Sin, Samantha, and the Talmud
Chezkel Shammes2010Love & SexOne who sees his evil inclination getting the better of him should dress in black and go to a place where he isn’t known.
That’s the famous passage in the Talmud that played in my head over and over like a nagging friend who just doesn’t know when to stop. I was horny and desperate, and the Talmud, just to complicate things, seemed only to say, “Eh, better you don’t, but if you can’t help it… nu, here are some ideas…”
It’s a healthy urge, I said to myself, as Cathy, the cute Hispanic receptionist, put another pile of mail on my already overflowing stack. Men all over the world feel the same, nothing unusual about it. Or perverted. I’m just healthy and normal, looking for what every male has looked for since the dawn of the Y chromosome.
Cathy’s ass was toward the flat side, and her face still had some residual acne, those flaky skin cells that stubbornly refused to read the memo that her adolescence was over. But she had a face that reminded me of Eva Langoria in her better days. I’d have done her in a heartbeat, except she hardly looked my way. My feeble attempts at making conversation seemed only an unwelcome distraction from the Yahoo Messenger windows she kept open all day, chatting no doubt with hot and ripped hunks from the South Bronx. I could never compete.
Why the unbearable urge? I couldn’t really say. Sex with the wife wasn’t so bad – in fact it was quite good. We’d come a long way from the shocked look on her face when I suggested we take it out of the bedroom and into the laundry room. Eventually she came to love doing it while sitting on the washing machine, during both the wash and spin cycles. (The dryer never proved very satisfying.) She didn’t have an orgasm until after our third child was born, but once she had it there was no going back. Seeing women in movies moaning “Oh, yeah; oh, God, yes!” once brought a completely baffled look to her face. She’d look away uncomfortably. But now she understood it. She’d changed.
But I changed too, and while she was just discovering her sexual side, I was starting to feel, um, uninspired. I needed variety.
Craigslist proved a failure. The women I encountered were interested in hearing about my Chasidic lifestyle, but their photos were a letdown. An overweight woman riding an elephant in Thailand, a punk rocker with more piercings and tattoos than body parts and a sizable muffin top to boot, a dorky looking girl with a crooked nose and no chin. I closed my email on the last one and grimaced. Not my thing, I mumbled to the stapler on my desk and the piles of overdue invoices. Cathy was just putting on her short white jacket with the fur- lined hood. I wondered what she had in store for the night. I imagined her in a tight mini-skirt, getting down at a club and shaking it. I longed to ask, but I didn’t dare.
And then came Samantha.
It was another of those days at the office. The boss yelled like a maniac, threatening to fire — no, fucking fire! — anyone who came within sight of him. Murphy’s Law had kicked in and just when we had an important meeting, the computer froze during the Powerpoint presentation. I, bookkeeper-slash-techie-slash-office-manager-slash-janitor, was at fault. I needed a break. Fuck it, I thought.
The Talmud warned against my intended actions. It’s like bringing a flood all over again. Automatic excommunication. Deserving of death. But that wasn’t the worst of it. I was tortured by the mystical warnings. I remembered the nighttime sessions studying Reishis Chochma as a teenager. Kaf Hakela, it said, was no fun. My attempts at re-imagining it as a super cosmological roller coaster might’ve worked, except for those damn Mal’achei Chabala, the angels of destruction, who beat and pursue your soul from place to place and make the Christian purgatory seem like a cruise to the Bahamas.
Then comes the Talmud and gives you ideas. Dress in black, go to a new city, just keep quiet about it; it’s all good. Talk about mixed messages. But at that point I no longer cared. By the time I got out of the meeting and out from under my boss’s fury, I’d made up my mind.
A sign outside declared it “the cleanest gentleman’s club in NYC.”
Hmm, I thought, clean is good, and I walked past the bouncer who looked after me without a word. The place was dark. On a small, low stage two topless girls lazily trotted around while gripping a gleaming silver pole. I wasn’t aroused. I felt in the wrong place. Self-consciousness kicked in like a bitch. Not to mention my anxiety about the sin, which reared its ugly head again. The fucking Talmud had me confused. Couldn’t the rabbis get their damn theology straight? Their inconsistency was killing me.
I ordered a Coors Lite and sat down to watch. I kept thinking I should leave. This wasn’t the place for me. I thought about how I’d feel the next morning, beating my chest, Ashamnu, bagadnu… rashanu, shichasnu, tiavnu. We’ve been wicked, wasteful, and committed abominations. But it wouldn’t be we, it would be I. Good Jews didn’t do these things. I did these things.
Samantha made it all go away. I hadn’t noticed her at first. I looked up from my beer and saw her walking across the room from where she’d been sitting alone. She sat down next to me and asked for my name. She was cool with just schmoozing, she knew how to sell her goods. She wanted to know about my life, my family, my job. If she was pretending, she was very good at it. She asked the right questions, and shared about herself without hesitation. She was smart, but not too brainy, working, literally and figuratively, towards an MBA. She was Hispanic, an Eva Mendez look-alike without the mole on her cheek, with long brown hair, baby-soft skin, a well-rounded butt that jiggled oh, so subtly, and very few clothes. Two pieces, to be precise, if you didn’t count the shoes.
While we were talking she caressed the fuzz on my arm. When she put her hand on my thigh I knew she had me. I wasn’t so naive to think this was anything more than a business transaction. She had something to sell, and I was an eager buyer. I might say I wasn’t looking for romance, or even a personal connection. But there was an illusion of that. People who work in this industry know what men want, and it isn’t, in most cases, just brute sexual gratification.
Unable to resist, I took Samantha to a private room towards the end of the club. Across the doorway was a curtain. Inside there was a bare table and an easy chair. Music was playing, top-40 songs, bubble-gum pop I’d been hearing on the radio. Samantha took my hand and said, “Let’s dance.” When I hesitated, she laughed. I didn’t know how to dance anything but a Chasidic-wedding-style hora. Dancing with a naked woman was completely new. But we danced. Or she did, and I held on to her hand and twirled her around again and again, turning my awkwardness into pretending I was spinning a top. She laughed when we stopped, dizzy from spinning, and fell on top of me onto the chair.
She went beyond the limits she’d set when she explained the rules. I like to think it showed she liked me, although it’s possible that she did the same for all customers. I had no way of knowing.
She became a habit. I ended up coming back at least every other week for a period of a few months. At the office I’d see Cathy and wonder what I ever saw in her. During stressful days at work, it was Samantha I looked forward to, a relaxing high before heading home, an oasis of pleasure in between the demands of office and family life.
Until one day, as I walked into the club, the bouncer yelled, “Samantha, your rabbi’s here.”
If my beard made me a rabbi then Allen Ginsberg was Moses himself. But you can’t argue with people’s perceptions. What do goyim know of rabbis and beards, I thought to myself. I greeted Samantha with the usual peck on the cheek, and settled down with a drink.
It was one of our best evenings. I started to think that perhaps she liked me for real. She’d started allowing things that she didn’t when we first met. To me that meant something. I even thought to ask her out, but then thought better of it. Best to keep it this way, simple, no attachments. I wasn’t even sure I had her real name, which suited me fine.
It was only when I left that I caught sight of the bouncer and remembered what he’d called out. Me, a rabbi. The thought was both ludicrous and insulting. I gave him a thumbs up as I left. He nodded and said, “Take it easy, boss.”
But I never went back.
121 Responses
the most awsome piece ive read in a long time im still in shock how accurate this story is wow does it reminds me of the good old days.
Wow! I’m floored! Fantastic piece!
On that passage in tractate Kedushin there is a priceless vort attributed to the late Harav Ruderman. He wanted to reprimand the boys in his Yeshivah before the summer break. He got up on the dais and recited the gemureh, than he proclaimed: “I wanted to do an aveyreh, I dressed in black and ventured to a faraway place, as the gemureh decrees. To my surprise, when I got there I met the whole Yeshivah- staff and students……”
One who sees his evil inclination getting the better of him should dress in black and go to a place where he isn’t known. That’s the famous passage in the Talmud
You ommited the main part at the end. And he should to whatever his heart lusts
If I were Samantha, I would do you for your writing skills alone.
Best piece on unpious by a long shot.
