Now Ye're Talking to - an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman

Neyite

You mentioned that a man cannot touch his menstruating wife the week of her period or a week after. So for approximately half of her menstruating life, she cant be touched? Does that refer to only sexual contact or does it apply to things like touching hands, or accidental touching?

What is the procedure if a man inadvertently or deliberately touches his wife out of necessity during this time (like she trips or faints or something)? Does he go through a cleansing or prayer ritual?

What about her children and touch during this time? Her dad? Her teen son? Or is it just her intimate partner that cannot touch her.

That a man cannot touch his menstruating wife suggests that it's perceived as unclean or dirty, and that she must be cleansed in the Mikvah before resuming physical contact. Is this the case?

Jjiipp79

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

Hi folks, will be very happy to answer any questions you might have

There is no such thing!

Atomic Pineapple

Thank you for answering my questions regarding science and going to the huge effort to answer all the questions, as an atheist it is interesting to see how much a religion allows its followers to learn and question. I'll admit it was disappointing to find out it appears to be a bit of a pseudo openness to learning from the outside but it is interesting to learn about all the same and I thank you for sharing.

WoolyJumper

I don't really know how to phrase this, but why Judaism over any other religion? What makes it more true for you than any other religion? Did you spend any significant amount of timing studying other religions? or was it just a case that you crossed passed with Judaism at a time when you were looking for answers?

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA

WoolyJumper wrote: »

I don't really know how to phrase this, but why Judaism over any other religion? What makes it more true for you than any other religion? Did you spend any significant amount of timing studying other religions? or was it just a case that you crossed passed with Judaism at a time when you were looking for answers?

It's hard to explain really- I just connected with Judaism unlike any other religion or nation. I kept finding logical flaws in all the other faiths I researched- Judaism was the only one which continually stood the test of relentless questions (and even encouraged further questioning!)

katydid wrote: »

Well, from what I know, men have more rights in Orthodox Judaism than women. Not specifically in marriage; for example, women are not allowed to become rabbinical court judges, and not allowed to be prayer leaders, rabbis etc. Jewish women were arrested at the Wailing Wall last year for daring to pray in the same manner as men.

As regards marriage, married women have to cover their heads, but married men don't. (you can hardly count the kippah as a head covering...)
A man has the right to divorce his wife at any time for any reason but a woman has no right to divorce her husband. The woman's role is seen as primarily the home maker; she is the one expected to do all the cooking and cleaning.

If I am wrong about any of this, please tell me. It doesn't sound to me that the wife has an equal role in either Judaism in general, or in marriage in particular.

This country may still have issues to resolve around the equality of women, but at least it's enshrined in law, and society generally recognises it as important. I just don't understand how someone could give up all that for a religion and a country that arrests women for praying!!

Re. becoming a Rabbinical court judge-- very, very few people ever reach such a position, and the study process to get there is extremely exhaustive. I don't see how a woman could raise a family (a much higher calling) as well as devote herself to years upon years of study of halacha.

The Jewish women arrested at the Kotel / Wailing Wall have been recognised by most for what they are- provocateurs. From what I have experienced and researched living here, they don't have any genuine purpose other than to rile up others and cause a nuisance. Their objectives of so-called 'equality' are flawed on so many levels- halachically and simply logically. Women can pray at the Kotel, as can men. Causing a scene at one of the holiest sites in Judaism, not to mention trying to draw attention to themselves physically is the antithesis of what it means to be a Jewish woman. We are not asked to stand in the corner, but it is known that the Jewish woman's power is from within and that she doesn't need to parade and expose herself publicly to be of huge importance in Jewish life. Call it anti-feminist, but I strongly agree that in life men and women both need to fulfill their separate roles to the best of their ability.

As for marriage- the sensuality of a woman and her hair cannot possibly be compared to that of a man. Look at any billboard or tv advertisement and you'll see how the female body is exploited continually like some kind of cheap commodity. This is why women are called upon to pay particular attention to modesty. That said, my husband covers just as much of his body as I do- sometimes more.

