I thought it might be interesting to take a look back at some of the (IMHO) more interesting posts I put up in 2008. I've picked out what I thought were some of the better ones. Here are my picks. The ones that I think are the best of the best are boldfaced.
Silly logic and bad arguments
1/31 -- A Yated reader's take on Science and its predictions -- and my response to his silly examples.
11/19 -- People should stop issuing silly "Torah proofs" which have so many holes in them that you'd think they were made of swiss cheese. They do far more harm than good.
11/13 -- And the same goes for arguments against evolution.
Keeping Up With The Times
1/24 -- Sometimes it seems that some segments of the Jewish community refuse to acknowledge that the world changes and that things that worked in the past do not necessarily work now.
1/28 -- For example, the status of women driving -- is it the same as it was fifty years ago?
11/25 -- And is anything that a gadol says applicable at all times and in all circumstances? Or is it possible that some of what he said might have been influenced by his times and enviornment?
The Gedolim
2/26 -- Written in the wake of the fiasco surrounding the banning and cancellation of "The Big Event," I wondered if the gedolim are (regrettably) slowly becoming irrelevant to our daily lives because they don't relate to us as they did in the past.
3/4 -- Likewise, do the gedolim understand the nature of today's society, and how it differs from life in the shtetl?
Living Beyond Our Means (with no mention of tuition)
5/2 -- Should we spend more than we can afford for Chol HaMoed trips? You'd think the answer is obvious -- but apparently not to everyone.
10/30 -- How about for Ugg boots and $150 ties?
Going Overboard
2/6 -- Is it possible that we're going overboard on tznius issues?
12/21 -- Or is possible that we've gone even further than we thought possible (see the comments to this post).
9/4 -- There seem to be a lot of Rabbinic Committees lately. Is this where we're headed in the future? (dark humor)
How About Just Doing The Right Thing?
6/19 -- Yeah, copying tapes and CDs may be techically permitted in some circumstances. But is it right? What ever happened to just plain old honesty?
6/5 -- Yes, I want to increase halachic observance. So do haredim. But sometimes people cause far more harm to the cause with vigilante actions. Kind of makes you wonder if that's their goal to begin with...
10/5 -- And yes, there is a right way and a wrong way to demonstrate your commitment to Torah values. Too bad many people always choose the wrong way.
7/2 -- You'd think that a school that preaches the values of Kibbud Av V'Em wouldn't, at the same time, undermine a child's respect for thier parents. We'll, you'd be wrong.
Parenting and Education
12/23 -- It's sad how many people think that anedcotal evidence of the success of some high-school dropouts is a valid excuse to not pursue a secular education.
12/16 -- How about this? Instead of banning something (like the internet) outright, how about teaching responsible usage? Bans are a short term solution, but a long-term disaster waiting to happen.
11/26 -- And while we're at it, how about teaching your kids to make responsible choices in life in general -- even if it means an occassional mistake.
11/19 -- And please don't tell me that we have to ban something because if even one child falls victim to something it's automatically bad.
And How Can We Not Include Some Shidduch Maddness?
11/3 -- You'd think that two people who are engaged to be married could be adult enough to tell their parents to butt out when it comes to a dispute over whether to wear peyos up or down. You'd be wrong.
5/29 -- Boy on a date: You look very nice. Girl: How dare you say that to me? I'm not going out with you again!
Miscellaneous
1/26 -- How much of our Jewish practice comes from areligious sources and historical circumstance? How much of it is "Steam Pipe Judiasm?"
6/23 -- Exactly what is the function and purpose of Kollel? Perhaps if we knew that, then we would have a better idea of how to run the institution.
8/11 -- If we censor information that runs counter to traditional Torah thought, is there anything left to read? What would be left in Rabbi Falk's encyclopedia?
2/13 -- There are a lot of similarities between Orthodox Jews and the Ferengi from Star Trek.
That's my roundup. If you think I missed a post that you thought was very good, just let me know!
Enjoy!
The Wolf
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
What's The Ideal Marriage?
