News Stories

[Mentar]

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

Dress in provocative clothing and walk into a religious neighborhood? I wouldn't wear a Rangers shirt and walk into a Celtic neighborhood in Glasgow, that's both incitement and outright stupid.

Just live and let live.

Living in a religious neighborhood does not strip you of your rights, Darkbeat. You may have to subject yourself to complaints and dissing. But not spitting or worse.

So? Thousands? What is that? A fringe compared to MILLIONS.

So why is there no clear distancing from the fringe of those millions? Why is there no real reaction of the government against it? You make it sound as if only some loony moonbats are pushing the religious zealotry. According to what I read (and heard from a friend who returned from a Jerusalem trip) it is _not_. The majority of haredim may not be violent themselves, but they sympathize with what this "fringe" is doing.

Beit Shemesh is particularly bad, but I see the co-existance and the situation from FACTS ON THE GROUND. Haaretz is the most left wing publication in Israeli media and is whipping up a frenzy with hareidi attacks. So much so that President Perez has called for them to stop; http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/...ncitement.html

Now, now. Haaretz is the oldest daily newspaper in Israel, no flamethrower. And Peretz did not call Haaretz to stop, like your choice of words seems to indicate, but he cautioned ALL media and ALL people not to overgeneralize.

I'm not anti-Haredim. Those who peacefully pursue their studies of scriptures - more power to them. Their opinion has as much weight as the opinion of a worldly jew. BUT. What I see their "fringe" as you called it doing is in essence exactly the same what the Basij militia in Iran is doing as well: Spreading religious intolerance in a harassing and sometimes even violent way against those who don't comply, in particular against women. I see this as a disturbing sign of civilizatory degeneration.

As I said, most hareidi women work. Many men study in yeshivot to be sure. Are you jealous?

Me?? No, certainly not, I prefer to work for my living. But even though I'm all for a proper social net: If someone would be harassing me with religious zealotry in his free time which he can do because I am alimenting him with my taxes, I would be thoroughly annoyed.

[Darkbeat]

What can I say? You're wrong about hareidi opinion, but other than that we agree. I'm against the fringe too.

I have no desire to continue arguing it however, just I'd appreciate if you could understand how I, as a member of the hareidi tzibur, would be upset that these alligations are being directed toward hareidim in general.

See my link above about the Belzer Rebbe.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Darkbeat

2. I'm not saying it's right, it's very wrong and extremely upsetting to the majority in the hareidi community. What I'm saying is that people shouldn't go around looking for trouble, just as much as people shouldn't start trouble. Putting yourself at risk is forbidden in halacha (Jewish law) as much as being the risk.

i am pretty sure some nice white man in the deep said same thing when discussing the latest hanging of a black man.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i am pretty sure some nice white man in the deep said same thing when discussing the latest hanging of a black man.

That's a BS analogy, given that there's a huge difference between an enclosed community and a region where the discrimination is against those who were brought to that region in the first place.

[Ithekro]

Well that and in some places in the Deep South the blacks are the majority and have been for a long time (it stands to reason that you have a lot of slaves for every plantation owner).

If we are talking an immigrant American jewish girl taking to a religious community *my analogies are way too extreme for the situation...but I'll leave them there* wouldn't that be more like the an Asian family moving to Tennessee right as the Second World War starts. They may or may not be Japanese...but the locals probably don't care. Now if the woman dressed in kimono or some other traditional dress to the market....she'd get hell for it in conservative rural and likely racist America in the 1930s and 1940s. (the whole Yellow Peril thing) Depending how depraved they might be it could result in rape and/or lynching.

That is an extreme example though. Maybe more like a Catholic Mexican family moving to some Protestant heavy Minnisota town? Or less extreme...a New Yorker moving to the Bible Belt. That alone can cause problems. Especially if they still have the Blue laws in effect still.

[Sumeragi]

The thing was that Darkbeat was most likely discussing deliberately engaging in a very controversial action in an enclosed community for the sake of "change". Basically, if a person knew about a religious community, and went out to deliberately provoke by wearing clothing that is considered very distasteful, how is that not an act against the freedom of that community to believe in their particular version of religion, when it's kept among themselves?

