Unable to save comment (key failed)
Emes Ve-Emunah
he man was definitely wrong,but that lady cannot be excused either.That is the practice in frum communities in israel and it is accepted and no one has a right to be so brazzen about it.It is not about second class citizenship,just the seperation of the sexes and the woman happened to end up in the back.If ther is no room in the front for men ,men stand.In the south women had to get off the bus,that is the difference.
Once again, a blogger falls prey to Nazi comparisions. When will this stop? Find something besides Nazi to compare it to.
Once again, a blogger falls prey to Nazi comparisions. When will this stop? Find something besides Nazi to compare it to.
True, this comparison is unfair to ... nazis. Nazis treated their own women with respect. These are more comparable to taliban.
"This was no Rosa Parks type act. There was nothing racist going on here. Just a hyper-sensitivty to the mixing of the sexes. And the vast majority of women using that bus actually prefered this aragngement."
I would disagree. Many women toleratethe situation and maybe even get used to it. As well, most people tolerate bad situations because they do not want to cause a ruckus. Even some of the blacks on the bus were mad at Rosa Parks for "starting up". Harry, you are wrong. It is EXACTLY the same. Change the words of men and women to white and black, and your story is EXACTLY the same. The men here are wrong. If this is not an official bus, then they MUST tolerate her presence, or at the most, respectfully request her to move. Aside from that, there is no heter to behave in the manner they did. If he was legit crazy, they have no heter to touch her, unless it's sakonos nefashos. What happened to "negia"? All of a sudden these men rely on the heter of "shelo bi'derech chibah" is mutar? Nope Harry, She maybe chose the battle, but it's a battle she was in the right for.
sorry - should have said "even if SHE was legit crazy"....
There are always choices, they just come at a cost. The charedi community could get the bus line to officially declare the bus mehadrin by whatever process they go through, they could take taxis or start their own van service.....
So the issue is how we function in a society that does not recognize our divine right (and this includes MO's as well) to determine how anyone outside (and often inside) our group should operate.
The rest is commentary.
KT
> "..in spite of the community standards that opposed women sitting next to or in front of men..."
Community standards? Says who? A few vocal extremists that want to impose their chumras? Like so many other developments in frum society, this change has occurred not because "the community" has decided they want it, but because certain elements have pressed for it and the rest of the community just goes along with it.
"Now it must be said, that this woman did want to be a bit of a martyr here. She chose her battle. She had to know that she was upsetting people."
Similar to Pinchas. Most people were tolerating what zimri and kozbi were doing in Public - did thjat make it right? Pinchas chose to battle instead and stand up for the Torah and God. So did this woman. The halacha is clear, their chumra is not torah. She stood up to a public disgrace and abuse and was a kanoi.
oh wait - maybe pinchas is only a good example if you're burning busses and throwing rocks, not "shev v'al ta'aseh".
"But is it Halacha? I don’t think so."
Instead of thinking all the time, why don't you look things up, or ask a Rav.
"There has been a letter floating around the internet"
And you take stuff "floating around the internet" as fact?! The first thing in school you learn about the internet is that you can't trust everything. Before believing such wild accusations of a brawl on a bus, it might have made sense to do some investigation before ranting about nazi chreidim. Has it been reported at ynetnews? They probably would be the first to publish the story.
There is a basic rule that says (see fourth perek of Pesachim) that in a place which is Noheg L'Chumra you can't go L'Kula. The reason is becasue it breeds lack of שלום. Assuming this story actually happened the woman was totally wrong. She was wrong from a Halachik standpoint. She was motivated by woman's rights when that wasn't the issue at all. This could be compared to a person who pushes a buggy into Brisk on שבת. It's אסור because it is going l'kula in a place which goes לחומרא. Nevertheless, the fight that broke out also was wrong. However, one should condemn the instigator as much or even more than the one's who responded. AS far as Shaya's response I can only fall back on דעת בעל הבית הפך דעת תורה
If the bus is not a Mehadrin bus but merely treated as one, the woman had every right to be there and to sit in the front. The men, Charedi or not, are expected to tolerate fellow passengers on an official bus, I would assume.
What I find ridiculous is that you wouldn't SIT with a woman, or allow a woman to sit in your compartment, but it's permitted to "punch her in the breasts" and otherwise handle her body parts while fighting her? Leaving aside the complete lack of fairness in that fight; the idea behind it is wrong.
If the bus is not a Mehadrin bus but merely treated as one, the woman had every right to be there and to sit in the front.
no, she doesn't see above post
but it's permitted to "punch her in the breasts"
Who said it's permitted, the person who fought also was wrong
Instead of thinking all the time...
Can't have that. All that thinking leads to more thinking.
The first thing in school you learn about the internet is that you can't trust everything.
Wow! You learned about internet in school? What kind of nest of kefira did you attend?
Biased, but interesting article about segregation on buses in Israel.
From Rosa Parks Redux?:
According to the government, separate seating will be enforced by not being enforced. "Transportation Ministry spokesman Avner Ovadia said that no one would be forced to sit in a certain area . . . Leaders of the ultra-orthodox community promised that those who refused to go along with the segregation would not be harassed." Ovadia, displaying either colossal naiveté or genuine stupidity, seems to forget that the haredi track-record as regards harassing women for "objectionable" behavior or "immodest" dress has gone from bad to worse. In the summer of 1996, brutal attacks by groups of haredi men upon secular women working at the Mea Shearim branches of the Israeli Ministry of Education and Culture were commonplace. Presumably the same women who were beaten up last year are now legally bound to ride to work in the back of the bus. Rachel Benziman, legal advisor for Israel Women's Network, is highly skeptical. "The fact that they call it voluntary is a trick. These haredi communities will not tolerate women who opt not to participate in the new system." The IWN has petitioned the Israeli Supreme Court to rescind the policy and called upon Dan and Egged to refuse to implement it.
This could be compared to a person who pushes a buggy into Brisk on שבת.
Really? Last I checked, there were almost no jews left there and public transportation is fully integrated, although it is unlikely that anyone pushes carts there on שבת or any other day.
blogger 1 "There is a basic rule that says (see fourth perek of Pesachim) that in a place which is Noheg L'Chumra you can't go L'Kula."
absolutely, but where is the klal -is it just the folks on the bus - or the community at large. My rov has addressed this halacha and it's not as simple as you make it seem. You might say the people on the bus are the klal and since the men have overpowered the will of god with their chumra - they are the rabim on the bus and l'kua (although this isn't a kula - it's halacha) isn't allowed. I would argue that all bus riding people are the tzibur and rov are not makpid on this distortion of halacha (chumra as you call it). so you are only helping my point.
Even if the instigator is wrong, the effect is worse than the cause. Equating them is wrong on your part.
As far as "daas baal habayis..." just because you keep dragging that line out, doesn't change that maybe my opinon is daas torah and not just daas baal habayis. I have halacha to back me up here, not just warm fuzzy feelings.
One could even argue that this is no different than the gay marchers. They wanted to impose their perversion on the klal, and many of you defended their throwing stones. Here too, the men want to impose their perversion of halacha on the klal, so maybe we should all throw stones at them? Hmmmm. Oh wait, MO people aren't rioting and doing that. How interesting....
if i would have seen this women do this i would have frowned and been upset by her actions- what's the point in trying to prove a point?
but, if this story was true, this is unacceptable. I find, that really the problem is that these people are like "katzon asher ain lahem ro'eh." imagine if we got a phone call from our child's school that our 5 year old son was spitting and being a bully. we would repremand him in a fitting way. we would control him. problem with these people- who is going to control these people?
another thing- one person may be cookoo- but those other 4? did they forget to put their thinking caps on that ealry in the morning?
if i was there i would have been swinging and punching away- any normal human being instinctively would rush to the aid of a woman who was being beaten up by a male, assuming he wasn't carrying a gun, K"V a jew who was being beaten up by someone who, in America, would be considered the lowest of the lowest- spitting in someone's face.
sorry - at the last paragraph should have said - "having stones thrown at them.
blogger1 -
"daas baal habayis" are you simply assuming that I'm a simple baal habayis (which I happen to be)? how do you actually know I am not a rabbi or lamdan. it happens to be I am not, but as I do not know who you are, I wonder why you keep dragging that line out as you are assuming my status.
Really? Last I checked, there were almost no jews left there and public transportation is fully integrated, although it is unlikely that anyone pushes carts there on שבת or any other day.
JoeCool
Remember, your name is not Joecool, It's Yossellecool, from Crakow (not Brisk)
but where is the klal -is it just the folks on the bus - or the community at large
Who do you think rides the bus. It's the people from the communities in which the bus passes. Have you ever been on the 2 bus. From what I remember it passes through many very Chareidi neighborhoods. I believe Har Nof is the most modern neighborhood it passes through and I'd still believe that the Rov is in favor of a simple Chumra in Hilchos separating the genders. I don't think it's a strecth at all to say that Rov of the community in which the bus serves are very Chareidi. In any case she is required not to make מחלוקת שלא לשם שמים. Since all the facts in this case are made up (as far as I know) it's not a stretch to say that her motivations were feminist based and not כולו לשם שמים
carlebach fan,
I'm neither from neither from Cracow nor Brest, and my name most certainly isn't Yossellecool. Besides, how is any of this is relevant to anything?
it's not a stretch to say that her motivations were feminist based and not כולו לשם שמים
None of this justifies assault and battery.
Blogger 1
I don't get it. The alleged assailants clearly violated issurei deoraysa (pen yosif le-hakoso) in an effort to protect against in all likelihood a chumrah (Dont argue that they were preventing hirhurim and that is deoraysa because to simply avoid the issur Torah they could have looked the other way instead of violating issurei Torah be-yadayim). The woman's wrongdoing was arguably being meshaneh mi-minhag ha-makom. And who shares the greater blame? Aside from the fact that Chana and others pointed out the hypocrisy of not wanting to sit next to a woman but ok with touching her repeatedly -- which I think is revealing of the assailants true motivation.
another thing- one person may be cookoo- but those other 4? did they forget to put their thinking caps on that ealry in the morning?
As Meishiv K'halacha told us above, thinking is discouraged in the charedi community.
None of this justifies assault and battery.
You are right. I was merely reponding to those who implied that the woman did no wrong. She did.
The alleged assailants clearly violated issurei deoraysa
אין הכי נמי, but again I just want to point out that the woman is guilty and an instigator and should be viewed accordingly. I'm not here to justify the men, I merely want to point out that the woman isn't an innocent victim, rather she's also a sinner and an instigator
Besides, how is any of this is relevant to anything?
Because R Carlebach says to tell all the Joe's in the world that there name isn't Joe it's Yosselle. I assume this applies to JOE COOL. So again your name isn't JoeCool it's YosseleCool.
"and I'd still believe that the Rov is in favor of a simple Chumra in Hilchos separating the genders."
Did you poll the women too in arriving at the rov?
Did you poll the women too in arriving at the rov?
Not required. Kiddushin doesn't work against a woman's will. Every woman married by choice. Minhag follows the Husband. It follows that the woman all chose to agree to their husbands Minhagim. Thus every man is actually 2 votes. I think my Rov is even stronger, thanks for pointing this out
I was merely reponding to those who implied that the woman did no wrong. She did.
It doesn't matter to me what she did and why. These men assaulted a woman. That makes them the lowest of the low.
If this story happened - (I'll second Meishiv's doubts, as I have my own)
..then the woman is an idiot asking for trouble. You dont shmeer honey on your head, stick it into a beehive expecting to come out unscathed...
she got what was coming to her...There is a better way to make a point. She's not even viewed as a martyr for the "cause", what changes will come as a result of this? so that makes her a loser to boot...
Obviously the men who attacked her are wrong yada yada yada... what do you expect from these people anyway? Harry, stop getting so shocked by violent chareidi responses.
Because R Carlebach says to tell all the Joe's in the world that there name isn't Joe it's Yosselle.
Just because some guy (I'm not a fan) said something, it doesn't make so.
One can argue that the #2 bus, which is definitely loaded with Charedim , was the wrong venue to insist on sitting where one wants. OTOH, the violent reaction that allegedly ensued as a result cannot be condoned. While it is wonderful that the victim wanted to daven Vasikin at the Kosel, she should have realized at the outset that siiting in the mens' section of the #2 bus might not have been the most efficacious way of addressing her grievances. Remember-those of us in NY who ride the subways can either follow RMF's psak on this issue or stand if you don't want to sit. In Yerushalayim and among Charedim in general in EY, the levels of separation between the genders are far more rigorusly adhered to, regardless of how the victim understood halacha. Why offend someone else's sensitivity and insist on what you think is the only possible interpretation if you can travel peacefully without allowing a halachic issue to degenerate into a violent outburst?
"As Meishiv K'halacha told us above, thinking is discouraged in the charedi community."
For someone who claims to be thinking, not a lot of thought went into what i was thinking.
For the most part halacha is not subjective. Therefore in reference to a halacha the phrase "Is it Halacha. I don't think so" really has no place. If you want to think about philisophical questions, fine, but for the most part, and I repeat, for the most part, Halacha is quite objective.
Please think about that thought before thinking that I am not thinking my thoughts.
Why does everybody seem to assume this story is true?? Are there any verifeid reports of it or just an email floating around?
As described, the man spit on the woman. What more do we need to know? Why is there any need to go beyond the simple act of physical violence? Yet another example of trying to run one's life through pilpul and not basic application of overarching concepts such as kavod habrios. Real men don't spit on women (or even on other men). Finally, it is now irrelevant whether the case is true. As we know, how purported bnei torah respond to hypotheticals are very revealing.
