of trinity) They usually respond with something along the lines of " Jews do not believe in blind faith, Jews are supposed to use intellect and are able to ask questions, and aren't deemed heretics if they do so. Jews also have a one-on-one relationship to hashem, they do not need a priest or a pope as an inbetween."
I reply "If we're supposed to blindly follow rebbeim because of the sources that were originally qouted or because we somehow assume they have our best interests in mind, where is the room for questions?"
Their reply to me is usually something along the lines of "1st you follow THEN you ask."
For that particular reply I had friend C (was just listening but mostly remains neutral) do the work for me. She said "What if he tells you to jump off a bridge and then Moshiach will come, when will you have time to ask aside from after death of terrible injury?"
Both A & B reply "Rebbeim wouldn't do that!"
And with that, the conversation gets really interesting:
"Really?" I reply "the Chofetz Chaim (as well as many other rebbeim) did just that. Don't you remember in HS when we learned about assimiliation that the Chofetz Chaim was specifically asked by the Jews if they can move to the US (programs and pre-ww2) and he said no. He justified himself by saying that it is better to die as Jews and remain that way through life, than assimilate and die spiritually"
A & B "But it says in the Torah death is better than assimilation"
"Right" I say "but what you forget to realize, is that assimilation is not something that occurs because Jews are not in Europe. It is something that occurs because Jews are away from each other. I would understand his fear if one family left at a time, but at the time the Jews approached him, it was fairly easy to leave for the US, which meant that MANY Jews would have gone, and ended up in the same neighborhoods. Not only that, but there WERE frum Jews in the US already in the Bronx, UWS, UES etc., would they really have assimilated more than they would've had they just led normal lives and moved to a smaller less-populated Jewish town somewhere else in Europe? The rebbeim basically did just that, they told us to jump off a bridge and no one cared to ask, we just agreed, and blindly jumped off the bridge like lemmings would if their leader happend to lead them off a cliff. Countless numbers of Jews could have been saved from the tortures the Nazi's brought upon them."
They usually reply with something like "but the Jews that didn't listen and did go to the US DID end up assimiliating."
And to that I tell them "You are right. I'm not denying that. But what you forget to consider is what I said about community, and the fact that more Jews would have gone, and therefore the community would have been more than 2-3 families, but rather an entire community, similar to what we see today. We would've had a butcher or 2, a Rabbi or 2, a merchant or 2, and so on. If majority of each community left, and ended up in the same places (and usually immigrants of the same ethnicity end up in the same areas), then they would not have assimilated."
Then, at that point. The convo stops, and my friends say something like "lets talk about the Purim story"
And I hate the Purim story,for many reasons. There is no way anyone can get me to beleive that ONLY Mordechai understood that the reason to not go to Haman's party superceded the kashrus of the wine?
But thats for another post. But generally, my friends usually recommend a rabbi that they know that basically "specializes" in the Purim story, because they cannot answer me themselves.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
My view on "Looking at the Good"
I'm a bit of a procrostinator, so if this post makes no sense, please keep in mind I have an essay due tomorrow so I'm trying to rush...
I just returned from a shuir in which the Rabbi was speaking about the fact that Jews managed to survive throughout all the years because they always had a sense of community. He mentioned that before each event in which Jews got "abused" (in whatever sense by the goyim) it was directly resulting from the Jews fighting amongs each other. He went on to say that nowadays there is an overwhelming amount of good that negates the bad in the community. So ofcourse I got skeptical, and he saw it in my face (he is my rabbi), and he asked what the problem was...so ofcourse I mentioned that there is no way we are a "community" in any sense of the form. So he mentioned a shabbaton he was on in which some girls there had peircings and had never experienced a shabbos in their lives. Blah blah...I was like "ooo...one whole shabbos, now what?" And then some man (no names) kinda interrupted the conversation and so we went on with the shuir.
Here is where my skepticism (pessimism may be the better word here) kicks in.
1st he mentioned all the good things going on in the community. He said how when Hatzolah is called they never discriminate amongst the type of Jew, they'll go and save lives. Then he said about the shabbatons and all the charity to the poor, and all the good in Israel that came over the summer during the war with Lebanon, when all the Jews had to flee North. And all that.
So there I was flipping out, shaking my head 'til the end of the shuir. I was thinking, "good, huh?"
Ok, so Hatzolah I did say was good, and no normal person would ignore the plea of a dying person (even goyim!). Then all the other stuff...Take kiruv.. so you make a girl frum, Mazel tov. What now? Now, you get to show off that you are a successful inspirational speaker. That looks super amazing in terms of shidduchim for your children (in most circles), as well as getting your children accepted into the "right" schools. What happens to the chesed case that is now a BT? Now they're stuck...why? Because if they became frum too much to the right their options are very limited. They can either marry only a fellow BT or someone with "tzaros" in the family (divorce, down syndrome, diabetes 3 generations up, lack of white tablecloth usage on shabbos etc.,) If they "only" became modern, it may be easier for them (depends on the community and how modern is modern...)
Then there's those that may argue "what if they're already BT, whats in it for them to do kiruv?" And honestly, I cannot tell you for sure, but its totally selfish. Like for example, one of my teachers in HS (I was in a kiruv program at school) was one of those super frummy lubavitch. Not sure she beleived the rebbe was moshiach, but she was super obsessed with discussing "what will happen when moshiach comes" Anyway, my class was half already frum and half not frum at all. Everyone was on a different level (whether frum or not) but as a general breakdown, it was half/half. One day this teacher was lecturing about something, and somehow the conversation came to the idea that "moshiach isn't coming because Jews don't keep shabbos" I don't completely remember how this happened but she particularly picked on one girl (whose older sister happened to be frum) and attacked her! "Why don't you keep shabbos? Your sister can do it, why can't you. YOu should be frum, its because of YOU that moshiach isn't here yet." The teacher ended up making the girl cry.