You’re right, Velvel. Crucial omission. Thanks for pointing it out.
Brooklynite and R & C: Thanks!
A masterpiece!
Everyone, online and off, seems fixated on the brilliance of this piece. Rightfully so. It’s flawlessly written, and with a fluidity that is of HR caliber to be sure. Which leaves one to wonder whether it was expertly edited, or whether it is merely a new pseudonym for the editor himself – but is that really the point? Can we please go on to discuss the ‘all American’ pastime of strip clubs?
I get that a visit to a ‘Gentleman’s’ club might indeed be viewed as a rite of passage to the average American guy, but the key word here is guy. Especially considering the fact that this guy claims to be married! shouldn’t the women be crying foul and calling for a lynching of the cheating bastard? And even if he weren’t actually married, why don’t women have enough self respect to denounce this ogling as degrading to us females, and generally degenerate behavior for the ‘evolved’ male?
Which makes me wonder how a site for the more liberated and again ‘evolved’, doesn’t recognize the irony here. How they reach for the stars, but keep landing in the mud.
This piece reminds me of a Rashi (Ki Sisa ) who quotes the Talmud (Yuma 66 – remember On Top of The Sixes ? ) : Sacrificing & incensing begot the sword ; hugging & kissing – U die for ! ; enjoying it all in the heart – it wrenches ur guts ! Enjoy Shit-sar & Chivasar !
Tzippi – when Haman looked up at the girl he got shit in his face but the girl dropped to her death !
Tzippy,
One can applaud the messenger, while opposing the message.
That’s all I asked for HT, let’s oppose the message a little more vocally.
Tzippi,
“why don’t women have enough self respect to denounce this ogling as degrading to us females”
Perhaps, just perhaps (work with me here for a moment) because they don’t actually think this is degrading to “us females”? Ah, you say, this is because they lack self-respect! And they would say, poor Tzippy, she is so sexually repressed and emotionally castrated by her cultural milieu that her brain turns anything fun with even a whiff of human sexuality into something “degenerate”!
Both of these opinions are equally (in)valid. Assigning a psychopathology as the basis for a contrary opinion and then arguing against that pathology is just another form of the straw-man argument. It doesn’t work. What you fail to realize from that high-and-mighty perch you imagine yourself to occupy is that reasonable people have different (reasonable) definitions on what exactly “landing in mud” would entail. Perhaps one day you will realize that your “mud” is another’s harmless fun and your harmless fun is another’s shallow and superficial waste of valuable resources.
All that said, I personally *do* find strip-clubs degrading. Oddly however, (and this is anecdotal, but serves to illustrate the point) despite the fact that most of my friends are of the male persuasion, practically all of my invitations to a night out at the strip-club were made by *female* friends. These women were not trying to impress me, but were seriously of the opinion that an outing with friends (and husbands) at the strip-club is good clean fun. I would guess they’d take serious issue with your self-respect deficiency diagnosis.
I hear you Tzippy, but I don’t feel compelled to. Its a “duh” protest, really. We all know decadence when we see it.
Wow! Am I reading this right? HT and Tzippy are in sync on this topic. That is strange…
Going OTD is one thing, cheating on your spouse is entirely a different ball game.
I think if men knew how pathetic “working” ladies find them, they might think twice before indulging. Even women who see sex work as a valid professional choice speak about their customers with almost no respect.
Tzipi, for the first time and hopefully the last time, I couldnt agree with you more.
It isn’t so strange, Yippy. When two people are both “nogie bedover” these miracles tend to happen
H.T.
I am not the proverbial “nogie beduver” and I whole heartedly agree with her. I think for this one time she hit the nail on the head. Why are you being deconstrunctionalistic? Can’t you give her the credit she is due?
BD, you’re working with the wrong audience here. You need to find one that understands that a culture’s moral code is a social construct. What’s acceptable today was unacceptable a hundred years ago, and what’s unacceptable today may be acceptable in a hundred years from now. But I don’t think this group of commenters is quite ready for your “radical” idea.
RandC, I don’t understand your comment here. I agree with Tzippy’s comment, but considering that she is preaching to the choir on this one, I opt to stay out. My shrill voice might ruin the beautiful harmony.
Scratch that.
I don’t want to sing in the choir. I only want to sing solo.
Laura, you’re right that morality is in a large part due to what is considered socially acceptable within a certain time framework. With that said certain things strike deep chords in the human psyche and they are not susceptible to the times. Do you think cannibalism and incest, also radical ideas, will be looked upon differently in a futuristic and more progressive society? I don’t think so. Certain ideals are idiosyncratic and characteristic of us being moral beings, and they are not frowned upon today because we are not enlightened enough, they reflect a deep rooted sense of right and wrong that human beings have.
HT it sounded like you were admitting to tzippi based on the fact that you are both of the same persuasion, not on the merit of the righteousness of her words.
There is no choir for you, as I see that even the Belze Rebbetzin’s choir consists of all boys.
Hello! people! what is this beautiful singing harmony here? Tzipis, HT and RC on one page???
Has anyone Google’d the percentage of affairs men AND woman are engaged in in America? Affairs in the workplace? anybody? don’t you all know its a fact of life!? People Cheat. Period. Its a human trait. Happens to classy business people, to Lawyers and to big Rabbi’s too. Research shows that most couples fall out of love within the first 2 years of marriage and start straying.
Gimme a break here! Moral Shmoral, we’re humans for christ’s sake.
And that’s exactly what I meant by saying I was a negie bedover. Sometimes, even I can be very human.
Rupture, morality is a social construct. And so is your “deep rooted sense of right and wrong.” Cannibalism and incest were (are, in limited societies) perfectly acceptable mores in certain cultures. However, I will take the advice I offered BD, and not argue the point in this forum. Anyone can take psychology classes or read various philosophy books that explain this concept.
Insider, I don’t think we are agreeing on the immorality of affairs and cheating. I was agreeing on the degradation of our society in contention to the commercialization of sex and the degradation of the female persona by the patrons who frequent those undesirable venues.
Tzippi — You’re mixing two criticisms in one (calling for a lynching, no less), when really they are unrelated. The first is the degradation of women, the second is the cheating. They’re unrelated because cheating is an offense that can be (and is, as studies show, equally) committed by both genders.
Re the degradation — Sorry, I just don’t buy it. I’ve read plenty a shrill screed against porn and sex work, but none of it seems convincing. If using a woman for her body is degrading, then so is using a construction worker for his.
The cheating charge is a more serious one, and arguably deserves a serious response.
Cheating implies violating a commitment, implied or explicit. For that reason, I think the cheating charge against Chasidic men (or women, for that matter) is complex. With marriages arranged, and the entire process highly prescribed by religion and culture, there is often little room for personal commitment. Fidelity is seen more as a religious construct than a matter of personal obligation.
When a man goes down on one knee, and when the woman gives him that “Yes,” both of them are well aware that implicit in that act is the declaration to be faithful to one another. It is a conscious commitment not to stray from this relationship unless the terms are explicity redefined.
In a Chasidic marriage, however, the relationship carries no such conscious decision making. In fact, there is plenty room to argue that — at least for the male — Jewish tradition is tolerant of non-monogamy. Nowadays it isn’t acceptable, but not because of an adoption of Western mores of marital fidelity: non-marital sex carries a biblical prohibition (a relatively minor one, in many cases), and polygamy within marriage has been rejected for practical reasons. But no religious texts emphasize “cheating” as such to be wrong. The Chusid therefore sees it more as an issue between him and God, and well… God, when we want something badly enough, can be forgiving.
“Sometimes, even I can be very human.”
Save my ears. Apostasy of the highest form. You human, no way!! Innocence has been dealt a death blow!! I cry.
Tzippi I am mystified by your complaint in general and at your admonishment directed at this collective in particular.
This story here is the tale of a Chosid. One who lives with God and Chazal. He thinks in Talmudic prose and does his best to live up to its directive. He plans to say Ashamnu tomorrow.
The fact that so many “seem fixated on the brilliance of this piece, rightfully so”, seem to me to say that most people seem to feel authenticity here.
Whether or not such behaviour is moral or not is completely off on a tangent I would say. The story is a perfectly realistic portrayal of a certain frum Chosid who finds himself in unfamiliar territory and is reported that way.