"Why does everybody seem to assume this story is true?? Are there any verifeid reports of it or just an email floating around?
Joe Socher | 12.08.06 - 1:12 pm | # "
Given the opportunity, those on this blog love to jump on chareidim, even if it's based on unsubstantiated reports from the internet.
"Finally, it is now irrelevant whether the case is true. As we know, how purported bnei torah respond to hypotheticals are very revealing."
What does this mean?? Noone here has condoned the actions of the men. They have stated that the women is not as innnocent as she makes herself out to be, if this incident even happened. So what exactly is being revealed here?
Anyway, it is totally relevent if this story is true or not. How can people react with disgust at the reation of the men, if nothing like this ever happened??? Why assume that men would act tihs way?? Unless that is the way chredi men are assumed to act to those of this forum, which would show a severe bias against chareidim. Which doesn't surprise me.
which would show a severe bias against chareidim
Of course there is a bias against charedis. It is a bias based on countless examples of similar behaviour and reinforced over and over by the charedi defenders such as yourself.
Please think about that thought before thinking that I am not thinking my thoughts.
Far be it from me, to interpret your thoughts. I was merely reflecting on your own words. I only assumed that some sort of rudimentary thought process occured before your words spilled out into the ether. I apologize if I was wrong.
"Not required. Kiddushin doesn't work against a woman's will. Every woman married by choice. Minhag follows the Husband. It follows that the woman all chose to agree to their husbands Minhagim. Thus every man is actually 2 votes. I think my Rov is even stronger, thanks for pointing this out"
this is not a "minhag" The mehadrin buses are a pretty new thing.
The story probably never happened, as people who I called up who live in Har Nof hadn't heard of it at all, and there is no Miriam Shear in the Har Nof directory (in various possible Hebrew spellings, though there might be one I missed).
And, JoeCool, you're a monstrous hypocrite. It was exactly one month ago that, on this blog, in response to this:
The Yasam are well known for their horrific brutality
You said this:
Whether this is true or not is irrelevant. They are not comparable to guards in nazi death camps.
After the comparison was made by a SURVIVOR. You called it obscene and disgusting.
You even said this:
I simply pointed out that they are not comparable to Nazis. It's bad enough when antisemites say that. When a jew says that, it's hillul hashem.
And now you, not a survivor, talk about four people on a bus in a story that may have never happened, and say they are WORSE than Nazis!
Take your Jew hatred somewhere else, hypocrite.
And now you, ... talk about four people on a bus ... and say they are WORSE than Nazis!
I said no such thing. In fact I agreed with another commenter that a comparison to Nazis was inappropriate.
Before you blow another gasket, I suggest you spend some time here. It is never to late.
blogger 1 "In any case she is required not to make מחלוקת שלא לשם שמים. Since all the facts in this case are made up (as far as I know) it's not a stretch to say that her motivations were feminist based and not "כולו לשם שמים
such an ego you have.
1. Why is it not l'shem shamayim? she felt they were creating an incorrect chumra that in fact is a tircha di'tzibura and possibly a chilul hashem and she protested nonviolently.
2. so your assumption that the facts are made up allow to to further assume that it was strictly for militant feminist reasons that she did this. Do you know the risk in "assuming" - it makes an "ass out of u and me"...
JoeCool:
True, this comparison is unfair to ... nazis. Nazis treated their own women with respect.
Care to explain?
Bari,
which word don't you understand? I'll be glad to look it up for you.
So I want to understand, according to you - who is worse, Nazis who treat their own women with respect, or these 4 Charedim who didn't?
So I want to understand, according to you - who is worse
In the grand scheme of things, even you can understand, Nazis controlled vast resources which they used to kill 6 million jew and many more million others. So, yes, they are worse than 4 insignificant charedi thugs, who merely behaved like monkeys that escaped from a zoo. Does that help?
"she felt they were creating an incorrect chumra that in fact is a tircha di'tzibura and possibly a chilul hashem"
Sorry Shaya. at times yuo make good points. But this is ridiculous. We don't know it is an incorrect chumra for noone has actulayy looked into it. Harry thinks its a chumra and has yet to provide sources to state the otherwise. Secondly what tircha ditzibura? It seems like the tzibur are the ones who want this being they are doing it of their own volition. And how is sitting seperate on a bus a chilull hashem? I'd like to see how you stretch that one.
Does that help?
No. Because when the commenter said that Harry shouldn't compare them to Nazis, which he did based on their brutality, you said that the comparison was unfair to Nazis.
If you would like to recant that hypocritical, obscene, disgusting, hillul hashem statement of yours, instead of resorting to moronic tactics like making believe I didn't understand what you wrote, go ahead.
It is more than a Chumra. The Gemara Brochos 61A says it is is preferable to walk behind a lion rather than behind a woman.
What if a woman sat in the men's section of an orthodox synagogue & refused to budge.I think if persuasion didn't work,it would be justified to forcibly remove her from her position or the synagogue.
Similarly here,I agree that the men acted deplorably & lost control by attacking the woman,but it might have been justified to forcibly remove her from the seat or the bus if persuasion did not work.
"It seems like the tzibur are the ones who want this being they are doing it of their own volition. And how is sitting seperate on a bus a chilull hashem? I'd like to see how you stretch that one."
Do you not realize that the women in the back turns people off from yiddishkeit?
"Similarly here,I agree that the men acted deplorably & lost control by attacking the woman,but it might have been justified to forcibly remove her from the seat or the bus if persuasion did not work."
Before the mehadrin buses existed, which rabbonim said you could forcibly remove women from their seat so as not to sit behind them?
The halachos of kashrus turn people off of yidishkeit. Those who want to be turned off will find any excuse. This is not an affront to women. Its a techinicality. If they are turned off becasue of it, then I'm sure theyll find some other reason to get turned off also. We can't live our religious lives worried about people getting turned off, if we are following accepted practice, which the seperate busses are.
"Before the mehadrin buses existed, which rabbonim said you could forcibly remove women from their seat so as not to sit behind them?"
None. but its not relevent. It theoretically was for all intents and purposes a seperate bus.
which he did based on their brutality
And I based it on how they treated their own. What's your point? Wasn't I clear?
making believe I didn't understand what you wrote
You obviously didn't. Now if you want to throw a spaz, that's your prerogative. Want to blame me for it? Sure, why not. However, if you merely want to make excuses for thuggish behaviour, stick to that, so we can all be on the same page.
What if a woman sat in the men's section of an orthodox synagogue & refused to budge.I think if persuasion didn't work,it would be justified to forcibly remove her from her position or the synagogue. Similarly here,,,
There is no similarity. Buses are a public conveyance. Synagogues aren't.
I went to seminary in Har Nof for a year and a half and rode the #2 bus pretty often. Granted, I haven't been there since 2001, but when I was there, it was definitely not a separate bus. It was common knowledge not to sit directly NEXT to a man if there were other empty seats, but totally separate? definitely not.
If this story is true, then it's horrible - hitting a woman is FAR, FAR worse than sitting across from her, or even next to her! But the whole story is a little hard to believe, just because I rode that bus so many times and NEVER experienced anything like this! Also many of the girls who I went to seminary with rode that bus in very inappropriate clothing and I can't remember anyone getting even a comment from a charedi man on the bus.
The violence is just inexusable.
What if a woman sat in the men's section of an orthodox synagogue & refused to budge
A Shul?!
Here's what I would do. First I would spit on her, then I would would punch her in the breasts shove her on the floor and kick her on the face. And Iwould hope there would be at least three other men with the courage to help me carry out this great Kiddush HeShem.
I remember this same thing happening to the Chafetz Chaim. A woman walked into his Kiosk and sat down next to him. He reacted the same way! He had help from his friends, the Aruch HaShulhan, R. Meir Simcha, and R. Chaim Ozer who were there at the time.
It was pretty funny watching that brazen woman bleed I think there is a picture of it on the internet (kind of grainy and in black and white but it's all there)
Now that's what I call Kavod HaTorah!
A man spits at a Jewish woman. He pushes her off of her seat and takes it away from her. When she tries to take the seat back, he kicks her in the face with his boot. A description of a Nazi Germany incident circa 1936?
Nope. Jerusalem, Jew versus Jew, 2006. There are not too many people who would do such a thing other than Nazis.
Of course I wasn't comparing what this miseerable excuse for a human being did to this woman to the genocide of the Nazis. Only to the type of behavior that was typical of Nazis during the holocaust.
AS to whether the story is true. It was checked out by various individuals. And ...one of the passengers had a camcorder and most of it was videotaped.
As I scrolled through some of the comments here, there was some question as to the authenticity of the story. The letter was signed by Miriam Shear.
I happen to know Miriam Shear, and received the email that she sent out.
Miriam is not a recent Oleh, although I believe she lived here in the past and may have made Aliyah some time ago. She does not currently reside in Israel, but was visiting Israel for a few weeks. That is probably why no one found her in a directory.
Meishiv - you keep saying that that is the way separate buses are. That might be so, but this bus is not a separate bus. Just because some people want it to be and maybe can sometimes make others uncomfortable enough that they change seats so as not to look less frum or even possibly start a fight does not mak eit a separate bus.
Granted, I have not used that bus in a number of years, but when I lived in Har Nof I practically lived on the no.2 bus and in no ways was it separate.
If enough people want it separate, they can petition Egged. Egged will decide on the merits of the request and on the finances if it is worth it and will either change it or not. Until the day it is officially Mehadrin, nobody has the right to make up their own rules. If they want to be "machmir" and not sit anywhere near a woman, they can find alternate transportation.
meishiv - I got a little carried away - it's not an incorrect chumra - just a chumra that needs to be more practical. Nonetheless, as in the rosa parks case, you could argue that the tzibur wanted it and many blacks sat in the back,. so it's a rproff, they agreed. Of course that's ridiculous. they sat in the back b/c otherwise they'd be lynched. as we see here - the same results.
ploni - "I think if persuasion didn't work,it would be justified to forcibly remove her from her position or the synagogue. "
apparently this is proof you should stop thinking. how do you get from a gemara that talks about a derech of behavior, but is obviously not actual halacha, to violence? negiah, chilul hashem, nezek, raising your hand against another jew, are all issurei di'orayisa. the gemara also says a jew who raises his hand against another jew is a rasha - so this negates your "thinking".
Harry, you owe 6 million jews an apology.
By comparing these charedim to Nazi's, you're implying that the suffering of those 6 million Kedoshim was no more than a couple punches.
The Kedoshim were dehumanized. They were TORTURED and stripped of every last shred of dignity.
HOW DARE YOU USE SUCH A WORD ON JEWS WHO WERE ON THEIR WAY TO PRAY TO GOD.
WHAT CHUTZPA YOU HAVE. HOW CAN A JEW EVEN THINK OF CONSIDERING A FELLOW JEW A NAZI (OR NAZI-LIKE), LET ALONE WRITE IT IN PUBLIC FORUM?!?!?
HITLER WOULD OF BEEN PROUD OF YOU.
The spitter was clearly a deranged mehugana. 99.99% of charedim would never do such a thing.
But she was acting defiant and provacative. She clearly knew that she was playing with the sensitivity of the majority. Yet, she stubbornly persisted. She was more interested in her rights, than caring about other people.
When she was spat at, she should have swallowed her arrogant pride, and moved to the back. But no. She decided to act like a bratty JAP (Jewish American Princess), and strike back.
She acted stupidly, and practicly begged for the coming response. What did she think? That by spitting back, the guy will back off???
I have no compasion for her. People who mess with crazies shouldn't come crying like a 2 year old that the crazy guy made them some boo boos. She wasn't the slightest bit innocent. She asked for it.
As far as the 4 other men, its very simple. A Bas Melech never publicly fights with men. Harry, had it been your wife, would she have spit back? No she wouldn't of.
When you see a women hitting back, its naturaly assumed that she's a crazy.
Crazies have to be subdued. Period.
The only thing the lady is guilty of is insensitivity. She broke no laws. Her abusers did.
When you see a women hitting back, its naturaly assumed that she's a crazy.
When you read stuff like that, it is clear that there is no need to bash charedim. Their self-appointed defenders are actually proud to proclaim their misogyny. They don't even bother to hide it in weasel-words.
I'd rather be guilty of accusing my fellow jews as mysogonists, then to be guilty of comparing them to Nazi's.
JoeCool, I equally understood your above comment that you were imlying that charedim are worse than Nazi's. You only defended the Yassam because they are secular.
You hate charedim. Period.
I'd rather be guilty of accusing my fellow jews as mysogonists
Id didn't say that you were accusing someone of misogyny. I was calling you a misogynist. Obviously reading comprehension isn't a skill valued by charedi defenders.
JoeCool, I equally understood your above comment that you were imlying that charedim are worse than Nazi's.
Before popping a vein like Bari, I suggest you spend a little time honing your reading skills. Literacy comes in handy in all kinds of circumstances.
As far as the 4 other men, its very simple. A Bas Melech never publicly fights with men. Harry, had it been your wife, would she have spit back? No she wouldn't of.
I can't speak for R' Harry, but I know what my wife would've done if attacked. I know what I hope my daughters would do. I know what Yaakov and his sons did when their daughter was attacked.
And when you say "publically" do you mean she should've just waited until later and fought them in private? Wouldn't that have been an issur yichud (or not if she took on all four, but maybe that's public)? 
Crazies have to be subdued.
Ok, so were was everyone else on the bus to subdue this spitter? Other passenger (chareidi and non), driver, etc? Huh?