Now, I have no idea what this teachers motive is in doing kiruv but I think it is a safe bet to assume its a selfish one, because she wants to make more people frum so that moshiach comes quicker. Hmm...anyone see the good?
Then theres other people I know who do kiruv and specifically focus on girls from divorced families or abusive home families. These people, probably a large percentage (I doubt more than half though) do this out of good intention. It really is sad to see some of these kids, and inviting them to your home, and making them comfortable with a community is really amazing. However, there is so much selfish motive in it. Like for example, I know of a family like this. They do a tremendous amount of work. Every shabbos their houses are open to these girls, they help them overcome the struggles and scars they may have ended up with, to make them really feel good about themselves...and then what. Then they're stuck. They still are deemed products of a "dysfunctional" home (as normal as they maybe) and are still hindered in their abilities to properly fit in within the frum community. I asked one of these people if they would allow their son to marry someone that was a BT from a divorced home after they become all "normal" like they claim they make the girls. She had nothing to answer, she just changed the subject.
So what is the point of doing the kiruv definitly not for the good of the person becoming frum, because in many communities the fact that one is a BT is an automatic hinderance to their starting a family or being accepted into certain schools (depends on age).
What is the point? Selfish motives...it looks good on the "resume" any "resume" infact. It looks good to say "Hospitable" even when searching for a "secular" position, just like it looks good on the "shidduch" resume or on the HS applications, and so fourth.
Whats good? The selfishness? I don't think so. I was so naive when I became frum. I thought "Wow,, the girls at HS will be so nice, so great!" After all, religious people tend to be known as being nicer and friendlier (the whole missionary attitude goes hand-in-hand with being nice).
No, HS was the worst. Had I been allowed to be in the yearbook (totally different issue though) it would've said that I graduated from my program, not the HS. Nope, the 3 years I spent wearing that ugly uniform, and taking "secular" subjects with the "main" school, definitly does NOT qualify me to be part of the yearbook as a first class citizen. and you know what the excuse is? The excuse was, that if they allowed it to NOT say the programs name under our pix, then if someone sees us dressed "untzniously" or in a treif place, they don't want people to identify that behavior as the norm, and writing my schools name would avoid that. So, why would the school agree to host my program to begin with? Only one thing...Selfish motives! because if they really gave a damn (pardon the language) they would've done what would've made the girls feel good, and cared about the girls feelings.
I can go on and on, but I really have to write my essay.
I just returned from a shuir in which the Rabbi was speaking about the fact that Jews managed to survive throughout all the years because they always had a sense of community. He mentioned that before each event in which Jews got "abused" (in whatever sense by the goyim) it was directly resulting from the Jews fighting amongs each other. He went on to say that nowadays there is an overwhelming amount of good that negates the bad in the community. So ofcourse I got skeptical, and he saw it in my face (he is my rabbi), and he asked what the problem was...so ofcourse I mentioned that there is no way we are a "community" in any sense of the form. So he mentioned a shabbaton he was on in which some girls there had peircings and had never experienced a shabbos in their lives. Blah blah...I was like "ooo...one whole shabbos, now what?" And then some man (no names) kinda interrupted the conversation and so we went on with the shuir.
Here is where my skepticism (pessimism may be the better word here) kicks in.
1st he mentioned all the good things going on in the community. He said how when Hatzolah is called they never discriminate amongst the type of Jew, they'll go and save lives. Then he said about the shabbatons and all the charity to the poor, and all the good in Israel that came over the summer during the war with Lebanon, when all the Jews had to flee North. And all that.
So there I was flipping out, shaking my head 'til the end of the shuir. I was thinking, "good, huh?"
Ok, so Hatzolah I did say was good, and no normal person would ignore the plea of a dying person (even goyim!). Then all the other stuff...Take kiruv.. so you make a girl frum, Mazel tov. What now? Now, you get to show off that you are a successful inspirational speaker. That looks super amazing in terms of shidduchim for your children (in most circles), as well as getting your children accepted into the "right" schools. What happens to the chesed case that is now a BT? Now they're stuck...why? Because if they became frum too much to the right their options are very limited. They can either marry only a fellow BT or someone with "tzaros" in the family (divorce, down syndrome, diabetes 3 generations up, lack of white tablecloth usage on shabbos etc.,) If they "only" became modern, it may be easier for them (depends on the community and how modern is modern...)
Then there's those that may argue "what if they're already BT, whats in it for them to do kiruv?" And honestly, I cannot tell you for sure, but its totally selfish. Like for example, one of my teachers in HS (I was in a kiruv program at school) was one of those super frummy lubavitch. Not sure she beleived the rebbe was moshiach, but she was super obsessed with discussing "what will happen when moshiach comes" Anyway, my class was half already frum and half not frum at all. Everyone was on a different level (whether frum or not) but as a general breakdown, it was half/half. One day this teacher was lecturing about something, and somehow the conversation came to the idea that "moshiach isn't coming because Jews don't keep shabbos" I don't completely remember how this happened but she particularly picked on one girl (whose older sister happened to be frum) and attacked her! "Why don't you keep shabbos? Your sister can do it, why can't you. YOu should be frum, its because of YOU that moshiach isn't here yet." The teacher ended up making the girl cry.
Now, I have no idea what this teachers motive is in doing kiruv but I think it is a safe bet to assume its a selfish one, because she wants to make more people frum so that moshiach comes quicker. Hmm...anyone see the good?
