Feminist and halachik discourses inhabit different spheres of thought, and the development of a feminist halachik discourse must attempt to bridge the gap between the two. Feminist discourse deals with self-actualization, rights, and the empowerment of a gender group as a reaction against male-normative values. It is inherently secular, and women are guaranteed their rights by virtue of being born women and human. Halachik discourse deals with worshipping God and obligations. It does not have a gender-agenda, though unwittingly adheres to what modern feminists would term male-normative values. The discourse places people on different levels based on the way they use their lives, in terms of their religious beliefs and practices. It is inherently religious.
The Talmud does not have an attitude, either positive or negative, towards women. The Talmud is a compendium of the sayings, halachik rulings, and religious debates of rabbis. As such, it is also a compendium of the beliefs of those rabbis about women, which must have been influenced to some degree by personal experience and societal norms. Among the variety of views on women presented, some are positive and some are negative.
One’s views on gender are inevitably based in part on personal experience and societal norms; whether or not these views lessen the validity of the halachik opinions of those who expressed them is a different issue. For example, the American Constitution was influenced by the founding beliefs of the fathers, but we do not invalidate because of that. Instead, we introduce amendments only in places where we feel the current values of America differ so much that it would be unconscionable not to amend. (An example of this would be the amendment abolishing slavery.) Halacha, like the constitution, is the embodiment of a legal system. Perhaps what makes sense is to “amend” halachas that are not “outright prohibitions”, only when one feels that it has reached a point where the halacha as it is will alienate significant amounts of the Jewish population, that is to say, in a situation where “Et laasot” is applicable. In that case, one does not start from a position of questioning the validity of the rabbis, but rather starts in a position of accepting the validity, and questions it only when forced to do so by circumstance.
At the same time, we can not deny that we, like the rabbis of generations ago, are also influenced by both society and personal experience when it comes to our views of gender. There is nothing to say that our post-feminist view of gender is any more valid or objectively right than that, except for two things 1. As a human being, you always assume your opinion to be right unless proven otherwise 2. Society justifies the post-feminist, and not the pre-feminist view, thus making us sure of our position’s validity. In reality however, the fact that the majority of society thinks something does not make it right. Two hundred years ago, the majority of society thought slavery was not immoral, but today we not only reject that position, but wonder how it is possible that society used to believe that. Thus, unless we can prove that our bias is more valid than the bias of the rabbis, we have no right to uproot halacha purely on the ground that the rabbis were biased.
There is a great danger of feminists reading feminist discourse into the Gemarah. It is important to keep in mind that positive statements about women in the Gemarah, as well as “rights” that are accorded to them, such as the right to do a zimun, were not said with feminist intent. The concepts of feminism, as well as of rights, did not exist. Instead, the Gemarah deals with religious obligations and religious truths. In pursuit of deciding who is obligated to do what, and what those truths are, the Gemarah may sometimes say things that reflect positively upon women, but this is coincidental, and not an attempt on the Gemarah’s part to empower women, unless such empowerment be dictated by religious truth or obligation. (example: rights of a woman in marriage) Phrasing the obligation for zimun in terms of rights and feminism can actually have a negative effect by politicizing the issue, thus prevent women not comfortable with the religious feminist agenda from engaging in the mitzvah.
Nevertheless, feminism has invaded the consciousnesses of women today. Some women may choose to embrace it, others may choose to fight it, and yet others may fall somewhere in between the two extremes. Even anti-feminist women however, often take for granted many things considered “feminist”, such as the right to a college education, and may not realize the extent to which feminist discourse has invaded their lives; elements of feminism have become part of the common American vocabulary and culture, and Orthodox society is not immune to this development.
By acknowledging the pervasiveness of feminism in our daily lives, women can choose to appropriate those methods and vocabularies of feminism which they find meaningful in the context of a life dedicated to avodat Hashem. Sometimes this may be making a conscious decision to view tzniut as an act of empowerment, while acknowledging that may or may not have been the original intent of the halachas. Other times, that may be choosing to go to college and pursue a satisfying career, while not allowing feminism to invade one’s religious life. Sometimes it may mean going to a minyan where Pesukey Dezimrah are led by women. Religious feminism, like the increasingly decentralized secular feminism of today, is all about individual choice.
Religious feminist discourse can deal with self-actualization in the context of hishtadlut and one’s relationship with God, rights to participate in religious obligations and take on voluntary religious acts, and empowering women to learn Torah, an area long dominated by men. (After all, until about 100 years ago, formal women’s Torah education was almost unheard of.) It can appropriate the language of feminism to discuss the halachik reality. Furthermore, the discourse of Halacha has much to add to an understanding of feminism, which can be seen in terms of obligations to other women, appreciating women as beings created by God and endowed with tzelem Elokim, and trying to right the gender imbalance as part of the pursuit of justice, in fulfillment of the maxim, “Tzedek tzedek tirdof”.
No comments:
Post a Comment