Does not the G'marrah impose the entire obligation of not walking behind a woman on the man. I.e. he has to speed up to get beside her or in front. The g'marrah nowhere (as far as I know) tells the woman to slow down and step aside, or to stop doing the laundry so men can go by etc. Much less does the g'marrah give men permission to forcibly remove women from the streets. If the story is as described, there was room to sit in front of the woman, so if the assaulter just wanted to be holy, he could have sat (or stood) in front of her.
I seem to recall a story of one of the Ba'alei mussar who, when visiting a wealthy ba'al habayit, relied on a very meikil shita in netilat yadayim rather than enhance his observance of that mitzvah on the back of the servant woman who had to draw the water.
Does not the G'marrah impose the entire obligation of not walking behind a woman on the man.
No, it does not, as it doesn't impose any obligation at all (cf. shulchan aruch).
Furthermore, the meritorious practice is to not to avoid being behind a woman, but not to _walk_ behind her (I'm not explaining why in the presence of some of the commentators here, but I assume a few seconds of being meharher (not recommended) can probably one to figure out why). Sitting behind her on a bus really presents little problem.
I think the sitaution is pretty clear.
The 4 People on the Bus, (yes, they are Charedim, but lets set that a side) were 100% wrong in doing what they did.
At no point in time is it okay to EVER lay hands on another person like that, especially your fellow Jew, and a woman.
Secondly, Of COURSE it is her right to go sit in that seat. There is no Law against it, (politically), and therefore it is totally her right to sit in any seat that she wants to. If they are sooo interested in following the Chumra, they could have certainly either gotten the Bus turned into a Mehadrin bus or found other modes of transportation.
HOWEVER, there is obivosuly something wrong with this Woman as she has put herself in this situation which was also very avoidable. It wasn't like she would get motion-sickness by sitting in the back of the bus, and she was obviously trying to make a point.
But lets give an example.
If you need to walk home, and there are 2 possible ways to walk, both taking exactly the same amount of time. On one way, you can get home safe, no problem. On the other road, you have a 90% chance of getting Mugged. So you take the other way, beceause Yes, it is Your RIGHT, and noone should be able to impose on YOUR rights. And then you get Mugged, and have a cow. Of course you are innocent, and the Mugger is 100% in fault, however, w/ a little bit of Sechel you would have known not to go down that street.
So teh same applies to the woman, OF COURSE it is her right, however with a Little Sechel she could have acted in a totally different manner.
However, in the end of the day, whether she is 'crazy' or not,the 4 men who beat her up, and the people who sat by and did not help her, totally are the ones at fault.
ed
this crazy idiot spits in her face. where were all the baal middos chareidim to defend her honor?
they didnt because they would of liked to spit as well.
there goes your theory.
otherwise they would of shamed this idiot.
I think the women in the bus should have
forcibly removed her from her position.
Many Poskim permit using force if verbal Tochacha does not help.
happy,
Defend her honor? What?!?
She was being provacative. She acted like a stupid arrogant defiant jerk. What honor?
ploni
we should call you ploni talibani
ed
where is the defiance
she was sitting down.
let the idiot stand
Its not that after she was spat at, she continued sitting and then he punched her.
She immediately spat back and called him a son of a xxxx. A cookoo woman. What honor is there to defend?
Where was the defiance?
Written all over her face. This wasn't the first time that she refused to move. She knew she was messing around.
where is the defiance
she was sitting down.
ed's definition of defiance means that she should have taken a beating without fighting back. Apparently, in his family womenfolk frequently receive beatings which they accept without complaint. As he said: "When you see a women hitting back, its naturaly assumed that she's a crazy."
why didnt they jump to her honor as soon as he spat on her.
go spit on some italian guy on the subway. he will mess you up but good.
regardless if she defended herself and rightly called the guy an idiot.
he is, and the men who stood by, are too.
if she was being raped and spit back and called the guy an idiot would you say she is cukoo also?
if the man spit at the belzer rebbe, would they sit idly by?
Her mistake was that she wasn't armed. She should have known chareidim are violent people.
Joe cool
re your comment about women in my family.
Time to hone YOUR reading skills. I wrote above: A bas melech doesn't *publicly* fight back.
And you're distorting my pov. Had she not been so defiant to remain seated there, she would have never gotten beaten. Yeh, I know she was ALLOWED to remain there. You're also ALLOWED to challenge a mugger. Just don't come back crying when he beats the crap outta you.
Happy,
There was no chance to jump to her honor. Read her own words:
**Without missing a beat**, I jumped up, called him a son-of-a-(deleted), and spat back at him. This brought screams from the women calling me a crazy woman.
EVEN THE WOMEN SAID SHE'S CRAZY!!!!!!!
"The halachos of kashrus turn people off of yidishkeit."
Nu? The fact that many halachos seem to outsiders to be strange or difficult is one reason that it's important not to turn people off unnecessarily.
"Those who want to be turned off will find any excuse. This is not an affront to women. Its a techinicality."
Even many religious women are turned off by it.
"If they are turned off becasue of it, then I'm sure theyll find some other reason to get turned off also. "
What an attitude! That attitude alone turns people off.
"We can't live our religious lives worried about people getting turned off,"
we certainly can and indeed we are obligated to do so
" if we are following accepted practice, which the seperate busses are."
accepted since when and by whom?
=========
"None. but its not relevent. It theoretically was for all intents and purposes a seperate bus."
did you read the comment this was in response to? The fellow said that mehadrin buses are not just a chumra and one should therefore be able to forcibly remove a woman from her seat, because non-separate seating is ossur.
"And you're distorting my pov. Had she not been so defiant to remain seated there, she would have never gotten beaten. Yeh, I know she was ALLOWED to remain there. You're also ALLOWED to challenge a mugger. Just don't come back crying when he beats the crap outta you."
Why should she think haredim are like muggers? Before you read this story, did you think haredi men would beat up a woman? In fact, I still don't believe it - I'm waiting to see the video show up before I'll believe that this happened.
"I think the women in the bus should have
forcibly removed her from her position.
Many Poskim permit using force if verbal Tochacha does not help."
It has to be ossur in the first place!
"She was more interested in her rights, than caring about other people.
When she was spat at, she should have swallowed her arrogant pride, and moved to the back"
How do you know what her motives were? Maybe she thinks it's a bad practice to tell women to go to the back of the bus, and she wants to put a stop to it for altruistic reasons.
I understand why you defend Haredism, as a way of life.
What is this business of deciding that every time haredim do something, they should be judged favorably and everyone else judged badly - their blood is no redder than anyone else's. Why is the analysis that the haredi men were acting l'shem shamayim, even if they shouldnt have hit her, and the woman is wrong. Maybe it is the men who were acting arrogantly and asserting their rights? They could always stand.
"If ther is no room in the front for men ,men stand.In the south women had to get off the bus,that is the difference."
What if the women's section is full and an elderly or pregnant woman gets on the bus. Is she allowed in the men's section, and the men then stand? If not, how is this justified l'halacha? Or do you mean only that if the men's section fills up, they don't kick off the women.
From the article cited above:
"The bus companies are certainly not the first to discriminate against women in order to earn money from haredi clients. Community leaders routinely demand that businesses which open in the ultra-orthodox neighborhoods of Jerusalem hire only men. Israeli supermarket chains and banks have agreed to such requests. These demands are not limited to private enterprise. A new post office branch in the haredi neighborhood of Geula agreed to the demand not to hire women as clerks and launched an advertising campaign emphasizing the increased services available to haredi men. The decision was made by Yitzhak Attias, the Jerusalem region's director of the Israel postal service, who declared that "for the achievement of tranquillity with the population of the neighborhood, this branch will not hire women." The legal advisor to the Israel Women's Network, Rivka Miller-Oleshitzky, called the postal service's decision "serious discrimination against women, crude trampling on their rights, and a wound to their honor." Communications Minister Limor Livnat annulled the decision a week later."
The chofetz chaim's wife ran a grocery store! R Meir Simcha's wife ran a store.
re your comment about women in my family.
My only question regarding your family, is this. When your father beats you mother, do you just watch, or do you get a few licks in to provide a boost to your sagging masculinity?
For those who think that ed's outlook seems eerily familiar, here is where you might have seen it recently.
If the woman is in her boudoir, in her house and if she’s wearing the veil and if she shows modesty, disasters don’t happen.
There are many comments in this thread that as an Orthodox Jew I find truly disturbing. It is no wonder that the Chiloni world hates Charedim so much. For all of the Ahavas Yisroel that we're supposed to have we can't even treat a woman - who may or may not be in the wrong -with simple Kavod HaBrios. Explain to her why the community has the feelings it does, talk to her. Treat her with dignity - she'll listen.
Egged is not a Halachic company - it is however a company that will abide by Halacha if the community demands it. If the bus wasn't a Mehadrin bus then it wasn't a Mehadrin bus and the Community obviously doesn't care enough to go through the process of getting it fixed.
That's the end of the story. Whatever wrong she did shouldn't even be discussed; the community has decided it doesn't care enough to prevent something like this from happeneing.
I agree with Shaya that the comparison with Rosa Parks is apt. Because if no one "sits down" in protest, before we know it, every bus in Israel will have separate seating. Who will say which bus is charedi and which isn't? This was a public bus as opposed to other charedi options. Maybe next time a woman will want to sit with her husband or her brother. Should we wait until a woman has a "good" reason for sitting in the "wrong" place before doing anything?
In Israel, democracy only goes as far as the concept that the majority can inflict its will on the minority, while minority rights are routinely trampled upon. On a public bus, one group cannot dictate where others should sit even if their reasons are leshem Shamayim.
A big part of the problem is that many people don;t know what is a din d'oraysa, what is a din d'rabbanan, what is a chumra, what is a minhag etc. Therefore, they don;t know how to react when someone violates a chumra as opposed to a din d'oraysa.
Apparently my last post was not clear enough. Let me try again. When the G'marrah tells men not to walk behind a woman, it does not tell women to slow down, get off the street, stop doing the laundry, etc.
That is, in order to follow this G'marrah, the men have to accept any resulting inconvenience themselves, not push it off on the women.
Thus, if the men feel the G'marrah is applicable to modes of transportation other than walking, their obligation is to sit or stand in front of the women, or to find another mode of transportation. I know of no suggestion anywhere in Shas or poskim that would permit the men to force the women out of their way; or even ask them to move to the rear.
The notion that it can somehow be a kiyum hamitzvah for men to organize a mob to hurl women toward the back of the bus (note: I meant literally organize a mob, not petition for a separate seating bus) is the sort of insult to the Torah that should make everyone's blood boil.
Natan
The woman fully understood the feelings of the community. She didn't give two cents about them. She was only interested in HER rights. Even WOMEN asked her to move to the back. Why was she so stubbornly defiant?
Joe cool
My father never beat my mom.
If he would have:
If he was doing it because he was a wild man, I'd defend her.
If she had been driving him up a wall to the point where he exploded from frustration, and its beyond my ability to break it up, I'd leave the room.
The woman fully understood the feelings of the community. She didn't give two cents about them. She was only interested in HER rights. Even WOMEN asked her to move to the back. Why was she so stubbornly defiant?
Maybe because the community is not as monolithic as you think? Maybe because the community is wrong? Maybe she's standing up for all the pregnant and elderly women who find it hard to ride in the back (let alone get there!) while juggling packages and kids? Maybe because her so-called chutzpah shouldn't have deserved violence?
he exploded from frustration
Maybe this hypothetical father could use some mussar so he no longer explodes?
After all, if the Torah requires gays to abstain from their desires, maybe we are also requested to exercise some self control?
"The woman fully understood the feelings of the community. She didn't give two cents about them. She was only interested in HER rights. Even WOMEN asked her to move to the back. Why was she so stubbornly defiant?"
How do you know why she did it? As Mike Miller and I wrote before, there are idealistic reasons to take a stand on a non-mehadrin bus, even if you think the stand is wrong. By the same token, why do you assume the men weren't insisting on their rights to push her around. After all, if they were so concerned with tznius they wouldn't have touched her.
By comparing these charedim to Nazi's, you're implying that the suffering of those 6 million Kedoshim was no more than a couple punches.
Don't be ridiculous. I was very clear about what I meant And I do not retract a word of it. I'll repeat:
"Of course I wasn't comparing what this miserable excuse for a human being did to this woman to the genocide of the Nazis. Only to the type of behavior that was typical of Nazis during the holocaust."
If you think it was any more humane that that, then you simply do not know the facts. I did not say he was a Nazi. I did not say he killed anyone. I did not say he performed medical experiments. I did not say that he tortured anyone (although it was pretty close to torture).
But what this Charedi Jew did was no different then what 1000s of Nazi SS guards did to Jewish inmates. Of course some of them were much worse. But some were even better in their tretment of inmates than this Charedi Jew was to this woman.
HITLER WOULD OF BEEN PROUD OF YOU.
Hitler would have been proud of this Charedi Jew. He would have made a fine Kapo.
ed - the fact that other women wre yelling at her to stop is no proof - there were blacks who were angry with rosa parks also - did that make her wrong too? some people just don't want to upset the apple cart, regardless of who's right or wrong b/c they fear attention or retribution. You have no proof, nor do you have any seichel by attacking this woman to the poinbt of saying she deserved it. She was an instigator, but she was stiill in the right. moshe was an instigator too. r' akiva continued to teach torah too, there were jews who felt he should stop.
"If she had been driving him up a wall to the point where he exploded from frustration, and its beyond my ability to break it up, I'd leave the room."
What if it weren't your father? I refuse to believe that if you saw someone beating up his wife because she "Drove him up a wall" you wouldn't intervene to stop it.
