tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post8794479292758778697..comments2024-03-18T03:40:39.185-04:00Comments on The Curious Jew: Is Nothing Sacred Anymore?Chanahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-71085471866482214572013-09-30T17:17:50.506-04:002013-09-30T17:17:50.506-04:00How sacred can this world be without leaders? Our...How sacred can this world be without leaders? Our society does not harvest leadership, instead promotes followers. Follow my brand, follow my church. Society has given power to the people, and now the select few know this.. and want this from us.<br /><br />It's a damage control society- and this is certainly damage but much less than humanity is capable of.<br /><br />It's a top-down situation. We look to a select few who don't deserve leadership (politicians, business leaders, anything on TV) and they influence us both directly and indirectly.<br /><br />Solutions come through systemic changes. If we rely on the masses of people to have a degree of civility and consideration, we will find none of it.<br />Sign Newshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16021664776448348821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-63118487195100314862011-04-17T05:37:40.790-04:002011-04-17T05:37:40.790-04:00First, why don't you change your page to "...First, why don't you change your page to "The OBNOXIOUS Jew" since it's people like you that push others away from the Jewish faith with your blithering idiotic ramblings. You're the perfect example of the TV and movie, whinning Jew. Get off the rag and get down off the cross, someone else needs the wood. Go out and find a man that can satisfy you because if you're married apparently your husbands penis isn't big enough for that gapping hole of a mouth you have and certainly isn't doing the job between your legs. If you can't find a man, which I think is the problem because who would want to listen to you complain about a show that centers around high school life and showtunes, since you're not bright enough to discuss the news, politics, world hunger or finance, then there is a gadget called "the Rabbit" that perhaps a good Gentile girl can explain to you. Please just go crawl in a hole or get some counseling and stop your ignorant bitching about GLEE and gays and transgenders and the fact that you either don't have kids or if you do they must really hate you since you are like nails scratched across a chaulk board. Please do us all a favor and delete any pages you have online.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-90982349101832865092011-03-08T00:36:37.597-05:002011-03-08T00:36:37.597-05:00You think Glee is sick for teens but not for yours...You think Glee is sick for teens but not for yourself? Why the double standard Chana? Furthermore, you claim it is "our" responsibility to act and respond. What are you doing?! You were perfectly ok ragging on Mouchka for her inaction whining? I'd take your whole article on her and apply it to this. YOU are whining here. YOU are not taking action. Perhaps it is YOU that needs to grow up. <br /><br />"He made a public status; I wrote a public response- I'm not sure where you see the problem".<br /><br />How is a FB status "public"? It is a thought shared with friends. Whether that's 2 friends sitting in my living room or 500 friends on my computer screen. If he knew you were going to write this, perhaps you'd be on a limited profile view list. Your justification is disturbing. Emily is right on ALL accounts. <br /><br />Chana, you thoughts are FULL of double standards, contradictions, logical errors, and morally questionable "outings."<br /><br />I was willing to give your "musings" one more shot, but you have officially lost me as a reader.<br /><br />-One Fan Lost (Forever)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-87206631765628110252011-03-03T11:10:53.380-05:002011-03-03T11:10:53.380-05:00>THE LINES IN REAL LIFE ARE BLURRED!