If members of the religious community go outside of their region and attempt to force non-believers in other parts to follow their strict beliefs, then that's a problem. However, the opposite also holds true.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

The thing was that Darkbeat was most likely discussing deliberately engaging in a very controversial action in an enclosed community for the sake of "change". Basically, if a person knew about a religious community, and went out to deliberately provoke by wearing clothing that is considered very distasteful, how is that not an act against the freedom of that community to believe in their particular version of religion, when it's kept among themselves?

If members of the religious community go outside of their region and attempt to force non-believers in other parts to follow their strict beliefs, then that's a problem. However, the opposite also holds true.

this is form the article i posted earlier.

Beit Shemesh's growing ultra-Orthodox population has erected street signs calling for the separation of sexes on the sidewalks, dispatched "modesty patrols" to enforce a chaste female appearance and hurled stones at offenders and outsiders. Walls of the neighborhood are plastered with signs exhorting women to dress modestly in closed-necked, long-sleeved blouses and long skirts.


Naama's case has been especially shocking because of her young age and because she attends a religious school and dresses with long sleeves and a skirt. Extremists, however, consider even that outfit, standard in mainstream Jewish religious schools, to be immodest.

this sound like deliberately provoking anyone?

[Ithekro]

Reading the article it seems like a rather odd encounter between the Orthodox and the ultra-Orthodox. Not even between the more usually secular or reform verse the Orthodox, but the Ultra against other Orthodox observant jews. That is what is weird here. Someone is not following the strictness, enough, for them....but is still following the strict religious laws. How does that function?


It doesn't say what she (Naama) is doing that is provoking the reaction. Is her hair not covered....is there too much neck exposed? Are the school's uniform codes not long enough in the skirts? It doesn't say.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

this is form the article i posted earlier.

this sound like deliberately provoking anyone?

And you're using the bat-insane Beit Shemesh example, which even most members of the hareidi tzibur consider extreme, as a generalization? This is basically an Ultra-ultra-Orthodox versus the rest of the country example, yet some people are using it as a context to say all Ultra-Orthodox are this extreme.

[Vexx]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16342327

President Shimon Peres backed the protest. "The entire nation must be recruited in order to save the majority from the hands of a small minority," Mr Peres said hours before the rally.
He said the demonstration was a defence of the "character" of the state of Israel "against a minority which breaks our national solidarity".
Opposition leader Tzipi Livni also condemned "the extremist elements that are rearing their heads and are trying to impose their world view on us".

Basically... unless the group wants to form their own country, they need to abide by the rules of the country they're -- and even if it is "only a few ultra-zealots" spitting on young girls for daring to want to be human beings, I should think the majority of the group would clean house internally if they didn't support such behavior. Spitting is considered assault and battery in many countries because of the potential of transmitted diseases. Name names, identify the "poorly behaved" and shame them themselves.

I have the same complaint about the fringes of Islam and Christianity so this group shouldn't feel singled out... for that matter I have the same feelings towards teacher's unions, doctor's and lawyers, policemen.... identify your rotten apples if they aren't following the purported rules. If hareidi in general find this behavior obnoxious/treacherous, then *great*, we all agree and the maladjusted can be handled via rule-of-law.

[Ithekro]

Ever notice that whenever Israel comes up in the news this thread grows a lot? it isn't the only thing that does it, but it is interesting that a lot of people have opinions on the matter. Some wildly different from others. Sort of the planetary hot spot...at least in English language forums.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

And name a Democracy (which Israel Claims to be) that runs a separate but equal service.

How about Japan?

[Dhomochevsky]

Using even more extreme examples to make the rest look better in comparison, is a slippery slope.

It does sound from that article like the reason for the extreme behavior in that particular city, is that the ratio of ultra orthodox to "normal" people is 50:50, as opposed to the rest of the country, where they would be a minority.

This may make them feel like having more of a right to impose their personal values on those around them. After all, it's "their" city.