A while ago, I posted about the "custom" of the chosson stomping (or gently stepping) on a bride's foot after the chuppah to "show her who the boss is." Of course, the vast majority of people do not follow this "custom" (which is probably a good thing for shalom bayis all over the world).
Well, apparently, there are some who think that doing anything in moderation is never enough. I don't know if this is just one sick individual (I'm sincerely hoping it is) or something that happens more often. Ariella, over at Kallah Magazine blog points us to a Q&A with Rav Aviner on disclosing possible defects in shidduchim. At the very end of the Q&A is this tidbit:
Rabbi Aviner told of a groom who slapped his bride on the cheek in the Cheder Yichud (right after the wedding ceremony), "to teach her who is boss from the very beginning." When the girl came out crying, her cheek all red, her father called off the marriage on the spot.
I don't know how anyone with more than two functioning brain cells could possibly think that giving your brand-new bride a slap in the face in the Yichud room is a good way to start a marriage. But let's say (and for heaven's sake I hope) that this is just a sick individual.
Nonetheless, there *are* those in the Jewish community who advocate the fact that the man of the house has to be... the man of the house, so to speak. No less a personage than R. Avigdor Miller wrote in his book, Awake My Glory*:
1095. (There cannot be two kings. The marriage relationship is two-fold. 1) The wife is submissive. This is not only Jewish but natural. There can be no harmony when there are two commanders. Without this indispensable condition, the home is disordered. "Arrogance is unbecoming a woman" - Megillah 14B. For a man it is not an ornament, but for a woman it is as if she wore a mustache. 2) The second, but equally essential foundation: a man must always demonstrate respect for his wife. This is "the way of Jewish men that... honor and support their wives in truth" as stated in the Jewish marriage contract. "He honors her more than his own body" - Yevamos 62B, Bava Metzia 59A. He is the captain,but she is the First Mate whose counsel is respected. She cannot be made a doormat, she need not beg for money, she deserves some assistance in the house chores, and the husband sides with her against his kin. He must express frequent appreciation and give words of encouragement, and he should remember his wife from time to time with gifts, big or little. Husband and wife should always say "Please" and "Thank You" and never forget to be always polite to each other.)
I find it interesting that Rav Miller thought it had to be that the man was in charge and that there is no other way. His worldview dictated that the man has to be in charge, and that the wife has to be submissive (although I highly doubt he would have ever advocated hitting one's wife to make the point).
And yet, I know of many Jewish families where that isn't the case. I know of quite a few marriages where (from my outside perspective -- granted I don't know what goes on behind closed doors) the wife is the dominant person -- and that it works fine for them. They're happily married, they manage to raise kids that are perfectly sane, normal and well-adjusted and are indisputably leading a frum lifestyle and adhereing to halacha.
I can even tell you that, in my own household, we don't follow the "the man is the boss" gameplan. Neither Eeees nor I are dominant personality types (in fact, we're both quite laid back). We're both perfectly happy to run a marriage as a partnership. Of course, that doesn't mean that no one can make an independent decision - but I would never make a major decision that affects the whole household without seeking her approval. Nor would she do the same without seeking mine. In other words, we both have veto power over major decisions. To use R. Miller's phraising, we don't have two kings -- but we do have two partners. Our household is not a kingdom, and does not need an absolute monarch.
But then again, that's what works for Eeees and I. Other households may have different requirements based on the personalities of the people that are in them. In other words, I don't think that you can make a general rule for marriages that the man has to be the boss. Every marriage is different, because the people who are in the marriage are different than the people in any other marriage. Each marriage has to work as it sees fit - whether with one person in charge (whichever it is) or as a partnership.
The Wolf
* Any typos or spelling errors are mine.
Well, apparently, there are some who think that doing anything in moderation is never enough. I don't know if this is just one sick individual (I'm sincerely hoping it is) or something that happens more often. Ariella, over at Kallah Magazine blog points us to a Q&A with Rav Aviner on disclosing possible defects in shidduchim. At the very end of the Q&A is this tidbit:
Rabbi Aviner told of a groom who slapped his bride on the cheek in the Cheder Yichud (right after the wedding ceremony), "to teach her who is boss from the very beginning." When the girl came out crying, her cheek all red, her father called off the marriage on the spot.