Then theres other people I know who do kiruv and specifically focus on girls from divorced families or abusive home families. These people, probably a large percentage (I doubt more than half though) do this out of good intention. It really is sad to see some of these kids, and inviting them to your home, and making them comfortable with a community is really amazing. However, there is so much selfish motive in it. Like for example, I know of a family like this. They do a tremendous amount of work. Every shabbos their houses are open to these girls, they help them overcome the struggles and scars they may have ended up with, to make them really feel good about themselves...and then what. Then they're stuck. They still are deemed products of a "dysfunctional" home (as normal as they maybe) and are still hindered in their abilities to properly fit in within the frum community. I asked one of these people if they would allow their son to marry someone that was a BT from a divorced home after they become all "normal" like they claim they make the girls. She had nothing to answer, she just changed the subject.
So what is the point of doing the kiruv definitly not for the good of the person becoming frum, because in many communities the fact that one is a BT is an automatic hinderance to their starting a family or being accepted into certain schools (depends on age).
What is the point? Selfish motives...it looks good on the "resume" any "resume" infact. It looks good to say "Hospitable" even when searching for a "secular" position, just like it looks good on the "shidduch" resume or on the HS applications, and so fourth.
Whats good? The selfishness? I don't think so. I was so naive when I became frum. I thought "Wow,, the girls at HS will be so nice, so great!" After all, religious people tend to be known as being nicer and friendlier (the whole missionary attitude goes hand-in-hand with being nice).
No, HS was the worst. Had I been allowed to be in the yearbook (totally different issue though) it would've said that I graduated from my program, not the HS. Nope, the 3 years I spent wearing that ugly uniform, and taking "secular" subjects with the "main" school, definitly does NOT qualify me to be part of the yearbook as a first class citizen. and you know what the excuse is? The excuse was, that if they allowed it to NOT say the programs name under our pix, then if someone sees us dressed "untzniously" or in a treif place, they don't want people to identify that behavior as the norm, and writing my schools name would avoid that. So, why would the school agree to host my program to begin with? Only one thing...Selfish motives! because if they really gave a damn (pardon the language) they would've done what would've made the girls feel good, and cared about the girls feelings.
I can go on and on, but I really have to write my essay.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Video games, spiritual progress?
While in Boston and waiting for chinese food, I spotted an issue of "Kabbalah Today" (the link is to the exact issue I am talking about). I picked it up and decided it would be great reading for the car. Anyway, the front page article "Better than the virtual world" really caught my attention (that and "cracking the happiness code" but thats for a later post). According to the article entering the virtual world is infact a spiritual progress for mankind.
The article explains that people seek alternate realities due to their hard and wearisome lives. This is in a form a "Second Life." The article continues by saying how according to Kabbalah the "Second Life" is not coincidental to the realities of the world. It is because more and more people have access to more and more information, required for work, and very stressful to constantly keep attaining, the "Second Life" is a haven from all this. According to the Kabbalah (or atleast what the article says is Kabbalah), this "Second Life" is not a bad phenomena. Infact, this "Second Life" is actually not a bad "prelude" to the "next step" for humanity.
According to the article, the concept of the virtual world shows that people are becoming more aware of their unphysical selves. As in they are really recognizing their spiritual selves by participating in the virtual world. This participation shows that people are infact slowly progressing to a possible fully spiritual world. The virtual world allows us to be in contact with people from a totally different part of the world, something that is impossible to do in the non-virtual sense. The reason why this is a good prelude to the fully spiritual world, is because we will slowly realize that the virtual world is not enough to fulfill us spiritually anymore, and we will eventually seek a fully spiritual existence.
"Kabbalists explain that as soon as we commence on our spiritual path, we will discover an abundance of Light that shines brighter than any high-resolution hue. But this Light won’t flicker briefly on the computer screen and then disappear when you go back to “real life.” It will be Real Life—one that’s endlessly filled with the Light of eternity and perfection"
------
Honestly, this type of stuff makes me a bit skeptical. For two reasons, the first, is that many years ago when I was first introduced to the game Sims (awesome game !!) I was a little brat in class. I used to tell my teachers that "Sims teaches a good lesson. As a good Sim family creator, you only have the Sims best interest at heart, but sometimes the Sims don't listen to the commands you give them, and they end up throwing fits, and they find themselves smelly (peed in pants), dirty, unemployed and in a terrible fight with a spouse/girlfriend. However, if they just listened to my commandments, they'd be alot better off...Same with Jews and Hashem." And I would go on and on to waste class time, and to annoy my teachers (because that really is a wise ass type of thing to say.lol)... So, the reason this makes me skeptical, is because it reminds me very much of my own "struggle" for the approval of video games and such. While I did it to irritate teachers, its very possible these guys are doing it to irritate some rabbinic figure (either way, I love the argument).
The second thing that makes me skeptical of this article, is the exact same thing that makes me skeptical of the newspaper as a whole. I cannot figure out what "denomination" of Jewry these guys are standing from. They can be targetting converts from the Modonna fan club, or they can really be legit (after all, I did get this at a Glatt Kosher restuarant), but I cannot find out where this stuff is...I probably just didn't do a fabulous job searching.
Anyway, I find this type of stuff very interesting, so I thought I'd share. :)
The article explains that people seek alternate realities due to their hard and wearisome lives. This is in a form a "Second Life." The article continues by saying how according to Kabbalah the "Second Life" is not coincidental to the realities of the world. It is because more and more people have access to more and more information, required for work, and very stressful to constantly keep attaining, the "Second Life" is a haven from all this. According to the Kabbalah (or atleast what the article says is Kabbalah), this "Second Life" is not a bad phenomena. Infact, this "Second Life" is actually not a bad "prelude" to the "next step" for humanity.