Must be a very hostile environment to live in. And of course people would fear that it may turn out that way in other places too, if "they" take over.
There are a lot of hints at that fear in the article. It makes sure to mention: highest growing population rate, got more agressive lately, are gaining political influence, ect
Whoever wrote this, feels threatened.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

How about Japan?

forgot about that one

i think it is pretty sad that any country needs to run separate but equal service because a section of its population need protection form other sections of its population.


As for my earlier

real voluntary oppose to involuntary voluntary

Do woman not get on the "Male" because they don't want to ride the bus with males or it is because they knew that if they get the "Male" bus they would be subject to hostile behavior.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

How about Japan?

Aye, to me that's an utter fail as well. Its a symptom patch instead of addressing the root problem (men who take liberties with the treatment of women for whatever reason or want to box off women because the *men* aren't behaving). How about running more trains so that people aren't packed together so tightly? Adding train monitors, cams, etc.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Aye, to me that's an utter fail as well. Its a symptom patch instead of addressing the root problem (men who take liberties with the treatment of women for whatever reason or want to box off women because the *men* aren't behaving). How about running more trains so that people aren't packed together so tightly? Adding train monitors, cams, etc.

Running more trains would decrease their year end bonuses, and besides, most people complain without taking any action, so why bother about them?

They already got their money......*sarcastic*

[Xellos-_^]

something funnier to discuss. it would be funny if isn't wasn't also so sad and true.



http://www.dilbert.com/2011-12-22/

[Ithekro]

Aren't reasonings like that the basis for the seperating of women from men in religions....the temptations of a woman. (or probably more accurately that males can't control themselves without help?)

Or is there something else (aside from of course control, and....oh what it the closest word....."domestication" of the breeding half of the species....as while a large section of the population follows ones bloodline via the males, I recall some notion that you are only a jew if your mother was a jew. Which in some respects I can see, until recently you can't fake who is giving birth to you (no egg swapping), but can have no clue who your father is.) The concept of "mine" I suppose? Ownership?

From what I can figure, it seems like a lot of these laws that more or less define civilzation post hunter-gatherer, would be to a woman's advantage (a female keeping one mate responsible to her for example where a male can quite easily mate with whoever and not return.) until something changed. Maybe there was a power struggle and the males took over and reworked the laws? Cause if you read some of the laws, especially those about food and sanitation...these seem like things that would benefit the female gatherers of the hunter-gatherer groups and not the male hunters who would be hunting. Then other laws about dress codes seem sort of tacked on...so maybe there was a male revolt or something that took over the priesthoods thousands of years before the jews and traditions remained from those days?

Without time travel or even more clear historical context....we have a hard time finding answers to why things are as they are in these texts. And why people strictly follow them...or even rewrite the texts and follow them even more strictly, depending on the text in question.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Without time travel or even more clear historical context....we have a hard time finding answers to why things are as they are in these texts. And why people strictly follow them...or even rewrite the texts and follow them even more strictly, depending on the text in question.

i think the problem why are people following instructions written down a couple of thousand years? Other then because we always done it this what logical reason is there? In Confucianism, man and woman are suppose to walk on separate side of the streets, but we gave that up before AD roll over as too impractical.

[Ithekro]

Almost all the Laws would need some origin and reasoning behind them logically. Some of the Kosher laws for example show a odd knowledge of diseases in an age before those things were defined. Sanitation laws also show some high degrees of understanding...yet also don't prove the writers understood why these things worked. Some things in these old texts sound like someone with advanced knowledge or at least an extreme observational and scientific mind was able to piece together a lot of things that our "modern" civilization has pretty much just figured out in the last few hundred years, or less (or perhaps refigured out...sometimes we are not clear on just what knowledge was lost before or after Rome fell). However it is written in a way to get the idea across to people that "clearly" would not understand that advanced person's ideas. At least in terms of why and how...so it becomes "You shall do this" orders...sometimes without reason...."or else" is added sometimes as well to be sure they do it.

But it makes you wonder. But then I read or watch too much Sci-fi and history.