You would be hard pressed to find a reader here who is as awkward with women and so deprived of their company as this guy in the story here is/was.
He is not one of ours at all. So why you see this piece as one that condones or otherwise his behaviour I do not know.
So here is my solo.
Being a female myself I find strip clubs to be offensive. I also can’t stand the smell of menstruel period.
Both disgust me, and both are here to stay. Forever. Next case.
HT, slight difference. Strip clubs don’t close shop 2 weeks out of every month. There stench is a year round reality.
Oh please RandC, I know I started this, but stop being so scatalogical!
Hmmmm, fancy, scatological, I learnt something today. You are right the preocupation with scat is Insider’s domain. I’ll butt out. All puns are most definetley intended!
RC, to quote a certain guy I lately had the honor of befriending “I’m a huge fan of vulgarity”
So here I am, serving your perverted needs
Brilliant writing (?) aside, this piece leaves me sad for the protagonist (I don’t assume that this is davka a true story from the writer’s experience) and with questions.
What does the talmudic passage really mean (I’ve never studied it)? I think I understand the part of “compelled by his nature”, but what of the other parts: Dress in black. Incognito? Mourning? Dirty? Formal? (Bear in mind that until recently, black clothes were not cheap, IIRC.) Go elsewhere. Literal or metaphoric? Return?
Besides the breach of trust with his wife and the waste of money he probably can’t afford, I feel sad about the character’s “relationship” with Cathy. Why does he assume that she’s IM-ing with “ripped hunks from the South Bronx”? Is that his 1-dimensional view of a young Latina? Why does he need to “do” her to appreciate her? Might a respectful professional friendship be more rewarding?
I can rationalize what compels the protagonist (who has a decent life with his wife) to act out (and pay more money for far less “action”), be it the presence of rules, the desire to experience “beauty” or sexuality with no strings or that’s just “nature”. Why the thumbs up to the bouncer? What makes him decide not to go back? Will the teshuvah be meaningful?
…and what’s his problem with Eva Longoria?
Hasidic Rebel –
“Re the degradation — Sorry, I just don’t buy it. I’ve read plenty a shrill screed against porn and sex work, but none of it seems convincing. If using a woman for her body is degrading, then so is using a construction worker for his.”
Let’s leave porn out of it, because there I agree with you (although certain kinds of porn certainly do promote degradation and violence towards women). But the vast majority of women in sex work, although this hold true for many young men as well, are not in it purely voluntarily. Sure, every now and then you hear about an Ashlee Dupree or another $3,500-per-hour call girl who has a couple of rich clients who “loves her job”, but the street workers don’t feel the same way. Many were sexually abused even before working the streets, and many more are sexually assaulted on the job. And unlike the construction worker, there’s no worker’s compensation when they get beat up by their pimp or an angry john.
“In a Chasidic marriage, however, the relationship carries no such conscious decision making. In fact, there is plenty room to argue that — at least for the male — Jewish tradition is tolerant of non-monogamy. Nowadays it isn’t acceptable, but not because of an adoption of Western mores of marital fidelity: non-marital sex carries a biblical prohibition (a relatively minor one, in many cases), and polygamy within marriage has been rejected for practical reasons. But no religious texts emphasize “cheating” as such to be wrong. The Chusid therefore sees it more as an issue between him and God, and well… God, when we want something badly enough, can be forgiving.”
You can spin it any way you want, but at the end of the day, every Chassidishe chosson and kallah are aware of the commitment they are making in marriage.
Textual support for polygamy, marriage with servants, and the yefas toar notwithstanding, cheating is wrong on any level. Polygamy doesn’t mean having a mistress the wifey doesn’t know about, and cheating is pretty good grounds for a woman demanding a divorce both in secular courts as well as under Jewish law.
Cheating stinks because it violates a basic trust. If a guy can’t handle that trust, have an open marriage or get divorced. It isn’t about the sex, it’s about the lying.
skeleton
you didn’t address HR’s point that the shidech was a set up, there was no acceptance of trust, it was an acceptance by two mchitunim that they will gain admiring glances in shul on what a wonderful and beautiful shidech they just did, by the time the couple realize their entrapment they curse the living daylights and are on a hunt for the opportunity they missed and which the average gentile had.
The average collecge grad has a college campus of thaousend of grads to choose and fall in love with, the chassidic bucher has a yeshiva with hundreds of bucherim and one girl he had the opportunity of conversing with for 20 minutes, there was no bond, no trust, nada!!!
I would like to add that Religiously in general there is no such thing as the husband cheating, as the man can marry as many women he wishes.
Skeleton — I agree with you on the sex and porn industry, but that’s about the conditions, not the concept itself. And arguably, the conditions are largely due to the lack of regulation in those industries. I would feel the same if such were the conditions for librarians or seamstresses; has nothing to do with their choice of profession.
“every Chassidishe chosson and kallah are aware of the commitment they are making in marriage.”
I don’t think it’s that simple. They are aware of religious and cultural expectations, but they give little thought to the commitment they’re making to the other person.
And to the degree that they are aware, it is the same awareness (or lack thereof) as that for what marriage actually entails, what with raising a dozen+ children and marrying them off, living with a spouse they know next to nothing about, and committing to a lifestyle at an age at which they have no business making such decisions.
I’m not saying that makes cheating right, only that it needs to be seen in context.
“cheating is pretty good grounds for a woman demanding a divorce both in secular courts as well as under Jewish law.”
Even in secular court that’s doubtful; depends on the state, I believe, and even then, it ain’t so simple. But Jewish law? Ain’t no such thing I ever heard about. (Unless it falls under the broad category of מאוס עלי, which can pretty much mean anything, including “I don’t like his brand of aftershave.” And even then, the B”D can only encourage ostracism, but not force a divorce.)
“Cheating stinks because it violates a basic trust. “
Agree wholeheartedly. That is, if there was trust established under full, sane, and mature mind. Which I don’t think most Chasidic couples are capable of at their time of marriage. Or at least many aren’t.
” It isn’t about the sex, it’s about the lying”.
Sorry, Skeleton, but I don’t buy that. If I lied to my husband and told him my new wig was 1000 bucks when in reality I paid 1500, would your moral outrage be the same? Is that grounds for divorce as well?
It absolutely is about the sex.
Insider and HR – I disagree that the average chosson/kallah are not aware of the commitment they are making. They might be young, immature, foolish, and unaware of the potential for unhappiness they are entering into, but they enter it in good faith (let’s not get started on those who don’t, who knowingly deceive and trick an innocent person into a doomed relationship). There is implicit trust that the other person is not cheating or planning on doing so in the near future, or you’d see a lot less marriage going on.
If what you’re trying to say is that there are mitigating conditions for the cheating due to unfortunate circumstances brought on by communal customs, that’s a valid point. But it doesn’t do a whit to make cheating right.
Hoezen –
There’s lying, and there’s lying. There are little white lies and big red ones. No doubt you are capable of realizing that magnitude does matter, and that underreporting the cost of your shaitel to your husband isn’t on the same plane as gambling away fifty thousand bucks in Atlantic City when you’re there on your girls-night-out and failing to tell him about it.
After reading chassidishe womens’ forums especially the threads on cheating, it is almost impossible to accept the theory that the context of a shidduch somehow necessarily limits expectations of fidelity. They are just as horrified and devastated when their husbands cheat as anyone else. The immediate outpouring of advice is almost always to seek a divorce. There is virtually no consideration of the halachic differences between male and female affairs.
” as gambling away fifty thousand bucks in Atlantic City when you’re there on your girls-night-out and failing to tell him about it.”
Exactly! You are making my point. Sex is BIG. Fifty thousand bucks big. And therefore, if you lie about the sex, the offense is big.
Skeleton, I think the point (or one of the points) Rebel and Insider are trying to make is, that if you force someone into promising something, that promise is compromised from the start.
And if you plan to sing the “chasidim aren’t forced into marriage” song, let me tell you that I agree. We are given a choice.
A choice between the bullet or the window, that is.
Chezkel – I do hope, for your sake and your wife’s, that you took precautions. Too many frum guys have been affected by the mussar they heard in yeshiva that they have their priorities screwed up. They rationalize, “If I do __ it’s okay as long as I don’t do __.” The preservation of health and life comes first.