According to the article, the concept of the virtual world shows that people are becoming more aware of their unphysical selves. As in they are really recognizing their spiritual selves by participating in the virtual world. This participation shows that people are infact slowly progressing to a possible fully spiritual world. The virtual world allows us to be in contact with people from a totally different part of the world, something that is impossible to do in the non-virtual sense. The reason why this is a good prelude to the fully spiritual world, is because we will slowly realize that the virtual world is not enough to fulfill us spiritually anymore, and we will eventually seek a fully spiritual existence.
"Kabbalists explain that as soon as we commence on our spiritual path, we will discover an abundance of Light that shines brighter than any high-resolution hue. But this Light won’t flicker briefly on the computer screen and then disappear when you go back to “real life.” It will be Real Life—one that’s endlessly filled with the Light of eternity and perfection"
------
Honestly, this type of stuff makes me a bit skeptical. For two reasons, the first, is that many years ago when I was first introduced to the game Sims (awesome game !!) I was a little brat in class. I used to tell my teachers that "Sims teaches a good lesson. As a good Sim family creator, you only have the Sims best interest at heart, but sometimes the Sims don't listen to the commands you give them, and they end up throwing fits, and they find themselves smelly (peed in pants), dirty, unemployed and in a terrible fight with a spouse/girlfriend. However, if they just listened to my commandments, they'd be alot better off...Same with Jews and Hashem." And I would go on and on to waste class time, and to annoy my teachers (because that really is a wise ass type of thing to say.lol)... So, the reason this makes me skeptical, is because it reminds me very much of my own "struggle" for the approval of video games and such. While I did it to irritate teachers, its very possible these guys are doing it to irritate some rabbinic figure (either way, I love the argument).
The second thing that makes me skeptical of this article, is the exact same thing that makes me skeptical of the newspaper as a whole. I cannot figure out what "denomination" of Jewry these guys are standing from. They can be targetting converts from the Modonna fan club, or they can really be legit (after all, I did get this at a Glatt Kosher restuarant), but I cannot find out where this stuff is...I probably just didn't do a fabulous job searching.
Anyway, I find this type of stuff very interesting, so I thought I'd share. :)
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Its not just frum people!
After shabbos my family went to Boston to visit our relatives. Our relatives are not frum at all, and so when they asked me "are you seeing anyone" I didn't expect them to judge me when I said "no, I'm not". While they didn't exactly judge me, they did surprise me with their answer.
They were like "why aren't you seeing anyone?" (normal question, I guess), and I replied that the guys I'm meeting are just not for me. So I expected them to be just like all the other non-frum "secular" people I know, to tell me "well, you're young still, go to grad school, you're smart, worry about marraige later." But what I got was "You shouldn't be so picky, you're already 20, you aren't getting any younger." I was so shocked by this, that I found myself speechless with nothing to answer. And now thinking back, I don't think I'd have anything to answer anyway. I mean, they're older than me, and are related, there really is nothing I could've said that wouldn't have sounded somewhat rude!
OY... I don't like the relatives from Boston on my back , especially since they're not frum, its like there's no escape!
They were like "why aren't you seeing anyone?" (normal question, I guess), and I replied that the guys I'm meeting are just not for me. So I expected them to be just like all the other non-frum "secular" people I know, to tell me "well, you're young still, go to grad school, you're smart, worry about marraige later." But what I got was "You shouldn't be so picky, you're already 20, you aren't getting any younger." I was so shocked by this, that I found myself speechless with nothing to answer. And now thinking back, I don't think I'd have anything to answer anyway. I mean, they're older than me, and are related, there really is nothing I could've said that wouldn't have sounded somewhat rude!
OY... I don't like the relatives from Boston on my back , especially since they're not frum, its like there's no escape!
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Flirting
One of my friends told me that flirting was not a good idea, because it wasn't a very tznious approach to getting to know someone. Then I told her that by not flirting, or laughing, or acting like you comfortable like you would with friends, a guy you're out with on a date may get the wrong impression and feel awkward telling the shadchan that he wants to date you again. I totally made that up ofcourse, but it ended up leading to a very interesting convo on flirting. Today, when I opened up my msn homepage and saw the article on 10 funny flirting facts I just started laughing and thinking of that convo we had.
Here will be some arguments pro and against flirting in accordance to frum law.
The first and most interesting fact (in my opinion) is:
"Flirting is good for you. Studies show that people who flirt have higher white blood-cell counts, which boost their immunity and keep them healthy. "
This fact happens to be on the pro-flirting side. Fortunately for frum people (especially the girls who are super self-conscience) fact #5 states:
"Flirting need not occur face to face. According to Pew Research, 40 percent of people who look for love online say they can easily flirt with someone via email or IM"
All I wonder is whether or not flirting through a shadchan would boost immunity? Or else it may take a few dates before the dates lead to direct calling! and what happens to frummy immune systems then?
The next fact is an anti-flirting argument for the frummies. The fact states:
"In some places, flirting is illegal. In Little Rock, AR, an antiquated law is still on the books warning that engaging in playful banter may result in a 30-day jail term. In New York City, another outdated law mandates that men may be fined $25 for gazing lasciviously at a female; a second conviction stipulates the offender wear a pair of blinders whenever he goes out for a walk. "
If it can be illegal in Little Rock, and was illegal before in NYC, then why shouldn't it be illegal for the holier-than-thou competitors?
The last fact states:
"Watch out, you can overdo it. According to the Social Issues Research Centre, the most common mistake people make when flirting is maintaining too much eye contact."
Why should frummies allow flirting, if their girls have never seen guys and may just end up maintaining too much eye contact! How embarrassing that would be for her, and her entire self-esteem would be ruined (except for the fact that she's probably already anorexic and hates her amazing wavy and/or curly hair and shows it by slowly damaging it daily by straightening it).