I don't know how anyone with more than two functioning brain cells could possibly think that giving your brand-new bride a slap in the face in the Yichud room is a good way to start a marriage. But let's say (and for heaven's sake I hope) that this is just a sick individual.
Nonetheless, there *are* those in the Jewish community who advocate the fact that the man of the house has to be... the man of the house, so to speak. No less a personage than R. Avigdor Miller wrote in his book, Awake My Glory*:
1095. (There cannot be two kings. The marriage relationship is two-fold. 1) The wife is submissive. This is not only Jewish but natural. There can be no harmony when there are two commanders. Without this indispensable condition, the home is disordered. "Arrogance is unbecoming a woman" - Megillah 14B. For a man it is not an ornament, but for a woman it is as if she wore a mustache. 2) The second, but equally essential foundation: a man must always demonstrate respect for his wife. This is "the way of Jewish men that... honor and support their wives in truth" as stated in the Jewish marriage contract. "He honors her more than his own body" - Yevamos 62B, Bava Metzia 59A. He is the captain,but she is the First Mate whose counsel is respected. She cannot be made a doormat, she need not beg for money, she deserves some assistance in the house chores, and the husband sides with her against his kin. He must express frequent appreciation and give words of encouragement, and he should remember his wife from time to time with gifts, big or little. Husband and wife should always say "Please" and "Thank You" and never forget to be always polite to each other.)
I find it interesting that Rav Miller thought it had to be that the man was in charge and that there is no other way. His worldview dictated that the man has to be in charge, and that the wife has to be submissive (although I highly doubt he would have ever advocated hitting one's wife to make the point).
And yet, I know of many Jewish families where that isn't the case. I know of quite a few marriages where (from my outside perspective -- granted I don't know what goes on behind closed doors) the wife is the dominant person -- and that it works fine for them. They're happily married, they manage to raise kids that are perfectly sane, normal and well-adjusted and are indisputably leading a frum lifestyle and adhereing to halacha.
I can even tell you that, in my own household, we don't follow the "the man is the boss" gameplan. Neither Eeees nor I are dominant personality types (in fact, we're both quite laid back). We're both perfectly happy to run a marriage as a partnership. Of course, that doesn't mean that no one can make an independent decision - but I would never make a major decision that affects the whole household without seeking her approval. Nor would she do the same without seeking mine. In other words, we both have veto power over major decisions. To use R. Miller's phraising, we don't have two kings -- but we do have two partners. Our household is not a kingdom, and does not need an absolute monarch.
But then again, that's what works for Eeees and I. Other households may have different requirements based on the personalities of the people that are in them. In other words, I don't think that you can make a general rule for marriages that the man has to be the boss. Every marriage is different, because the people who are in the marriage are different than the people in any other marriage. Each marriage has to work as it sees fit - whether with one person in charge (whichever it is) or as a partnership.
The Wolf
* Any typos or spelling errors are mine.
Friday, December 26, 2008
The Ghosts of Grand Central
This is a photo of Grand Central Station in New York City. If you look closely at the picture, you'll see that there are people who have been "ghosted." This was done by leaving the shutter open for a long period of time -- 30 seconds in this case. People who stood still the entire 30 seconds came out in the picture. Those that moved around appear as "ghosts," with the degree of "ghostness" varying depending on how long they stood still.
Canon XSi, 18-55mm lens at 18mm
f/22, 30 seconds
Another thing to take note of is the fact that I used a *very* narrow aperture (f/22 -- remember: the higher the f/ number, the smaller the aperture and the larger the depth of field), and therefore just about all of the picture is in focus. If I used a larger aperture (such as f/4, for example), the entire background would have been a blur.
I'll go into more of a discussion on shutter speed at another time. In the meantime, enjoy the photo.
