View Full Version : Converting Religions - Is there a RIGHT reason?
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
[
9]
10
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 11:37 AM
I agree with you Lola. It makes more sense for women to stay home and raise kids if they are a family-oriented couple. The mother should be the primary caregiver during a child's infant years. It's just...easier and more practical that way. Also it's better for the children. Fathers definitely contribute invaluable things and play an extremely important role in child rearing, but they are more biological suited to contribute financially by default.
This isn't to say that women and men are always destined to be caregivers of children. There are gay men and lesbians who don't procreate. There are straight people who don't want kids- etc etc.
We are all aware of the exceptions. I just want to say that I get what you're saying.
Exactly. I think you are so good at explaining things. This is what I meant, but I cannot always perfectly articulate it. Not every woman is made from just 1 mold, and not every man is either. But ease and practicality say that a mother is better able to feed and nurture her children, and a father is better at providing for their general material needs. This is not to say a woman or a man cannot step out of these natural roles. They can and do. But they are still natural roles.
I agree with Lola. Men and women are built differently, and presumably it's for a reason. We balance each other out. They have greater physical strength, we have better communication skills, they're problem solvers, we're nurturers. Not all men are alike and not all women are alike, but we do have pretty common distinctions. I am NOT a man with a vagina. I'm a woman and I like how that makes me different from a man. And in my opinion, yes, we do fill different social roles and that's a good thing..
Exactly! I'm proud of the things that make me different from a man. Not only the physical differences, but the mental and emotional ones too. They make me special, unique, and they greatly effect my point of view of pretty much everything.
ColetteCalahan
03-11-2008, 01:05 PM
Me stating my opinion and explaining why is offensive to you? ok, if you wanna be that way, I'm seriously not even going to bother.
Saying my thoughts are outdated or w/ev is the only thing I see as offensive here ::)
No.... you're misunderstanding me. Choosing that path for yourself is fine. Saying that's the 'natural' way for all women is generally believed to be an 'outdated' view. But apparently many others support you, so w/ev. *(shall i add an insulting smilie?)*
flickad
03-11-2008, 02:12 PM
I'm sorry, why is this so horrible? Women and men are different emotionally, physically, mentally. How many treads say "men are immature, they mature later, guys are horrible, guys are putty for a hot chick" and so on. Everyone knows men and women are DIFFERENT!!!!!!!!!!
They do things in different ways. For someone who intends to stay childless, I see this as possibly less important. But for the traditional people, the truth in this is magnified. How many men can breastfeed and give birth? Woman (not all, but definatly most) just have a natural way about them, more nurturing, very compassionate, more MATERNAL. For a family with young children, where the mother breastfeeds, or stays home to care for her children, it is natural that she do the dishes, laundry, and most of the childrearing. But someone has to work, to provide, to have an income. That leaves the man to do that. It is a very natural, logical position. Unfortunatly, many people live above their means, and the woman decides to work, to pay someone else to care for her children, usually in a group setting, and therefore these natural lines are...... sort of foggy.
By different roles she meant that the woman's role is the stuck-in-the-home bearing and raising kids one. While I appreciate that this might suit some, referring to it universally as a woman's role really sticks in my craw. Men and women are biologically different, but to lock them into mandatory roles on the basis of that difference seems plain old sexist to me. It's not very different from saying that people of different races are different (which in some ways, they are- different builds and physical aptitudes) and saying that, for example, because black men are naturally more muscular than white ones they should be the ones in society who perform all the physical labour.
The reason I want to work isn't just financial. The fact that I have ovaries and a uterus and produce more oestrogen than testosterone doesn't preclude my also having a sharp mind, just as the fact of, say, the more powerful build of members of some races doesn't preclude their having the intellectual ability to be something other than a menial labourer.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 02:37 PM
By different roles she meant that the woman's role is the stuck-in-the-home bearing and raising kids one. While I appreciate that this might suit some, referring to it universally as a woman's role really sticks in my craw. Men and women are biologically different, but to lock them into mandatory roles on the basis of that difference seems plain old sexist to me. It's not very different from saying that people of different races are different (which in some ways, they are- different builds and physical aptitudes) and saying that, for example, because black men are naturally more muscular than white ones they should be the ones in society who perform all the physical labour.
The reason I want to work isn't just financial. The fact that I have ovaries and a uterus and produce more oestrogen than testosterone doesn't preclude my also having a sharp mind, just as the fact of, say, the more powerful build of members of some races doesn't preclude their having the intellectual ability to be something other than a menial labourer.