This next fact isn't really an argument pro/against flirting, but rather against the cell phone:
"These days, cell phones do the flirting. In one survey, half of all mobile phone users have texted suggestive messages to keep things interesting while away from their amour. "
Why give single girls/guys the tool to enable them to flirt? HALF is alot! Why tempt the neshamos of klal yisroal by allowing them to have such tools when they aren't even married?
Anyway, I hope you all enjoyed that. I had a bit of time to write something. I am currently working on two posts, but I may go away after shabbos for a few days, so I have no idea when I'll post next...Have a great Shabbos and a great weekend !!
Here will be some arguments pro and against flirting in accordance to frum law.
The first and most interesting fact (in my opinion) is:
"Flirting is good for you. Studies show that people who flirt have higher white blood-cell counts, which boost their immunity and keep them healthy. "
This fact happens to be on the pro-flirting side. Fortunately for frum people (especially the girls who are super self-conscience) fact #5 states:
"Flirting need not occur face to face. According to Pew Research, 40 percent of people who look for love online say they can easily flirt with someone via email or IM"
All I wonder is whether or not flirting through a shadchan would boost immunity? Or else it may take a few dates before the dates lead to direct calling! and what happens to frummy immune systems then?
The next fact is an anti-flirting argument for the frummies. The fact states:
"In some places, flirting is illegal. In Little Rock, AR, an antiquated law is still on the books warning that engaging in playful banter may result in a 30-day jail term. In New York City, another outdated law mandates that men may be fined $25 for gazing lasciviously at a female; a second conviction stipulates the offender wear a pair of blinders whenever he goes out for a walk. "
If it can be illegal in Little Rock, and was illegal before in NYC, then why shouldn't it be illegal for the holier-than-thou competitors?
The last fact states:
"Watch out, you can overdo it. According to the Social Issues Research Centre, the most common mistake people make when flirting is maintaining too much eye contact."
Why should frummies allow flirting, if their girls have never seen guys and may just end up maintaining too much eye contact! How embarrassing that would be for her, and her entire self-esteem would be ruined (except for the fact that she's probably already anorexic and hates her amazing wavy and/or curly hair and shows it by slowly damaging it daily by straightening it).
This next fact isn't really an argument pro/against flirting, but rather against the cell phone:
"These days, cell phones do the flirting. In one survey, half of all mobile phone users have texted suggestive messages to keep things interesting while away from their amour. "
Why give single girls/guys the tool to enable them to flirt? HALF is alot! Why tempt the neshamos of klal yisroal by allowing them to have such tools when they aren't even married?
Anyway, I hope you all enjoyed that. I had a bit of time to write something. I am currently working on two posts, but I may go away after shabbos for a few days, so I have no idea when I'll post next...Have a great Shabbos and a great weekend !!
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Things to do on a date in the NY area
After reading the post Is taking a shidduch to Starbucks too cliche? on the frumsatire blog, I decided to write up a list of 10 things you can do on a date that are relatively cheap. I think that Starbucks is a good idea, but I guess that can get old. Here is a list of ideas:
1) Dunkin Donuts instead of Starbucks (ok, I'm being corny, but I had too!)
2) go to F.A.O. Schwartz. That's alot of fun. I've been there on a date, and I had alot of fun. The enormous toys and the cute children were great conversation starters. I told about a million babysitting stories and stories about how much I used to love barbies. :). Also, this would be a great place to bring up the question "what would you do if you had all the money in the world" !
3) Take your date to Coldstone Creamery. The place has incredibly amazing ice cream. Its the same thing as Starbucks but instead of coffee, ice cream, which is greatly appreciated (except by the girls on diets, but who really cares about them?!).
4) Go Bowling. This may be an annoying issue because of the whole wearing other people's shoes thing.
5) ESPN Zone. I ALWAYS wanted to be taken to an arcade on a date. Its not expensive, its alot of fun, and casual!
6) If in the summer go boating in Prospect Park or for a Nature walk at Marine Park (never been, but heard it was absolutely gorgeous. Just make sure she knows and wears comfy shoes!)
7) Brooklyn Botanical Garden/NY Acquarium/Bronx Zoo
8) Ice Skating is alot of fun...make sure she knows in advnaced that you're taking her ice skating, so she knows to take socks.
9) Miniature golf. There are some indoor places around the city (I heard) so this should be ok for all seasons.
10) Go Painting at Plaster Gallery, or go to a place in the city like My Name is Mud (is it still open?)
11) This isn't an "original" idea, but a great place to take a date, is to Benny's Glatt on Ave M and Ocean Ave...OMG...that place is amazingly delicious, and really inexpensive. The shish kabobs are to die for!!
12) Target shooting. Yes, its guns, but oh how much fun that would be!!!!! (says me, whose never been shooting, lol) I have no idea if this is expensive or not, but its definitly original and probably alot of fun...will probably also lead to interesting discussions on people who are being imagined while shooting ;).
Any other ideas? I do sometimes get asked what to do, and I never know!
1) Dunkin Donuts instead of Starbucks (ok, I'm being corny, but I had too!)
2) go to F.A.O. Schwartz. That's alot of fun. I've been there on a date, and I had alot of fun. The enormous toys and the cute children were great conversation starters. I told about a million babysitting stories and stories about how much I used to love barbies. :). Also, this would be a great place to bring up the question "what would you do if you had all the money in the world" !
3) Take your date to Coldstone Creamery. The place has incredibly amazing ice cream. Its the same thing as Starbucks but instead of coffee, ice cream, which is greatly appreciated (except by the girls on diets, but who really cares about them?!).
4) Go Bowling. This may be an annoying issue because of the whole wearing other people's shoes thing.
5) ESPN Zone. I ALWAYS wanted to be taken to an arcade on a date. Its not expensive, its alot of fun, and casual!