That is o...>THE LINES IN REAL LIFE ARE BLURRED!<br /><br />That is obviously not the type of blur I am talking about. I know very well that women want to work and do work and have worked. You can go back to medievel Jewish life and the women were working while the men learned. <br /><br />This is not an orthodoxy issue at all. I am simply talking about societies trend of blurring the lines between differences existing between the male and the female (more than just reproductive differences). Not only blurring....but an active push to get rid of any differneces. (The sexual arena is the perfect example of this) Why else would someone get offended by "Ladies and Gentlemen?" Again, Chana's parody is a perfect example of getting rid of any distinctions in the goal of equality (i.e. sameness)<br /><br />PS- Re: Hedonism: Even hedonistic people had family and kids.Holy Hyraxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17704030181702087485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-23557984830263195112011-03-03T03:45:30.476-05:002011-03-03T03:45:30.476-05:00Perhaps Emily sees a problem with the fact that in...Perhaps Emily sees a problem with the fact that in responding to your friend's status, you didn't:<br /><br /> a)respond in a similar venue, (facebook) but on an entirely separate site, and<br /><br /> b)didn't even notify your friend about the fact that you posted an entire response to his status on your blog. <br /><br />While certainly NOT cyberbullying, I can see why someone would think this was rude. If someone had a response to something I wrote on the internet, and chose to post it on the internet, the polite thing to do would be to notify me of its existence (preferably before it was posted), and give me the opportunity to respond if I so chose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-44657522146397842302011-03-02T16:38:08.728-05:002011-03-02T16:38:08.728-05:00There are over 250,000,000 American citizens. Even...<i>There are over 250,000,000 American citizens. Even if there are "tens of thousands" making amateur porn, it's still a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction. Again, you're pointing to the extremes and pretending that it's representative of society.</i><br /><br />Out of that population, a large number are AARP age. If you take the number of youths (say between 18-25), it would be a small fraction of that. But my point was not that they are statistically representative, but to look at the trend. Look up Porn 2.0 (or maybe even Porn 3.0) I guess we can see where we are at in a decade or so.<br /><br /><br /><i>Can't say I know enough about the state of premarital sex in Ancient Rome and how it related to hawks vs. doves.</i><br /><br />I wasn't talking about premarital sex specifically. You have heard though that Romans were known for their orgies. <br /><br />Anyhow, I am going on vacation for a week so I gotta cut this short. Thanks for the conversation.Epicurusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-23581694394820356802011-03-02T15:37:32.545-05:002011-03-02T15:37:32.545-05:00Now it's just regular kids, "amateurs&quo...<i>Now it's just regular kids, "amateurs" - and there are tens of thousands of videos and pictures out there. </i><br /><br />There are over 250,000,000 American citizens. Even if there are "tens of thousands" making amateur porn, it's still a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction. Again, you're pointing to the extremes and pretending that it's representative of society. <br /><br />And anyway, I don't see how putting a picture or video of yourself engaged in sexual activity is incompatible with a life that is not 100% hedonistic. Do those people not have families friends or neighbors or causes they sacrifice for? Does this one act define their entire life?<br /><br /><i>So in your world, the peaceniks are just screwing their brains out while the sexually repressed prudes are blowing the Taliban back to the stone age?</i><br /><br />Well it's not quite that simple, obviously. I'm talking more about the supporters of war than the soldiers. Also, the Taliban are an excellent example of a society that is sexually repressed. How many suicide bombers believe in premarital sex? (I'm not talking about hypocrites -- that comes with its own set of issues. I'm talking about people who are okay with the idea.)<br /><br /><i>How do you explain the Roman empire? They seem to have had their cake and ate it too.</i><br /><br />Can't say I know enough about the state of premarital sex in Ancient Rome and how it related to hawks vs. doves.Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-40130201638669872342011-03-02T14:41:39.017-05:002011-03-02T14:41:39.017-05:00First, I think you're exaggerating. People sti...<i>First, I think you're exaggerating. People still have families and jobs they hate and make sacrifices for one another.<br /><br />You're basically making a slippery slope argument</i><br /><br />Well, yes, I am. But a slippery slope argument is not always wrong.<br /><br /><i>that sexual liberation leads inexorably to "no limits," etc. It's the kind of argument people make against alcohol -- some people are alcoholics, therefore there is no place in this world for alcohol. The fact that some people go to excess or that you can point to some demographic (e.g. college kids) who are abusing it doesn't mean the thing itself is bad. It's just not a fair representation.</i><br /><br />I think you have it backwards. The point I was trying to make is that the lack of any kind of sexual inhibitions is just one of the aspects of a society that is spiraling into hedonism. Take a look at the amount of porn on the web. I am in no way a prude, but what's bizarre is that it used to be that the majority of porn was made by "actresses" or models or whatever. Now it's just regular kids, "amateurs" - and there are tens of thousands of videos and pictures out there. People committing the kind of lewd acts that would make a hooker blush. And no, I am not exaggerating.<br /><br /><i>And you don't see an overlap between those who support the wars and those who oppose premarital sex? I think the overlap is enormous and I don't think it's a coincidence.</i><br /><br />So in your world, the peaceniks are just screwing their brains out while the sexually repressed prudes are blowing the Taliban back to the stone age? How do you explain the Roman empire? They seem to have had their cake and ate it too.<br /><br /><i>What is your explanation for the correlation/overlap between the religious right and the hawkish right? Pure coincidence?</i><br /><br />No, it is not a coincidence. However, you are comparing extremes. If you took a look at the more moderate cross sections of both camps, I don't think it will correlate as neatly.<br /><br />(Changed by nick to English letters)Epicurusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-27545069931960770392011-03-02T14:04:43.022-05:002011-03-02T14:04:43.022-05:00Re: the hedonism.