I'm refering to so many women who decide to have children, but, even though they would be fine relying on one income, work full-time anyways, just so they can have more more more stuff.
And raising children isn't a menial labor, and is much benefited by having a sharp mind. I don't understand why someone whould have children if they believe raising them is "menial labor"
I am not saying women are only good for raising children, just that they are more naturally suited for it.
cameron_keys
03-11-2008, 02:42 PM
Sometimes it isnt just that they want more stuff. Some people, including women, arent fulfilled just staying at home being a housewife and mother. I personally would go bat shit crazy in a month. Some of us need the outside intellectual stimulus of working,mothers or not. Some just dont want their years of education and experience to get thrown down the toilet just because they are now a mother.
In a society where we can now have both...theres no reason not to. And even thoguh I agree that women are more often better with the kids...I know a LOT of cpls who would be better off all around(if they had to rely on one income) with the father staying home. A lot of men are more nurturing then women...especially women like me who barely have a nurturing gene in their body!
Though how exactly did a thread on converting religions turn into a thread about mothering?????
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 02:45 PM
No.... you're misunderstanding me. Choosing that path for yourself is fine. Saying that's the 'natural' way for all women is generally believed to be an 'outdated' view. But apparently many others support you, so w/ev. *(shall i add an insulting smilie?)*
I didn't say it is for everyone. I am just saying that when a couple decides to have children, it is more natural for the mother to take care of the needs of their children then for the father to do that. And it is, men cannot birth a baby or feed it, and are just naturally less inclined to be nurturers. There are exceptions of course, gay couples with children, people who choose to remain childless or cannot have children, and occassionally, stay at home fathers. The fact that these exceptions exist doesn't void the fact that mothers are just generally better suited to this position.
To me, this is like saying short people are just as good at basket ball as taller people are. Of course there will be the occassional exception, but it's really just a sport suited better to those with some extra height.
and you can use whatever smilie you feel you need to use to help you get your point across. :cutie:
TheSexKitten
03-11-2008, 02:47 PM
In a society where we can now have both...theres no reason not to. And even thoguh I agree that women are more often better with the kids...I know a LOT of cpls who would be better off all around(if they had to rely on one income) with the father staying home. A lot of men are more nurturing then women...especially women like me who barely have a nurturing gene in their body!
Though how exactly did a thread on converting religions turn into a thread about mothering?????
LOL! QFT, you! To choose the path of wife-and-mother is all well and good, but aside from the fact that my breasts produce milk, there is no reason why my hypothetical husband would be less of a caregiver. :) Especially if I have a better-paying job or a higher educational degree than he does, why is it more natural for me to stay home with the kids? My dad was a stay-at-home dad, and he's a much more nurturing, patient person than my mom was. My mom made more money, so she worked. I just can't buy into the "natural functions" of men and women when the aforementioned reasons for this "natural" setup are obsolete in today's American society anyway.
In fact, many of my friends' dads were either 50% or primary "caregivers". A nice, gentle, and devoted father is just as good and even better than just any old mother. When one becomes a mother they don't automatically becaome loving and dewy and sweet. Many women are selfish bitches, just like many men are aggressive and aloof. (Or vice versa!)
Yekhefah
03-11-2008, 02:48 PM
Who said that a woman's only role was to be a stay-at-home mother? /:O
TheSexKitten
03-11-2008, 02:50 PM
Stay-at-home mother or father is roughly equivalent to primary caregiver. (Not primary breadwinner)
Basically, whoever has the potential to make more money should go make it, and whoever is left over should either breast feed or pump his wife's milk (blah blah blah possibly in addition to a job etc. I feel like I have to write legal documents on this forum sometimes...)! ;)
Yekhefah
03-11-2008, 02:51 PM
Yes, but it seems quite a leap to take "men and women have different social roles" and assume from there that a woman's only social role would be stay-at-home mother. Seems like you're putting words in her mouth. Motherhood is only one of our many different roles.
TheSexKitten
03-11-2008, 02:53 PM
That's not the point I was trying to get across. Baby out of vagina, milk out of boobs are the main biological advantages women have for parenthood. So, I'm saying that men can do it just as well nowadays. Women are great at being mothers! Men can also be great at being fathers. :) That's all.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 02:53 PM
Sometimes it isnt just that they want more stuff. Some people, including women, arent fulfilled just staying at home being a housewife and mother. I personally would go bat shit crazy in a month. Some of us need the outside intellectual stimulus of working,mothers or not. Some just dont want their years of education and experience to get thrown down the toilet just because they are now a mother.