6) If in the summer go boating in Prospect Park or for a Nature walk at Marine Park (never been, but heard it was absolutely gorgeous. Just make sure she knows and wears comfy shoes!)
7) Brooklyn Botanical Garden/NY Acquarium/Bronx Zoo
8) Ice Skating is alot of fun...make sure she knows in advnaced that you're taking her ice skating, so she knows to take socks.
9) Miniature golf. There are some indoor places around the city (I heard) so this should be ok for all seasons.
10) Go Painting at Plaster Gallery, or go to a place in the city like My Name is Mud (is it still open?)
11) This isn't an "original" idea, but a great place to take a date, is to Benny's Glatt on Ave M and Ocean Ave...OMG...that place is amazingly delicious, and really inexpensive. The shish kabobs are to die for!!
12) Target shooting. Yes, its guns, but oh how much fun that would be!!!!! (says me, whose never been shooting, lol) I have no idea if this is expensive or not, but its definitly original and probably alot of fun...will probably also lead to interesting discussions on people who are being imagined while shooting ;).
Any other ideas? I do sometimes get asked what to do, and I never know!
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Oy, I really surprise myself sometimes...
I was in the copy room at work and my coworker (who isn't Jewish) decided to start a convo with me on how happy she was that the company closes early on Friday's (due to the company being owned by frummies). She also started talking about shabbos, and how she has no idea how I keep it. She was going on and on about how she would never be able to commit to not being allowed to do anything on Saturday's. The conversation jumped around from one frummy topic to another, and I found myself saying something like:
"better religious than slutty"
After I said it, I was shocked. I was like "oh wow, high school really got to me"
I was really surprised with the statment. I was more surprised with myself that I was able to have it leave my mouth. I was one of those "rebellious" types in HS. I ignored all my "hashkafa" teachers because I knew they were full of it. I also debated with the teachers when I did pay attention, because they usually were full of it, and I liked to point it out to them.
I had one teacher tell us not to worry about regents "because Public School kids were meant to pass them"...and let me tell you, she KNEW I was from public school. These teachers told us things like "if you date too long you will have a greater chance of getting a divorce." Or "if you aren't shomer then guy's wont respect you and will never marry you " [because of the "why buy the cow if you get the milk for free" thing? ]
HS used to really upset me, and I really thought that I was safe from the brainwashing. Unfortunately, from the statment I made at work, I was not as safe as I thought. Which scares me very much. Oy
"better religious than slutty"
After I said it, I was shocked. I was like "oh wow, high school really got to me"
I was really surprised with the statment. I was more surprised with myself that I was able to have it leave my mouth. I was one of those "rebellious" types in HS. I ignored all my "hashkafa" teachers because I knew they were full of it. I also debated with the teachers when I did pay attention, because they usually were full of it, and I liked to point it out to them.
I had one teacher tell us not to worry about regents "because Public School kids were meant to pass them"...and let me tell you, she KNEW I was from public school. These teachers told us things like "if you date too long you will have a greater chance of getting a divorce." Or "if you aren't shomer then guy's wont respect you and will never marry you " [because of the "why buy the cow if you get the milk for free" thing? ]
HS used to really upset me, and I really thought that I was safe from the brainwashing. Unfortunately, from the statment I made at work, I was not as safe as I thought. Which scares me very much. Oy
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Something about Tznius
When I was younger, and not yet frum, I remembered wanting so badly to wear black stockings/pantyhose/tights (whatever you call them), with one of my black dresses. In the secular community, black stockings were considered very sexy. I remember, finally when I was about 10 years old, my mother allowed me to wear them. It was picture day, and I begged and I pleaded until she finally said "yes, fine." I was so happy. I remember that morning my mom was walking me to school and we met our neighbor. She saw that I was wearing black stockings and she said "wow Anita, you're such a big girl, wearing black stockings already." Ofcourse I was so happy, the comment made my day...and possibly my month.
A few months ago I read a book by NY Times columnist Maureen Dowd. In the book "Are Men Necessary" Dowd quoted a source (I forgot which) which actually stated how in order to attract men, a woman must stand with her left foot in front of her right, and put all her weight on her right leg. She should also wear sheer black pantyhose to attract the male eye.
When I became frum I learned that black tights in the frum community were the ultimate in tznious. The entire concept when I originally learned about it, was that tznious was a form of modest self-expression for woman. When I delved further into it (school uniform rules and learning about why they have some of the strict/crazy ones etc) I realized that all modern day tznious, is basically just a bunch of stupid rules that make absolutely no sense. As examples I will use a quote from an article I found on Wolf's post "Going Overboard on Tzniyus". The article he quoted from is on the Jewish Chronicle website. It is called "Why I won't wear a Burka" Anyway, here is the quote:
A CD recording by a top rabbi from Lakewood, New Jersey, for example, reportedly asks women not to swing their arms while they walk and not to allow their daughters to wear colourful banana-clips in their hair. Women know that if they wear skin-coloured stockings, they must include a seam so it is clear they are not bare-legged. Schoolgirls do not wear shiny shoes that could “reflect their underwear”.
This quote was by far the funniest thing I've ever read in my life. Firstly, I would like to ask, how is it possibly to walk normally without swinging ones arms? I mean, I try when I play with little kids and we have "contests", but to request women to not "swing their arms while they walk" is a bit ridiculous.
Then there's this entire issue of wearing a seam when one is wearing skin colored stockings. I don't know how many of you ladies (or gents) receive Victoria's Secret catologs, or browse their website, but in the "secular" world, seams are considered pretty sexy. Victoria's Secret has collections of lingerie with seams. The cover of the movie "Secretary" (under NO definition can that movie be considered clean or modest) she is wearing a seam. Yes, a seam...and not with "skin-coloured" stockings, but with shear black ones. Then there's Silkies (granted they are more conservative than VS) that featured seamed stockings as their pantyhose of the month (I beleive in December). This was definitly not to attract the attention of frum people, rather to attract the attention of costumers looking for a sexy, new and stylish look. Basically, the seam is considered sexy as well.