First, I think you're exa...Re: the hedonism. <br /><br />First, I think you're exaggerating. People still have families and jobs they hate and make sacrifices for one another. <br /><br />You're basically making a slippery slope argument, that sexual liberation leads inexorably to "no limits," etc. It's the kind of argument people make against alcohol -- some people are alcoholics, therefore there is no place in this world for alcohol. The fact that some people go to excess or that you can point to some demographic (e.g. college kids) who are abusing it doesn't mean the thing itself is bad. It's just not a fair representation.<br /><br /><br /><i>I'm curious what you're talking about. If you mean the US, we're in the middle of two wars right now.</i><br /><br />And you don't see an overlap between those who support the wars and those who oppose premarital sex? I think the overlap is enormous and I don't think it's a coincidence.<br /><br /><i>For now I won't bring up the statistical maxim of "Correlation does not imply causality".</i><br /><br />I wasn't offering it as proof, just as something to think about. <br /><br />What is your explanation for the correlation/overlap between the religious right and the hawkish right? Pure coincidence? Tell me a person's stance on premarital sex, and I can guess at that person's stance on the Iraq war with far greater than 50% accuracy. Why is that?Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-54047360599975083712011-03-02T13:02:02.091-05:002011-03-02T13:02:02.091-05:002) I don't agree that there has been a complet...<i>2) I don't agree that there has been a complete abandonment of limits. Neither sex with minors (by adults) nor non-consensual sex is permitted or culturally accepted.</i><br /><br />I have been privy to fourth graders having conversations about oral sex. This is in a well off suburban elementary school, not some inner city ghetto. Likewise, "blow job buses" conversations among 13 year olds in a Jewish Conservative school... It may not be "culturally accepted", but it is much more prevalent than it used to be before the "sexual revolution"<br /><br /><i>As for being "obsessed" with sex, it's one of humanity's most basic drives, and it sells. People choose to focus on the sex part as the problem, but the real problem is the commoditization of everything, including sex.</i><br /><br />I thought that this was one of the main points of the original blog post.<br /><br /><br /><i>But our society also values other things, like love and family (of various kinds) and generosity and hard work and talent.</i><br />I guess I disagree. Speak to some immigrants from those societies to get a true sense of the gap between their understanding of these concepts and mainstream American understanding... In my experience the gap is enormous.<br /><br /><br /><i>*huge eyeroll* Societies collapse because they overextend financially and militarily, not because they are sexually liberated.</i><br /><br />I never said that it is the sexual "liberation" which causes the collapse. I said that is the is hedonism which makes the individual more important than the society. This is a basic concept in sports, in the military, and in life.<br /><br /><br /><i>There are tons of songs about all of those things. But, yes, sex sells. Again, you're blaming the sex instead of the selling, though.</i><br /><br />I am not blaming anything, just pointing out that there is a fine line between un-repression and wanton hedonism. Sex, like anything, without some type of limits, is not a good thing. Not from a religious point of view, but from a philosophical and social point of view. The Turkish sultans were encouraged by their viziers to spend their days shtupping their concubines in their harems while high on opium. The ultimate "ideal". <br /><br /><br /><i>I don't think the historical correlation between sexual liberation and dovishness is a coincidence.</i><br /><br />I'm curious what you're talking about. If you mean the US, we're in the middle of two wars right now. For now I won't bring up the statistical maxim of "Correlation does not imply causality".Ἐπίκουροςnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-43582489782075033092011-03-02T12:54:17.702-05:002011-03-02T12:54:17.702-05:00Interesting is the percentage of posts on orthodox...Interesting is the percentage of posts on orthodox blogs (including this one) related to m/f issues.<br /><br />ALso iirc there were a number of posts on this blog that some commenters felt were on the wrong side of the line that iiuc the baalat hablog is trying to draw in this post.<br /><br />The world is a messy place sometimes.<br /><br />KT<br />Joel RichAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-76317951347736641932011-03-02T12:31:58.059-05:002011-03-02T12:31:58.059-05:00HH:
