Let's talk about sex. You heard me, sex. S-E-X. As in the physical and intimate connection between a man and a woman. Screwing. F&%^ing. Oral, Anal, Missionary style, it doesn't matter. The unspoken word, the great taboo, this is the most hated word in the Orthodox community (doesn't matter what part). Worse than kefira. Worse than avoda zara. The ultimate taboo that must never be spoken of, let alone crossed.
Anyone who wants to understand the hafrada craze that has been plaguing our communities for over thirty years must understand that it is considered part of a milhemet mitzva declared against…wait for it…sex. There, I said it. I guess I won't get maftir Yonah, but it was worth it.
In girl's schools, the main emphasis is on sex – God forbid girls should ever look half –way attractive so as to tempt the dreaded yetzer. Cover your sleeves, your calfs, your face. Don't put on make-up, or God forbid have a fashion sense more developed than an ant. Boys and girls should never meet, touch, converse. Girls may as well be from Venus the way we treat them as an other-wordly species. Tzeniyut? A code-word for protecting men from the evil girls, nothing more.
Our bodies (boys and girls)? Feh, disgusting, gashmiyut, hevlei ha'olam hazeh and yetzer hara (whatever happened to tzelem elokim?). We are all apparently wild beasts at once completely unable to control our urges and horrible, filthy things to be caged. Women in particular are taught extreme self-loathing, as though it was theirfault that the human race needs to procreate through sex.
I've heard before that Judaism is not Christianity, with its emphasis on chastity and its extreme misogyny (Women=Devil and all that). I'm not convinced. At all. There is a huge and ever-expanding literature on covering women up, as well as declaring things like hotza'at zera lebatala to be the worst sin ever committed. The way we learn now, you'd think that holding a girl's hand was the equivalent of a wild night on the town. There is correspondingly very little about the positive aspects of sex when conducted be'heter (i.e. in wedlock).
Yes, yes, I know that the Torah and the Toshba have a much healthier attitude towards sex. They treated it, as, well, just a part of life, kind of like eating and sleeping. It was something that could be used for bad, as well as good purposes. Sex scenes and physical expressions of love abound in the Tanakh, and there are implicit and explicit discussions in Toshba, Gemara included.
Except that it's not what's in the sources, but how they are taught that counts. You want an example? Show of hands – how many people have learned Ketubot? Good. OK, how many people have ever wondered about the abundance of sexual references, discussions of sex frequency etc? Confusion. How many actually know what the Petach Patuach is referring to or shelo cedarka? Yeah, that's what I thought (no-one). Much more important to get bogged down in the minutiae of the R. Gamliel + R. Eliezer Vs. R. Yehoshua debates at the end of Perek Rishon (Spoiler: the former win, by rule of majority psak). Shi'urim discussing how sex is important as a tool of non-verbal intimacy in a couple or the other issues that come up in Ketubot? Not on your life.
And don't give me the peru u'rbu song and dance. Even the chumash never accepted the idea that sex is a purely functional act. I don't think anyone will seriously argue that the Avot, who are described as loving their wives very deeply, simply saw them as physical baby-making machines (e.g. the Duda'ei Re'uven story, Yitzhak taking Rivka back to her tent and being comforted for the death of his mother etc).
No less bad is seeing it simply as Mitzvat Onah. Again, a functional, legal obligation that can no doubt be circumvented by zealous Yeshiva bahurim more interested in solving a sugiya than making their wife happy (e.g. poresh before Rosh Hashanah). Said bahurim have apparently never learned the mitzvah in context, where it is clear that onah is merely a minimum requirement for Amot Ivriot, certainly not the maximum for fully married couples. I see no reason why it shouldn't be taught in the same context as tzedaka or chesed – there's a minimum requirement, but kol hamarbeh harei zeh meshubach (again, when permitted).
You want to change this problem? Start treating sex – sex, attraction, physical desire, not the euphemisms of "beino lebeina" or "bayit ne'eman beyisra'el" - as a natural phenomenon that needs to be channeled, not despised. Write about the joys of love and love-making – maybe learn about the Rabbis who wrote love poems from Making of a Godol. Maybe discuss how post-Niddah period should be a kind of anniversary, where both partners invest heavily in making it like their wedding night. Talk about how that two-week period should be a time of joy equivalent or greater than the previous two-week hell. You've got other ideas, please share.