In a society where we can now have both...theres no reason not to. And even thoguh I agree that women are more often better with the kids...I know a LOT of cpls who would be better off all around(if they had to rely on one income) with the father staying home. A lot of men are more nurturing then women...especially women like me who barely have a nurturing gene in their body!
Though how exactly did a thread on converting religions turn into a thread about mothering?????
most of the time tho, it is about wanting more stuff. sometimes it's out of necessity. Many women who need the stimulus of a job work part time, at least untill their children are out of the baby/toddler stage.
and yes, in this day and age, people can have both. But it's often a compromise. You can continue to work, but loose the experience of being there for all of your childs achievements and growth. Financially, sometimes the mother makes a lot more, and the father stays home. to me, that is better then sending the kids off to daycare, but 2nd to the mother being home. Men can be very nurturing, I'm not arguing that. but women tend to be more so. Those women who are not so nurturing many times end up like you, chosing not to have children they don't really want. I see nothing wrong with that choice either.
and threads evolve. Just b/c it isn't "on topic" doesn't mean it isn't a good and enlightening conversation.
Katrine
03-11-2008, 02:53 PM
I am NOT a man with a vagina.
Oddly enough, I often feel like a man with a vagina. Really I just do.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 02:55 PM
LOL! QFT, you! To choose the path of wife-and-mother is all well and good, but aside from the fact that my breasts produce milk, there is no reason why my hypothetical husband would be less of a caregiver. :) Especially if I have a better-paying job or a higher educational degree than he does, why is it more natural for me to stay home with the kids? My dad was a stay-at-home dad, and he's a much more nurturing, patient person than my mom was. My mom made more money, so she worked. I just can't buy into the "natural functions" of men and women when the aforementioned reasons for this "natural" setup are obsolete in today's American society anyway.
In fact, many of my friends' dads were either 50% or primary "caregivers". A nice, gentle, and devoted father is just as good and even better than just any old mother. When one becomes a mother they don't automatically becaome loving and dewy and sweet. Many women are selfish bitches, just like many men are aggressive and aloof. (Or vice versa!)
maybe those women shouldn't have children till they mature, or maybe even never. I am not saying that a man cannot be a good primary caregiver.
TheSexKitten
03-11-2008, 02:56 PM
most of the time tho, it is about wanting more stuff. sometimes it's out of necessity. Many women who need the stimulus of a job work part time, at least untill their children are out of the baby/toddler stage.
and yes, in this day and age, people can have both. But it's often a compromise. You can continue to work, but loose the experience of being there for all of your childs achievements and growth. Financially, sometimes the mother makes a lot more, and the father stays home. to me, that is better then sending the kids off to daycare, but 2nd to the mother being home. Men can be very nurturing, I'm not arguing that. but women tend to be more so. Those women who are not so nurturing many times end up like you, chosing not to have children they don't really want. I see nothing wrong with that choice either.
and threads evolve. Just b/c it isn't "on topic" doesn't mean it isn't a good and enlightening conversation.
I really agree with you on all points, just not this one. I can't agree that it is applicable in all, or even most cases, especially as society and culture moves away from stereotypical macho male gender roles as men are increasingly encouraged to participate in these traditionally "feminine" aspects of life.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 02:57 PM
Stay-at-home mother or father is roughly equivalent to primary caregiver. (Not primary breadwinner)
Basically, whoever has the potential to make more money should go make it, and whoever is left over should either breast feed or pump his wife's milk (blah blah blah possibly in addition to a job etc. I feel like I have to write legal documents on this forum sometimes...)! ;)
but why is it all about money? money is important of course, but really, for people choosing to have children, raising them well is way more important then more money.
TheSexKitten
03-11-2008, 02:59 PM
Well in that case, you could reverse the priorities, but still regardless of gender. Whoever is more patient should head the childcare role, and the other can go and make the money.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 02:59 PM
I really agree with you on all points, just not this one. I can't agree that it is applicable in all, or even most cases, especially as society and culture moves away from stereotypical macho male gender roles as men are increasingly encouraged to participate in these traditionally "feminine" aspects of life.