I think I addressed most of your points in my...HH:<br /><br />I think I addressed most of your points in my response to Epicurus. Let me address this, though:<br /><br /><i>Why on earth would people actively want to blur those lines?</i><br /><br />THE LINES IN REAL LIFE ARE BLURRED! That's the thing that religious people and conservatives do not get. They have these one-size-fits-all rules that are kinda okay for most people, but for the outliers it's basically "tough luck." Homosexuality is the perfect example of this -- in reality some percentage of the populate is gay. In Orthodoxy and conservatism, you say "Most people are straight, therefore straight is the only way to be, so tough." <br /><br />It's the same thing with feminism. Probably more women than men on average want to stay home with kids. That's fine and that's their right. But conservatives and religious people take it to the next step and say ALL women have to be that way. NO women can be rabbis, even if they are exceptionally qualified.Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-79959976554419497252011-03-02T12:21:19.613-05:002011-03-02T12:21:19.613-05:00Ἐπίκουρος,
1) I, personally, based on experience,...Ἐπίκουρος,<br /><br />1) I, personally, based on experience, find American conservatism to be a bad thing.<br /><br />2) I don't agree that there has been a complete abandonment of limits. Neither sex with minors (by adults) nor non-consensual sex is permitted or culturally accepted. (The Torah, of course, is okay with both, in various circumstances, although the Oral Law has "interpreted" most of it away as it followed Western civilization by a couple of hundred years as it evolved.)<br /><br />As for being "obsessed" with sex, it's one of humanity's most basic drives, and it sells. People choose to focus on the sex part as the problem, but the real problem is the commoditization of everything, including sex.<br /><br /><i>In the process, we are turning our society into one where the only value is "does it make me feel good".</i><br /><br />Not remotely true. It's true that "does it make me feel good" is more valued than in other cultures like Orthodox Judaism or various Asian cultures, but I see that as a good thing. The individual's wants are treated as valid and important and it's not all about sacrificing one's own wishes for God/the gods/the society. But our society also values other things, like love and family (of various kinds) and generosity and hard work and talent.<br /><br /><i>Yet, historically, when societies reach this point, they inevitably collapse.</i><br /><br />*huge eyeroll* Societies collapse because they overextend financially and militarily, not because they are sexually liberated.<br /><br /><i>Sure, people sang about love since time immemorial, but where are the songs about friendship, about love for your country, about nature, about social issues. They are basically non-existent. Just "sex, drugs, and rock and roll".</i><br /><br />There are tons of songs about all of those things. But, yes, sex sells. Again, you're blaming the sex instead of the selling, though.<br /><br /><i>But your utopian statements about if only people stopped being sexually repressed and then we will have equality, peace, motherhood and apple pie, seem like a real stretch.</i><br /><br />I admitted it might be a stretch, but I think there is more than a grain of truth in it. I don't think the historical correlation between sexual liberation and dovishness is a coincidence.Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-69666863787264478392011-03-02T11:25:01.374-05:002011-03-02T11:25:01.374-05:00JA
I believe Ἐπίκουρος made some good points. Thi...JA<br /><br />I believe Ἐπίκουρος made some good points. This is not about repression but about a private vs public domain. You say some things are excesses. I beg to differ. They are not excesses but the normal outcome of continuous exposure to sex at every turn of the head. There is no reason to say that shows like "skins" for example is an excess. It's just the next step. So yes, Sex is a natural drive. So what? Is there no virtue to it? Should it be branded, and sold to a younger and younger audience? So yes, your side teaches condom use. I remember, I went to public school. But the need to teach about condoms and safe sex (etc) comes as a need to a society that is over saturated with sex. How many times have I read young boys disciplined for what is now being called "sexual harassment?" Slapping a girls butt? Are we serious? Sexual harassment?. Well obviously NOW!. You have sexualized a society, they harass women and now, we have to "discipline" them at younger ages that what they are dong is tantamount to sexual harassment when 20 years ago, that was absurd. <br /><br />-You cause the problem, then you try to remedy it. I at least understand the problem and try to remedy it mechatchila.