You want to call it something else besides the s-word? Fine. Yedi'at ish et ishto should do. Ah, but won't this open a slippery slope where kids go out and have sex? I've got news for you – many of them already are. Many of them will continue to do so regardless of how many ridiculous humrot, giduffim and hafradot you idiots come up with. The difference is that with my suggested method, those who abstain, and those who err but come back will be part of a Judaism that teaches love of life and creation itself rather than its hatred, that seeks to temper and soften yetzarim as beautiful and delicate things rather than the debased animalism you keep seeing this as.
10 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Now that's the kind of Torah I like reading!! Kol HaKavod:)
1. Write about the joys of love and love-making – maybe learn about the Rabbis who wrote love poems from Making of a Godol. Maybe discuss how post-Niddah period should be a kind of anniversary, where both partners invest heavily in making it like their wedding night. Talk about how that two-week period should be a time of joy equivalent or greater than the previous two-week hell.
Come on, these exact ideas are repeated ad nauseum to every couple before they get married. No, they are not taught to people for whom they are irrelevant, and worse, tantalizing to the point of mockery. Is there not some logic to that?
2. The Shulchan Aruch (in line with the consensus of earlier sources) says that men are required "lekitrachek meod meod" from women, not walk behind them on the street, not admire their clothing even when not being worn. And so on and so on. If you are speaking to the Orthodox community, you cannot really avoid mentioning these sources, even if only to say that you reject them.
3. You complain about taboos, yet refuse to write the F-word in its full spelling. Is it so hard to understand people whose, after all, simply have a different set of taboos from yours? :)
4. Maybe your school taught that sex was evil and to be avoided at all costs. Mine didn't, and not only don't I have a hangup about sex, I don't have a hangup about people with that hangup either.
>>1. Write about the joys of love and love-making – maybe learn about the Rabbis who wrote love poems from Making of a Godol. Maybe discuss how post-Niddah period should be a kind of anniversary, where both partners invest heavily in making it like their wedding night. Talk about how that two-week period should be a time of joy equivalent or greater than the previous two-week hell.
Come on, these exact ideas are repeated ad nauseum to every couple before they get married. No, they are not taught to people for whom they are irrelevant, and worse, tantalizing to the point of mockery. Is there not some logic to that?<<
No, they aren't. I refer you to the following article, where it's clear that the main emphasis remains the obsession with issurim of all sorts:
As for "irrelevance" - people need to know more about the light at the end of the tunnel of abstinence. It won't "tantalize" them any more than they already are, and they might learn to see it as something that's only taboo for now, but won't be later.
2. The Shulchan Aruch (in line with the consensus of earlier sources) says that men are required "lekitrachek meod meod" from women, not walk behind them on the street, not admire their clothing even when not being worn. And so on and so on. If you are speaking to the Orthodox community, you cannot really avoid mentioning these sources, even if only to say that you reject them.
I'd have thought you figured out my opinion on the subject already. :)
I'd be interested in seeing these sources of which you speak, if only to reject them.
3. You complain about taboos, yet refuse to write the F-word in its full spelling. Is it so hard to understand people whose, after all, simply have a different set of taboos from yours? :)
I don't have a problem with people whose personal values are different than mine. I have a problem with people who try and force their positions on everyone else.
4. Maybe your school taught that sex was evil and to be avoided at all costs. Mine didn't, and not only don't I have a hangup about sex, I don't have a hangup about people with that hangup either.
Good for you; It's not the case in many boys' schools and it's exponentially worse in girls' schools. Only now, for instance, are Yeshivot Bnei Akivah starting a sex-ed program.
"I don't have a problem" is not a refutation of a general trend.
1. The study you link to includes the following line near the beginning: "We were well aware of the religious literature promoting taharat haMishpahah as a way of renewing sexual interest." Enough said.
2. I'm short on time, but a quick googling brings me to SA Even Haezer 21:1, http://www.israel613.com/books/SHMIRAT_ENAIM_KK20.pdf
4. It is problematic to speak of "general trends" when the group under discussion is diverse enough (including MO, DL, "Yeshiva/Agudist" and "Hassidic", as well as a broad range of ages) that any generalization is likely to be flawed.
1. OK, granted there need to be more suggestions, but if you actually read the article, you'd notice that they don't often do so.