I'm starting to think that tznius is actually meant to attract guys, while playing on the girls' naivety and making them think that its actually making the guys turn away.
Then there's the ridiculous final statment made by the lakewood CD rabbi. The fact that girls should not wear shiny shoes because they may reflect their underwear is just bizarre, I cannot even comment on it. I'll just say, that when I read that sentence I started laughing uncontrollably. My sister was like "what's so funny" I told her to read the paragraph, and she started laughing as well. Anyway, my point isn't that one should not keep tznious (I wouldn't do that unless I used satire) but rather that it is ridiculous to think all these crazy stringences actually mean anything. If anything, they really are a way for men to have fun.
I really think its kind of sad that this is what our religion has come too. These bans and chumras really make me think about what Hashem thinks about us in shamayim. Is he happy that we all went insane? Is he happy that his "chosen" people have basterdised the religion?
A few months ago I read a book by NY Times columnist Maureen Dowd. In the book "Are Men Necessary" Dowd quoted a source (I forgot which) which actually stated how in order to attract men, a woman must stand with her left foot in front of her right, and put all her weight on her right leg. She should also wear sheer black pantyhose to attract the male eye.
When I became frum I learned that black tights in the frum community were the ultimate in tznious. The entire concept when I originally learned about it, was that tznious was a form of modest self-expression for woman. When I delved further into it (school uniform rules and learning about why they have some of the strict/crazy ones etc) I realized that all modern day tznious, is basically just a bunch of stupid rules that make absolutely no sense. As examples I will use a quote from an article I found on Wolf's post "Going Overboard on Tzniyus". The article he quoted from is on the Jewish Chronicle website. It is called "Why I won't wear a Burka" Anyway, here is the quote:
A CD recording by a top rabbi from Lakewood, New Jersey, for example, reportedly asks women not to swing their arms while they walk and not to allow their daughters to wear colourful banana-clips in their hair. Women know that if they wear skin-coloured stockings, they must include a seam so it is clear they are not bare-legged. Schoolgirls do not wear shiny shoes that could “reflect their underwear”.
This quote was by far the funniest thing I've ever read in my life. Firstly, I would like to ask, how is it possibly to walk normally without swinging ones arms? I mean, I try when I play with little kids and we have "contests", but to request women to not "swing their arms while they walk" is a bit ridiculous.
Then there's this entire issue of wearing a seam when one is wearing skin colored stockings. I don't know how many of you ladies (or gents) receive Victoria's Secret catologs, or browse their website, but in the "secular" world, seams are considered pretty sexy. Victoria's Secret has collections of lingerie with seams. The cover of the movie "Secretary" (under NO definition can that movie be considered clean or modest) she is wearing a seam. Yes, a seam...and not with "skin-coloured" stockings, but with shear black ones. Then there's Silkies (granted they are more conservative than VS) that featured seamed stockings as their pantyhose of the month (I beleive in December). This was definitly not to attract the attention of frum people, rather to attract the attention of costumers looking for a sexy, new and stylish look. Basically, the seam is considered sexy as well.
I'm starting to think that tznius is actually meant to attract guys, while playing on the girls' naivety and making them think that its actually making the guys turn away.
Then there's the ridiculous final statment made by the lakewood CD rabbi. The fact that girls should not wear shiny shoes because they may reflect their underwear is just bizarre, I cannot even comment on it. I'll just say, that when I read that sentence I started laughing uncontrollably. My sister was like "what's so funny" I told her to read the paragraph, and she started laughing as well. Anyway, my point isn't that one should not keep tznious (I wouldn't do that unless I used satire) but rather that it is ridiculous to think all these crazy stringences actually mean anything. If anything, they really are a way for men to have fun.
I really think its kind of sad that this is what our religion has come too. These bans and chumras really make me think about what Hashem thinks about us in shamayim. Is he happy that we all went insane? Is he happy that his "chosen" people have basterdised the religion?
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Not everyone can learn full-time!!!
On one of her dates a friend of mine asked "what would you do if you had all the money in the world?"
He answered, being a businessman and stock market investor, that he would stop working and teach about investing.
My friend got annoyed at this answer, and seriously reconsidered giving him another date. I got annoyed with her for reconsidering a guy because of this. In her messed up little mind, there was no reason why a guy wouldn't sit and learn full time if he had all the money in the world. I tried to convince her that not everyone was cut-out to learn full-time, but she didn't seem interested enough to hear what I had to say.
My friend, B"H didn't reject him for this, she rejected the guy for a different reason, but regardless of the reason, she found nothing wrong with potentially rejecting someone for hypothetically not wanting to be a full time learner.
I couldn't help it and I found myself really irritated with her. I told her that if she were to marry him, and they somehow came up with alot of money (enough to never have to work again), and the guy quits working and begins teaching, that would be a good thing as long as he is doing it in a good way, and that, many times, is up to the wife. For example, say he begins to teach investing to married men in kollel. He would, in a sense, be learning vicariously. I explained, that kollel guys usually find themselves in very tough/tight financial situations. By teaching them to invest (any excess money, if say first year of marraige and wife has good job), or even if just by teaching them some form of financial literacy, would help alot of these families. I told her, that as long as he specifically says on the date that he wouldn't teach in a mitzvah sort of way, there really is no reason to break up with the guy. Not everyone is cut out for learning!!!
She was extremely stubborn and decided that Hashem wouldn't make it a mitzvah to learn if "not everyone were cut out for it", what she failed to grasp was that not everyone is cut out for FULL-time learning, infact I would feel safe betting that a large majority of lakewood is full of guys who are NOT cut out for it.