As always, comments, critiques and criticisms are welcome and appreciated.
The Wolf
Previous Photos:
Third Night
Shooting From A Different Angle
Duck!
Gargantua
Sunflower Arrangement (discussion of lens apertures and depth of field)
Empire (basic discussion of lenses)
Hovering Bee
Sunflower Macro
Statue of Liberty
Trinity Church, September 11, 2008
Manhattan Tulips
Dragonfly
Canon XSi, 18-55mm lens at 18mm
f/22, 30 seconds
Another thing to take note of is the fact that I used a *very* narrow aperture (f/22 -- remember: the higher the f/ number, the smaller the aperture and the larger the depth of field), and therefore just about all of the picture is in focus. If I used a larger aperture (such as f/4, for example), the entire background would have been a blur.
I'll go into more of a discussion on shutter speed at another time. In the meantime, enjoy the photo.
As always, comments, critiques and criticisms are welcome and appreciated.
The Wolf
Previous Photos:
Third Night
Shooting From A Different Angle
Duck!
Gargantua
Sunflower Arrangement (discussion of lens apertures and depth of field)
Empire (basic discussion of lenses)
Hovering Bee
Sunflower Macro
Statue of Liberty
Trinity Church, September 11, 2008
Manhattan Tulips
Dragonfly
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Should We Post About Extreme Customs?
In my post on (what I thought would be fictional scenarios of) segregation of the sexes, ZachM made an interesting comment that I felt deserved a response.
Here is Zach's comment:
Please, everyone, we know that these aren't rational approaches, do not make sense, and are completely abhorrent, but only some of us know that it is not the norm. Living in a modern orthodox community, i have been privileged to live with common sense, a strong sense of values, and equality and I truly believe that these are the sentiments of most Jews--not the crazy separatist views portrayed by those ultra-orthodox (though i do not like this designation, as it makes them seem more right, when all they are is ridiculously extreme and wrong); however, many especially *outsiders* looking in do not know this! Imagine how we Jews look to others who see posts like this! If i did not know that this was a small minority, i myself would be turned off of Judaism! Please, everyone, in your posts we could avoid a huge Chillul Hashem by pointing out that these outlandish customs are just that--outlandish--to the rest of the Orthodox community!
I'll admit off the bat that Zach has what is potentially a valid point: that people who read about the customs of some of the extreme (or even not-so-extreme) fringes of our society may be turned off to Judaism and may just dismiss us as a bunch of provincial, backwards kooks. However, I do have to disagree with Zach. I think that it behooves us to actively make the point that these customs do *not* represent normative Judaism. If we fail to do so, and simply hope that people who are "on the fence" about becoming frum aren't going to find out about the extreme fringes, we are doomed to failure -- because they will eventually find out. In today's day and age, where information flows freely, they will hear about the people who demand separate seat buses, or who beat up girls who walk through "religious" neighborhoods anyway. It's up to us to actively bring to the fore the fact that these people *do* exist and that they are *not* a part of normative Orthodox Judaism.
The Wolf
UPDATE (12/26 7:22am): Apparently, I misunderstood ZachM's point. He agrees with me after all. My apologies for misreading your comment Zach.
The Wolf
Here is Zach's comment:
Please, everyone, we know that these aren't rational approaches, do not make sense, and are completely abhorrent, but only some of us know that it is not the norm. Living in a modern orthodox community, i have been privileged to live with common sense, a strong sense of values, and equality and I truly believe that these are the sentiments of most Jews--not the crazy separatist views portrayed by those ultra-orthodox (though i do not like this designation, as it makes them seem more right, when all they are is ridiculously extreme and wrong); however, many especially *outsiders* looking in do not know this! Imagine how we Jews look to others who see posts like this! If i did not know that this was a small minority, i myself would be turned off of Judaism! Please, everyone, in your posts we could avoid a huge Chillul Hashem by pointing out that these outlandish customs are just that--outlandish--to the rest of the Orthodox community!