I've found it's rare to meet a father who is capable of being a better primary caregiver then a mother (assuming both people are fit parents in the first place).
cameron_keys
03-11-2008, 03:21 PM
most of the time tho, it is about wanting more stuff. sometimes it's out of necessity. Many women who need the stimulus of a job work part time, at least untill their children are out of the baby/toddler stage.
and yes, in this day and age, people can have both. But it's often a compromise. You can continue to work, but loose the experience of being there for all of your childs achievements and growth. Financially, sometimes the mother makes a lot more, and the father stays home. to me, that is better then sending the kids off to daycare, but 2nd to the mother being home. Men can be very nurturing, I'm not arguing that. but women tend to be more so. Those women who are not so nurturing many times end up like you, chosing not to have children they don't really want. I see nothing wrong with that choice either.
and threads evolve. Just b/c it isn't "on topic" doesn't mean it isn't a good and enlightening conversation.
I do agree that SOMEONE should be home if at all possible. I'm just saying that in todays society...you cant assume anymore that the mother will or even should just because its always been more natural for the female to do so. Girls arent being raised in that mentality anymore and some boys are actually being raised to be more nurturing,while girls are encouraged to get out in the world and work. If for no other reason then to fight AGAINST the stereotype and try to raise either sex to be as equal as possible.
I do agree that is in engraved on our DNA as women that we SHOULD be nurturing...which leaves those of us who arent born mothers feeling like there is something inherently wrong with us. That it is natural for women to feel like mothers or want children or instinctively know what to do to take care of them. So women like myself who dont really feel that...or even women who WANT children,then dont have a clue what to do when they are born...often feel like we are failing our gender. It can also lead to serious post-partum depression. I think it may help a lot of women to stop referring to these traits as "natural" and simply state that they differ from person to person regardless of gender.
And I never said it wasnt a good and enlightening conversation.I wouldnt continue to discuss it if I didnt think it was worthy of discussing! I'm just not sure how it evolved into the current topic and hope Lysondra doesnt get pissed at her thread being derailed. Maybe a new thread should be made to avoid that? Just a suggestion...
TheSexKitten
03-11-2008, 03:22 PM
I think it may help a lot of women to stop referring to these traits as "natural" and simply state that they differ from person to person regardless of gender.
:yes: This was my point!
flickad
03-11-2008, 03:53 PM
I'm refering to so many women who decide to have children, but, even though they would be fine relying on one income, work full-time anyways, just so they can have more more more stuff.
And raising children isn't a menial labor, and is much benefited by having a sharp mind. I don't understand why someone whould have children if they believe raising them is "menial labor"
I am not saying women are only good for raising children, just that they are more naturally suited for it.
What I am saying is not that raising children is wholly menial, though it is by far and away highly menial work, particularly during infancy and toddlerhood. I used the comparison of locking black men into menial tasks on the basis of biology because it is indisputably racist, rather than to imply that childrearing is an entirely mindless task. I wished to show that it is, as in my race-based example, indisputably sexist that women be consigned only to the childrearing and housekeeping role. A sharp mind helps in menial labour too- does this mean that it is any less stifling to lock one race into it on the basis of supposed biological predisposition?
As it happens, I am unarguably biologically female and am also unarguably far more suited to pursuing professional goals than I am to childrearing.
flickad
03-11-2008, 03:56 PM
Oddly enough, I often feel like a man with a vagina. Really I just do.
Likewise, except that I lack the hyped-up sex drive common to most males of the species.
Katrine
03-11-2008, 03:59 PM
Likewise, except that I lack the hyped-up sex drive common to most males of the species.
That, my friend, I do not lack.}:D
flickad
03-11-2008, 04:00 PM
Who said that a woman's only role was to be a stay-at-home mother? /:O
A rebbitzin who taught Jewish studies at my high school did.
EDIT- Lest you say that's not exactly what she said (though it's hard to contend that what she did say didn't carry that implication), I'm going to bring my analogy back here. What if I said that, though people with black skin and people with white skin are equal, they have different roles? What if I used the old Plessy vs Fergusson 'separate but equal' argument? What if I then tried to argue different biological tendencies as a foundation for those supposedly different roles? Would you think I was being racist or reasonable?
I see no material difference if we substitute gender for race in this hypothetical scenario.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 04:23 PM
I do agree that SOMEONE should be home if at all possible. I'm just saying that in todays society...you cant assume anymore that the mother will or even should just because its always been more natural for the female to do so. Girls arent being raised in that mentality anymore and some boys are actually being raised to be more nurturing,while girls are encouraged to get out in the world and work. If for no other reason then to fight AGAINST the stereotype and try to raise either sex to be as equal as possible.