Anyway, I don't know where girls get this type of information from. She went to HS with me, and I know our HS (as retarded as it was) did not teach us that everyone is cut out for learning full-time. Maybe seminary does this? Probably just the seminary she went to because I have friends who completely frummed up at seminary yet they still understand not everyone can learn full-time!!
He answered, being a businessman and stock market investor, that he would stop working and teach about investing.
My friend got annoyed at this answer, and seriously reconsidered giving him another date. I got annoyed with her for reconsidering a guy because of this. In her messed up little mind, there was no reason why a guy wouldn't sit and learn full time if he had all the money in the world. I tried to convince her that not everyone was cut-out to learn full-time, but she didn't seem interested enough to hear what I had to say.
My friend, B"H didn't reject him for this, she rejected the guy for a different reason, but regardless of the reason, she found nothing wrong with potentially rejecting someone for hypothetically not wanting to be a full time learner.
I couldn't help it and I found myself really irritated with her. I told her that if she were to marry him, and they somehow came up with alot of money (enough to never have to work again), and the guy quits working and begins teaching, that would be a good thing as long as he is doing it in a good way, and that, many times, is up to the wife. For example, say he begins to teach investing to married men in kollel. He would, in a sense, be learning vicariously. I explained, that kollel guys usually find themselves in very tough/tight financial situations. By teaching them to invest (any excess money, if say first year of marraige and wife has good job), or even if just by teaching them some form of financial literacy, would help alot of these families. I told her, that as long as he specifically says on the date that he wouldn't teach in a mitzvah sort of way, there really is no reason to break up with the guy. Not everyone is cut out for learning!!!
She was extremely stubborn and decided that Hashem wouldn't make it a mitzvah to learn if "not everyone were cut out for it", what she failed to grasp was that not everyone is cut out for FULL-time learning, infact I would feel safe betting that a large majority of lakewood is full of guys who are NOT cut out for it.
Anyway, I don't know where girls get this type of information from. She went to HS with me, and I know our HS (as retarded as it was) did not teach us that everyone is cut out for learning full-time. Maybe seminary does this? Probably just the seminary she went to because I have friends who completely frummed up at seminary yet they still understand not everyone can learn full-time!!
Monday, February 4, 2008
Make Jerusalem a City on Monopoly!
Parker Brothers is coming out with a 75th edition of its game Monopoly. They are having a contest on which cities should be placed on the board. The 22 cities which receive the most votes get picked for the board. Jerusalem is #27 now, and with enough votes, can easily be bumped up! So if you care, please vote :)!
http://www.monopolyworldvote.com/en_US/world
L"Shana Haba B"Yerushalayim !!
(not exactly s/t that relates to monopoly, but why not?)
http://www.monopolyworldvote.com/en_US/world
L"Shana Haba B"Yerushalayim !!
(not exactly s/t that relates to monopoly, but why not?)
Friday, February 1, 2008
Bux (tm) for Girls
This is a letter written to the Yated, last week, in response to the previous weeks letter "Shidduch Bux". I cannot figure out which idea is worse, the initial Shidduch Bux , or this one for girls...oyy...I hope this ends with the Readers Write Forum and no idiot actually makes it so far to start the registery....but it seems as though the term is TM!!!!! SO, I really have no idea, I'm beginning to think this world has gone psycho!
Have a great shabbos!
Dear Editor,
I read about the Shidduch-Bux (TM) idea with great interest. What a wonderful idea it is.
I think that Shidduch-Bux (TM) for boys is great, but what about equal rights for women in the 21st century? Why should females be left out?
How about a similar system be put in place, but this time for girls. A point structure would work something like this:
-3 points for a girl who agrees to meet initially upon receiving a boy's okay to meet and not taking advantage and usurping power once having gotten the boys "yes."
-3 points for getting back to the shadchan with either a yes or no within three days.
-5 points for every time a girl says yes to a second date.
-10 points for a yes to a third date, fourth date, etc
- 5 points to a girl who originally wanted to marry a learning boy and agrees to go out with a working boy after reaching age 26.
- 7 points for a girl whose date comes back with a report that she did not give him a hard time by responding with three word answers, but instead contributed towards making the date a mutally pleasant experience.
For the working boys and girls:
- 20 points for returning a boy's call within 24 hours instead of screening the calla nd letting it go to voicemail for three days.
Upon the girl getting engaged, these points can be redeemed for a new shaitel, a new dress, or anything of that nature.
Hope to hear from you soon,
Mr. Matchmaker
Have a great shabbos!
Dear Editor,
I read about the Shidduch-Bux (TM) idea with great interest. What a wonderful idea it is.
I think that Shidduch-Bux (TM) for boys is great, but what about equal rights for women in the 21st century? Why should females be left out?
How about a similar system be put in place, but this time for girls. A point structure would work something like this:
-3 points for a girl who agrees to meet initially upon receiving a boy's okay to meet and not taking advantage and usurping power once having gotten the boys "yes."
-3 points for getting back to the shadchan with either a yes or no within three days.
-5 points for every time a girl says yes to a second date.
-10 points for a yes to a third date, fourth date, etc
- 5 points to a girl who originally wanted to marry a learning boy and agrees to go out with a working boy after reaching age 26.
- 7 points for a girl whose date comes back with a report that she did not give him a hard time by responding with three word answers, but instead contributed towards making the date a mutally pleasant experience.
For the working boys and girls:
- 20 points for returning a boy's call within 24 hours instead of screening the calla nd letting it go to voicemail for three days.
Upon the girl getting engaged, these points can be redeemed for a new shaitel, a new dress, or anything of that nature.
Hope to hear from you soon,
Mr. Matchmaker
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)