Was away – and missed so much. Pity.
So here are the ones I just had to respond to:
Laura –
Indeed, what do us simple fold know of complicated matters like social constructs? I reckon that the concept of a society evolving is so far beyond our capability to grasp, that truthfully – I’m appalled at my own audacity to tread on this sacred territory that only those who’ve taken psychology classes and read philosophy books rightfully dare to even attempt to approach.
Oh, but wait. Li’l silly me noticed a glaring point you seem to have missed.
As society has evolved, some of what was previously considered acceptable has on the same vein become unacceptable, or at least less so. Going back in time burlesque shows were considered pretty mainstream. Perhaps with a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ vibe, and not something that women would discuss in polite company, but a pastime that they knew their husbands engaged in, even if they might have not fully approved.
Whether it was Feminist movement or simply – society has evolved – but the very idea of men ogling naked titties is now frowned upon by the general public.
Indeed. We’ve evolved. In this sense, for the better.
Pen –
The was a fictitious masterpiece. To keep focusing on the talent of the writer isn’t doing the subject matter, and the intended pursuing dialogue, any justice.
And the fact that in this particular fictitious masterpiece, the protagonist appears frummer than the’ unpious’ fellows – pray tell, why would that change my view of the behavior depicted?
HR –
I was gonna respond to the going down on one knee and the ensuing deep bond that forms, so much more than the frum guy who marries this girl under the chupah. And my response was gonna be something like ROFL, but then Skeleton beat me to it.
Cheating stinks, mitigating circumstances notwithstanding.
That’s right T Langshtrump, This group of unpious are a primitive bunch indeed. No one will understand Bal devorim. No one that is, except Laura. She is different. She is elite. She also happens to be the best speller among us, and has amazing grammar to boot.
BSM:
>>> …and what’s his problem with Eva Longoria?
Nothing. The resemblance made Cathy desirable, despite her flat ass and questionable dermitologic condition.
Chevremaidel:
>>> I do hope, for your sake and your wife’s, that you took precautions.
No worries, Samantha was very responsible that way.
I don’t quite get the difficulty or the big lomdes here.
Cheating sexually is a big deal because it’s allowing an outsider to share the intimacy which belongs exclusively to the relationship between a husband and his wife.
How can you compare that to lying over the cost of a shaitel??
So Tzippi, an Unpious writer tells a tale, of how some chosid has behaved, from the chosids perspective, and you see fit to proclaim that the Unpious “reach for the stars, but keep landing in the mud,” merely because they tell the story?
Frummer,
You didn’t get it. No one compared cheating to lieing about a shaitel,
I was agreeing with u. In a sleepy sort of way.
Pen:
No, they land in the mud, bcs they do stuff that “decent people” shouldn’t do.
Why are so many of the recent posts about sex?
Sorry Frummer,
Guess I forgot to look out for your British humor…
I am trying to get the point this writer tries to make and couldn’t find it nor do I understand the brilliance of the article. I must be missing much as an uneducated chasid.
And I’m trying to understand as naive as I may be, why should a guy pay for sex? It’s so ridiculous in my eyes, maybe she should pay him? Isn’t this paying for sex falling in the same category as all substance abuse like drugs and alcohol the more you do it the more you need and it and only brings you problems? There’s so much Cheskel could do with his hard earned money, things with healthy fulfillment he can take along with him. And when just thinking on the details of such a transaction it makes me puke. To what dirty and ugly guy did Samantha do the same thing before and after you? would you wipe yourslfe with a towel 10 other guys used before you? Forget about the germs,it’s just not sexy.
Hoezen -
Exactly! You are making my point. Sex is BIG. Fifty thousand bucks big. And therefore, if you lie about the sex, the offense is big.
You’re saying, if you lie about the sex. Again, it’s the lie that’s emphasized here. Point being, I’m no prude who’s only out to condemn extra-marital sex, yet my innate sense of right and wrong still tells me that cheating is immoral irrespective of how “acceptable” anyone deems it. Personally, I might find open/polyamorous marriages distasteful and they are certainly antithetical to a frum Torah’dig lifestyle, but I cannot say they are immoral according to an objective moral standard. So again, it’s not about the sex – it’s about the fact that the sex was wrapped in deception.
Skeleton, I think the point (or one of the points) Rebel and Insider are trying to make is, that if you force someone into promising something, that promise is compromised from the start.
Try making that point to the cop who pulls you over for speeding, or to the judge who’s sentencing you for selling ex.
Like I said, mitigating circumstances, depending on the premise. But never enough to completely annul and invalidate the implicit promise of fidelity present in a Jewish marriage.
And if you plan to sing the “chasidim aren’t forced into marriage” song, let me tell you that I agree. We are given a choice.
A choice between the bullet or the window, that is.
This is a whole ‘nother subject. Even so, I somewhat disagree with you. You can fight the fight, and jump out of the second story window or get the bullet in the thigh, or you can comply and get married, and jump out of the seventh floor or get the bullet in the heart. There’s pain either way, but there are options.
Velvel –
And I’m trying to understand as naive as I may be, why should a guy pay for sex? It’s so ridiculous in my eyes, maybe she should pay him?
You must’ve missed these lines “I might say I wasn’t looking for romance, or even a personal connection. But there was an illusion of that. People who work in this industry know what men want, and it isn’t, in most cases, just brute sexual gratification”. They’re true. The prostitute’s art is not the sex, it’s the illusion he/she offers the john of being wanted, of being good in bed, and of the simplicity of the “transaction”.
“Samantha, your rabbi’s here.”
“But I never went back.”
And the moral of this brilliantly spun tale is:
“Be careful with your words”.
HR
“Re the degradation — Sorry, I just don’t buy it. I’ve read plenty a shrill screed against porn and sex work, but none of it seems convincing. If using a woman for her body is degrading, then so is using a construction worker for his.”
HR, you’re losing me. Are you serious? The lap dancer and the construction worker are equivalent? First, the body of the construction worker isn’t used; it’s the product of his artisanship that is being used. Second, although sex is an animalistic act, it is understood to arise and emanate from love, affection, admiration and all the beautiful feelings and emotions. It’s the bare selling of sex without the preexisting conditions that is highly degrading to the female archetype. Examining the bodies on the dance floor like examining meat in the market place is just wrong. Call me crazy, but I think it’s extremely degrading to reduce a person, who possesses a soul, to the equivalence to a lifeless object. The objectifying of the human being is what is degenerative about it, nothing wrong with sex; it’s the approach that’s wrong.
Re: “Jewish tradition is tolerant of non-monogamy. Nowadays it isn’t acceptable, but not because of an adoption of Western mores of marital fidelity: non-marital sex carries a biblical prohibition (a relatively minor one, in many cases), and polygamy within marriage has been rejected for practical reasons. But no religious texts emphasize “cheating” as such to be wrong. The Chusid therefore sees it more as an issue between him and God, and well… God, when we want something badly enough, can be forgiving.”
You are right that the prohibition on cheating in Judaism isn’t understood the same as it is in the western world, as a breaking of a commitment or an agreement. The implausibility of unfaithfulness, like most other Jewish ethics, is completely God oriented, as I have already pointed out in a previous comment. I have to disagree about polygamy though. Everybody knows that according to the Toireh polygamy is permitted. It has only been prohibited since the Cherem D’rabeynu Gershom. With that said many historians have pointed out that we don’t find polygamy to have been common practice in Judaism before the Cherem. We don’t find it in to be prevalent in the Gaonite period, in the Rabunun Savoruim period, in the Talmudic period, and even not in the late biblical period. Polygamy is only prevalent in the earlier centuries, at the time when the bible was first authored; which is around 1200-800 BCE. All of this shows that there has always been a general disdain and unacceptance of the practice. According to historians R”G, only concretized and solidified the prohibition through ascribing the Cherem status to it. It’s quite apparent that he did it only in response to the staunch Christian prohibition of the practice. Sort of like, “they can’t possibly be more righteous than us!”
