As Trep was saying, it is, indeed, instructive that some rabbis rail against gays & ignore agunot: Chief Rabbi Amar withdraws from conference
Chayyei Sarah thinks it's typical that Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar withdrew his support for a conference concerning agunot ("chained" wives whose husbands refuse to give them a get, a Jewish religious divorce).
My comment to her post:
"Essentially, being an agunah is very close to the functional equivalent of being a slave: In many instances, a "chained wife" cannot free herself from her marriage unless she literally buys her freedom from her husband. From the point of view of halachah (Jewish religious [law]) as currently interpreted and applied, it may be no coincidence that the word "baal" means both husband and master.
Here's the "money quote" from the article in Arutz Sheva:
"Reminded that some hareidi elements felt that the women's groups that pushed for the conference were themselves exerting pressure, Rabbi Blau said, "I resent the notion that rabbis can't stand up to women's groups' pressures. Any solution that would be considered would only be a Halakhic one. It's very sad that people are afraid of discussion."
In other words, it's not even okay for rabbis to seek solutions to the problem that, according to Jewish law, only a man is authorized to grant a get. Heaven forbid that women themselves might actually try to advocate for being treated as human beings. Radicals! "Reformot!" Feminists! Apikorsot (heretics)! Kofrot (atheists)!
My comment to her post:
"Essentially, being an agunah is very close to the functional equivalent of being a slave: In many instances, a "chained wife" cannot free herself from her marriage unless she literally buys her freedom from her husband. From the point of view of halachah (Jewish religious [law]) as currently interpreted and applied, it may be no coincidence that the word "baal" means both husband and master.
Here's the "money quote" from the article in Arutz Sheva:
"Reminded that some hareidi elements felt that the women's groups that pushed for the conference were themselves exerting pressure, Rabbi Blau said, "I resent the notion that rabbis can't stand up to women's groups' pressures. Any solution that would be considered would only be a Halakhic one. It's very sad that people are afraid of discussion."
In other words, it's not even okay for rabbis to seek solutions to the problem that, according to Jewish law, only a man is authorized to grant a get. Heaven forbid that women themselves might actually try to advocate for being treated as human beings. Radicals! "Reformot!" Feminists! Apikorsot (heretics)! Kofrot (atheists)!
posted by Shira Salamone at 9:28 PM
4 Comments:
And those comments on the A7 article are even more nausea-inducing.
Good post- have you seen "Mekudeshet"?
It's always a pleasure to be told that one's post is good (even when the subject is not so pleasant). Thanks.
(My Hebrew's a bit limited--might I ask what "tafka" means?)
The article got me sufficiently upset all by itself--I haven't read the comments.
Thanks for the gentle reminder--I really should see "Mekudeshet."
Good post, Shira! But of course, I concur with the sentiment that the topic is not a pleasant one. BTW, tafka will probably tell you this but I read her profile recently so I can tell you, she says on her profile that tafka stands for "the artist formerly known as"...I'll leave it at that, check out her blog for the rest!
Shabbat Shalom
Thanks, Hila.
"the artist formerly known as . . . "
Now why didn't I "get" that? I must be gettin' old, or somethin'. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home