I refuse to believe that if you saw someone beating up his wife because she "Drove him up a wall" you wouldn't intervene to stop it.
I don't
If she had been driving him up a wall to the point where he exploded from frustration, and its beyond my ability to break it up, I'd leave the room.
So, under some circumstances, you'd be ok with your mother getting a beating. The only thing you'd protect is your own sensibilities, by walking out of the room. Do tell more. What kind of things are apt to drive your father "up a wall"? Burnt chicken? Dusty floor? Leaving a light on? Maybe if she just looked at him wrong?
Just to clarify my position:
I'm not, in any way shape or form, opposed to the idea of mehadrin buses. I'm also not, in any way shape or form, opposed to the admirable goal of a community being led by its leaders to adopt more stringent standards than their parents or predecessors as a way to increase their avodas Hashem.
I am, however, opposed to public buses being "mehadrin," as I'd rather see egged not run any buses; let private companies run mehadrin buses (the way they do in many (most?) chareidi areas.)
When traveling alone, I take whatever bus is available. If the two were equal, I'd probably try and take the mehadrin buses whenever possible. When traveling with my wife and children, we always sit together (i.e., in the same area; if we're with the kids, we usually _don't_ sit right next to each other so that we can both sit near the kids, but we try and be w/i one row).
If (when) I'm traveling on a non-mehadrin bus, I do not, lechatchila, sit down next to a woman to whom I'm not related. If there are no other seats available, I'll stand (discretely in another section if it's a non-frum woman). If a woman sits down next to me, I will not, however, embarrass her by standing up, relying on RMF p'sak.
Finally, I'm opposed to any chumra that turns out to lower avodas Hashem and/or kavod shamayim. Any idea that has caused it's followers to turn into disgusting animals needs to be carefully considered, and any implementation that breeds such disgusting conduct needs to be opposed (yes, this also applies to things like the importance of Yishuv HaAretz as well, which has also, tragically, been perverted on occasion to justify some loathsome behavior)
"I'm not, in any way shape or form, opposed to the idea of mehadrin buses. I'm also not, in any way shape or form, opposed to the admirable goal of a community being led by its leaders to adopt more stringent standards than their parents or predecessors as a way to increase their avodas Hashem."
Were mehadrin buses started by the leadership? I think they were started by private individuals.
"The woman fully understood the feelings of the community. She didn't give two cents about them. She was only interested in HER rights. Even WOMEN asked her to move to the back. Why was she so stubbornly defiant?"
This is from the email:
"After a few weeks, other women decided that they, too, do not enjoy sitting in the back and sat down next to me or behind me. These women were verbally bullied by the other passengers to move to the back. All of them caved. However, 1 woman who had been literally picked up by 2 other women and moved to the back of the bus, came back a few days later, took a seat behind me and adamantly refused to move when beckoned to move to the back. Another woman later sat next to her but moved when other women loudly demanded that she moved. In the meantime, they were leaving me alone and I became somewhat confident that they would continue to leave me alone."
sounds like there are some women who don't like the set-up
ed
"even the woman said she was crazy"
the woman are idiots also.
they were brainwashed in the same place.
you cant deny the simple fact that this woman was sitting down where she was allowed to.
these caredim dont own the bus.
if this idiot needed a seat, he should of waited for next bus or stand.
these are all facts.
he spit at her.
regardless of her reaction.
how could it be that a busload of people didnt stand up to her defense.
they should of shamed this man.
instead they emboldened him.
they were a lych mob.
and their lynch mob mentatlity is exactly why charedim dont practice judiasm, but avodah zara. (its from the talmud, if you show anger, you are like you are worshipping idols.)
this woman was ATTACKED.
she was attacked for the simple fact that she didnt bow to men, like you expected your mother to do when your father blew a gaskget. well let me tell you something, anger is a weapon. your father blew that gasgket because he couldnt argue ideas, so he figured let me blw up and be a cry baby and get my way.
im sure you are proud of him and your charedim for the inability to be civil and THINK.
What kind of things are apt to drive your father "up a wall"? Burnt chicken?
Come on, burnt food is grounds for divorce, not a beating.
(yes, this is a joke)
anon 8:27,
But none of them would have spat back.
>he spit at her.
regardless of her reaction.
how could it be that a busload of people didnt stand up to her defense.
I don't get you. Even the women on the bus screamed that she's crazy. Kal Vachomer the men thought she is.
>this woman was ATTACKED.
She wasnt. She was only spat at. She wasnt in the slightest danger. Only her arrogant pride was in danger. She chose to fight for her pride, and suffered the consequences.
"But none of them would have spat back."
How do you know what they would have done? Before this email, wouldn't you have said no haredi men would beat up a woman for not changing her seat (you can still wait for video evidence)
Would you say this about a man - if someone spit on him, would you say he's crazy for spitting back, or hitting back?
"She wasnt. She was only spat at. She wasnt in the slightest danger. Only her arrogant pride was in danger. She chose to fight for her pride, and suffered the consequences."
do you have ruach hakodesh? How do you know what she was fighting for? The men were not fighting for their pride?
>So, under some circumstances, you'd be ok with your mother getting a beating. The only thing you'd protect is your own sensibilities, by walking out of the room.
Your blowing my words out of proportion. If the mom practicly asked for the beating by intentionaly driving him nuts(obviously, the comparison is, that this isn't the first time she's driving him crazy, and that she was acting provacative), let 'em fight it out. Her lack of control is just as bad as his. She isnt innocent.
ed
"She was only spat at."
ONLY?
let me see how you react when i walk into lakewood and ONLY spit at rabbi Mattisyahu Solomon.
or If the Belzer rebbe comes to town and i ONLY spit at him.
as in the case of the vilna goan and secular studies, is it time for you to admit how you thought is simply wrong?
>do you have ruach hakodesh? How do you know what she was fighting for?
I can only judge by what she wrote. The guy wanted her out of the seat and spat at her to enforce it. Had she gotten up, he would not have any reason to beat her.
>The men were not fighting for their pride?
No. They were fighting for the tznius principle, not for their manly pride. That doesnt make em right. But she was a minority here. She wasnt surrounded by 5 friends willing to fight with her. It was stupid of her to retaliate.
ed
"I can only judge by what she wrote. The guy wanted her out of the seat and spat at her to enforce it. Had she gotten up, he would not have any reason to beat her.
"
so youre suggesting this idiot had a reason to attack her. he wanted it so it must go his way.
as soon as he told her to move, the bus should of been in an uproar to shame him.
why didnt they?
i guess you also feel that when a girl is raped she had it coming.
>ONLY?
>let me see how you react when i walk into lakewood and ONLY spit at rabbi Mattisyahu Solomon.
Your comparison is ridiculous. She was being provacative and she fully knew she was messing around. She wasn't the slightest bit innocent here.
"I can only judge by what she wrote. The guy wanted her out of the seat and spat at her to enforce it. Had she gotten up, he would not have any reason to beat her."
Maybe she thought other people would stand up for her and not let her be beaten. Isn't that what you would have expected too?
"No. They were fighting for the tznius principle, not for their manly pride."
Men who are fighting for tznius don't hit women. She says her hair covering fell off, where's the tznius. Just because they are wearing haredi garb, that doesn't give the right to judge them favorably and insist she should be judged unfavorably.
ed
by the way, im surprised he didnt rip her blouse off to shame her ala sotah.
or maybe she was bosomy, so he held like rav yehudah.
got to give it to these charedim, so frum, so frum, so eidel, so mentchlich.
oh they do lots of tzsedakah, musnt forget that.
from the mind of a charedi:
but a woman sitting down on a public bus. hey we run the world. the nerve that she even thinks she could sit there. wasnt my stare enough. what a bitch. i'll show her.
get the hell out of my seat. here a spit for the bitch you are.
If the mom practicly asked for the beating by intentionaly driving him nuts(obviously, the comparison is, that this isn't the first time she's driving him crazy, and that she was acting provacative), let 'em fight it out. Her lack of control is just as bad as his. She isnt innocent.
It must've been magic growing up in your house. However, you're still a bit vague about what kind of things would throuw your father into a pugilistic rage. Please clarify.
"Your blowing my words out of proportion. If the mom practicly asked for the beating by intentionaly driving him nuts(obviously, the comparison is, that this isn't the first time she's driving him crazy, and that she was acting provacative), let 'em fight it out. Her lack of control is just as bad as his. She isnt innocent."
How gentlemanly. "Fight it out." Are you not aware that most men are stronger than most women?
>as soon as he told her to move, the bus should of been in an uproar to shame him.
why didnt they?
The women also told her to move. I dont understand what your saying.
>i guess you also feel that when a girl is raped she had it coming.
When a woman teases and jiggles her assets at a man for 10 minutes and he then rapes her, he is wrong for doing so. But I would call her an idiot.
ed
"Your comparison is ridiculous. She was being provacative and she fully knew she was messing around. She wasn't the slightest bit innocent here.
"
provocative? really now.
and a girl who goes to the gym alone is not being provocatve to a rapist?
from the point of view of the rapist she is.
that charedi was looking for a provocation.
he saw it anywhere a woman doesnt lower her head when he walks in. he is the king of the bus.
this is a PUBLIC bus. the charedim are the provocative ones. they were a lynch mob.
too bad she didnt kick more of them in the balls.
ed
"The women also told her to move. I dont understand what your saying."
they were idiots.
im saying your charedi religion doesnt teach ehrlichkeit or menthclichkeit.
its a bs religion.
the people showed their true colors.
they couldnt deal with someone not listening to them. its angered them so much. who is she? we will show her.
what right do they have to be uncivil to her? was it a private run bus?
they need to learn their place.
ed
"When a woman teases and jiggles her assets at a man for 10 minutes and he then rapes her, he is wrong for doing so. But I would call her an idiot.
"
now youve shown your true colors.
you are so ignorant it surprises me that im surprised.
woman dont get raped because they jiggle for 10 minutes.
ask the girl in lakewood wether she jiggled for 10 minutes.
these charedi bastards werent provoked, they were LOOKING to be provoked.
>Maybe she thought other people would stand up for her and not let her be beaten. Isn't that what you would have expected too?
Why? "Without missing a beat", she spat back at cursed him out. She asked for a fight, and got it. When he punched her, she didnt call out for help. She punched back. Why should anyone run to help her?
>Men who are fighting for tznius don't hit women.
Correct. But this lady wasn't normal. Even the Charedi women screamed that she's crazy.
>She says her hair covering fell off, where's the tznius.
Where the tznius of kicking a man in the loins, and smiling about it?
>Just because they are wearing haredi garb, that doesn't give the right to judge them favorably and insist she should be judged unfavorably.
My argument isnt because the men were Charedi. Its because she was one individual who chose to fight, she lost, and then comes crying like a baby. Grow up.
Ok, folks, ignore the troll...
>woman dont get raped because they jiggle for 10 minutes.
I never said that thats why women IN GENERAL get raped. I gave you one example.
>these charedi bastards werent provoked, they were LOOKING to be provoked.
Read her story please. She was asked countless times to move. SHE was the provacator. She acted like a bratty spoiled princess, and she paid for it. Yes, she had the RIGHT to sit there. But she lacked the seichel to get up.
ed
no, the charedim wanted to fight.
she was the lynch mob victim.
ed
she was asked countless times.
so everyone on the bus, if they were human beings, which apparently you dont think they are, should of said to the idiot, shut up and stand or find another seat.
that is the problem.
that they asked her countless times is disgusting behaviour for a people you claim are so ehrlich and mentchlich.
proves they arent.
When a woman teases and jiggles her assets at a man for 10 minutes and he then rapes her, he is wrong for doing so. But I would call her an idiot.
I again direct everyone's attention here.
When it comes to adultery, it’s 90 percent the woman’s responsibility. Why? Because a woman owns the weapon of seduction. It’s she who takes off her clothes, shortens them, flirts, puts on make-up and powder and takes to the streets, God protect us, dallying. It’s she who shortens, raises and lowers. Then, it’s a look, a smile, a conversation, a greeting, a talk, a date, a meeting, a crime, then Long Bay jail. Then you get a judge, who has no mercy, and he gives you 65 years.
"My argument isnt because the men were Charedi. Its because she was one individual who chose to fight, she lost, and then comes crying like a baby. Grow up."
I don't believe it for a moment. The person who chose to fight was the one who spit first and the one who hit first. If it was a haredi woman and a bunch of secular or MO men, you'd defend the woman. On blogs, you defend individual haredim, no matter what they do - that's why you defended the rioters and the stone throwers. You try to argue "From their perspective" no matter how crazy. It's stupid. If you would defend haredism as a way of life, you'd see that you shouldn't defend these men at all.
In real life, I think you would be right there defending the woman and trying to get the men to stop. It would support haredim much better if you would say so, instead of thinking you should "Defend" any haredi no matter how meshugge what they do is.
joecool
what isnt ed getting?
i mean he sounds like a stereotype of what a white trash would sound like.
its amazing how similiar charedim are with the most uncivilized people.
When she was spat at, she should have swallowed her arrogant pride, and moved to the back.
What if she just sat quietly in her seat, refusing to budge, and let them spit at her?
anonymous
ed has said up above. she was provocative just by sitting there. and every punch, apit or kick she got she deserved for being an idiot and sitting in that seat when someone tells her to move.
who is she not to move. only a woman. how dare she not obey a direct order?
>What if she just sat quietly in her seat, refusing to budge, and let them spit at her?
What about it?
what isnt ed getting?