I'll admit off the bat that Zach has what is potentially a valid point: that people who read about the customs of some of the extreme (or even not-so-extreme) fringes of our society may be turned off to Judaism and may just dismiss us as a bunch of provincial, backwards kooks. However, I do have to disagree with Zach. I think that it behooves us to actively make the point that these customs do *not* represent normative Judaism. If we fail to do so, and simply hope that people who are "on the fence" about becoming frum aren't going to find out about the extreme fringes, we are doomed to failure -- because they will eventually find out. In today's day and age, where information flows freely, they will hear about the people who demand separate seat buses, or who beat up girls who walk through "religious" neighborhoods anyway. It's up to us to actively bring to the fore the fact that these people *do* exist and that they are *not* a part of normative Orthodox Judaism.
The Wolf
UPDATE (12/26 7:22am): Apparently, I misunderstood ZachM's point. He agrees with me after all. My apologies for misreading your comment Zach.
The Wolf
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
How About Addressing The Problem Instead of Just Changing The Definition?
Matzav.com reports on a new development in the Ger community in Israel. As it turns out, a Ger bochur is usually expected to become engaged to marry at the age of 18. However, for whatever reason, more and more Ger bochrim are passing the age of 18 without becoming engaged. Sometimes bochrim as old as 20 are still looking for their match. At that age, a Ger bochur is already considered "old."
I don't want to comment on whether or not an 18 year old is ready to get married. Let's just say, for the sake of argument that they generally are, and that it's a good thing for the community that they are married so young. That being the case, what do you do when you find out that more and more young men are becoming the Ger equivalent of "old maids" at 20 and 21?
Well, the Ger community in Israel hit upon a solution. They are simply going to add an extra year on to the elementary school curriculum. This will cause the high school graduates to be a year older. Therefore, 19 and 20 won't seem so "old" anymore.
Personally, this strikes me as simply a case of redefining what "old" is, rather than actually addressing the problem. If this is a major concern for the Ger community, what they should do is actually look into the reasons why bochrim are delaying engagement and address those reasons. Simply issuing a new definition of "old" is not going to solve the problem I'm willing to bet that, absent, any other action, we'll be hearing the same story in a few years, with the ages simply being one higher.
The Wolf
I don't want to comment on whether or not an 18 year old is ready to get married. Let's just say, for the sake of argument that they generally are, and that it's a good thing for the community that they are married so young. That being the case, what do you do when you find out that more and more young men are becoming the Ger equivalent of "old maids" at 20 and 21?
Well, the Ger community in Israel hit upon a solution. They are simply going to add an extra year on to the elementary school curriculum. This will cause the high school graduates to be a year older. Therefore, 19 and 20 won't seem so "old" anymore.
Personally, this strikes me as simply a case of redefining what "old" is, rather than actually addressing the problem. If this is a major concern for the Ger community, what they should do is actually look into the reasons why bochrim are delaying engagement and address those reasons. Simply issuing a new definition of "old" is not going to solve the problem I'm willing to bet that, absent, any other action, we'll be hearing the same story in a few years, with the ages simply being one higher.
The Wolf
Third Night
Yeah, I know it's not Friday, but the photo is time-sensitive. This is Wilma's menorah. Enjoy!
Canon XSi, 18-55mm lens at 41mm
f/5, 1/100 sec.
As always, critiques, criticisms and comments are welcome, encouraged and appreciated.
The Wolf
Previous Photos:
Shooting From A Different Angle
Duck!
Gargantua
Sunflower Arrangement (discussion of lens apertures and depth of field)
Empire (basic discussion of lenses)
Hovering Bee
Sunflower Macro
Statue of Liberty
Trinity Church, September 11, 2008
Manhattan Tulips
Dragonfly
Canon XSi, 18-55mm lens at 41mm
f/5, 1/100 sec.
As always, critiques, criticisms and comments are welcome, encouraged and appreciated.
The Wolf
Previous Photos:
Shooting From A Different Angle
Duck!