Laura dear
“Rupture, morality is a social construct. And so is your “deep rooted sense of right and wrong.” Cannibalism and incest were (are, in limited societies) perfectly acceptable”
1)What I mean by cannibalism is the viewing the human being as a source of nutrition. I know that in certsin societies human flesh is and was consumed. In the cultures where cannibalism appears, human flesh is eaten either as ritual or in extreme times of deprivation. You can’t name me one society where the slaughter and consumption of humans, for the sole purpose of nourishment, was a common and accepted practice. Every society must have at its base certain fundamental ethics and principles that enables the continuity and flourishing of the society. The prohibition and taboo of murder is the most simple and basic characteristic of any existing society. A culture can’t, and wouldn’t, survive if murder isn’t considered taboo. The prohibition of murder is almost as basic as the importance of procreation to enable the continuance of the society. Incest might not be on the same high plateau of ethical significance in the construct of the society as the prohibition on murder, nevertheless it’s also mighty important for the continuity of the society. I don’t think I have to explain this any further. Procreation is the life blood of every society. You need able bodied and healthy offspring to assure the permanence of the community. Incestual relations don’t produce healthy and viable offspring, so it would be self understood that it must be abstained from. I’m not a sociologist neither am I a an anthropologist, I would be shocked beyond belief to discover a society where incestual relations was considered the accepted norm in the vital societal effort to procreate.
2)Don’t tell me you are denying the entire concept that certain things can be deeply rooted in the human psyche. I agreed that a lot of the ethical configuration of a society is socially constructed; nevertheless these ethics have their root in the human mindset. No society has ever abolished starring at trees, or any inconsequential act for that matter. There is a reason why we pick and choose the ethics, principles, morals, and rules for the society to abide by. There are some things that we fundamentally understand to be right and wrong and we set up the rules accordingly. “Deep rooted” doesn’t imply that “right and wrong” must be somewhere on the human genome map: it doesn’t have to be organic for it to be deep rooted, rather how about this? In the collective unconsciousness of the western mind, cannibalism and incest have been deemed unquestionably unacceptable, and henceforth is considered indispensably wrong.
Fix this now, gentleman at the helm! Why aren’t my comments appearing?
R & C
r u using firefox, and r u using adblock? That might b the reason.
HT
“Skeleton, I think the point (or one of the points) Rebel and Insider are trying to make is, that if you force someone into promising something, that promise is compromised from the start. And if you plan to sing the “chasidim aren’t forced into marriage” song, let me tell you that I agree. We are given a choice. A choice between the bullet or the window, that is.”
Very true about the choice. It closely resembles Communist elections. Gorbitchov vs. Gorbitchov.
Youre all right that a contrived promise is no promise, but you are all putting way too much emphasis on the moment. Agreed, that the average Orthodox chosson kalah have no clue what they are getting into when the do the “Haray At”. Nevertheless if at some point during the marriage a trust and care consensus is developed, we have a commitment to faithfulness. It doesn’t have to be a specific moment; neither does a contract have to be drafted to proclaim the status of matrimonial monogamy. It’s a sense of trust and commitment that 2 people have in each other that can, and in most cases does, develop over time. In the instance that two people have reached that plateau in their relationship, subsequent fidelity is a violation of the unspoken pact.
Thanks Frummer.
I’m not using any of those. I’m perplexed. Certain comments arrive others get lost. What could it be? There are no obscenities in them either.
“Rupture, morality is a social construct. And so is your “deep rooted sense of right and wrong.” Cannibalism and incest were (are, in limited societies) perfectly acceptable”
1)What I mean by cannibalism is the viewing the human being as a source of nutrition. I know that in certsin societies human flesh is and was consumed. In the cultures where cannibalism appears, human flesh is eaten either as ritual or in extreme times of deprivation. You can’t name me one society where the slaughter and consumption of humans, for the sole purpose of nourishment, was a common and accepted practice. Every society must have at its base certain fundamental ethics and principles that enables the continuity and flourishing of the society. The prohibition and taboo of murder is the most simple and basic characteristic of any existing society. A culture can’t, and wouldn’t, survive if murder isn’t considered taboo. The prohibition of murder is almost as basic as the importance of procreation to enable the continuance of the society. Incest might not be on the same high plateau of ethical significance in the construct of the society as the prohibition on murder, nevertheless it’s also mighty important for the continuity of the society. I don’t think I have to explain this any further. Procreation is the life blood of every society. You need able bodied and healthy offspring to assure the permanence of the community. Incestual relations don’t produce healthy and viable offspring, so it would be self understood that it must be abstained from. I’m not a sociologist neither am I a an anthropologist, I would be shocked beyond belief to discover a society where incestual relations was considered the accepted norm in the vital societal effort to procreate.
2)Don’t tell me you are denying the entire concept that certain things can be deeply rooted in the human psyche. I agreed that a lot of the ethical configuration of a society is socially constructed; nevertheless these ethics have their root in the human mindset. No society has ever abolished starring at trees, or any inconsequential act for that matter. There is a reason why we pick and choose the ethics, principles, morals, and rules for the society to abide by. There are some things that we fundamentally understand to be right and wrong and we set up the rules accordingly. “Deep rooted” doesn’t imply that “right and wrong” must be somewhere on the human genome map: it doesn’t have to be organic for it to be deep rooted, rather how about this? In the collective unconsciousness of the western mind, cannibalism and incest have been deemed unquestionably unacceptable, and henceforth is considered indispensably wrong.
Pen –
The purpose of this tale was to demonstrate the inevitability of the ‘open-minded’ chosid ending up in a strip club. Something along the lines of – “even if he’s still doing the whole garb and tefilla thing, he’s evolving”. The misconception continually seems to be that the more ‘oifgeklert’ the more likely to cheat.
Considering that you guys believe intellectual pursuits above all else, and in the evolvement of our species, it just leaves me to wonder why this chosids foray into (what you’d deem) reaching for the stars, is landing him in the mud.
This is freakin frustrating.
Be still my heart! R&C said something that made sense…
It’s the bare selling of sex without the preexisting conditions that is highly degrading to the female archetype. Examining the bodies on the dance floor like examining meat in the market place is just wrong. Call me crazy, but I think it’s extremely degrading to reduce a person, who possesses a soul, to the equivalence to a lifeless object. The objectifying of the human being is what is degenerative about it, nothing wrong with sex; it’s the approach that’s wrong.
I’m looking out my window, but pigs aren’t flying. And the sun’s still rising in the east.
Coinkidinks happen. So I’ve heard. I’m sure this was just a fluke.
And Frummer asked Why are so many of the recent posts about sex?
You’re seriously asking that? The answer is so obvious! Because this is enlightenment! (Ask Insider. He’s all kinds of evolved.)
“Jewish tradition is tolerant of non-monogamy. Nowadays it isn’t acceptable, but not because of an adoption of Western mores of marital fidelity: non-marital sex carries a biblical prohibition (a relatively minor one, in many cases), and polygamy within marriage has been rejected for practical reasons. But no religious texts emphasize “cheating” as such to be wrong.
One more thing. Although Judaism does not forbid polygamy, there are so many restrictions on just about anything extramarital that it can hardly be said that a blind eye is turned to cheating or promiscuity. An adulterous man or women can be killed. Sex with Jewish unmarried girls without intent of marriage is prohibited under kedeishah. Sex with non-Jewish girls is at least marginally prohibited, as evidenced by the story of Zimri and the free reign given to kanoim pagi bo. According to many or most opinions, concubines were (at least rabbinically) forbidden to all except royalty.
So what’s left? Only the whole shebang of polygyny with all the strings, ropes, and baggage attached, or the one-night-stand with the yefas toar. Big whoop. Hardly sounds like the rockin’ 60’s and free love.
It’s hypocritical to expect the modern, Westernized “perks” of marriage like love, companionship, and equal partnership but reject the modern, Westernized expectations of fidelity. They work hand-in-hand. One cannot exist without the other. Back when women were the inferior and passive partners in marriage, they could expect little, least of all fidelity or monogamy, and in exchange the guy got lots of sexual variety but not much from the neck up.
“And Frummer asked Why are so many of the recent posts about sex?”
Because thats what we Chassidim do. We drink kalteh seltzer and ve talk sex!
The more profound question should be: why do most of the articles have a sexula theme, whether minor or major, in it? Have we adapted the golden rule of the west that for anything to be considered of literarry value it MUST have sex in it?