One thing he isn't getting is that if you're standing at the bottom of a 6 foot hole, it's best to stop digging.
its amazing how similiar charedim are with the most uncivilized people.
I don't think that ed is representative of charedi mentality. At least, I hope not. However, it is obvious that many charedim (particularly in Israel) are very immature in their interactions with women.
Well, aside from the fact that it's generally a more effective method of civil disobedience -- which do you consider to be the bigger problem, that she didn't move or that she fought back? What if she didn't move but didn't fight back? And what do you think she should have done if (completely hypothetically) she had been sitting quietly in the women's section and a gang of men had come up to her, spit in her face, and tried to remove her from the bus?
>ed has said up above. she was provocative just by sitting there. and every punch, apit or kick she got she deserved for being an idiot and sitting in that seat when someone tells her to move.
Please. If she would not have responded to the spitting and just sat there and the guy would have punched her, I would have punched HIM. She asked for it by spitting back, and cursing him out etc. A guy who spits at you will 110% start beating you if she spits back. If she didnt realize that, she's really an idiot. The point i made about her being defiant, is that she wasnt innocent. This wasnt the first time she was on an egged bus. She knew she was messing.
"I don't think that ed is representative of charedi mentality. At least, I hope not. "
I don't think he's even representative of his own mentality. He writes this stuff to "Defend" haredim that he doesn't believe. Just as he defended the rioters.
i'm anon 9:33 not 9:37 am
"Please. If she would not have responded to the spitting and just sat there and the guy would have punched her, I would have punched HIM. She asked for it by spitting back, and cursing him out etc. A guy who spits at you will 110% start beating you if she spits back. If she didnt realize that, she's really an idiot. The point i made about her being defiant, is that she wasnt innocent. This wasnt the first time she was on an egged bus. She knew she was messing."
That's illogical. If you would have defended her if he only spit at her, then the problem isn't that she was "messing" on an egged bus. It's that she should have realized the guy was violent. Maybe she didn't realize no one would defend her.
>Well, aside from the fact that it's generally a more effective method of civil disobedience -- which do you consider to be the bigger problem, that she didn't move or that she fought back? What if she didn't move but didn't fight back?
I have no problem with her refusing to move. She had the right to sit there.
>And what do you think she should have done if (completely hypothetically) she had been sitting quietly in the women's section and a gang of men had come up to her, spit in her face, and tried to remove her from the bus?
Call the cops. Scream at the bus driver for help. But dont spit back. Unless she's begging for a fight. Fine, beg for a fight and acted like a jerk. Just dont come back crying about your boo boos.
Ed, its people w/ opinions like yours that makes the rest of the world hate us even more.
Yes, she didn't have Sechel, I'll give you that, but that doesn't give these men the RIGHT in any way, shape, or form, according to ANY psak, to Spit, touch or punch her.
Ed, when will these people (4 men, or extreme-charedim start taking responibility for their own actions, as opposed to making everyone else take reesponsiblity for thier actions?
>He writes this stuff to "Defend" haredim that he doesn't believe.
I'm not defending charedim. They were wrong.
I'm calling this woman a stupid jerk for fighting back.
I don't think he's even representative of his own mentality.
It is easy and comforting to assume that all people have at least some core principles and everyone could be reasoned with. However, as the link I provided above shows, many people in this world share ed's viewpoint.
I think the Ed vs. everybody dichotomy here may come down to the relative exposure to the idea, in certain sectors of Western society, that it is not ever acceptable for a man to hit a woman unless she attacked first, he is in serious danger, and there is no other way for him to defend himself. And maybe not even then.
"I have no problem with her refusing to move. She had the right to sit there"
You're contradicting yourself. You wrote:
"The woman fully understood the feelings of the community. She didn't give two cents about them. She was only interested in HER rights. Even WOMEN asked her to move to the back. Why was she so stubbornly defiant?"
the feelings of the community aren't about what to do when someone spits at you.
>Yes, she didn't have Sechel, I'll give you that, but that doesn't give these men the RIGHT in any way, shape, or form, according to ANY psak, to Spit, touch or punch her.
The spitter was a million percent wrong. As far as the 4 men, even the charedi women on the bus said she's a crazy women. I dont blame the men for subduing her.
I'm not defending charedim.
That would be funny, if it wasn't so sad.
I'm not defending charedim. They were wrong.
I'm calling this woman a stupid jerk for fighting back.
Would you say the same thing about Jews fighting back as a people?
"I'm not defending charedim. They were wrong.
I'm calling this woman a stupid jerk for fighting back."
My parents used to say that if we kids were having an argument, anyone who hit first was automatically wrong, period. Doesn't matter if originally the other side was wrong, whoever hit first was the one who was wrong, no excuses allowed. I have the same policy. Why is it different with adults who behave like children and start spitting and hitting?
That's the only way to get the message across that violence is not acceptable.
ed
ok, so youre saying if she hadnt reacted to the spit she would of been right to sit there?
now how many spits does she need to endure before other passengers will defend her?
>I have no problem with her refusing to move. She had the right to sit there"
>"The woman fully understood the feelings of the community. She didn't give two cents about them. She was only interested in HER rights. Even WOMEN asked her to move to the back. Why was she so stubbornly defiant?"
If women want to use their rights and acts defiantly against the feelings of the majority, go right ahead. Just dont come crying that a crazy spat at you. There was NO reason she couldnt move to the back. She wanted to make a statement, and the crazy guy took the bait. Like I said, if a woman teases a guy, he is wrong for raping her. But she's an idiot too.
And i never said that most women get raped because its thier own fault.
"If women want to use their rights and acts defiantly against the feelings of the majority, go right ahead. Just dont come crying that a crazy spat at you. There was NO reason she couldnt move to the back."
Make up your mind. You said you would have defended her and punched the guy if she hadn't spit back.
"She wanted to make a statement, and the crazy guy took the bait. Like I said, if a woman teases a guy, he is wrong for raping her. But she's an idiot too."
But you changed midcourse and said the problem was that she spit back.
Ed -- is someone who challenges the will of the majority by, say, wearing a kippah in a public place where people are hostile to Judaism an idiot?
I think the Ed vs. everybody dichotomy here may come down to the relative exposure to the idea, in certain sectors of Western society, that it is not ever acceptable for a man to hit a woman unless she attacked first, he is in serious danger, and there is no other way for him to defend himself. And maybe not even then.
Also, the idea that "When a woman teases and jiggles her assets at a man for 10 minutes" is not an excuse for rape. Apparently, ed hasn't been exposed to that one either.
"The spitter was a million percent wrong. As far as the 4 men, even the charedi women on the bus said she's a crazy women. I dont blame the men for subduing her."
Why don't you blame them for hitting her? Suddenly they are not starting up? You said they fought for "tznius principles" before. Now you say they needed to "Subdue" her. They could have pulled the guy off the woman and told him that if he has any seichel he'll leave her alone.
>Would you say the same thing about Jews fighting back as a people?
Please be more specific
>Also, the idea that "When a woman teases and jiggles her assets at a man for 10 minutes" is not an excuse for rape. Apparently, ed hasn't been exposed to that one either.
Where did I say its an excuse?
Where did I say its an excuse?
Above ed. If it wasn't an excuse, you and Sheik Hilaly wouldn't be bringing it up.
>Above ed. If it wasn't an excuse, you and Sheik Hilaly wouldn't be bringing it up.
As i said above, you need to hone your reading skills too. I gave a moshol. A specific example. I didnt say its the underlying cause of rape.
Ed, they call ehr 'crazy', because in thier lifestyle, she is 'crazy' the same way you are crazy for using the internet...you don't respect thier views, therefore you are considered a 'crazy'. I guess any jew who has ever fought back is considered a 'crazy' to the people who are opressing him/her.
Harmonic,
You agree then, that crazies should be subdued. The question is who qualifies as a crazy.
The charedim aren't required to contact you for your definition.
ed
since when do you subdue the person
being attacked?
why didnt they subdue that idiot charedi man?
"I don't"
I do. Ed decided that haredim get bashed on blogs, so the thing to do is to defend anything that any haredi does, no matter how meshugge or wrong. That's why he is being so inconsistent. One minute he says that she deserved it for not moving, the next he says that she deserved it only because she spat back and otherwise he'd defend her. It doesn't have to make sense - his goal is only that the result should be that even if the haredi men were wrong, the woman was even worse. How he gets there doesn't matter and nothing he says has to make sense or be consistent. The bottom line has to be that the haredi men were not as wrong as the nonharedi woman.
No matter how much worse he makes haredim look, he keeps thinking the thing to do is defend individual haredi meshugaim.
Maybe one day he'll arrive at the conclusion that to defend the haredi way of life, he should condemn people who don't act in accordance with haredi values.
I didnt say its the underlying cause of rape.
Actually, you did. And so did your australian friend. Read your own words.
BTW, I am still waiting for more details of your father's violent temper. What sort of things cause him to fly off?
joecool
i have a couple
there isnt salt on the table when he makes a hamotzie (nu nuuuuu nuuuuuuuuu!)
she didnt put a piece of gorgil in his soup bowl
she was talking in the kitchen when he ready to cut the challah (nu, nuuuu, nuuuuuuuu!)
maybe we should have a contest, top 10 reasons ed father screamed nu, nuuuu, nuuuuuuuu!
I feel so sorry for this guys wife. I hope she never steps out of line.
However, if you merely want to make excuses for thuggish behaviour, stick to that,
I see. So now protesting comparison to Nazis means that we're making excuses for the behavior? I'm glad to know that you think the Yassamniks who beat up innocent people should be excused.After all, you protested the comparison to Nazis...
One thing he isn't getting is that if you're standing at the bottom of a 6 foot hole, it's best to stop digging.
Alternatively, resort to dishonesty and links to reading comprehension sites, with some insults to boot.
bari
can we see some mussar for ed.
let him be upfront and admit that he doesnt believe in what he writes but he wants to dan lkaf zchus for the idiot hateful spitting charedi man.
he is just giving us the mans warped mindset.
thats all.
we just need to understand the difference. is this ed or is this ed thinking what a warped person would think?
I don't understand the woman's insistence on sitting there. The comparison to Rosa Parks is flawed because the blacks felt humiliated by that sort of segregation, and she was representing blacks. In this circumstance, the men and the women who use the bus were fine, more than fine, with the arrangement, and if, as a commenter wrote above, she was just visiting Israel, it seems quite rude of her.
The behavior of the spitter and the four men as described was despicable. Rav Shach and Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz rode busses that were not 'Mehadrin'.
I find it hard to believe that an Israeli bus driver would not stop the bus. In my experience riding Israeli buses, that's practically unthinkable.
"The comparison to Rosa Parks is flawed because the blacks felt humiliated by that sort of segregation, and she was representing blacks. In this circumstance, the men and the women who use the bus were fine, more than fine, with the arrangement,"
From the email:
"other women decided that they, too, do not enjoy sitting in the back and sat down next to me or behind me. These women were verbally bullied by the other passengers to move to the back. All of them caved. However, 1 woman who had been literally picked up by 2 other women and moved to the back of the bus, came back a few days later, took a seat behind me and adamantly refused to move when beckoned to move to the back. Another woman later sat next to her but moved when other women loudly demanded that she moved."
I'm sorry, but have we seen ANY evidence, such as this video, yet? Or are will still attacking people based off of one person's letter, which may or may not be real?
Another woman later sat next to her but moved when other women loudly demanded that she moved."
I agree that some women don't like it. The comparison is still flawed, because there are some who prefer it.
Anonymous,
How you feel about what the woman did?
ju
im arguing based on bari and ed' comments
for example bari said:
"I don't understand the woman's insistence on sitting there....she was rude for doing so."
who the hell cares if bari understands why she was sitting there.
its not a private bus. the charedim dont own this world. its a free world where you follow the rule of law, not the rule of the charedi junge.
we dont need to give a reason why you sit on a bus in a free world. If the charedim dont like the arrangement then they should get the hell of the bus. let them stand up for their principal by insisting on more mehadrin buses. if the company thinks its worth the money they will do it. until then, they should mind their own business.
all we need to discuss is why the passengers were so rude to this woman.
they let a man molest her verbally, and then attack her phsically.
and they did so becuase they think like bari, that the victim is at fault.
where is the so called vaunted menthclichkeit and erhlichkeit i hear so much about.
bari, if it was the belzer rebbe sitting, and someone told him to move, im pretty sure the oilam would of beaten the living daylights out of him.
>Would you say the same thing about Jews fighting back as a people?
Please be more specific
Say, Mordechai. You think there weren't Jews out there who thought he was a total idiot for provoking Haman the way he did, rather than just going along with the accepted practice of the place, which everyone else seems to have been fine with and which most people probably didn't even think that hard about?
"Anonymous,
How you feel about what the woman did?"
I don't do that. The person who spat and hit first is wrong, period.
Since it was a nonmehadrin bus, I think they were wrong to harass her or embarras her after the first request to move also.
RIZMeltzer didn't go into his own house when a cleaning lady was singing. I don't see why she has to aspire to all kinds of mussar and they can aspire to being biryonim.
Wait... first you said:
"im arguing based on bari and ed' comments"
Then you said:
"all we need to discuss is why the passengers were so rude to this woman.
they let a man molest her verbally, and then attack her phsically."
Again. Have we seen ANY evidence of this? YNet (who loves this stuff) has not reported it. People here who I've spoken to haven't heard of it. There's supposed to be a video which hasn't been released, which is suprising considering how easy it is to publish it.