- <br /><br />The list can go on to how even college girls perceive themselves in a society that idolizes the body and glorifies sex all around them. I understand we come from two different value spectrums. That is why we can't see eye to eye. Any benefit to an over-sexed society is overwhelmed by the obvious hedonistic natural consequences to it. This isn't even a religious issue. It's a value driven issue that plenty of non-religious people hold to be true when they just think for a moment about unintended consequences in the future. <br /><br />Also, I disagree with your notion of how to reach equality and what equality means. If the only way (for example) for women to reach equality is by the continuous openness of sex and selling of their bodies, than indeed this is a sad day. The women's suffrage movement did not need this aspect of open sex to deliver their message. Also, I believe Chana PERFECTLY parodied the notion of equality. Equality today means "the same." But there is no such thing as "the same". We are not the same. We should be equal UNDER THE LAW, but lets face it, it has gone over beyond the law as can be seen by the example of Chana's facebook friend. It's a farce. There are males and there are females. Each are unique in their rite. Why on earth would people actively want to blur those lines?Holy Hyraxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17704030181702087485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-876398926033278662011-03-02T09:18:17.659-05:002011-03-02T09:18:17.659-05:00JA,
1) I think that, religious issues aside, cons...JA,<br /><br />1) I think that, religious issues aside, conservatism as a philosophical position is very defensible. You seem to, a priori, consider a conservative to be misguided and wrong. That may be your belief, but I think it is presumptuous to treat that as a fact going into an argument.<br /><br />2) There is a distinction between repressing your sexuality, and the complete abandonment of limits. Our society is obsessed with sex - and I think it is at the societal level, not the personal level, that things fall apart because of this obsession.<br /><br />Humans are hard-wired for sex and the marketing machine uses this weakness to sell. In the process, we are turning our society into one where the only value is "does it make me feel good". Yet, historically, when societies reach this point, they inevitably collapse. This is due to several things. One is, to build and grow you need to sacrifice. A society which focuses on immediate gratification does not raise members who are willing to sacrifice. This is why birth rates are negative in non-immigrant Europeans. Two, the preoccupation with sex leads to the neglect of everything else that's important. Look at the lyrics of all popular songs - it's all about love and sex. Sure, people sang about love since time immemorial, but where are the songs about friendship, about love for your country, about nature, about social issues. They are basically non-existent. Just "sex, drugs, and rock and roll".<br /><br />Sex is a basic drive. It should not be repressed. Premarital sex has many benefits, including ensuring sexual compatibility of partners. There I agree with you.<br /><br />But your utopian statements about if only people stopped being sexually repressed and then we will have equality, peace, motherhood and apple pie, seem like a real stretch.Ἐπίκουροςnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-20703838249611319472011-03-02T01:48:58.609-05:002011-03-02T01:48:58.609-05:00I actually agree with you that Kurt's characte...I actually agree with you that Kurt's character has crossed a line recently; while I think he's a fantastic character who has done so much for gay kids, his interactions with his father have been completely off the mark. His father had every right to yell at him for having a sleepover with another boy, and his response that his father should better educate himself on gay sex was ridiculous.<br /> Kurt's father has been an ideal model for how a parent of gay kids should behave. From the moment Kurt came out to him, he has been accepting, non-judgmental, and fully committed to defending his son. I only wish parents I know in real life could be half that fantastic. For Kurt to continue to accuse his father of prejudice is ridiculous. <br /><br />And to JA: the sexual utopia you describe isn't exactly the reality for most women out there, despite sexual liberation. In fact many women are having unhealthier, less satisfying sex lives. The statistics of women with STDs is horrifying. <br />And sorry, but I don't buy your premarital sex= less crime and wars. I'm sure most criminals happily engage in premarital sex, but somehow they are still inclined to partake in criminal activity. I agree that a healthy sex life is important, but contrary to what you're saying sex does not equal happiness. Its just sex.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-58077157104870898012011-03-02T01:17:21.268-05:002011-03-02T01:17:21.268-05:00I'd like to agree with Talia's point and a...I'd like to agree with Talia's point and add one of my own.<br /><br />I agree with Talia because I think (and know, having seen it done by example) that certain norms can shift without morality disintegrating. Case in point: a committed gay couple. Yes, they are of the same sex, but they do not cheat on each other and have a happy stable relationship.<br /><br />Someone can take the sanctity of relationships and sexuality seriously while still coming to terms with their sexual identity.