2. >>It is problematic to speak of "general trends" when the group under discussion is diverse enough (including MO, DL, "Yeshiva/Agudist" and "Hassidic", as well as a broad range of ages) that any generalization is likely to be flawed.<<
Nice dodge. Get back to me when you actually read the article and deal with the issues involved.
No dodge. In the community I grew up in, at least in the younger generation, I see no evidence of such problems (beyond their level in the non-Jewish population). Blaming the problems of Borough Park and Monsey on our education system is nonsensical. Anyway, the article says that 70-75% of women are "very satisfied" with their sex life. Such numbers hardly seem like a cause for panic.
1. Again, "I personally had no problem growing up" is an example of nothing but your own experience. Aside from being non-scientific, it is a very solopsistic way of looking at things (i.e. the whole world is like me). Aside from that, how do you know people aren't just hiding it from you?
It's somewhat reminiscent of people who talk about how religious life in Israel pre-'67 was just fine. All well and good, until you read several testimonies to the contrary and understand the situation was and is much more complex.
I was not referring to the general statistics, but the in-depth discussion of specific problems, which you are still avoiding. Notice the many complaints of lack of proper preparation by the very madrichim you extoll.
I do not blame "Monsey and Borough Park" but the ever-increasing desire of many moderate religious Jewish educators to mimic Monsey and Borough Park. You might want to check out an article on the subject that appeared in Makor Rishon's Friday edition (last week or two weeks ago, don't remember exactly). It refers specifically to the fact that DL/MO/whatever you want to call it education refused to touch the issue with a ten foot pole.
I suggest you stop being so condescending. Just because "you don't have a problem and don't really see one" doesn't mean it isn't there.
Pleasure connects. It either connects a person to himself, or a person to other people.
A person who regularly prepares feasts and then eats them alone solely for the sake of his physical enjoyment, is a pig. However, if a person has feasts with other people to celebrate different things (graduating, chagim...), then it is an elevating experience that connects him to other people (and G-d in the case of chagim).
Crack-cocaine would be wrong even if it did not cause health problems and often near-immediate death. However, it could be ok if it was done together with other people in order to have fun.
The reason I wrote "it could" is because there it is possible for the experience to because a self-centered experience (in which case it is not good). In the case of sex this means that a person ends up seeing the other as akin to (but better) than a plastic doll for his or her sexual enjoyment. Of course, despite the fact that there are some who 100% see their partner (or partners) this way, there are a significant amount who partly see their partner this way, to different degrees.
Basic enjoyments that are not related to connecting to other people are good according to the degree that they enable you to be psychologically healthy (i.e. eating tasty food/watching movies). However it is better if they are used to connect to other people, or higher purposes (e.g. watching comedies in order to be more humorous and "jovial" around other people.)
And now to more practical discussion:
1) I'm glad that Bnei Akiva schools have started teaching sex ed. However, I think that they should also include (in addition to more basic topics) high-quality philosophical, historical, and psychological articles that discuss and debate pleasure, homosexuality, bisexuality, and differences between men and women. I'm sure that universities in Israel must have some excellent articles on these topics. I also think that students would learn better (and more could be covered) if it was not for marks.
2) Sexual problems exist on both sides of the spectrum. I also don't think that masturbation is fine since "apes do it" (according to my Gr. 8 homeroom teacher). However, on the other side, I also don't think its as bad as stealing or murder (some radical descriptions seem to equate it to something like Hiroshima!). It is not that difficult not to jack off, and I highly suspect that people who go on long hikes or outward bound do not jack off since it is not as convenient, and they are not watching movies with pornography (or in the case of some movies, pornography with a plot).
3) Obsession with Tzniut is ridiculous. Although, I still support uniforms for Gr. 7-12 for different reasons, such as preventing social groups from being emphasized by dress. In school the rap star and math nerd should dress the same since it enables them to interact with far greater ease, and maybe even learn something from each other.
Sorry for any irrelevant rambling...
btw, עונג (pleasure) has the same root letters as the verb "to connect" לנגוע
Many may see this as too much of a "drash". However, it is 100% clear that the word "yearning"/"longing" (געגוע) has the repeated root of the essential root of the verb "to touch". I agree with the approach that many verbs with a hey on the end, or nun at the beginning, are really two letter roots. This indicates that all "yearning/longing" comes from the desire to connect. Whether to connect the body to the world, the soul to the body, or a person to other people. The only real danger is when the soul becomes enslaved to the body, instead of having the correct relation between body and the essential essence of what is you i.e. your "soul".