Tzipi. Hahaha
“I’m looking out my window, but pigs aren’t flying. And the sun’s still rising in the east.”
Look out the westren window, stop glaring at the east, you’re all caught up in the East; the West is where its at baby! As Jim Morrison so profoundly proclaimed……”The West is the best….Drive the highway West baby!!”
Skeleton
“An adulterous man or women can be killed.” Yes to the Woman, no to the Man.
I think HR’s point is that the prohibitions of invalid sex in Jewish law doesn’t stem from the perspective that it isn’t right to the partner in marriage. In Judaism the marriage partners don’t have rights that secure the sanctity of the marriage, over each other. It’s prohibited because God decreed so; the prohibition emanates from a consecrated institution not a human one.
Thank you, R&C; b/c reiterating simple points can get tiring.
Tzippi and R & C:
Nah, in the “good old days” of blogging, in the days when us “on the fringe bloggers” were teritorial animals – when we all lived within the confines of our own blogs, very few of the posts were about sex. But now, a bunch of guys and gals very unpiously join forces, and suddenly all that seems to be on people’s minds is sex.
Dare I suggest that some of the unpious ones aren’t that unpious after all?
HR- I’m glad to have receive the stamp of approval that I have reached the depth of your profound insight.
I just noticed. There’s even a special section on this site titled “Love and Sex”.
We’re going all cosmo here. Only on their site, that sexction is the first.
tzippi, I feel your pain shaifeleh, I know it hurts, gorgeous. The truth always hurts.
R&C –
Yes to the Woman, no to the Man. Darn, the terminology is complicated! Darn these Western-Christian appellations! By adultery I meant if the woman in the relationship is married. Otherwise, that’d be fornicating (for the guy), I guess. Whatever.
You’re right in the second part of your comment, about Judaism placing it squarely between (wo)man and God rather than man and wife. But reread the last paragraph in my comment above yours, where I make the point that wanting it both ways is just, well, selfish and a-”holy”.
Skeleton:
“I make the point that wanting it both ways is just, well, selfish and a-”holy”.”
A very subjective proclamation, if ever there was one. (I mean the “a-holy” part, and your previous charge of “hypocrisy.”) But it is sort of amusing that you’d accuse the unpious of being, well, unpious.
Insider you are out of role and out of character. You are the vulgarist laureate of the community, not the compassionate matriarchal soother. Or are you being mordacious?
Skeleton, I will try one more time. You know I always have to have the last word
Scenario number one. I spend the night in AC, and blow fifty thousand bucks down the toilet. I call my husband and tell him what I did.
Scenario number two, I blow all that money, and don’t tell him. Instead, he finds out from a friend three days later.
I don’t know about you, but I would be in serious dodo if either version of this story actually happened. My husband would throw a fit, and the focal point of his anger would be on the money gambled and not on the fact that I did it without informing him myself.
It might seem more progressive to say the issue is the cheating and the deception, but it’s much more about the *type* of deception.
Most people *have* to lie about the sex, because they could never get away with being honest about their extramarital “recreational” actions.
Skeleton
“But reread the last paragraph in my comment above yours, where I make the point that wanting it both ways is just, well, selfish and a-”holy”.”
Congrats on A-Holy. A superb conjunction!!
I never quibbled on that point. It’s a tremendous point and I totally agree with it. We have adopted the Western definition of matrimony and we have to take the whole institution the way it’s presented. If we want to enjoy love and all of those lofty feelings the obvious payoff is commitment, disclosure and honesty.
HT and Skeleton, pardon my ignorance, but I have no clue what you guys are arguing about. What’s wrong with saying that it’s both, the “lying about the act”? The act is wrong and so is the deceit associated with it.
HT, we might have a problem. The last word is my sole territory.
“We have adopted the Western definition of matrimony and we have to take the whole institution the way it’s presented.”
We have to?!
Or else, what? Violate some social norm? So is that what it’s come down to?
Or is that we’ll be labeled by Unpious commentors as “hypocritical”? Well, I do get a hankering for good ole-fashioned hypocrisy from time to time. At least the kind that gets people all flustered, pounding away at their keyboards, exclaiming, “Harumph, you… unpious scum… you amoral, Godless, valueless pieces of shit… you selectively claim the highest values, and harumph, how dare you discard MINE!”
HR -
I strive to amuse
HT –
Although I heartily allow you the last word, here’s just one more thought (after which I promise to shut up, at least for a while): perhaps people are different. Some might want to know if their spouse is having a side dish from a take-out while others davka want to stay in the dark. Some people are more comfortable deceiving themselves, and others are more comfortable dealing with reality.
R&C, the problem with arguing about the act is that morality is subjective and relative.
HR, now don’t go getting your knickers in a twist, especially over an abstract comment with no charges of hypocrisy leveled against anybody in particular. Hypocrite or not, we love you anyway, bro!
HR
“We have to?!
Or else, what? Violate some social norm? So is that what it’s come down to?”
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. It’s not that we have to follow certain rules only because they are rules. The way the Western institution of marriage is set up its natural that the prohibition on unfaithfulness is the natural product of the perks we enjoy in a marriage. Infidelity, deceit, and promiscuity is a direct breach of love, disclosure and faith. It’s a thesis antithesis relationship. It’s not that the marriage police will thrash you for your wrongdoings.
And BTW who moderates the moderator?
I’m feelin the love, Skeleton. Feelin the love.
Skeleton.
“R&C, the problem with arguing about the act is that morality is subjective and relative”
In essence yes. I do believe though that there are certain universal morals that are not relative to the limitations of time and space.
Look back at my dialectical discussion with Laura, I expounded on it a bit there.
Is it too late to jump on the love bandwaggon? I love you too bro!
R&C — I don’t believe trust and faithfulness have anything to do with the “Western institution of marriage”. Those are human values that most of us appreciate. But marriage has nothing to do with it.
It should be noted that ideas of fidelity exist even in relationships not proclaimed sacred by Church or State. They’re individual understandings between any two parties. But the values are not sacrosanct in and of themselves. They are set and defined by our own conceptions of what is good, right, and noble. And those, as Skeleton pointed out, are subjective and relative, up to each individual to embrace or reject as, most importantly, factors of consequence in any individual situation.
HR.
I don’t disagree I never claimed that trust and faith are idiosyncratic and particular to marriage. Of course it’s a vital factor in every social relationship. Sexual infidelity is squarely characteristic of the marriage institution, though.
Chezkel Shammes – what an appropiate name for the author of a piece that discusses those whose status & anxiety landed them staring up glassy eyed from the bottom of the pole. Chezkel Shammes’s legendary tolerance & simpathy for the conflicted souls that frequented Houses of Ill Fame & his tireless efforts to help them improve their situation r understandably not mentioned in this great post – after all is said & done it still remains up to the individual to deal with his own issues. What hurts is the banal & simple black & white picture painted in some of the comments. In contrast to Wil’amsburg Diaries, the presently most commented on post which attracted many insightful comments that deal with appropriate simpathy to the issue at hand, the thread on this chain is plagued with pontificaly sanctimonious judgements on the sorry condition of the sexually frustrated Orthodox male. As painfull as it is for a woman to feel cheated on & disillusioned she still has recourse – and the responsibility to herself and her children – to engage together with her husband in appropriate marital & SEXUAL therapy. Woe to the falsely PIOUS – Vey Tzidkascha – who LOVE to conveniently place the blame on the other for the unfortunate societal bonds that handcuff their ability to effectively surmount the challenges of modernity. While the clubs & escort services will continue to be frequented by and some of them will even welcome the elites of FRUM society – check the SHU”T to see how it played out historically – the overwhelming clientelle of those establishments r well represented by all elements of society.
uh these strippers do not give a sh** about you. They want your money. So stop dreaming they want you, are lusting for you and want to marry you. Get over it.
Of course strippers don’t care about their customers. I’m not sure you understand this piece at all.
Hi there shalom
There is a Torah solution for this horny man problem, really, it is called polygamy.
This also solves the problem of prostitution. If all the vulnerable single women and all the horny married men could get together without shame and secrecy, wouldn’t that be great? The wives might not like it at first but then they might make friends with the pilegishim and could become very cozy if everyone worked at it.