Gargantua
Sunflower Arrangement (discussion of lens apertures and depth of field)
Empire (basic discussion of lenses)
Hovering Bee
Sunflower Macro
Statue of Liberty
Trinity Church, September 11, 2008
Manhattan Tulips
Dragonfly
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
The Importance of a Good Education
Over at the CoffeeRoom, some of the folks were having an interesting discussion concerning the merits of getting a secular education. Most of the people there seem to believe that getting a secular education (at least through the high school level) is a good thing. As is usual in these types of conversations, some one puts forth the fact that there are those who have managed to succeed without an education. One poster put it this way:
there have been many successful people who have droped [sic] out of school
My response to this was:
I think that I would ask for a definition of the word "many" in this context.
there have been many successful people who have droped [sic] out of school
My response to this was:
I think that I would ask for a definition of the word "many" in this context.
Nonetheless, yes, there are people who have been successful despite dropping out of school - but those people are the (exceedingly rare) exceptions and not the rule.
Sure enough, someone pulled out a small list of people who did well despite dropping out from school. The list they provided was Albert Einstein, The Wright Brothers, Billy Joel, Tom Cruise "and a ton more."
Well, right off the bat, we can eliminate Einstein. While he may have dropped out at one point, he did end up earning a PhD from the University of Zurich. We can, in theory, also eliminate Cruise who did graduate from high school, but we'll discuss him a bit later.
The Wright Brothers did not complete high school -- that is a fact. Nonetheless, they lived in an age when completing high school was more luxury than necessity. Many people in the 1880s and 1890s did not complete high school; they were often forced to go looking for work to help out the family. That reality, however, does not exist today. You really can't use The Wright Brothers as a comparison. Were they alive as teenagers today, you can bet your bottom dollar that they would complete their high school education.
Billy Joel and Tom Cruise have a fairly unique quality -- they have been blessed with very unique talents. Not any shlub off the street can walk into a studio and open a $100M movie based on name recognition alone. Not any shlub can announce a concert at Shea Stadium and sell out the tickets 45 minutes after they go on sale. The fact is that these people (like many professional athletes) have such unique skills that they don't need an advanced education to make a ton of money. But the fact of the matter is that the reason they can make so much money is because their skills are exceedingly rare. You can't tell the average kid "it's okay to drop out of high school like Celebrity X," because the average kid doesn't have the God-given unique talents that Celebrity X has.
That being said, let's talk about what the more typical kid might find. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, here are the usual median weekly earnings of people in the US by education for Q3 2008:
Less Than High School: 471
High School Diploma: 618
Some College Education: 725
Bachelor's Degree: 1020
Bachelor's Degree or more: 1131
Advanced Degree: 1333
I have data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics going back to 2000 (email me if you want them, or you can get them from here), and the relationship between education and salary always holds. The more education the average person has, the more they earn.
Is it possible for a person with little or no education to strike it rich? Absolutely. But in just about every case, you'll find that the person either has an incredibly rare and valuable skill or is incredibly lucky (and won the lottery). For the other 99.99999% of the population, you need an education. In other words, you can't look at the exception and posit it as the rule.
It should be noted that an interesting development seems to be occurring in the chareidi world. The Jerusalem Post reported on Sunday that chareidim want to go to college. Many, however, cannot go to college because they lack the necessary skills that they would have learned in elementary and high school. However, I wonder if this isn't the beginning of a change in chareidi society towards seeing the value of a decent secular education as necessary to get by in day-to-day life. Even if these particular chareidim can never go to college, you can bet that they will see to it that their kids don't follow the same path that they did, and that their kids *will* get a decent high school education, even if they have to go through "back channels" to get it for them.
The Wolf
UPDATE (1:20 pm): The person who posted the original comment came back with this response, which I hereby dub "the stupidest quote of the day:"
i hold that statistics dont affect us yidden.
The Wolf
Monday, December 22, 2008
Some Random Observations
Has anyone ever noticed how well the words of Maoz Tzur fit with the tune of Deck the Halls?