10 comments:
Now that's the kind of Torah I like reading!! Kol HaKavod:)
Some comments:
1.
Write about the joys of love and love-making – maybe learn about the Rabbis who wrote love poems from Making of a Godol. Maybe discuss how post-Niddah period should be a kind of anniversary, where both partners invest heavily in making it like their wedding night. Talk about how that two-week period should be a time of joy equivalent or greater than the previous two-week hell.
Come on, these exact ideas are repeated ad nauseum to every couple before they get married. No, they are not taught to people for whom they are irrelevant, and worse, tantalizing to the point of mockery. Is there not some logic to that?
2. The Shulchan Aruch (in line with the consensus of earlier sources) says that men are required "lekitrachek meod meod" from women, not walk behind them on the street, not admire their clothing even when not being worn. And so on and so on. If you are speaking to the Orthodox community, you cannot really avoid mentioning these sources, even if only to say that you reject them.
3. You complain about taboos, yet refuse to write the F-word in its full spelling. Is it so hard to understand people whose, after all, simply have a different set of taboos from yours? :)
4. Maybe your school taught that sex was evil and to be avoided at all costs. Mine didn't, and not only don't I have a hangup about sex, I don't have a hangup about people with that hangup either.
AIWAC - thank you for posting this. It needed to be said.
>>1.
Write about the joys of love and love-making – maybe learn about the Rabbis who wrote love poems from Making of a Godol. Maybe discuss how post-Niddah period should be a kind of anniversary, where both partners invest heavily in making it like their wedding night. Talk about how that two-week period should be a time of joy equivalent or greater than the previous two-week hell.
Come on, these exact ideas are repeated ad nauseum to every couple before they get married. No, they are not taught to people for whom they are irrelevant, and worse, tantalizing to the point of mockery. Is there not some logic to that?<<
No, they aren't. I refer you to the following article, where it's clear that the main emphasis remains the obsession with issurim of all sorts:
http://www.jewishideas.org/articles/observant-married-jewish-women-and-sexual-life-empi
As for "irrelevance" - people need to know more about the light at the end of the tunnel of abstinence. It won't "tantalize" them any more than they already are, and they might learn to see it as something that's only taboo for now, but won't be later.
2. The Shulchan Aruch (in line with the consensus of earlier sources) says that men are required "lekitrachek meod meod" from women, not walk behind them on the street, not admire their clothing even when not being worn. And so on and so on. If you are speaking to the Orthodox community, you cannot really avoid mentioning these sources, even if only to say that you reject them.
I'd have thought you figured out my opinion on the subject already. :)
I'd be interested in seeing these sources of which you speak, if only to reject them.
3. You complain about taboos, yet refuse to write the F-word in its full spelling. Is it so hard to understand people whose, after all, simply have a different set of taboos from yours? :)
I don't have a problem with people whose personal values are different than mine. I have a problem with people who try and force their positions on everyone else.
4. Maybe your school taught that sex was evil and to be avoided at all costs. Mine didn't, and not only don't I have a hangup about sex, I don't have a hangup about people with that hangup either.
Good for you; It's not the case in many boys' schools and it's exponentially worse in girls' schools. Only now, for instance, are Yeshivot Bnei Akivah starting a sex-ed program.
"I don't have a problem" is not a refutation of a general trend.
1. The study you link to includes the following line near the beginning: "We were well aware of the religious literature promoting taharat haMishpahah as a way of renewing sexual interest." Enough said.
2. I'm short on time, but a quick googling brings me to SA Even Haezer 21:1, http://www.israel613.com/books/SHMIRAT_ENAIM_KK20.pdf
4. It is problematic to speak of "general trends" when the group under discussion is diverse enough (including MO, DL, "Yeshiva/Agudist" and "Hassidic", as well as a broad range of ages) that any generalization is likely to be flawed.
1. OK, granted there need to be more suggestions, but if you actually read the article, you'd notice that they don't often do so.
2. >>It is problematic to speak of "general trends" when the group under discussion is diverse enough (including MO, DL, "Yeshiva/Agudist" and "Hassidic", as well as a broad range of ages) that any generalization is likely to be flawed.<<
Nice dodge. Get back to me when you actually read the article and deal with the issues involved.