<br /><br />Also, regarding Glee: I think Kurt is meant to be seen as a realistic character. Many teenagers mouth off to their parents. I don't think the show glorifies that. <br /><br />Additionally: Overt sexuality portrayed for entertainment purposes is perhaps distasteful, but I don't know if it is immoral in the same sense that outright promiscuity is. It might be, but surely there are degrees?<br /><br />And where I agree with you is how sickening it is whenever love and lust are somehow seen as interchangeable. That is something truly against the spirit of Torah and any sensitive, reflective person.ilanicahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02362729274032022634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-19737505101000708322011-03-02T00:17:17.160-05:002011-03-02T00:17:17.160-05:00Chana, you do realize that your notions of biology...Chana, you do realize that your notions of biology are totally incorrect, right? There are plenty of people with XY chromosomes who are phenotypically female from birth and plenty of people with XX chromosomes who are phenotypically male from birth (i.e., these are not people who have transitioned medically in any way).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-49445314741484038232011-03-01T23:08:20.327-05:002011-03-01T23:08:20.327-05:00Emily,
Any chance you care to explain exactly why...Emily,<br /><br />Any chance you care to explain exactly why you respectfully disagree? <br /><br />More importantly, of course you can recognize who I'm talking about if you're friends with him on Facebook. The point is not to comment about him in such a way that those who are NOT his friends can recognize him. He made a public status; I wrote a public response- I'm not sure where you see the problem.<br /><br />Re: mocking and derisive, if you're talking about my Harrison Bergeron rewrite, then sure, that definitely pokes fun at the direction our society is going. I hardly think I mocked our mutual friend, though- just said that I think he's dead wrong, which I do think. And mocked his particular point of view on this subject. I'm not sure what you see as being wrong with mocking someone's point of view when you find it ridiculous- do you think our friend ought to get a free pass and I should accept his points of view just because he's gay or what?Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-48146866633405890072011-03-01T19:36:03.886-05:002011-03-01T19:36:03.886-05:00HH,
Hey, long time no see!
What part did I ignor...HH,<br /><br />Hey, long time no see!<br /><br />What part did I ignore?<br /><br /><i>Based on what? A more sexualized world where everything all around you (even geared toward young children) is a good thing?</i><br /><br />You think that's an objective way of looking at it? Sure, there are excesses, especially where young children are involved, but that's just the bad part. The good part is unrepressed sexuality, which has a lot of good effects. <br /><br />For example, it tends to lead to more gender equality. It tends to lead to greater enjoyment of sex for women. It tends to lead to people figured out (or admitting) that they're gay instead of just marrying a person of the opposite sex. It lets people marry people who they are sexually compatible with instead of entering a crapshoot. It lets people wait until they're ready to get married instead of rushing into it. It leads to safer sex, because people always had premarital sex, but where it's stigmatized, condom usage is less likely and less correctly done. Oh yeah, and it lets people just enjoy sex before marriage! <br /><br />Finally, not having premarital sex seems to be correlated with being uptight and conservative, so the less of that the better. I admit I'm reaching here, but hopefully fewer wars, less crime, etc. People having good sex are just not as likely to want to do that stuff.<br /><br /><i>Aren't you part of the spectrum that abhors female objectivism? Ever think of where that can POSSIBLY come from?</i><br /><br />I think it comes from religion and "traditional" values, actually. For example, in a comment on this very post, Chana offers up a defense of traditional gender roles. Traditional Judaism basically sets up the woman as a child-rearing and raising (and cooking&cleaning) object. It forbids women rabbis, etc. <br /><br />A sexually-liberated society is much more egalitarian and therefore less objectivizing. Women are empowered to decide what kind of role they want to lead -- they are aren't forced or coerced into some kind of cookie cutter. Sure, some choose to be strippers or porn stars or even prostitutes, but that is their right.Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-19959899706629673072011-03-01T19:29:30.907-05:002011-03-01T19:29:30.907-05:00Olivia (or Chana, if you prefer),
In terms of the ...Olivia (or Chana, if you prefer),<br />In terms of the first part of your response, I'm going to respectfully agree to disagree with you.<br />In terms of the second part, if I could recognize who you're talking about, then so can other people. Furthermore, I specifically said "reminiscent" because I don't actually think that this was cyberbullying. It was, at the very least, mocking and derisive.Emilynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-36100522615072846702011-03-01T19:08:21.661-05:002011-03-01T19:08:21.661-05:00JA,
