First of all, the ship has already sailed. Plenty of Jewish women wear pants including plenty pf Orthodox, especially those not in the NY Ghetto. So if you're declaring skirts to be a distinctive Orthodox dress, you're effectively declaring that multitudes of women who keep shabbat, kashrut, and mikvah are not really to be considered Orthodox, since they don't wear the uniform.
As you pointed out, there's nothing immodest about pants. And the obsession of "does she wear pants or not" tends to be a juvenile obsession of those self-described Modern Orthodox who take more of their cues from the Yeshivish community than from anything truly modern and which is mostly unique to the greater NYC area.
Also, your comparing it to the outfits that other ethnic groups wear is faulty at best and gross stereotyping of those ethnic groups at worst. Most Asian women, for instance, dress in an entirely modern western manner.
And what about comfort? My sisters rode bikes for a little while as kids then eventually gave it up. I, on the other hand, continued riding on a regular basis till this day, despite the fact that I was stuck, as a teenager, in my all-boys yeshiva HS for far more hours than they spent in their schools. I suspect, therefore, that their reluctance to ride had something to do with being required to wear skirts. If you want to discourage a girl from playing sports or riding a bike, the best way to do it is insist that she wear only skirts.
Skirts, especially the tight outfits work by many frum girls today, are not exactly modest. Pants tend to be more modest, on average. And with pants, you don't have repressed yeshiva boys hoping to catch a glimpse under the girls skirts if they sit the wrong way.
I suspect that some part of you subconsciously is looking at what you may have been taught by the centrist/yeshivish community and trying to rationalize it in modern terms.
Sorry, it's not working.
I think you have an interesting approach here and forgetting for a moment if I agree or disagree specifically with it, you are so right that Jews as a nation don't really have a unifying "look." We were never in the same place together long enough to develop that. We're always moving around and being strangers in strange lands, etc. The closest thing we have is Israeli style, but that is SO not representative of Jews as a whole.
On the other hand, I think you'll probably get a bunch of disdainful comments from people who are fiercely, inherently opposed to making us all look the same, because today in America it's all about being different. I'm not sure an argument for some sort of Jewish uniform would fly today.
Also, I totally understand what you mean when you point to the cultural dress of other nations. I don't think you're trying to insinuate that they don't dress modernly as well, but there is definitely a cultural dress which we Jews don't really have. Guys have it much more than girls - tzitzis, kippa, talis, etc. For girls, there's the bais yaakov look but, again, that's not representative of all Jewish girls. (And, I know, there are people who could say - not all Jewish guys where a kippa! That's not representative either! But, um, all guys are supposed to wear something on their heads. So that's very different than a beis yaakov uniform or something).
I think the closest thing we have to cultural dress is something fairly Israeli looking that is blue and white and has a magen david on it. At least, whenever there are Jewish/Israeli dolls or something, that's how they're dressed.
>So if you're declaring skirts to be a distinctive Orthodox dress, you're effectively declaring that multitudes of women who keep shabbat, kashrut, and mikvah are not really to be considered Orthodox, since they don't wear the uniform.
Nothing of the sort. I'm merely suggesting that those that are already doing it, to view it in a different light.
>Also, your comparing it to the outfits that other ethnic groups wear is faulty at best and gross stereotyping of those ethnic groups at worst. Most Asian women, for instance, dress in an entirely modern western manner.
No, you misunderstood me. I know that a Japanese woman does not wear a kimono to her day job, but a kimono nonetheless exists. It's an identifying feature for that culture.
>If you want to discourage a girl from playing sports or riding a bike, the best way to do it is insist that she wear only skirts.
I'm not insisting on anything really. I'm only bringing up a redeeming quality to the skirt. Even with that, I see no problem with at specific times to wearing pants when the need is there.
>Skirts, especially the tight outfits work by many frum girls today, are not exactly modest.
A skirt, just like pants CAN be immodest. I'm not talking about butt hugging skirts here. That should be obvious.
>And with pants, you don't have repressed yeshiva boys hoping to catch a glimpse under the girls skirts if they sit the wrong way.
I'm sure there are.
>I suspect that some part of you subconsciously is looking at what you may have been taught by the centrist/yeshivish community and trying to rationalize it in modern terms.
I never had the "privelage" of being raise, or taught or anything by the yeshivish community. I am a late BT. It's not a matter of rationalizing it. The way I see, wearing skirts HAS ALREADY become a sort of identifying marker for us. So I am simply using that to give it new meaning. Perhaps you can, in some way, compare it to a kippa. Wearing a kippa is not halacha, but over time it has become so much a part of our culture that literally, its an identifying cultural marker for us.
