A tallit-and-tefillin-wearing woman in a traditional Conservative synagogue?! An unorthodox—and non-orthodox—perspective on Jews and Judaism from a perpetual misfit. This blog, welcoming the entire Jewish community, is dedicated to those who take Judaism seriously, but not necessarily literally.
Ouch--my gum hurts. And so does my wallet. :(
These photos of The Pond, which is at the southeast end of Central Park (and literally across the street from my dentist), are the only consolation for the giant hole that my dentist has drilled in our budget.
One of the dentist's assistants said that, almost every year, some fool walks out onto the ice and falls in.
posted by Shira Salamone at 10:06 PM
Once upon a time, I belonged to a left-wing egalitarian Conservative synagogue, where I was one of a number of women who wore a tallit—and one of the few members who used an Orthodox prayer book (adding the Mothers, of course). Having moved since then, I now belong to a right-wing traditional Conservative synagogue, where I’m almost always the only woman wearing a tallit—and one of the few members who adds the Mothers. I seem destined to be forever . . . on the fringe.
3 Comments:
Shira, this is off-topic and a highly controversial question, but I'll ask it anyway:
What are Judaism's thoughts on child sex dolls/robots? Because once one invokes the "oness" argument in regards to allowing homosexuality, this argument can very easily be extended to child sex dolls/robots as well--so long as this does not make actual children less safe, of course--considering that being attracted to minors is arguably a sexual orientation (certainly an incurable one) just like homosexuality is:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22218786/
(Those minor-attracted people who will not be capable of being permanently satisfied with child sex dolls/robots should, of course, get castrated due to a lack of better options, but nevertheless I do suspect that there would be *some* minor-attracted people who would view child sex dolls/robots as a satisfactory permanent solution for them.)
It just seems rather cruel to force those minor-attracted people who *are* permanently capable of being satisfied with child sex dolls/robots to get castrated instead considering that it denies them any semblance of a satisfactory sex life and thus can likely severely affect their quality of life (just like what would happen if anyone else was denied a satisfactory sex life).
What do you think, Shira?
This question is, of course, of no personal relevance to me given my own lack of sexual interest in minors and my extremely strong preference for adults. But the whole debate over child sex dolls/robots, along with of course the debate over homosexuality, has given me a sizable amount of empathy for those people whose sexual attractions deviate from those of the majority, just so long as these people never actually harm anyone else, of course.
Also, I want to address the question of polyamorous relationships and marriages. I feel like Conservative Judaism, if it is being truly honest with itself, will feel compelled to eventually accept such relationships and marriages due to the fact that, from a harm reduction perspective, having adultery occur with the consent of one's SO/spouse is superior to having adultery occur without the consent of one's SO/spouse and also superior to divorcing one's spouse, which can have negative effects for one's children, et cetera. Some people might be biologically wired to prefer polyamory, so trying to force them into monogamy against their wishes and desires might only result in them committing adultery without their spouse's consent and/or them divorcing their spouses later on:
https://www.fatherly.com/health-science/are-men-hardwired-to-cheat-on-partners
In spite of society heavily attempting to shove monogamy down people's throats, people have often cheated on their SOs/spouses throughout history. This suggests that, in spite of widespread social stigma, there really might be some genetic and/or biological basis that causes some people to be dissatisfied with limiting their sexual partners for their entire lives. So, it's a choice between having people be miserable, having people engage in adultery without their SO's/spouse's consent, having people divorce their spouses, or having people preserve their relationships and marriages while committing adultery with their SO's/spouse's consent. To me, the last option here seems by far the most superior one. It's certainly the least harmful one here, after all. What do you think, Shira?
Post a Comment
<< Home