I do agree that is in engraved on our DNA as women that we SHOULD be nurturing...which leaves those of us who arent born mothers feeling like there is something inherently wrong with us. That it is natural for women to feel like mothers or want children or instinctively know what to do to take care of them. So women like myself who dont really feel that...or even women who WANT children,then dont have a clue what to do when they are born...often feel like we are failing our gender. It can also lead to serious post-partum depression. I think it may help a lot of women to stop referring to these traits as "natural" and simply state that they differ from person to person regardless of gender.
And I never said it wasnt a good and enlightening conversation.I wouldnt continue to discuss it if I didnt think it was worthy of discussing! I'm just not sure how it evolved into the current topic and hope Lysondra doesnt get pissed at her thread being derailed. Maybe a new thread should be made to avoid that? Just a suggestion...
I think it's ok, I mean, it does relate. (the thread)
I don't see why people should break stereotypes just to break them. Sometimes it just feels like it's so much about equality that it becomes too much. There are exceptions, not every woman is a nurturer. But overall, most are.
woman who have no clue what to do with a baby should take a class, read a book, or ask for help. A woman who really doesn't want children but feels that they are failing maybe has some hidden desires or fears or something she has to deal with.
I agree that these traits are not natural to all, but to the great majority, they are.
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 04:31 PM
What I am saying is not that raising children is wholly menial, though it is by far and away highly menial work, particularly during infancy and toddlerhood. I used the comparison of locking black men into menial tasks on the basis of biology because it is indisputably racist, rather than to imply that childrearing is an entirely mindless task. I wished to show that it is, as in my race-based example, indisputably sexist that women be consigned only to the childrearing and housekeeping role. A sharp mind helps in menial labour too- does this mean that it is any less stifling to lock one race into it on the basis of supposed biological predisposition?
As it happens, I am unarguably biologically female and am also unarguably far more suited to pursuing professional goals than I am to childrearing.
I never said ALL women should be mothers, or that it was all they are capable or suited to doing. I personally do not feel that is what the rebitson meant either, but I wasn't there. I only said they are generally more suited to it. I also think this is a bad connection, female/male "roles" and race roles. Women of all cultures and ethnicities and races are much the same in general traits. So are men.
I completely disagree that it is menial work to raise a child. I believe children understand so much more then they're often given credit for, and that even in infantcy, they make lasting subconscious decisions and thoughts. I think a smarter woman is probably much better capable of raising intelligent thoughtful and kind children.
flickad
03-11-2008, 05:07 PM
I never said ALL women should be mothers, or that it was all they are capable or suited to doing. I personally do not feel that is what the rebitson meant either, but I wasn't there. I only said they are generally more suited to it. I also think this is a bad connection, female/male "roles" and race roles. Women of all cultures and ethnicities and races are much the same in general traits. So are men.
I completely disagree that it is menial work to raise a child. I believe children understand so much more then they're often given credit for, and that even in infantcy, they make lasting subconscious decisions and thoughts. I think a smarter woman is probably much better capable of raising intelligent thoughtful and kind children.
I personally think that's what she did mean, given the kind of school it was and the other things that were said about women and motherhood, and universities being improper places for good Jewish girls to attend (but not the boys, you'll note, many of whom did go on to become professionals, though Facebook searches indicate that the bulk of my former classmates- I went to a Hassidic girls school with substantial ties to a Hassidic boys one- married young and settled into childrearing and traditional Jewish womanhood).
You seem to misunderstand the racial comparison I made. What I was trying to illustrate was that to say that any group of people, based on an arbitrary characteristic with some or other biological basis, has a different role from another group is demeaning and illustrates prejudice. There is no such thing as a pre-determined role in life. Humans are amazingly adaptable. To say that we must adapt to someone else's pre-conceived notion of what our role must be because we belong to one sex or the other is to deny the range of roles in life that we, as humans, desire and are capable of. You would be understandably and justifiably outraged for that very reason if I was to state that the Jewish role should be to work as money-lenders, no matter what clever arguments or biological basis I could dredge up to support my position. Your outrage would likely not be substantially lessened even if I modified the position to one that most Jews were best suited to money-lending and that of course a minority of them might not be, and that money-lending (or banking finance, if you like) is a fine role that requires intelligence, so what are you complaining about anyway? You would call me anti-semitic (and I am certain you would do so even if I invented a reasonable-sounding biological foundation for my argument), just as I call such a position when applied to women sexist.