Many frum women have fantastic legs which you can't see with pants.
>I'm not sure an argument for some sort of Jewish uniform would fly today.
The uniform comment was more tongue-in-cheek, just to get my point across. I don't mean for all Jewish women to wear the same skirt. Any skirt is fine.
>I think the closest thing we have to cultural dress is something fairly Israeli looking that is blue and white and has a magen david on it.
Ya, but thats only Israel. So I'm just expanding on that to include the skirts Jewish women already wear
>Many frum women have fantastic legs which you can't see with pants.
Yes. Maybe I should have put that as the primary reason then.
The uniform comment was more tongue-in-cheek, just to get my point across. I don't mean for all Jewish women to wear the same skirt. Any skirt is fine.
I know. But I know there will be people who'll insist that saying Jewish women should wear skirts instead of pants is suppressing their individuality. I don't agree with that, but considering the culture we live in today, that's just the reality.
>I think the closest thing we have to cultural dress is something fairly Israeli looking that is blue and white and has a magen david on it.
Ya, but thats only Israel. So I'm just expanding on that to include the skirts Jewish women already wear
I know - that was my point. That, like you said, we don't have any sort of cultural dress to represent Judaism as a whole. The question is, though - do we need one? It all comes back to "what is Judaism?" Is it just a religion? Is it also a nationality? Is it also a culture? I tend to think it's a mix of all three, especially since, well, clearly it's a religion, and in the Torah we are clearly treated as a nation. But I think there are people who see it as a lot grayer than that. If people see it as just a religion, then they may not see a need for any sort of identifying cultural dress. That sort of thing is speaking more to the national aspect of it. I think.
HH,
Sorry if I misunderstood what you were writing and your motivation. But I still think that promoting skirts in any way is silly. I think that promoting pants wearing for those who feel like it but are afraid to buck frum society is a good thing. Let women be more comfortable and get more physical activity.
The whole reasoning for skirts in halacha is basically that it is inappropriate for men to see the split of a woman's legs so they won't be tempted by what that split hints at. That's relegating women to sex objects and the sooner the frum community leaves that behind, the healthier they would be.
But that's not going to happen anytime soon.
Please note that I have no objection to a woman wearing only skirts if sh feels more comfortable that way for any reason. I just don't like the restriction on those who would prefer pants.
>Let women be more comfortable and get more physical activity.
No objections here.
>The whole reasoning for skirts in halacha is basically that it is inappropriate for men to see the split of a woman's legs so they won't be tempted by what that split hints at.
Right. I said the reason behind the halacha IS modesty, but I don't see a problem in giving a different value to it. A value, that more or less on its own has developed.
>That's relegating women to sex objects and the sooner the frum community leaves that behind, the healthier they would be.
Women ARE sex objects. You can't run away from that. Societies everywhere make them into even MORE sex objects. Judaism whether you agree or not seems to want to downplay it. Maybe in reaction, also go overboard and that leads to many OJ sectors to over sexualize things that need not be.
>I know. But I know there will be people who'll insist that saying Jewish women should wear skirts instead of pants is suppressing their individuality.
Certainly, but then again, I don't see a need to be apologetic about this. Judaism never promised an all out venue for free expression of someone's individuality. No society allows for it. What if a woman sees pants as suppressing her individuality, what then?
HH,
>Women ARE sex objects.
You can't know what that means otherwise you would slap yourself for saying such a thing. Does your wife know this about you?
I agree with you, HH. I really dislike the whole "I need to do my own thing and be an individual!" attitude when it goes so far that people actually do things not because they want to, but just because it sets them apart. And certainly "maintaining individuality" is a bad reason not to follow halacha. I guess I was just trying to recognize the issue of trying to promote another reason for wearing skirts that is outside halacha. A lot of people probably wouldn't buy into it. But then again, I guess that's their problem.
>You can't know what that means otherwise you would slap yourself for saying such a thing. Does your wife know this about you?
You disagree? I think you misunderstood. I'm not saying to TREAT them as sex objects, but that women are naturally more of the sexual and desired "object" between the species.
>I'm not saying to TREAT them as sex objects, but that women are naturally more of the sexual and desired "object" between the species.
What the hell does that mean?