As for seeking a divorce, it must first be stated that divorce is always a complete last resort. Modern society often looks very casually on the union of marriage, which is why it is increasingly failing. Women can demand a divorce from their husband if he is abusive or otherwise fails to live up to his marital obligations (to provide food, clothing, intimacy etc). At the wedding, it is the man who signs a contract (Ketubah) stating his intentions to provide for his wife- his wife, on the other hand, goes into the marriage without promising him anything other than fidelity. Since it is the man who initiates the marriage contract, it is he who needs to dissolve it. There are extremely rare cases of men who unfortunately refuse to provide a divorce to their wives and such people are considered despicable human beings by all areas of society. Rabbis can coerce them into providing a divorce and the state of Israel can also imprison them until they do. It's not an easy situation, but only the party who created the contract can dissolve it. There is an upsurge in halachic 'pre nups' which avoid this situation, and I will be glad of any advancements made in this area.

As for cooking and cleaning, Judaism doesn't state who should do either of these. In my house, I do more cooking because I only work part-time but my husband does the vast majority of the cleaning. It's considered praiseworthy for a woman to take these tasks upon herself to allow her husband more time for Torah study (which is an obligation for him) but both I and all my friends are by no means tied to the home or kitchen. That said, women should prioratise and understand that while careers etc are to be encouraged, they can never be at the expense of their children or marital happiness. Without shalom bayit (peace in the home), everything falls apart.

4friggA wrote: »

Thanks for answering my question.
Why can't a man touch a woman during and after her period?
You say "others don't know when this time is, it's better not to touch at all in public.", why would anybody care if a man is touching a woman?
Does this apply to all men and women, i.e. family members, or just those in relationships?

This question relates to the laws of Taharat Mishpacha (family purity). We do not know the 'real' meaning of 'purity' as in the Tanach (and it certainly doesn't relate to the state of being clean or not). Basically, for the time a woman has her period and for one week afterwards, she is not allowed to be with her husband intimately. Beds are separated (this is why religious Jews have 2 single beds and not one double bed) and they refrain from touching each other, being undressed around each other or engaging in behaviour which could lead to the desire to be intimate.

After this period of approximately 2 weeks, a woman goes to the mikveh (a pool of water with exact measurements to include 'live' water i.e. water from the rain or a river etc) and immerses, reciting a blessing and emerging to be with her husband again.

Scientific evidence has already emerged to prove the benefits of this practice- women who refrain from relations during this time and pay attention to their cycle are much less likely to develop issues with their intimate areas and notice irregularities which could indicate grave illnesses, G-d forbid. Also, it is timed perfectly so that husband and wife reunite when the wife is at her most fertile, ensuring the continuation of the Jewish people.

I can also say that from personal experience, boredom can set in very quickly in an intimate relationship and this 2 week break each month has had an amazing impact on renewing our physical relationship every month and allowing a couple to get closer to each other emotionally for 2 weeks in addition to their physical relationship.

Before anyone asks, the 'hole in the sheet' thing is a myth...!!

Tombo2001 wrote: »

What you describe sounds very like other minorities in the country. Irish language speakers would be an obvious example, another would be the Methodist communities in places like Wicklow or Carlow. At this stage, even catholocism is definitely in the very small minority, if judged on things like regular prayer and mass attendance, receiving the sacraments etc.

My feeling would be that it would be wrong in that situation for parents to encourage for example their children to socialise only with other kids of their own faith or background, who are practising and are in strict adherence with the given faith or culture; because it would simply be too limiting. And by extension, an inevitable consequence of this is that cultural or religious values get diluted.

Is this something you would agree or disagree with.

Jews aren't forbidden from interacting and being friends with non-Jews. However, this doesn't mean they need to negotiate their own identity in order to appease or befriend others. I wouldn't raise Jewish children in Ireland, simply because I feel that it would be confusing for the child and unfair, when there are other options available of living among others who follow the same way of life. Allowing one's cultural and religious values to be diluted is a choice- we can choose the opposite too. Personally, I'd rather live a much less luxurious life in Israel than compromise on my faith anywhere else.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Also, your comment: "Reform Judaism in Ireland is, at best, Christianity with a Jewish flavour. They basically pick and choose what's convenient and throw out the rest. I simply can't identify with it or regard it seriously as Judaism at all."

I find that a little harsh. You are only able to live the way you live, by your own admission, because you left the country you grew up in, moved away from your family and friends to start a new life elsewhere. For a lot of people, that is a really difficult choice. To choose either their faith or their country is not a decision everyone wants to make; so sometimes they need to compromise, and I don't think they should be disrespected for that.