Are we simply getting upset and attacking each other over something that might never have happened? Aren't there certain halachos that cover verbally attacking groups of people? ESPECIALLY without any evidence?
Happy,
Did you read my second paragraph? Don't get all in a bunch.
Y
Anonymous,
If kid A takes kid B's ball, and kid B spits at kid A (i.e. terrible overreaction), you don't think you ought to, after giving whatever punishment is appropriate to kid B, question whatever possessed kid A to do that?
Happy
Bash ME all you want.
Comments on my father or any other family member crosses the line. You wouldn't appreciate me throwing you a line about who your mother slept with the night she conceived you.
My father never beat my mother, and any implication of such was in the context of a hypothetical moshol to the issue of the thread.
I kindly ask all commenters to direct all your frustrations at me only.
Thank you.
After all, you protested the comparison to Nazis...
I said two days ago that comparison to Nazi was inapropriate. When asked by you directly which is worse, I answered clearly. If you're still bothered by that, feel free to proceed with your aneurysm.
Here is the question for you. Do you feel that the woman in this story deserved what she got? Yes or no?
Alternatively, resort to dishonesty and links to reading comprehension sites
Obviously, it's not going to help untill you admit to yourself that you have a problem. I was only trying to help.
ju
ed said he didnt find it unreasonable that 4 men proceeded to beat the woman.
he said its her fault and she was crazy and needed that beating.
so hypothetical or not, im discussing the attitude that it would be acceptable or understandable.
bari
fact is you said in your first paragraph she was rude.
she wasnt and you are for thinking so.
bari
this bus is not the charedi ball.
get it?
its her ball as well. so what possesed the charedi to want something that is not his.
i perfectly understand why she didnt want to give up what is hers.
ed
pretty extreme to go from no salt on shabbos table to my mothers sleeping habits.
anyway,
i respect your wishes
lets have a contest why men would yell at their wives nu, nuuuu, nuuuuuuu!.
lets have a contest why men would yell at their wives nu, nuuuu, nuuuuuuu!.
Usually, it's because they're afraid to yell at their boss, and the neighbor might yell back.
Here is the question for you
The answer is no. I stated so clearly.
Now that that is out of the way...
Happy,
If everyone else who was on the bus at the time lives in Israel and wants the bus separate, and the visitor decides she wants to make a point because the law is in her favor, she's well within her legal rights, and rude. I agree, there's no law against being rude.
"If kid A takes kid B's ball, and kid B spits at kid A (i.e. terrible overreaction), you don't think you ought to, after giving whatever punishment is appropriate to kid B, question whatever possessed kid A to do that?"
She didn't take anyone's ball - that's true whether she should have moved or not.
Spitting, for an adult that is pretty sick thing to do IMO, but in this story he also hit her first. I am not interested in analyzing the woman's exact status al darchei hamussar when the men acted this way, and I question why anyone would if not to defend either the men or the status quo, which is obviously leading to problems.
that is if the men acted this way. I won't believe it without video.
he wants to make a point because the law is in her favor
She just wanted not to be treated like a second class citizen. She wasn't trying davka to make a point. Why do you call her a "visitor"?
"If everyone else who was on the bus at the time lives in Israel and wants the bus separate"
How can you know if everyone wants the bus separate if the women get spit on and harassed? This is according to the email not the first time there's been harassment on this non-mehadrin bus.
I agree, there's no law against being rude.
Do you also agree that there are laws against assoult and battery?
bari
because a bunch of thugs decide they want a public bus to be the way they want its rude for someone not to acknowldge their thuggery?
you need to set the context. the bus is public. the charedim have no rights on that bus other than to ride it.
they have no right to make rules in a public bus. when people accomodate them it doesnt become god given. unfortunately the steroetype seems true, give a finger, take a hand.
ed - you are absolutely right. Those who turned it personal should retract and redirect to the discussion at hand. There is no need to make the discussion personal.
I myself am completely flabbergasted by your comments and can't even find the right words to respond, but addressing your family isn't the correct method, even as an example.
Bari - you're example would only work, if the women threw the man out of his seat. The seat was open and she sat in it. she didn't take away his ball - (although apparently she kicked him there lol). no-one is arguing that she "instigated" a debate. Absolutely she knew there would be an argument. But spitting and then hitting, uh uh. as well, we have examined her intiating, and the fact is she was ALLOWED to be where she was. The men just didn't want her there. there was no official bus policy. There is NO halachic basis for her to move. There is no excuse for their behavior. AT the most they could have respectfully asked her to move and when she refused - move on.
I won't believe it without video
why should video make you believe it, do you know how easy it is to fake a video. On the other hand I find it interesting that there was someone ready to video it. Seems like this woman was looking to provoke a man to this and was waiting to capture it on tape. I wonder how many busses she rode without incident. Until she found the one crazy to instigate. HMM...
"On the other hand I find it interesting that there was someone ready to video it."
I'm not sure there was - where's the video? It was very early in the morning for people to have "two large video cameras" but who knows.
It was very early in the morning for people to have "two large video cameras" but who knows.
so you agree that if there were cameras that this might have been a set up.
What will people do to make the chareidim look bad?????
I was commenting on it being odd that the video isn't available yet. Maybe she is going to court or the video isn't hers. You have two contradictory arguments - one is that it never happened and a video can be faked, the other is that it was a set up. I fail to see how a set up is much of a defense. Can I "set you up" to start spitting and hitting a woman for not changing her seat on a bus and "set up" the rest to go along with it?
~You agree then, that crazies should be subdued. The question is who qualifies as a crazy.
The charedim aren't required to contact you for your definition.~
Yea, I think the 'crazies' should be subdued, but, by the Authorities who deem them crazy while breaking Laws, as opposed to a bunch of thugs (no matter what color their jackets are) who deem tehm crazy for not following their 'accepted rules'.
and I question why anyone would if not to defend either the men or the status quo, which is obviously leading to problems.
It was not to defend the men or the status quo, it was to give look at that angle of the story.
There is no defense for the despicable act the men allegedly did.
Whether what the woman did was above reproach is, I think, questionable. The reaction to what she did is reprehensible.
"You have two contradictory arguments"
I know, But either could be true
"I fail to see how a set up is much of a defense"
It depends, if the whole thing is set up ie she knows the "charedim" who spit at her and they were in cahoots with her to make the Chareidim's bus policy look bad then that is a clear defense. But even if the Chareidi really attacked, we could suppose that she has been riding busses for weeks or months provoking Chareidim without response until some crazy went overboard. Such a premeditated provocation surely would be viewed by JoeFool and co differently
JoeFool and co differently
oops, F and C are so close to each other on the keyboard
just a theory
why are the charedim getting provoked?
who made them owners of a public bus system?
bari still thinks she isnt perfectly legit for sitting on any seat she damn well pleases.
the only reason you think that is that somehow the caredim think the bus is theirs.
so they are provoking everyone.
how rude!
Happy,
If there is an open air concert in a public park every Sunday that you enjoy, is it okay with you if I come visit your town and play a bad banjo right next to you? I can play my banjo anywhere I d#@$ well please in a public park, and just because some group decides to have their concert every Sunday doesn't mean they shouldn't have to listen to my banjo.
bari
bad analogy
open air concerts get permits.
there is no permit that says on a public bus a woman cant sit where she wants.
And if noone ever bothered to get a permit for the past decade - its fine with you?
no permit, then its fine.
public space is public space.
if the banjo guy disturbs them let them get a permit.
Happy,
We'll just have to disagree then. I think the visitor to the town is being quite rude for insisting on playing his banjo right where the concert is taking place, even if the laws of the town say that they should have a permit.
"the only reason you think that is that somehow the caredim think the bus is theirs.
so they are provoking everyone."
Again... how can you attack an entire group based off of something that very well never happened?
We're going off of ONE email somebody sent in without a shred of evidence!
bari
i dont get your analogy.
the concert that went on for years was legitimate.
the charedim have no right to consider the bus should adhere to their non halachic issues.
this banjo player could be seen as rude for davka bother a legit concert.
maybe a better analogy is that if the first concert was illegit, they would play at all odd hours of the day, never announcing when they start, and ignore wether other events are already occuring.
simply they felt they own the park.
along comes a banjo player and nebech, she can never get a chance to play.
she told go to the next town.
ju
im talking about the hypothetical that bari is defending.
he thinks its legit for charedim to set the rules on a public bus.
F and C are so close to each other on the keyboard
is that the best you can come up with? Sad. Even poor illiterate ed did better.
Do you also agree that there are laws against assault and battery?
Bari,
You didn't answer my question above. Are you afraid?
ed
give it up
The chareidim involved were scum of the earth and I agree with harry 100% - would have made fine kapos.
Individuals as your self who support and defend acquiescence to such behavior, and oppose defiance to it are the bane of human existence.
Frankly, you're well within your right to believe your daughter deserves to be raped because she "jiggled" but that's your perversion of logic. Why expect the rest of the sane world to buy into it.
You didn't answer my question above.
Frankly, I don't feel it necessary to answer dishonest people. But to humor you, since, obviously, words like 'despicable' and 'reprehensible' don't register in your Charedi hating brain, the answer to your question is yes.
the concert that went on for years was legitimate.
So is separate seating on a bus.
The banjo player can play in the other half of the park.
Happy,
Let me understand something. In Littleton, Colorado, they have been having these open air concerts for two years now, every Sunday, with no permit, despite the fact that the law in Littleton says they should get one. Some people in Littleton think that band that plays is a bit vulgar, but doesn't fight it.
Along comes a Charedi from Brooklyn with his boom-box playing MBD at full blast right in the middle of the concert. He says its a public park and he can play his music wherever he pleases. We all know he doesn't like the vulgarity. Legally, he's absolutely right. He gets spat at and gets the stuffings beaten out of him.
What the Charedi did was:
a) A Chillul Hashem
b) A Kiddush Hashem
c) Idiocy
d) None of the above?
the answer to your question is yes.
Just follow-up then, When a woman is faced with a criminal attack have a legal right to defend herself at least proportionally?
your Charedi hating brain
Let's see. I made some disparaging remarks about some people that you just admitted are criminals. You, on the other hand, would have us believe that charedis should be expected to act in criminal manner. So exactly who is a charedi hater?
Just follow-up then, When a woman is faced with a criminal attack have a legal right to defend herself at least proportionally?
Yes. I could be wrong in terms of the legality. But, I would understand it, even if it isn't legal.
Its not always the smartest thing to do, but I won't deny her right.
In Littleton, Colorado...Along comes a Charedi from Brooklyn with his boom-box playing MBD at full blast
Wouldn't all that make him a lubavitcher?
You, on the other hand, would have us believe that charedis should be expected to act in criminal manner.
Where did I say that?
JoeCool, pick your letter on my question.
but I won't deny her right.
So what exactly are you arguing then? That you wouldn't trust her to be your babysitter?
Where did I say that?
Did you argue that the reaction this woman received was predictable? Or am confusing you with ed?
JoeCool, pick your letter on my question.
I pick (d), since my answer would be a "crime victim" based on the facts you presented.
Did you argue that the reaction this woman received was predictable? Or am confusing you with ed?
I think the latter.
I pick (d), since my answer would be a "crime victim" based on the facts you presented.
That's just evasive. Making a Kiddush hashem/chillul hashem/being an idiot is not contradictory to being a crime victim.
That's just evasive. Making a Kiddush hashem/chillul hashem/being an idiot is not contradictory to being a crime victim.
I didn't see kidush or chilul hashem in your description and idiocy is a subjective term that can have many meanings. You could have offered "inapropriate act", "foolhardy", and many others.
I think the latter
In that case, I apologize for not noticing your repudiation of his views.
Let's clarify the metzius here. This is a public bus. It is not "Mehadrin", according to Egged. It runs through plenty of areas where non-religious people get on. The Chareidim have no right to change the status quo, but they want to since some sickos decided that this bus was blown up 2 years ago (the number 2 bus bombing on shmuel hanavi) because of the horrible pirtza of mixed seating on a bus. There are - or were, as of quite recently - plenty of people who ignored this and sat wherever they want. Thus, the woman who sat in the front is not some sort of interloper, as Bari wants to make her out to be with his Littleton comparison.
>The chareidim involved were scum of the earth and I agree with harry 100% - would have made fine kapos.
Not at all. The spitter was a deranged fellow. I dont know of any sane Charedim who would have spat.
The four guys looked up, and saw a woman kicking and punching.
A crazy woman.
Even the Charedi women on board thought so.
Read her own words:
"In fact, the women were screaming at me that this was MY fault because "you don't know your place, you stupid American".
They subdued the "stupid American".
Thats not a story about Kapos. That a story about 4 citizens preventing the crazy women from doing further harm. In hindsight, its very easy to say that they didn't have to beat her etc etc. B'shaas maaseh, they witnessed a woman acting wild, and they responded.
End of story.
>Frankly, you're well within your right to believe your daughter deserves to be raped because she "jiggled" but that's your perversion of logic. Why expect the rest of the sane world to buy into it.
I never said that a woman who jiggles DESERVES to be raped.
ed
youve said she has a right to sit there.
youve said that the charedi idiot who demanded she move, and the woman who demanded she move, were wrong to demand that.
im adding that anybody on the bus who didnt defend her from this verbal assault was wrong.
youve said that the charedi idiot who then spat at her was wrong
but you feel a need to comment on the victim.
do you always feel that victims need to be disparaged? does it make you feel better that other people disparaged her and used it as an excuse to attack her in a lynch mob?
im not sure why its not enough for you to say, she was in her right, she was assaulted, no was mentchlech enough to defend her. end of story.
but you need to dig. attack the victim.
she shouldnt cry victim, she deserved it. she had it coming.
think about how you reacted to the tragedy in lakewood.
did you feel the need to dig? she deserved it? she had it coming?
you cant find it in your heart to accept that in this story, these thugs beat a woman. you should cry for her. what has this world come to that men beat up on woman because they sit where they please.