By saying that child-rearing is substantially menial work, particularly in the early years, I am not implying that children themselves lack astuity and intelligence. I am saying that the role of the carer is, in substantial part, menial. It involves feeding, cleaning, putting to bed, changing- these are all unarguably menial and form the bulk of the work during the very early years. A smarter woman is also capable of being, say, a better CEO than a less intelligent but more compassionate man. Should she be consigned to stay-at-home motherhood while the less capable man works as a CEO because biology should, in your view, be destiny?
Lysondra
03-11-2008, 05:26 PM
I am so confused how this thread turned out as I was asleep.
Good thing I'm infertile?
Lola Rose
03-11-2008, 06:10 PM
I personally think that's what she did mean, given the kind of school it was and the other things that were said about women and motherhood, and universities being improper places for good Jewish girls to attend (but not the boys, you'll note, many of whom did go on to become professionals, though Facebook searches indicate that the bulk of my former classmates- I went to a Hassidic girls school with substantial ties to a Hassidic boys one- married young and settled into childrearing and traditional Jewish womanhood).
You seem to misunderstand the racial comparison I made. What I was trying to illustrate was that to say that any group of people, based on an arbitrary characteristic with some or other biological basis, has a different role from another group is demeaning and illustrates prejudice. There is no such thing as a pre-determined role in life. Humans are amazingly adaptable. To say that we must adapt to someone else's pre-conceived notion of what our role must be because we belong to one sex or the other is to deny the range of roles in life that we, as humans, desire and are capable of. You would be understandably and justifiably outraged for that very reason if I was to state that the Jewish role should be to work as money-lenders, no matter what clever arguments or biological basis I could dredge up to support my position. Your outrage would likely not be substantially lessened even if I modified the position to one that most Jews were best suited to money-lending and that of course a minority of them might not be, and that money-lending (or banking finance, if you like) is a fine role that requires intelligence, so what are you complaining about anyway?
By saying that child-rearing is substantially menial work, particularly in the early years, I am not implying that children themselves lack astuity and intelligence. I am saying that the role of the carer is, in substantial part, menial. It involves feeding, cleaning, putting to bed, changing- these are all unarguably menial and form the bulk of the work during the very early years. A smarter woman is also capable of being, say, a better CEO than a less intelligent but more compassionate man. Should she be consigned to stay-at-home motherhood while the less capable man works as a CEO because biology should, in your view, be destiny?
ya, most hassidic women and men marry young, have lots of children, and most of the women stay home to raise them. But I bet a lot of them do more then "just" raise babies. I bet a lot of them teach or take classes at chabad. I bet a lot of them volunteer their time doing many amazing things. And I bet an overwhelming majority are incredibly happy. I bet thay travel, learn, and have a lot of intellectual friends. Not going to college isn't awful.
many parents teach their kids that anything less then going to college is unacceptable. I see nothing wrong with teaching young women that they should have kids. I don't think, tho, in either case that they should be heavily discouraged from the alternatives. And yes, a lot of lubavitchers really do think the woman should stay home with her children. But they (in my observances, and personal experiences) are almost always taught to do other things as well. But these other thinks are 2nd to the family, which to me makes sense.
I am going to not comment on your banker analogy, b/c it's just not a logical comparisim.
As for the bit that I bolded. How do you not get that a woman and a man are different? inherriently, biologicly, physically different. If you don't get that by now, I'm not going to say it again.
flickad
03-11-2008, 07:01 PM
ya, most hassidic women and men marry young, have lots of children, and most of the women stay home to raise them. But I bet a lot of them do more then "just" raise babies. I bet a lot of them teach or take classes at chabad. I bet a lot of them volunteer their time doing many amazing things. And I bet an overwhelming majority are incredibly happy. I bet thay travel, learn, and have a lot of intellectual friends. Not going to college isn't awful.
many parents teach their kids that anything less then going to college is unacceptable. I see nothing wrong with teaching young women that they should have kids. I don't think, tho, in either case that they should be heavily discouraged from the alternatives. And yes, a lot of lubavitchers really do think the woman should stay home with her children. But they (in my observances, and personal experiences) are almost always taught to do other things as well. But these other thinks are 2nd to the family, which to me makes sense.
I am going to not comment on your banker analogy, b/c it's just not a logical comparisim.
As for the bit that I bolded. How do you not get that a woman and a man are different? inherriently, biologicly, physically different. If you don't get that by now, I'm not going to say it again.