How about the rest of Chana wrote? You seem ...JA, <br /><br />How about the rest of Chana wrote? You seem to have ignored it.<br /><br />>And the world is a better place because of it<br /><br />Based on what? A more sexualized world where everything all around you (even geared toward young children) is a good thing?<br /><br />Aren't you part of the spectrum that abhors female objectivism? Ever think of where that can POSSIBLY come from?Holy Hyraxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17704030181702087485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-70735279743869105522011-03-01T18:34:57.418-05:002011-03-01T18:34:57.418-05:00Since it seems that both Tali and Emily don't ...Since it seems that both Tali and Emily don't understand why what my friend wrote has to do with sexualization, I'll break it down for you.<br /><br />A gendered society is one in which certain gender roles are appointed for men and women. Namely, there's a difference between them that corresponds to their genetic makeup- the XX and XY chromosomes yield not only different bodies but different personalities.<br /><br />While it is certainly true that society creates SOME gender roles (for example, when a girl baby cries vs. a boy baby, the girl is told, aw poor baby, why are you sad, whereas the boy baby is praised for making that lusty sound), it is not true, at least according to Judaism and halakha, that it is totally arbitrary.<br /><br />The problem with the idea of gender being a construct in Judaism is that then everything works according to what the person feels himself to be. What that means is that even if I have XX chromosomes, I can wake up in the morning, say I feel my gender is a man's, and ask for a milah to be performed upon my sexual organs. Or alternatively, decide that as a feeling-myself-to-be-male I want to serve as a Kohen in the mikdash. Or that I want to wear male clothes and it's not crossdressing because my true gender identity is a male. Etc.<br /><br />What this division of genders to create a genderless society eventually leads to is the idea that everyone can be anything they want. I can have XX chromosomes but act as a man. You can have XY chromosomes but be a woman. I with XX chromosomes in my "male" self can have a relationship with a man with XY chromosomes and call myself gay. It's all meaningless and there are no gender boundaries. Breaking the one boundary leads to the other. There's much more freedom and fluidity between sexes, because after all, why shouldn't there be- we're all genderless. Urinals may as well be full-out toilets with men and women both urinating in public because our sex organs don't define us. From this, we get to a model of a free-for-all. And if that free-for-all exists in gender, why not in sexuality as well?<br /><br />If our society was genderless, there would be no concept of gendered marriage, for instance. The whole conception in the Torah of a "man lying with a woman as he does with a man" would be moot, because hey, even though I was born with XX chromosomes, I feel myself to be a man or vice versa, so presto, the Torah is outdated.<br /><br />Basically, the one conception feeds into and founds the other.<br /><br />As to your belief regarding cyber-bullying- I find that remarkably hard to believe since a) I deliberately didn't use the person's name and b) I'm responding to a point he made, not saying that he is a bad person for thinking this point. If you call this cyber-bullying, you've probably never had the real experience of being bullied, which is nice for you, because I have (both online and offline), and let me tell you, this is not it.Chanahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17655144434904957767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-19651706048745102782011-03-01T18:13:34.053-05:002011-03-01T18:13:34.053-05:00(I tried to post this 15 minutes ago, but I think ...(I tried to post this 15 minutes ago, but I think it didn't go through.)<br />Olivia,<br />You used your friend's statement as an introduction to your blog post, but the topic of your post had no connection to what you spoke about, namely, as Tali Adler said, "promiscuity or the other harmful behaviors." If you want to make a statement about those topics, that's fine. If you want to address your friend's post, that's fine too. But to mock what he wrote and use that as a transition to your article undermines the intellectual merit of your post and is somewhat reminiscent of cyberbullying.Emilynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12970718.post-73684220003032269932011-03-01T18:10:00.515-05:002011-03-01T18:10:00.515-05:00This issue would apply to nearly every media: TV, ...This issue would apply to nearly every media: TV, Radio, printed material would be subject to this kind of subhuman in-your-face shout out. So what are my options throw all those away and live in self imposed ghetto like the Chasidim?<br />My former Yeshiva gedolah is gravitating towards a no internet policy for students. In the past I thought it cruel, but your post seems to support this view.Noamnoreply@blogger.com