End of story.
The end of story, is that even Bari abandoned your bizzarre reasoning. You stand alone in defending criminals.
BTW, If your father didn't teach you that women should take a beating without defending themselves, where did you pick it up? Who taught you that this was allright?
bari
in the 50 and early 60s blacks in the south couldnt use the same bathrooms as whites, same fountains, or sit in the front of the bus.
now knowing they would get the crap beat out of them, they decided to test these boundaries.
does that mean they provoked? does that make them idiots that shouldnt cry when they get hit?
if they spit back after being spat upon, and all the white folks say what a crazy person, does that make them crazy?
youre of the opinion that youre an idiot if you stand up for your rights.
is that a torah true value?
ps im not saying the woman was on mission of civil rights. im just looking for an analogy that explains why a victim doesnt automatically have to have brought it on themselves.
bari
c - idiocy. why is he still listening to mbd?
anyway, so youre basically agreeing that the bus story as told, is about a bunch of thugs who think they own this bus, and will spit and punch people who defy them?
i wonder why we have a shomrim? or police? dont they know that criminals could hurt them? are they idiots in your mind?
Joe Cool,
My father taught me, that people shouldn't act stupid and provocative.
Had she gone to the back, the guy would have never spat at her.
Had she wiped the spit off her face and gone to the back, she would never have gotten beaten.
Sure she had the RIGHT to spit back. Sure she had the RIGHT to punch and kick back.
BUT SHE CHOSE THAT. Instead of giving up her wallet to the mugger, she chose to fight him off. Is she allowed to do that? OF COURSE!! But only a fool would do so.
She chose to fight back,and she lost. Why is she whining about it?
psst, because she's a loser. Like the Charedi women on the bus said, she's a stupid american loser.
Had I been in her shoes, I would had moved to the back. Not because I'm a wimp, but because it isn't worth the fight over a lousy seat.
Her arrogant pride was more concerened about her "rights". She fought for them, and lost. Suck it up, sister. You lost the battle. Go home, and swallow your pride down.
BUT SHE CHOSE THAT. Instead of giving up her wallet to the mugger, she chose to fight him off. Is she allowed to do that? OF COURSE!! But only a fool would do so.
But let's say a woman was goin to be raped and fought back and was beaten. Would you just tell her "hey you're a loser for fighting back?"
Maybe it would be stupid for her to fight back, but I'd assume you'd have a little more sympathy.
ed would say suck it up sister.
next time dont go to the gym yourself, you idiot.
My father taught me, that people shouldn't act stupid and provocative.
Had she gone to the back, the guy would have never spat at her.
Had she wiped the spit off her face and gone to the back, she would never have gotten beaten.
So, I was right all along. You did learn your attitudes from your father. My heart goes out to your mother. It is probably too late to fix you, but if you ever have any sons, I hope they break this chain and learn to respect women.
Ed,
You are blaming the victim here. Your arguments sound strangely familiar to those who opposed resistance movements in WWII. It isn't a matter of how foolish the outcome is it's that the attack needs some sort of justified response. By letting it go you are explicitly telling the men that it's okay to punch, spit, and remove the tichel of a married woman because she sat where he wanted.
That is never okay.
I do not know at this point one way or the other at this point what really happened, but I removed the letter from my site based on information presented to me in the comments. I will be trying to verify the information and the story, one way or the other, and see what if anything is true.
That being said, if we would assume this was presented as a fictional story, the responses seen here on your site are shocking and the fact that the story might be made up do not validate the responses posted here by some of your commenters.
See the comment on my site http://lifeinisrael.blogspot.com...t.com...ack-of-
bus.html from somebody who knows Miriam Shear.
That being said, if we would assume this was presented as a fictional story, the responses seen here on your site are shocking
Exposing attitudes like this is shocking. I happen to believe the story. But even if the story is fition it was still worth posing it as a hypothetial to see reactions to it.
In hindsight, its very easy to say that they didn't have to beat her etc etc. B'shaas maaseh, they witnessed a woman acting wild, and they responded.
The customary response, when one sees a physical fight, is to separate and subdue both people as quickly and nonviolently as possible, and then figure out what happened, not to start attacking whoever you think was at fault -- particularly when you're in a confined public space like a bus!
Natan
I don't see where Ed says its ok to spit and punch the woman. She makes herself sound so innocent. Ed argues that she isn't so innocent. She shouldn't be blasting the Haredim for something she could have easily avoided. Why you all coming down so hard on him?
anon
"She shouldn't be blasting the Haredim for something she could have easily avoided. "
in this hypothetical story, why not?
are you being motzei shem ra on hareidim that they dont know how to act like human beings?
normally ed defends haredim, here it seems he has decided that they cant possiblt act civil, so you need to be an idiot to ride on their bus.
An Isha Tzenuah would not have stubbornly insisted on sitting there after repeatedly being asked by men and women alike to move to the back.
An Isha Tzenuah would not have spit back.
An Isha Tzenuah would not have screamed - you son of a b****.
An Isha Tzenuah would not have kicked a man in the loins and smiled about it.
An Isha Tzenuah would have used her Seichel to avoid such a confrontation.
An Isha Tzenuah would have cared about other peoples sensitivities before her own "rights".
This woman is a disgrace to Judaism. I cannot think of even one Charedi woman, who would of acted in such an unjewish, unrefined way.
People who can call jews nazi-like and Taliban are an equal disgrace to Judaism. Charedim are Gods children too. Maybe they are at times misguided. Maybe they make mistakes. I would never call a MO jew a nazi no matter what I thought of him. That term is reserved for Rotzchim. For cold blooded murderers. Not for jewish people who may have gotten carried away.
ed,
I think you've made your point perfectly. She is a "disgrace to Judaism", while the chareidim "Maybe they are at times misguided. Maybe they make mistakes".
I hope you reread your post and see what you wrote and how ridiculously defensive you are of the men (chareidi or not), and how vicious you are to the woman. How about an Ish zanua? You know, men have the same mitzva of vi'hatzna leches! Is this how an Ish tzanua should behave? You really should step back, take a deep breath and collect your thoughts, because what you just wrote trying to "clarify" your position is embarrasing to ALL frum jews, even the true and responsible chareidim who unfortunately get caught up with the bad.
I am amazed that you continue to try to defend the men to the point that they are victims and she is the rasha. I am embarrassed and shocked. Maybe you don't care what I think, fine. but, you really should reread your most recent comment and see how vile it sounds towards the woman in defense of the behaimos who started the physical violence.
hashem yerachaim
I didn't defend the men. I accused her for acting in a horrible unjewish way, while blasting the charedim for how unjewish they were acting. She's a one minded hypocrite who thinks she could step on other peoples sesitivities and scream obcenities so vulgar, that Harry had to delete it.
Would pious Shaya's Rebbetzin have acted the way this woman did?
"Exposing attitudes like this is shocking. I happen to believe the story. But even if the story is fition it was still worth posing it as a hypothetial to see reactions to it."
I think Rafi G. did the responsible thing. The story hasn't hit the papers, and the video isn't available - there's no evidence yet. I would think it's anti-charedi animus that makes people accept it as true, but both sides seem to be acting as though it were true. Strange.
But even if the story is fition it was still worth posing it as a hypothetial to see reactions to it
I disagree. If it is true, it should be posted. If it is not true, and you want to post it just as a hypothetical to see what people would say about it, it should be posted with a disclaimer saying it is a fictional story. the story is highly slanderous. if it is true, that is worth discussing. If it is not true, you are prejudicing people against haredim based on a story that is not true but they do not know it. That is called inciting hatred.
I see on other sites that posted the letter (not just here)that people assume it is true. because it is presented as fact. They then talk about how horrible the haredim are. If it is fictional, there is something wrong with posting it as fact.
I am not asking you to take down the story. That is your decision. You believe it, that is fine by me. I am saying that the story has been verified by nobody but the authoer of the letter. No witnesses have come forward, this did not make the general press, no videos, no nothing of even slight confirmation. The story itself as written by the author raises a lot of questions and doubts as to the veracity of the incident. It needs to be verified.
ed - my point was, look at how angry and the strength of loshon you used to explain your position about how wrong the woman was, yet about the men, you shrug it off, "Maybe they are at times misguided. Maybe they make mistakes". Maybe? Even your being modeh they were wrong was only half-hearted. Your words belie a lack of rachmanus and sensitivity towards ALL people that a jew should have. Fine, you think she was wrong, but there is such anger in your words as you write how much she deserved it. It's almost as if you would have participated if you were there. Maybe you don't mean it, maybe you can't hear it, but you are strangely, more angry at her for acting within halachic guidelines, yet outside chumra guidelines, than you are with the Ovrei issurei di'oraysa bi'farhesya of the mens actions. Physical violence is an issur di'oraysa. Moshe rabbainu said to dasan "rasha - lama sakeh es rayahcha" Moshe killed the mitzri - he didn't beat dasans wife and say she deserved it. Rashi explains the why - but he doesn't say she deserved it.
as far as my pious rebbetzin
1. as you requested earlier, let's not turn our families into this discussion (I defended you from JC).
2. She would not have because her nature is to be a sheep, but I would have expected her to and told her so. And yes, I would have immediately jumped to the womans aid regardless of her innocence or guilt, as physical violence crosses the line. I have done so in the past in other situations. There is no halachic physical punishment from beis din for "untznius". Kal vi'chomer from regular people. The facts are sometimes your version of tzanua is not always the only one. Yael killed sisra, Devorah was a neviah, yehudit killed the general (sorry about forgetting the name) they were both acting beyond your version of tznius. Yes there was a greater stake involved. But according to your theory, that shouldn't matter. They should never have been there in the first place.
I also want to make it clear that I am approaching this with an attitude of 1. Whether it's true or not Let's discuss the behaviors, at least as a study. 2. I am not blaming chareidim. I am addressing these behaimos simply as men who misbehaved.
Rafi is right (yes, I am biased towards him), a disclaimer at minimum should be made that it may not be true and any discussions should be kept in mind that it's a behavioral study rather than emes.
Shaya,
What do you make of it, that even the Charedi women called her "a crazy woman" and "stupid american"????
Are they also B'heimos for saying that?
ed
as I explained in an earlier comment. many blacks were angry with Rosa Parks for what she was doing. Many jews in the warsaw ghetto were not happy with the rebellion. many jews in spain converted rather than fight. there are always victims who would rather "play it safe" and go wwith the flow, rather than challenge and correct an injustice. The fact that others made a mistake is no proof about her behavior. The halacha is that she is in the right for where she sat. Others are more meek and scared, I am sorry for them. Historical facts are that many on the bus were angry, sp who was right? Rosa or the rest of the bus? If the tzibur is behaving badly, does that make it right for others to acquiesce?
I'm with Rafi G. 100%, kol hakovod lo.
Even the newspaper article re Yisrael Valles - it turned out that the allegations of signs the baby was beaten were false, and there is no evidence the baby was ever abused prior to whatever happened the day he died. How many people who read the original posts on that heard that later?
If it is not true, you are prejudicing people against haredim based on a story that is not true but they do not know it.
I disagree. I did not say one bad word about Charedim. I said it about the people that beat this woman up, not other Charedim. My son is Charedi. I assure you I have never bashed him.
I delayed posting this story until one of my sources told me that the story was checked out and believed to be true. Combined with the victim's statement that the incident was videotaped, I decided to post it.
But even if it isn't true, it is illustrative of the attitude of at least one Charedi that blames a victim for the brutality that was inflicted upon her by others. He believes she 'egged them on' and that this somehow ameliorates the behavior. Were this story fiction the attitude would be the same. And if there is one individual expressing this view, there are likely others. The indictment is as much against him and others like him as it is on the by-standers who would let it happen.
Furthermore, the Charedi behavior referred to in this letter is not that different from the behavior of those Charedim who rioted in Jerusalem and caused much damage to innocent bystanders and public property. It is not such a stretch to believe that the same kind of individual was involved here. It is therefore not a Chidush... or Motzie Laz to tell story about certain members of this community, even as a hypothetical. But as I said, I do believe it happened.
Shaya,
When someone is a Novol B'rshus Hatorah, that person also says: Hey! According to Halacha I'm right!
I see all the time Harry and the other charedi bashers constantly berating the Charedim for not living according to the "fifth" Shulchan Aruch.
Here, you have a selfish woman who clearly was only concerened about her halachic "rights", and didn't give a hoot about the fifth S"A.
Maavir Al Midosov? Lifnim M'shuras Hadin? Tznius? Nivul Peh? Feh. She cared about her pompous rights, nothing else. She had no excuse not to sit in the back, except for the reason that "no self righteous charedi is going to tell me where to sit".
Yet, because the Charedim acted stupidly and she wasn't Charedi, everyone here is nazi-izing the Charedim and glorifying her for not using her seichel.
That is sheer hypocrisy and I will vehemently protest it.
ed
why does her behavior qualify as a naval biri'shus hatorah? Just because you disapprove of her behavior, I would be more cautious about qualifying her as such. The others were "over issurei di'raysa bi'farhesya". She was maybe over a di'rabbanon.
as well, I do not see the hypocrisy. You do not know her motivation, you are assuming it's feminust. I do not know the mens reasons, but there's nothing to assume, they got violent. Who cares the reasons. One is shev, one is koom. There's a difference.
i got it. You do not like attacking chareidim. I actually agree. I just don't like stupid behavior, if they happen to be chareidim, zehu. I have criticized MO as well. My only argument is the level with which you attack her behavior and character, and how you equate it to issurei di'oraysa.
ed
"What do you make of it, that even the Charedi women called her "a crazy woman" and "stupid american"????