I'm not saying that it is awful for these Hasidic women to choose to live as they do. Imposition of that choice, however, is awful. I see nothing terrible about a woman herself opting to fulfil a more traditional role, because of that being concurrent with her own desires. I see plenty terrible about her being told that such a role is the only natural one for her and the road she should be taking. I see plenty terrible about her other options being limited. I tend to disagree that young women should be told to reproduce- I think they should be told to listen to their hearts.
I think it is a logical comparison. It is telling a group of people that they should make certain choices in life based on being a member of that group. That assertion has been made here with respect to women. You seem to suggest that to make it with respect to Jews or a racial group is a different thing. I'm arguing that this isn't the case, even if significant biological differences could be found between the racial or religious groups (and in the case of some racial groups, they can).
I understand that women and men are biologically different and never claimed otherwise. However, where we diverge is in thinking that this difference consigns women to a traditionally 'female' role involving childcare and home-centred activities on the main. I don't see that women's biological differences are any justification for claiming this as the natural female role and think that, indeed, it is hugely sexist to make such a claim. Women's reproductive capabilities and the effects of oestrogen on our emotions do not preclude our being something other than mothers and housewives.
Alia_of_the_Knife
03-11-2008, 07:39 PM
Just got to the thread but all I have to say is WOW, what a tangent.
ColetteCalahan
03-11-2008, 11:34 PM
To sum up what Flickad's saying (and I agree with it) I just don't find difference feminism very empowering. Some women do. I guess we all get off on different things.
AlexxaHex
03-12-2008, 12:17 AM
I am so confused how this thread turned out as I was asleep.
Good thing I'm infertile?
No, you're not really. You just haven't met ME yet. *wink wink*
:hyper:
Chrissy68
03-12-2008, 12:42 AM
I knew it!
As far as jewish conversions go, I know an awful lot, due to the Jewish middle and high school I attended. There's no right reason other than it feeling right Lysondra. If you are connected spiritually then you have reason enough IMO.
Alas several Jews don't believe in god necessarily but they are fully connected to the rituals as well as the culture. I love our customs and rituals but don't necessarily but into keeping kosher and praying daily.
One of my favorite rituals isn't observed by my sect, it's an orthodox one. It is the ritual of writing a list of your sins over the past year and ripping up the paper to throw into a moving body of water like a stream. (done on yom kippur, the day of atonement)
The point I'm trying to make here is, we believe that certain souls were meant to be Jews and they often feel much more spiritually connected and at home within Judaism. If your reasons are because your soul believes it is home and it feels right to you, then you should act.
And no rabbi willturn you away without considering all of what you express to him or her. FYI, my aunt is a rabbi in the reconstructionist sect. If you want to talk more please do PM.
Chrissy68
03-12-2008, 12:44 AM
Whoa holy tangent and I should have read thru first. Yeah.
GoldCoastGirl
03-12-2008, 06:07 AM
Good thing I'm infertile?
Not until you have bathed and drank the Stripperweb water :cheers:
:devil:
I'm also purposefully staying the hell out of that water as well as NOT drinking a drop!!!
:P ;)
Lysondra
03-12-2008, 06:14 AM
YAY YAY! Instead of making a food giftbasket I took a very needy friend grocery shopping for Purim. Not only do I feel extremely happy to be following my faith, I feel good on the inside too! In return she made me a YUMMY meal from the food I bought her. Plus I brought her some of my yummy Purim cookies!
I'm donating to five soldiers in the Israli army for my charitable donation...
now I just need to make a food giftbasket for one more person.
I know it's probably a week early, but my friend kinda needed food today, yannow?
AlexxaHex
03-12-2008, 12:17 PM
No, you're not really. You just haven't met ME yet. *wink wink*
:hyper:
OH jeez what a douche I am. I gotta stop posting at 3 am. And I should definitely never hit on women. This is why I don't. Because I sound like a total moron even when I'm trying to be funny.
Lola Rose
03-12-2008, 01:05 PM
OH jeez what a douche I am. I gotta stop posting at 3 am. And I should definitely never hit on women. This is why I don't. Because I sound like a total moron even when I'm trying to be funny.
you can hit on me at 3am... ;)
or any other time....}:D
Lola Rose
03-12-2008, 01:06 PM
YAY YAY! Instead of making a food giftbasket I took a very needy friend grocery shopping for Purim. Not only do I feel extremely happy to be following my faith, I feel good on the inside too! In return she made me a YUMMY meal from the food I bought her. Plus I brought her some of my yummy Purim cookies!