What do you think?
Zoney.
Polygamy is neither toirehdig nor is it a solution.
Hello, wake up, stop fantasizing. The wives befriending the concubines and massive orgies in the succah on the day of the great willow……Yeah, it would be totally great!! You quickly solved the wives problem of not liking it at first, it will be so cozy, everybody will be happy, polygamy is the key to utopia…..common, are you insane?
Why all the sex here? Perhaps because there were no other forums for the frum or ex-frum to explore this avenue in this way. Even the apologists are doing here what they can’t do in their “home town media”. One person needed to start, then came the torrent. I’m sure it’ll cool.
For those of us not intimate with the two “conflicting” texts, the cautionary “Raishis Chochmah” and the “enabling” Talmud piece, could you elaborate more about them, what they really mean and how the story ties in to them? Are the Hispanic women allusions to the Spanish Kaballists. Is the thumbs up to the bouncer and the resolution to not return symbolic of the descent and ascent of the soul (what little I understand of these concepts)? Or, am I reading too much into this?
Shabbat shalom.
BSM: I think it’s simpler than that; sex is a subject people love, or love to hate, frum, frei, or in between.
Re the conflicting texts, I don’t have sources at hand, but the “dress in black” text is a gemoroh in Kedushin, I believe. It’s generally understood to be not so much permission to sin as much as a reluctant concession towards the power and intensity of man’s sexual urges.
The counteracting (and far more emphasized) texts are found in various parts of the Talmud, and they warn against the various evils of sexual iniquity.
The Reishis Chochma has an entire chapter called, I believe, Shaar Hakdusha, in which the author details the horrific penalties for even the most minor of sexual transgressions. An additional source of no less severity (if less fantastical in its descriptions of the afterlife of the transgressor) is R’ Chaim Vital’s Shaarei Kedusha. Both of the above are heavy in mystical teachings, the basis of which later formed Lurianic Kabbalah.
I think, also from memory, that the ילבש שחורים message is that in addition to the transgression itself, one must be mindful of the influence such behavier might exert on others – as the Medrash explains the אשר קרך with Amalek.
Of course, the problem here is that even if one follows this advice and goes the extra mile (literally), one’s still damned, for המחלל שם שמים בסתר נפרעין ממנו בגלו and there goes the secret.
BSM
I’m not familiar with Raishit Chuchmeh; I’m not a misogynist and I was never compelled to read it. All I can tell you is that the passage in tractate Qedushin quoted in the story is definitely the exception to rule than the established Talmudic norm. Here is an enlightening passage from Tractate Sanhedrin (75 amud 1) that exemplifies how stringent chazal really were on these matters. אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מעשה באדם אחד שנתן עיניו באשה אחת והעלה לבו טינא ובאו ושאלו לרופאים ואמרו אין לו תקנה עד שתבעל אמרו חכמים ימות ואל תבעל לו תעמוד לפניו ערומה ימות ואל תעמוד לפניו ערומה תספר עמו מאחורי הגדר ימות ולא תספר עמו מאחורי הגדר פליגי בה ר’ יעקב בר אידי ור’ שמואל בר נחמני חד אמר אשת איש היתה וחד אמר פנויה היתה בשלמא למאן דאמר אשת איש היתה שפיר אלא למ”ד פנויה היתה מאי כולי האי רב פפא אמר משום פגם משפחה רב אחא בריה דרב איקא אמר כדי שלא יהו בנות ישראל פרוצות בעריות ולינסבה מינסב לא מייתבה דעתיה כדר’ יצחק דא”ר יצחק מיום שחרב בית המקדש ניטלה טעם ביאה וניתנה לעוברי עבירה שנאמר (משלי ט) מים גנובים ימתקו ולחם סתרים ינעם:
Here is my poor attempt at translating these sublime gemureh. The gemureh relates an incident where a man laid his eyes on a certain woman. He became obsessed with her and he fell gravely ill due to his obsession. Doctors were summoned and their medical advice was “the man wont get better unless he sleeps with the woman of his obsession”. Concerning this case the sages ruled “its better that he should die than sleep with her” The doctors offered an alternative remedy. “let her stand befoe him naked and that might appease him.” The sages ruled, he should rather die than see her naked”. The doctors offred a third alternative, “let her converse with him from behind a barrier, maybe that will appease him.” The sages ruled , He should rather die than converse with the woman of his fantasy from behind a fence”.
There is an ensuing disagreement between R’ Yaaqov the son of Idi and R’ Samuel the son of Nachmieni on the status of the woman in question. One claims she was a married woman, whilst the other posits she was single. The gemureh than proceeds to state that its understanble the strictness the sages applied to the case if the woman was indeed married, but if the woman was unmarried what was the reason for the stringency of the sages ruling? The gemureh gives 2 resolutions. Either- to prevent familial shame or for the sole reason that Jewish girls shouldn’t be immodest in matters of intimacy.
I think the passage speaks for itself and no further explanation is needed.
In regards to the passage in Qedushin, the Rishonim on the daf claim that the gemureh never intended to permit the transgression of any form. The whole dressing up and venturing to a faraway place is more of technique to distract the consumed mind of the individual in question. Hopefully whilst going through all the preparations to do the aveyreh he will come to his senses, but of course it is not a permission to do as ones heart desires.
Yoilish:
“I think, also from memory, that the ילבש שחורים message is that in addition to the transgression itself, one must be mindful of the influence such behavier might exert on others”
I think that one of the commentaries give that explanation on the passage, but that is still questionable, because in essence the explanation contends that the in the proper circumstances (in this case the avoidance of chilul hashem) the aveyreh is permitted. The explanation I brought down does away with the whole heter. If I’m not mistaken it’s the Ritv”a’s opinion and is the commonly accepted p’shat on the gemureh.
“My feeble attempts at making conversation seemed only an unwelcome distraction from the Yahoo Messenger windows she kept open all day, chatting no doubt with hot and ripped hunks from the South Bronx. I could never compete.”
I enjoyed reading your story, most of us can relate to those feelings at least for me in the past…
If you were to invest 30 minutes a couple of times a week doing basic workouts, lifting weights, etc. you can be as ripped as any dude from the bronx. Just give it like six months and of course watch your diet too.
R&C: Be careful, some might accuse you of working for Artscroll…
(Although your non-Charedi transliterations, “Yaqov” and “Qedushin,” might suffice to allay such suspicions.)
Hahah. Nice to see that you chopped the usage of Q instead of K. I love to do this shit.
What is the difference between a oifgeklert chusid and a stam chusid? A stam chusid says “tekifas ha’geonim” and a oifgeklerte chusid says “the gaonite period”. Kedushin and Qedushin, is another one.
Zoney Petunia,
That’s the problem with you guys. You make it a problem and then have the perfect solution. If someone doesn’t believe in god, he has ‘amunah problems’. And should go to a Chasidic brain-washer to restore his mind. If someone goes to a strip club, he obviously has a sex addiction, and you had the perfect solution for it.
I haven’t read all the comments – who has the time.
But I am shocked that so many think all this is OK in the name of breaking free and exploring other worlds.
As someone who grew up in the secular world, I cannot fathom this kind of morality. What about the WIFE? You know, the one who finally, after years and years, relaxed enough, trusted enough, to enjoy her sexuality. What a betrayal.
What if SHE decided to ‘break free’ of tradition and spice up her love life? Would that be OK? I doubt the issue is halachic. After all, dear Samantha is nidda, etc.
There is a trust implicit in any normal relationship which you have shattered. It has nothing to do with religion.
Shira, maybe you should read the comments. I haven’t seen one commentator who claims that what the protagonist is doing is justified in the name of breaking free.
OK, my fault. I read the bulk of the comments, and you are right; most people, thankfully, saw this as a huge problem.
I do hope the narrator used protection (however halachically unacceptable) and isn’t exposing his wife to disease on top of this humiliation.
great writing.
Thanks for the great post! You have a new fan.
Why do women make such a big deal about sex? If you eat in a restaurant you are eating someone else’s cooking. Does your wife go crazy about that? No, because cooking is not as Intimate as sex. But that’s the whole point. Men need sex physically, like food. they need variety. For women, they use sex to define themselves and their worth. That’s the mistake. A women is more than just her sex.