Are they also B'heimos for saying that?"
yes
you also said:
"She had no excuse not to sit in the back, except for the reason that "no self righteous charedi is going to tell me where to sit"."
NO EXCUSE? I look at it from the other perspective.
The Charedim had NO excuse to make woman sit in the back.
They are thugs for doing so. On a public bus, charedim have no rights. they want to have chumros, let them put their money where their mouth is, dont make your chumors mine at the publics expense. no one asked them to live in israel. let them move to the palestian territorities.
"Furthermore, the Charedi behavior referred to in this letter is not that different from the behavior of those Charedim who rioted in Jerusalem and caused much damage to innocent bystanders and public property. It is not such a stretch to believe that the same kind of individual was involved here. It is therefore not a Chidush... or Motzie Laz to tell story about certain members of this community, even as a hypothetical."
That's the problem, that no one can tell how widespread these things are if there are urban myths floating around.
"But as I said, I do believe it happened."
According to your sources, why is it not in the papers, and where is the video?
A disclaimer for stories of this nature would not be the end of the world. Saying it's par for the course, and just like the other stories, is circular.
Shaya,
I didn't say she's a novol. I showed you a point that your claim of "I'm acting according to Halacha", isn't the beggining and end of Judaism. Just like you guys always harp the Charedim - "What happened to the fifth Shulchan Aruch?!?", but when its one of your own who didn't act seichel'dik, you glorify her and call the opponents Nazi's. Why? Where's the fairness? Where's the Yashrus? How can you just ignore the fact that this woman acted like a pompous brat? Kicking, spitting, punching, and cursing like a goyishe shaigetz?!? Because of a lousy seat?!?
because of a lousy seat they spit on her, and punched her, uncovered her ervah.
must of been some seat.
Happy is more than happy to call every last person on the bus a B'haima.
I will be Dan him L'kaf Zechus. He was terribly insulted by them refering to her as a "Stupid American". Being that he is a Nogeah B'dovor to that insult, Happy is willing to dismiss them all as B'heimos.
Exactly right, Happy. Their actions were unjustified just over a lousy seat. But that doesn't warrant them being Nazi's either.
Kicking, spitting, punching, and cursing like a goyishe shaigetz
There we have it. According to ed, charedi men are like goishe shkutzim.
There we have it. According to ed, charedi men are like goishe shkutzim.
I shudder to think what he would call charedi women.
Not sure if this story is true, but it reminds me of a story I heard about one of the Gerrer Rebbes (don't recall which). The story goes that he was walking in the street with a bachur and a woman walking in the other direction walked by them. As the woman approached the bochur made an big show out of turning his face so that he was walking while looking sideways at a wall and thus would not be looking at the woman. The Gerrer Rebbe's reaction as I recall it was that (excuse my yiddish) "es is besser tzi kikken of a frau in trachten veggen vant vi tzi kikken of di vant in trachten veggen di frau".
Of course ed defends them. Even if he decries them, he defends them.
The men who did this belong in jail. What about the issur of touching a woman, did they think about that as they punched her?
The charedi mentality must be completely deconditioned of this zealousness that is willing to kill over things so trivial.
Those men are examples of chillul hashem. Ed, try to extricate yourself from their lot.
By the way, were the police involved?
"But as I said, I do believe it happened."
So based off of what you believed to have happened, despite ANY evidence to support it (no video, no witnesses, no police, no newspaper reports), you placed this letter on your site for all to read.
In response, a whole slew of people have attacked a entire segment of the frum community. Whether or not this was your intention, you run a serious problem.
We all know that it is assur to praise Ploni in front of others who do not like that person, because that will lead to those people speaking loshon horah about Ploni. All the more reason not to post such a letter that has no evidence backing it up, knowing full well that commentors will attack chareidim as a group.
I don't see how in the world, al pi halacha, this post is mutar to put up, simply because you 'believe' it to be true.
"The Gerrer Rebbe's reaction as I recall it was that (excuse my yiddish) "es is besser tzi kikken of a frau in trachten veggen vant vi tzi kikken of di vant in trachten veggen di frau"."
If the Gerrer Rebbe was on blogs, they'd say he was "anticharedi"
"The men who did this belong in jail. What about the issur of touching a woman, did they think about that as they punched her?"
torud bemelachtan!
In response, a whole slew of people have attacked a entire segment of the frum community.
The only one doing that is ed. The rest of us understand that these were actions of specific individuals. ed in his zeal to find excuses, would have us berieve that charedim shold be expected to behave this way.
There goes Joe Cruel twisting and distorting my words again.
"The only one doing that is ed. "
I took two seconds and found this:
"Her mistake was that she wasn't armed. She should have known chareidim are violent people.
mike | 12.09.06 - 11:46 pm |"
... and we all know there is more anti-chareidi comments on here, and other posts as well.
It still seems pretty clear cut that it was assur to post this.
"The only one doing that is ed. "
I took two seconds and found this:
"Her mistake was that she wasn't armed. She should have known chareidim are violent people.
mike | 12.09.06 - 11:46 pm |"
... and we all know there is more anti-chareidi comments on here, and other posts as well.
It still seems pretty clear cut that it was assur to post this.
There goes Joe Cruel twisting and distorting my words again.
No need to do that. Your views are already pretty twisted.
>According to ed, Charedim are like Goishe Shkotzim.
Not Charedim.
THOSE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS, AND THE WOMAN CRAZY ENOUGH TO ACT LIKE THEM.
I took two seconds and found this:
"Her mistake was that she wasn't armed. She should have known chareidim are violent people.
mike | 12.09.06 - 11:46 pm |"
Ok, you got me. It's ed and Mike. Although Mike may be simply relying on ed's statements. No excuse, I know, but still...
"No excuse, I know, but still..."
But still, halacha is halacha.
THOSE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS,
ed also said:
She acted stupidly, and practicly begged for the coming response.
Meaning: No matter which specific charedim were on the bus, she should have expected this response.
Blaming the victim is a despicable tactic.
But still, halacha is halacha.
What does halacha say about blaming the victim of a violent crime for that crime?
Yes, by spitting back and shouting vulgarities, she was begging a response. Whad she think, that by spitting him back he'll go away?!?!?
>Your views are already twisted.
So are yours.
Yassam's are Saints, Charedim are Nazis.
Cool.
ed
"Yes, by spitting back and shouting vulgarities, she was begging a response. Whad she think, that by spitting him back he'll go away?!?!?"
she could of thought, if i dont fight back they will uncover my ervah.
and they did.
maybe next, they would treat her like a sotah and rip her blouse off.
you never know what those crazy charedim will do to teach someone a lesson.
ed
by the way, you really have a low respect for charedim.
you automatically assume that if she spat back they would punch her.
why should you assumer that they would give up and leaver her alone. she is soooo crazy. normal people leave crazy people alone.
except charedim. we have to assume they wont be normal.
thanks for the chizuk.
she was begging a response.
Which means that according to ed, charedim should be expected to commit violent crimes. Nice. You really are a charedi-hater.
should above should read
shouldnt
>Your views are already twisted.
So are yours.
At the very least, I don't view all charedim as potential criminals.
At the very least, I don't view all charedim as potential criminals.
ed on the other hand...Well, we all know where he stands. Charedi-hater.
Distortionist,
A crazy who spits at women will most likely start punching if his victim spits back.
Only a blithering idiot like JoeCool won't get that, and will twist my words around to imply that all charedim are prone to violence.
ED
but its not only the initial spitter.
you have the 4 men who beat her, and were megaleh her ervah.
you expected they would attack her.
so the question is why?
Happy,
You are utterly being choshed B'ksherim.
Read her words on dovbear. Her snood fell off in the scuffle. They were NOT megaleh ervah.
Which only strengthens my argument. She acted in a non tzenuah way, and mida kneged mida, she was disgraced in a non tzenuah way.
Ed
Standing up to a bully while others cower meekly is not arrogance or acting pompously.
If she was the one who was wrong and lost the "battle" than why did the guy have to run and escape through the kotel like the criminal that he is?
ed
no ed, charedim should of known hitting a woman in the head will lead to megaleh erva.
so you havent explained why you are being choshed bksherim.
you believe the woman should of known that they would attack her.
are you saying charedim are expected to act like thugs?
are you saying charedim are expected to act like thugs?
Of course he is. He's been saying it for 2 days straight. He is a charedi hater.
No doubt, other options existed for Miriam Shear other than spitting back at the perp. If she carried a cell phone, she could have called the police. That would have caused the perp. to leave the bus. She could have waited for the bus to reach the kotel before asking for police intervention. Of course, her continued sitting pat would have induced other sociopathic behavior from the perp. She could have carried some Mace in her bag and given the perp a faceful after he spat on her. However, she was mad and was not afraid of a physical confrontation. How would the gainsayers here feel if they were spat on while minding their own business? There is no excuse to equate the actions of the agressors with that of the woman. She was entitled to sit where she was and to defend herself if she so chose.
Y. Aharon
ed
"I didn't say she's a novol. I showed you a point that your claim of "I'm acting according to Halacha", isn't the beggining and end of Judaism. Just like you guys always harp the Charedim - "What happened to the fifth Shulchan Aruch?!?", but when its one of your own who didn't act seichel'dik, you glorify her and call the opponents Nazi's. Why? Where's the fairness? Where's the Yashrus? How can you just ignore the fact that this woman acted like a pompous brat? Kicking, spitting, punching, and cursing like a goyishe shaigetz?!? Because of a lousy seat?!?"
I want it on record that I did not attack chareidim. I addressed the issue attacking frum men who should have behaved better. I specifically disavowed myself from the rest of the commentators who are addressing "chareidi".
I do agree that she started, but I happen to believe she was correct in what she did. She protested non-violently until the first spit was thrown. should she not have hit back? maybe. i think she's allowed self-defense at that point. She wasn't kicking/punching/screaming like a goyish brat because of a lousy seat. Because of a lousy seat she just sat down. the rest was because she was getting punched/kicked/spat on by lousy shegatzim over a lousy seat.
Fairness. she's right, they're wrong. what's unfair? If she is wrong, then discuss the issue calmly and move on. Why the spitting and yelling? how does sitting in the "wrong" seat justify spitting at her? I have no problem with this story, if everything would have remained a discussion. but when the spitting and yelling starts, that's it. There's nothing more that she can be blamed for!
Ed-I commented previously that while the victim may have erred in her choice of a seat, the same did not justify the vicious attack on her by a gang of hooligans in Charedi attire.R Jonathan Rosenblum reported that his initial skepticism about the truth of the story were overcome when the victim called and spoke to him for a while about what had happened. The victim is in fact a student with one of Yerushalayim's great teachers for women and attends the HaNeitz miyan at the kotel. She hardly strikes me as a feminist in any manner.
I would suggest that you read R Jonathan's column at Cross-Currents before you indulge us in any further "blame the victim" or "she was asking for it because she fought back" type of logic. Just curious-do you dismiss all and any claims of spousal abuse in the Charedi community with such specious and chauvinistic defenses?
One more comment-Perhaps, the woman erred in sitting where she sat on that bus. However, that error was no excuse for a violent reaction by some thugs dressed as Charedim. It is indeed a sad day and a sigh of the influence of the worst elements of the Gentile world that rationalizations are offered here that might have been offered at such exemplary cases of human cruelty as the OJ Simpson and Central Park jogger cases in defense of thugs dressed as Charedim who assaulted a Bas Torah. Once again, their conduct was a Chillul HaShem that resonated far beyond the immediacy of their actions into the secular media and elewhere because it placed all Charedim and Jews who care about Tznius in a horrible light. The fact that the secular media reported was IMO simply the icing on the cake.
Thanks to the internet and blogging charedim can't get away with stuff like spitting on women,burning down stores, protecting child molesters,throwing bleach on women etc., etc.
Boys, the free ride is over !!
>Boys, the free ride is over !!
Its actually just beggining....
Steve
...and if she was a "feminist in any manner" would the exact same scenario have been any more justifiable??
Please!
Come on-You missed my point. There was no excuse whatsoever for that act against anyone-regardless of their background.
Having read the victim's e-mail account and having seen the reactions thereto from the chareidi community I (a male) plan on sitting in the back of the number 2 kotel bus whenever the opportunity to ride presents itself. This incident combined with other events in our kehillos has convinced me that the "chumro bus" phenomenon is in fact dangerous to am Yisrael.
>"I happen to believe the story. But even if the story is fition it was still worth posing it as a hypothetial to see reactions to it.
Harry Maryles | 12.11.06 - 5:51 am"
I agree, and the responses to this incident from within our own 'velt' are a substantial part of what led to my decision above.
"I find it hard to believe that an Israeli bus driver would not stop the bus. In my experience riding Israeli buses, that's practically unthinkable.
Bari | Homepage | 12.10.06"
Bari-- I disagree. I have heard of bus lines in Israel where the driver is terrified of his own passengers. And these are not lines that travel through violent Arab areas...
This is what chareidism is today - a group of fundamentalists. The correct comparison is not with the nazis but with islamic fundamentalists.
chareidism has swung just as far from judaism to the right as reform has to the left.
Let's admit it - chareidism is not judaism.
Commenting by HaloScan