No dodge. In the community I grew up in, at least in the younger generation, I see no evidence of such problems (beyond their level in the non-Jewish population). Blaming the problems of Borough Park and Monsey on our education system is nonsensical. Anyway, the article says that 70-75% of women are "very satisfied" with their sex life. Such numbers hardly seem like a cause for panic.
1. Again, "I personally had no problem growing up" is an example of nothing but your own experience. Aside from being non-scientific, it is a very solopsistic way of looking at things (i.e. the whole world is like me). Aside from that, how do you know people aren't just hiding it from you?
It's somewhat reminiscent of people who talk about how religious life in Israel pre-'67 was just fine. All well and good, until you read several testimonies to the contrary and understand the situation was and is much more complex.
I was not referring to the general statistics, but the in-depth discussion of specific problems, which you are still avoiding. Notice the many complaints of lack of proper preparation by the very madrichim you extoll.
I do not blame "Monsey and Borough Park" but the ever-increasing desire of many moderate religious Jewish educators to mimic Monsey and Borough Park. You might want to check out an article on the subject that appeared in Makor Rishon's Friday edition (last week or two weeks ago, don't remember exactly). It refers specifically to the fact that DL/MO/whatever you want to call it education refused to touch the issue with a ten foot pole.
I suggest you stop being so condescending. Just because "you don't have a problem and don't really see one" doesn't mean it isn't there.
First the philosophical, and then the practical:
Pleasure connects. It either connects a person to himself, or a person to other people.
A person who regularly prepares feasts and then eats them alone solely for the sake of his physical enjoyment, is a pig. However, if a person has feasts with other people to celebrate different things (graduating, chagim...), then it is an elevating experience that connects him to other people (and G-d in the case of chagim).
Crack-cocaine would be wrong even if it did not cause health problems and often near-immediate death. However, it could be ok if it was done together with other people in order to have fun.
The reason I wrote "it could" is because there it is possible for the experience to because a self-centered experience (in which case it is not good). In the case of sex this means that a person ends up seeing the other as akin to (but better) than a plastic doll for his or her sexual enjoyment. Of course, despite the fact that there are some who 100% see their partner (or partners) this way, there are a significant amount who partly see their partner this way, to different degrees.
Basic enjoyments that are not related to connecting to other people are good according to the degree that they enable you to be psychologically healthy (i.e. eating tasty food/watching movies). However it is better if they are used to connect to other people, or higher purposes (e.g. watching comedies in order to be more humorous and "jovial" around other people.)
And now to more practical discussion:
1) I'm glad that Bnei Akiva schools have started teaching sex ed. However, I think that they should also include (in addition to more basic topics) high-quality philosophical, historical, and psychological articles that discuss and debate pleasure, homosexuality, bisexuality, and differences between men and women. I'm sure that universities in Israel must have some excellent articles on these topics. I also think that students would learn better (and more could be covered) if it was not for marks.
2) Sexual problems exist on both sides of the spectrum. I also don't think that masturbation is fine since "apes do it" (according to my Gr. 8 homeroom teacher). However, on the other side, I also don't think its as bad as stealing or murder (some radical descriptions seem to equate it to something like Hiroshima!). It is not that difficult not to jack off, and I highly suspect that people who go on long hikes or outward bound do not jack off since it is not as convenient, and they are not watching movies with pornography (or in the case of some movies, pornography with a plot).
3) Obsession with Tzniut is ridiculous. Although, I still support uniforms for Gr. 7-12 for different reasons, such as preventing social groups from being emphasized by dress. In school the rap star and math nerd should dress the same since it enables them to interact with far greater ease, and maybe even learn something from each other.
Sorry for any irrelevant rambling...
btw, עונג (pleasure) has the same root letters as the verb "to connect" לנגוע
Many may see this as too much of a "drash". However, it is 100% clear that the word "yearning"/"longing" (געגוע) has the repeated root of the essential root of the verb "to touch". I agree with the approach that many verbs with a hey on the end, or nun at the beginning, are really two letter roots. This indicates that all "yearning/longing" comes from the desire to connect. Whether to connect the body to the world, the soul to the body, or a person to other people. The only real danger is when the soul becomes enslaved to the body, instead of having the correct relation between body and the essential essence of what is you i.e. your "soul".
I think R. Shmuley Boteach focuses on this too in his book 'Kosher sex'.
Have you seen it?
Post a Comment