Her brains, beauty, personality, style, opinions , all make her attractive as a package to her husband. Sex is important too, but its not the end of the world if the husband is on a business trip or at a party and fools around or even has a meaningless one night stand.
Just be safe.
I understand the women’s point of view, but I think they need to chill out and maybe take a testosterone pill to think more like a man. Why are women so emotional??
moshele,
As a man, I find that statement incredibly depressing
Tzippi, you’re such a whimsical pintaleh-yid moralist. The religious community is hopelessly entrapped within an ethio-hierarchical mindset that encapsulates the world’s every development and denizen. You’re merely taking that ethio-hierarchical mindset and swapping in a feminist engine, then revving that engine at 8200 rpm. I suggest you take a step back and try to appreciate men in our imperfect state in a sahamedi-like fashion. Admittedly the first time I tried doing this exercise with your gender, I ended up flaying my knuckles on a punching bag. I assure you though, the journey was worth it.
oooh i love this.
ps: “why are women so emotional?” lolllll looks like you’re worked yourself into a tizzy. i’m just sitting here all calm. just saying. not all women value sex in the same way, just like not all men are somehow unemotional and only biologically driven… your argument is invalid.
Luke Ford comes to mind as the writer of this piece.
Tzippi Langstumpf, you are exactly right, and brave; I felt much less alone when I read your comment, thank you for it.
Most men who read this site and consider themselves to be rejecting the principles of Judaism do not also consider that American society is fundamentally and deeply based on Judeo-Christian belief; nor do they consider the fact (and it is fact) that Judaism is one of the most patriarchal schools of thought out there–it’s always been part of the Jewish male (who wrote both the Torah and Talmud exclusively, no female input) mindset that men are entitled to the sexual use of a woman’s body, and that men are also entitled to more than one woman, that there’s an obligation for a woman to be faithful to her husband that doesn’t compel a man in the same way; this has nothing to do with innate male drives, and everything to do with the fact that property and land rights, as well as last name, were passed through the side of the father among the Israelites–the Jewish patriarch wanted to be damned sure he wasn’t raising another man’s “seed” and so, strict controls had to be placed on the sexuality of Jewish women.
There’s the story of Tamar acting like a harlot with Judah, and plenty of others in the Torah and Talmud, that, at the very least, imply Jewish men were considered entitled to use women in prostitution if they wanted or “needed” to; this was better than “spilling seed” as well; if contemporary Jewish men–religious and non–continue to equate women with sex, to use women for sexual release, to use economic leverage to get sex from women who would not otherwise have sex with them, then, in my opinion, the least they can do is stop telling themselves this is somehow “violating” patriarchal thought or the principles of Jewish belief–these men, though seemingly unaware of it, remain stuck in the same mindset that women were created by a male god for men’s (their) pleasure, and to service their sexual needs, and that they themselves as males were somehow “made” by god (ex religious men switch out biologically determinant arguments about men and women’s sexual nature and “unconscious drives”–and we can thank Freud for a lot of that, who was not immune to the influence of Judaism himself–for god, but basically, they are still falling back on the argument that some “higher power” beyond their personal control “makes them do it”–meanwhile, not all men go to strip clubs, and certainly before the sexual objectification of women became as normalized and rampant as it is nowadays in pop culture, not all men used to)
I’m not a theist; my problem with men going to strip clubs is not about sex outside marriage, but with coerced sex; sex obtained through coercion means the woman isn’t having sex with you for her own sexual pleasure, & she wouldn’t have sex with you unless there were some external factor pressing her to do so–be it physical force, as in flat out rape, or be it economic force, as in pornography and prostitution which cater overwhelmingly to a male consumer pool; we live in a culture that titilates men CONSTANTLY with sexually subordinating, graphic imagery of women; men must learn the message that “this is what a woman IS and this is what a woman really WANTS–though you may have to ‘unleash her hidden nature’ or some such bs); no man in this culture is immune; and I don’t just mean porn, I mean the advertising we all see daily; women are socialized to believe we have no worth unless men find us sexually attractive (and you can see this clearly by how older women are reviled and treated as undesirable in this culture) and men are socialized to believe that happiness will come to them from fucking as many women as possible; both are empty promises, of course, but American culture is so saturated by the sex industry at this point that I don’t think most people, men or women, ever feel there are any other options.
Add to that the fact that men are encouraged not to feel and not to be connected with any of their emotions except maybe anger, and you get males who are uncomfortable with emotional connection in relationships; I’m sorry, but I refuse to believe this is some “innate” trait of men (though I know the Talmud says women are just more spiritual and moral and passive and blah blah–which, again, is PATRIARCHAL THOUGHT); I think men who feel lonely and alienated, from women especially (& I have to say, nearly every ex chassid male I’ve known has had some very painful rejection from the women in his life, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that some of them seem to feel literally afraid of women and/or women’s displeasure with them as a result), often turn to buying women in prostitution of some form or other; it seems like a quick fix–I don’t have to satisfy her because the money will take care of that–but then, the narrator of this story doesn’t sound like a very happy person, and I’d argue that’s because the human need (not a male or female need but a HUMAN one) to be personally known and accepted never really goes away)–and that tone I appreciate in this story; he seems to search for ways to blame the woman or accuse her of “manipulating him” somehow of course, but is that to assuage his own guilt? Really, what is she supposed to do? American culture says women are whores, that we’re supposed to be, and then men get mad when we believe this message about ourselves, or when we sell sex, playing the part men created for us in the interest of survival? Why wouldn’t we adapt, seriously? For a whole lot of women, the message that sex is all that we have to offer and all that’s worthwhile about us is drilled in constantly, & most women who end up working in strip clubs don’t have happy histories with the men in their lives either; many are abuse survivors; their “work” is basically just a way for them to keep reabussing themselves.
“It’s a healthy urge, I said to myself, as Cathy, the cute Hispanic receptionist, put another pile of mail on my already overflowing stack. Men all over the world feel the same, nothing unusual about it. Or perverted. I’m just healthy and normal, looking for what every male has looked for since the dawn of the Y chromosome.”
This is an interesting passage to me; the narrator seems to be trying to convince himself that thinking of women as just so much fuckable commodity is what he wants, and consistent with the person he wants to be; yet, again, he seems conflicted, at the very least, and ultimately dissatisfied with the time he spent at a strip club, or else why wouldn’t he keep going? And of course, the last sentence isn’t true–there’s a whole history of cultures that predated ancient Israel where women occupied a much higher status than they have for the past 5000 years or so, despite Y chromosomes being fully present; Gerda Lerner’s “The Creation of Patriarchy” is a great, thoroughly secular, read on that for those interested, but, bottom line, for a long time men survived really quite well without a multi-billion dollar a year sex industry to sell them access to women; that proves it’s very possible for a man to live without pornography, strip clubs, prostitution, etc. and it’s possible now too, (though I agree with one of the comments above, that this can really become an ADDICTION for many men, and, if a man has an addiction or sexually compulsive behavior, it doesn’t mean he’s “evil” or “bad” but habituated and dependent on a stimulus that works powerfully on the human brain; if he wants to stop, it’s a long process that requires a lot of courage, support, and self-forgiveness, and it’s very hard to do alone).
The notion that the sale of sexual access to women’s bodies to male consumers is okay though, just because a lot of men do it, is not a viable argument in terms of proving that strip clubs are “right” or destined to continue on indefinitely (you’ve already got secular governments in Iceland and Sweden who’ve banned them, and those aren’t religious countries, but rather, countries with a strong feminist presence at the government level, certainly not the case in the US); something can be “normal” in the sense that most people believe in it, without it being ethical or humane as well; the overwhelming majority of people in Nazi Germany believed Jews were a subhuman life form that should be eradicated; that was absolutely normal; in this country, now, the huge majority believe that everybody should follow and worship jesus christ and that those who don’t must burn in hell; that’s as “normal” as the belief that men going to strip clubs is healthy; however, just because most men do it, that doesn’t mean it’s the only worldview, or even a desirable one.
That’s all I have to say really.
Hey there, You’ve done an excellent job. I will definitely digg it and personally recommend to my friends. I’m confident they will
be benefited from this site.