Sure men like to have sex with women, and men are sexually aroused by women. However, this by no means makes them sex objects. Calling women sex objects means they are mere things to have sex with, and that's it. Nothing more, nothing less. It's very sexist to say that women are sex objects.
Oh give me a break FTU. It's obviously MORE than just wanting to have sex with woman. Afterall, woman want to have sex with men as well. So its not just about having sex. But there is a reason that advertising of ANY product uses the female figure overwhelmingly more than a man is used.
I don't mean that they are objects to HAVE sex with only. I mean, they are are an object (like a man is an object) that in societies carries more of the sexuality. They are flaunted more and are more of an object of desire and lust, and hence modesty rules usually apply to them more.
HH
I think your idea for there to be a acultural "uniform" is a nice idea. There is the Midrash that the Jews didn't change their dress in Egypt. However in 2008 I think that our culture has evolved beyond textiles to more cerebral areas. I don't know about you but I see minimal value in segment from our society dressing in 18th century Polish nobility or the regimented Shabbos clothes during the week other MOTT wear. We have evolved beyond the black hat, I don't see why you are looking backwords. Yes it is nice to spot another tribe member, however, to indoctrinate young women that they are not as close to God if they wear modern clothes is equally ridulous to wearing anachronistic garb.
Dan
I'm not after wearing old clothing or even shabbat clothing. A girl can wear a skirt from Venice Beach or a skirt she got from the mall it doesn't matter. And I disagree regarding the fact that we have evolved beyond the black hat. I believe it will be a sad day for Judaism when all outside expressions of who we are, are gone. We are a people of visible symbols and meanings. I am merely suggesting extending it to a familiar feature, the skirt. That we can say "yes, we wore it for modesty, but now we wear it because its shows off our identity as a single nation." I am not naive to think everyone would buy this, but it might give another value to it for someone that is not so sure if she wants to only wear skirts.
>Yes it is nice to spot another tribe member, however, to indoctrinate young women that they are not as close to God if they wear modern clothes is equally ridulous
I never said anything of the kind. Nor does this have anything to do really with God. Its about us.
"Defence"? So you're British?
Anyway, how many times have you seen a woman wearing pants but with her hair covered? Pretty rare (though I have seen Moslem woman that do this.)
It's interesting how (MO) women are much more meikel about going without a head-covering than with wearing pants! The latter is clearly a cultural issue, while the former is often claimed to be on a d'oraisah level.
>"Defence"? So you're British?
Argh
I mean, that was on purpose. To see if you were paying attention.
I always thought those who oppose pants for women were claiming it is mens clothing with the response to that being that now there are womens pants too. I never heard of it as a modesty issue.
"It's interesting how (MO) women are much more meikel about going without a head-covering than with wearing pants! The latter is clearly a cultural issue, while the former is often claimed to be on a d'oraisah level.
frumheretic | Homepage | 08.22.08 - 6:01 pm | # "
Interesting, my Grandmother (From Lvov and Vilna) tells me that her mother and grandmother wore tiny little wigs in the center of their hair, sort of like a kippah, that nobody could see. It was a head covering, like a tiny yalmukah, for the sake of having a head covering. It was nothing along the lines of "don't let once hair be seen" Sometimes for cultural reasons they would wear a scarf.
Pants, I always also thought it was a begged Ish issue, as well as an issue of seeing the crotch lines.
The Naughty Boy
There was a naughty boy,
And a naughty boy was he,
He ran away to Scotland
The people for to see
Then he found
That the ground
Was as hard,
That a yard
Was as long,
That a song
Was as merry,
That a cherry
Was as red,
That lead
Was as weighty,
That fourscore
Was as eighty,
That a door
Was as wooden
As in England
So he stood in his shoes
And he wonder'd;
He stood in his shoes
And he wonder'd.
-----by aoc gold
Nice point. I personally do adhere to the "skirt only laws" and I don't generally have a problem with it. But I 100% agree with the "kinship" you feel for people dressed in a similar fashion. It's nice to see things in a positive light, instead of bashing ideas to the ground. Good job.
I personally would think that a head-covering is more of an indicator, as lots of non-Jewish women do wear skirts.
Personally, I had always hoped to go the opposite and wear pants and a partial head covering (a bandanna or one of those super-wide headbands)
Then I went and married a BT who was indoctrinated Yeshivish, and I'm stuck in skirts and full hair covering and covered elbows, and it's DARNED HOT here in the summer!
You have a blog!
(..decidin where to put my 'stupidest statement' award...)
Commenting by HaloScan