I'm donating to five soldiers in the Israli army for my charitable donation...
now I just need to make a food giftbasket for one more person.
I know it's probably a week early, but my friend kinda needed food today, yannow?
that is so great! I'm inspired, now I wanna make a food gift basket :)
AlexxaHex
03-12-2008, 01:06 PM
I'm scared I'd make an ass of myself...
again. :-[
TheSexKitten
03-12-2008, 04:39 PM
Now aside from my participation in the child rearing tangent, I wish you the best of luck in your search for spirituality! If you don't believe in a god now, you might be searching out there to make sure. At least subconsiously. If it never happens that you do believe, then you'll know good and ready whether or not Judaism as a whole is right for you in the long term. Have fun at all the kickass holidays... I miss them!! :'(
Passover was my favorite. :P
Chrissy68
03-12-2008, 10:00 PM
passover is my favorite! that and purim, where you're supposed to get so drunk you can't tell the difference between Haman (bad guy) and Mordecai (good guy).
Yekhefah
03-12-2008, 10:17 PM
I'm weird, no one celebrates my favorite holiday but I love Tu B'Shvat. What other faith has a holiday like that, especially in the western world? I'd love to see it get bigger than it is.
I love the Passover seder but not the rest of the week!
Katrine
03-13-2008, 09:58 AM
Simchat torah is the shiznit, especially at the Lubavitch temple!
ColetteCalahan
03-13-2008, 10:01 AM
i think klezmer is one of the best things about being jewish. when i was going through my ska phase in HS i found so many awesome klez-fusion bands... the Klezmatics kicked major ass.
Hello_Kitty27
03-13-2008, 05:59 PM
Alright, now that Yek has replied - it was Judaism. It's not JUST the people or my lonliness. It's that I really love the reasoning behind their beliefs even if I can't follow some (like the stricter Jews believing in not seeing their wives naked before marriage out of respect and honour, not really anything else). There are things in the actual beliefs I can't follow, like nudity and the usual... but other things... bringing the light toward you, the people.... I even want to go to Shabbat and Kiddush and things. I just really like Judaism as a belief system. As a community.
Jews are strong-willed and passionate, they are not forceful in their beliefs and are very understanding and humble. They believe in hard work and doing your best, they are active members in helping their fellow Jews... it's just the overall 'style' I like.
I think Yek gets what I mean. I don't believe in the God... but I want to be a good Jewish girl with the faith system of everything else.
I think it makes more sense now that you know the religion.
I don't believe in the God part, but I find the services and holidays to be spiritually satisfying. I mean, the prayers to God may not be my god, but I feel a 'release' when I do them. Like even though I don't think my prayers are going anywhere, I am happy to have said them... does that make sense?!
I felt damn near the exact same way as what you stated on the first page (I admit, I haven't read the rest b/c I have limited internet access right now)....I unfortunately put it on hold for various reasons, one of which was the lack of faith in "god"...I've heard that it's OK to be an atheist Jew, but I feared that I would not be accepted as a true convert. I've continued to read books here and there but have yet to come across any good ones specific to the atheist aspect of it all. I can't wait to be able to read the rest of the thread!
AlexxaHex
03-14-2008, 12:52 AM
i think klezmer is one of the best things about being jewish. when i was going through my ska phase in HS i found so many awesome klez-fusion bands... the Klezmatics kicked major ass.
:O Is that like the Hebrew Plasmatics?
Lysondra
03-14-2008, 10:43 PM
Oh my G-d. I have never been so overwhelmed in my entire life. I must've looked like a deer in headlights the whole time.
I never felt more accepted than when the Rabbi invited me to lunch in his home. What a big meal! I had like 20 things... and the Rabbi even made chocolate cake! Yummy!
And I had CHALLAH again!!! :hyper:
But Synagogue itself was difficult.
fancygirl
03-14-2008, 11:12 PM
hmm--- the idea of switching is kind of funny if you're not really switching--
because you don't believe in God, you're not suddenly changing that.
I would think that you should make that community part of your lifestyle
but going through all the ceremonies and not believing in God is...yeah, a tad
not so good.
however, if you can keep your mouth shut and no one will ever find out and thus never be offended, then do what makes you happy. I can just see a lot of chaos in your adopted community if it's found out that you did all of their religious ceremonies without actually believing in their God.