If your latkes are baked in Canola oil instead of olive oil, is it really in commemoration of the miracle?
Who knew, when Adam Sandler wrote those immortal words "O.J. Simpson - not a Jew!" back in the '90s that anyone would ever care again beyond that year?
I'm not a big fan of Christmas carols. Aside from the fact that I'm Jewish, they just don't... move me. However, there is one that I happen to think is hauntingly beautiful - the Carol of the Bells. To hear a beautiful men's a capella version of it, click here.
It's very disheartening to read that things that you thought were so extreme that they surely can't exist actually, in fact, do (read the comments).
The Wolf
If your latkes are baked in Canola oil instead of olive oil, is it really in commemoration of the miracle?
Who knew, when Adam Sandler wrote those immortal words "O.J. Simpson - not a Jew!" back in the '90s that anyone would ever care again beyond that year?
I'm not a big fan of Christmas carols. Aside from the fact that I'm Jewish, they just don't... move me. However, there is one that I happen to think is hauntingly beautiful - the Carol of the Bells. To hear a beautiful men's a capella version of it, click here.
It's very disheartening to read that things that you thought were so extreme that they surely can't exist actually, in fact, do (read the comments).
The Wolf
Sunday, December 21, 2008
They're At It Again! This Time It's Separate...
... checkout lines at the grocery store.
You know, for the crowd who likes to scream "HaChadash assur min HaTorah" (that which is new is forbidden by the Torah) at every technical innovation, they never seem to frown at new ways of keeping men and women separate. Separate sides of the sidewalk? Separate seating on buses? Separate checkout lines at a grocery store? Yeesh, where are we headed?
One wonders where this is ultimately going to lead. Anyone want to take bets on how long it'll be before any of the following happens?
-- Separate weddings -- the kallah will send a shliach (messenger) to accept the kiddushin from the chosson. Separate receptions (in separate buildings) will be held for men and for women. The only time that a man might see a woman at all during the night is when the chosson and kallah arrive at their new home after the simcha.
-- Separate seating at the Shabbos table -- families will now have to eat the Shabbos meal separately. This is especially true if there are non-family guests who are invited over. A system will have to be devised so that men and women do not meet accidently in the kitchen while retrieving food for their separate dining rooms.
-- Single gender Parent-Teacher meetings -- only parents of the same gender as the teacher/rebbi will be allowed to meet with the teacher/rebbi. IOW, only fathers should go to meet their son's rebbeim, while only mothers should meet their daughter's teachers or son's pre-school moros (the issue of female pre-school teachers for boys will be addressed in the future).
-- Separate seating at restaraunts -- I'm sure it must be extremely unmodest to have women sitting out in the open while eating out with their families. After all, men from other families can ogle them from their seats. The only solution to this is to institute separate seating at restaurants.
All kidding aside, I think the best remark I've seen on this (and chumors in generals) came from a YWN commentator named gamzultova. He (she?) said:
When you make the derech 1 mm wide, don’t be surprised when more and more people fall off it.
How true.
The Wolf
You know, for the crowd who likes to scream "HaChadash assur min HaTorah" (that which is new is forbidden by the Torah) at every technical innovation, they never seem to frown at new ways of keeping men and women separate. Separate sides of the sidewalk? Separate seating on buses? Separate checkout lines at a grocery store? Yeesh, where are we headed?
One wonders where this is ultimately going to lead. Anyone want to take bets on how long it'll be before any of the following happens?
-- Separate weddings -- the kallah will send a shliach (messenger) to accept the kiddushin from the chosson. Separate receptions (in separate buildings) will be held for men and for women. The only time that a man might see a woman at all during the night is when the chosson and kallah arrive at their new home after the simcha.
-- Separate seating at the Shabbos table -- families will now have to eat the Shabbos meal separately. This is especially true if there are non-family guests who are invited over. A system will have to be devised so that men and women do not meet accidently in the kitchen while retrieving food for their separate dining rooms.
-- Single gender Parent-Teacher meetings -- only parents of the same gender as the teacher/rebbi will be allowed to meet with the teacher/rebbi. IOW, only fathers should go to meet their son's rebbeim, while only mothers should meet their daughter's teachers or son's pre-school moros (the issue of female pre-school teachers for boys will be addressed in the future).
-- Separate seating at restaraunts -- I'm sure it must be extremely unmodest to have women sitting out in the open while eating out with their families. After all, men from other families can ogle them from their seats. The only solution to this is to institute separate seating at restaurants.
All kidding aside, I think the best remark I've seen on this (and chumors in generals) came from a YWN commentator named gamzultova. He (she?) said:
When you make the derech 1 mm wide, don’t be surprised when more and more people fall off it.
How true.
The Wolf
Friday, December 19, 2008
Shooting From A Different Angle
A nice way to make your photos more distinctive is to shoot them from a different or unusual angle, so that we see the subject in a different way than we are used to seeing. For example, take another look at my Manhattan Tulips picture from a few months ago.
Sure, I could have shot the flowers from on top looking down at them. But that's how we *usually* see tulips. I didn't want just an ordinary photo, I wanted an extraordinary one. By shooting the flowers from a different angle than the one that we are accustomed to viewing them, the picture takes on a much different quality. The viewer sees the tulips in a way that he or she is not used to seeing them.
Another thing you can do by shooting at a different angle is create a perspective illusion. A perspective illusion is an effect whereby some aspect of the subject is made to appear much different than it truly is. I shot this picture in the Marine Park Salt Marsh.
Canon XSi, 18-55mm lens at 33mm
f/4.5, 1/1000 sec.
In reality, this plant was not very tall -- not taller than my waist. I took the shot while laying down on the ground underneath it, shooting upward. Sure, I could have shot the plant while standing up... but then it would have been just a boring picture of a nondescript plant. By shooting from a different angle, however, I made the picture (at least, IMHO) much more interesting.
Have you taken any pictures from unusual angles to make the subjects more interesting? If so, feel free to link to them in the comments section.* I'd love to see them.
As always, comments, criticisms and critiques are welcome and appreciated.
The Wolf
Previous Photos:
Duck!
Gargantua
Sunflower Arrangement (discussion of lens apertures and depth of field)
Empire (basic discussion of lenses)
Hovering Bee
Sunflower Macro
Statue of Liberty
Trinity Church, September 11, 2008
Manhattan Tulips
Dragonfly
*Hey, it's a Jewish (and family) blog. Please don't post links to inappropriate pictures.
Sure, I could have shot the flowers from on top looking down at them. But that's how we *usually* see tulips. I didn't want just an ordinary photo, I wanted an extraordinary one. By shooting the flowers from a different angle than the one that we are accustomed to viewing them, the picture takes on a much different quality. The viewer sees the tulips in a way that he or she is not used to seeing them.
Another thing you can do by shooting at a different angle is create a perspective illusion. A perspective illusion is an effect whereby some aspect of the subject is made to appear much different than it truly is. I shot this picture in the Marine Park Salt Marsh.
Canon XSi, 18-55mm lens at 33mm
f/4.5, 1/1000 sec.
In reality, this plant was not very tall -- not taller than my waist. I took the shot while laying down on the ground underneath it, shooting upward. Sure, I could have shot the plant while standing up... but then it would have been just a boring picture of a nondescript plant. By shooting from a different angle, however, I made the picture (at least, IMHO) much more interesting.
Have you taken any pictures from unusual angles to make the subjects more interesting? If so, feel free to link to them in the comments section.* I'd love to see them.
As always, comments, criticisms and critiques are welcome and appreciated.
The Wolf
Previous Photos:
Duck!
Gargantua
Sunflower Arrangement (discussion of lens apertures and depth of field)
Empire (basic discussion of lenses)
Hovering Bee
Sunflower Macro
Statue of Liberty
Trinity Church, September 11, 2008
Manhattan Tulips
Dragonfly
*Hey, it's a Jewish (and family) blog. Please don't post links to inappropriate pictures.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)