Being a Jew is difficult. However, choosing to 'compromise' by not following a religion as is clearly stated does not make sense at all. It shows a clear weakness in belief. After all, if a person truly believes that this is the truth, they will do whatever it takes and make any sacrifices necessary to do it. Jews have died for the sake of their faith- yet others can't even move as far as London for an active Orthodox Jewish community?

I chose a very difficult path, upset many people along the way, really suffered personally and literally made my life over on my own in a foreign country because I believe that Judaism is the truth. If someone's weakness in belief means that they're willing to compromise on fundamental tenants of the Jewish faith, that's their problem. In Leviticus 26:21 G-d states that if we treat Him and His commandments casually, He will deal casually with us. He won't care for us and provide all the things in life we take for granted. And it is only fair. If someone chooses to be a reform Jew, I feel sorry for them because they are losing out on the vast majority of Judaism's beauty. But G-d has given us all free will, and it's up to them how they exercise it.

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA

Neyite, I think my computer's filter has blocked your post, but if you can message it to me (and possibly remove problematic words? Sometimes it does this without any real reason) then I'd be happy to answer you

catallus

Hi, is there anything you miss about Ireland? Anything that makes you say "Well, in Ireland they do X this way and it's better!" ?

katydid

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

Re. becoming a Rabbinical court judge-- very, very few people ever reach such a position, and the study process to get there is extremely exhaustive. I don't see how a woman could raise a family (a much higher calling) as well as devote herself to years upon years of study of halacha.

The Jewish women arrested at the Kotel / Wailing Wall have been recognised by most for what they are- provocateurs. From what I have experienced and researched living here, they don't have any genuine purpose other than to rile up others and cause a nuisance. Their objectives of so-called 'equality' are flawed on so many levels- halachically and simply logically. Women can pray at the Kotel, as can men. Causing a scene at one of the holiest sites in Judaism, not to mention trying to draw attention to themselves physically is the antithesis of what it means to be a Jewish woman. We are not asked to stand in the corner, but it is known that the Jewish woman's power is from within and that she doesn't need to parade and expose herself publicly to be of huge importance in Jewish life. Call it anti-feminist, but I strongly agree that in life men and women both need to fulfill their separate roles to the best of their ability.

As for marriage- the sensuality of a woman and her hair cannot possibly be compared to that of a man. Look at any billboard or tv advertisement and you'll see how the female body is exploited continually like some kind of cheap commodity. This is why women are called upon to pay particular attention to modesty. That said, my husband covers just as much of his body as I do- sometimes more.

As for seeking a divorce, it must first be stated that divorce is always a complete last resort. Modern society often looks very casually on the union of marriage, which is why it is increasingly failing. Women can demand a divorce from their husband if he is abusive or otherwise fails to live up to his marital obligations (to provide food, clothing, intimacy etc). At the wedding, it is the man who signs a contract (Ketubah) stating his intentions to provide for his wife- his wife, on the other hand, goes into the marriage without promising him anything other than fidelity. Since it is the man who initiates the marriage contract, it is he who needs to dissolve it. There are extremely rare cases of men who unfortunately refuse to provide a divorce to their wives and such people are considered despicable human beings by all areas of society. Rabbis can coerce them into providing a divorce and the state of Israel can also imprison them until they do. It's not an easy situation, but only the party who created the contract can dissolve it. There is an upsurge in halachic 'pre nups' which avoid this situation, and I will be glad of any advancements made in this area.

As for cooking and cleaning, Judaism doesn't state who should do either of these. In my house, I do more cooking because I only work part-time but my husband does the vast majority of the cleaning. It's considered praiseworthy for a woman to take these tasks upon herself to allow her husband more time for Torah study (which is an obligation for him) but both I and all my friends are by no means tied to the home or kitchen. That said, women should prioratise and understand that while careers etc are to be encouraged, they can never be at the expense of their children or marital happiness. Without shalom bayit (peace in the home), everything falls apart.it.

Surely it's up to an individual woman to decide what to do with her life? Maybe she doesn't want to get married and have children, or maybe she will have a supportive husband who shares the parenting and household duties with her. I am frankly astonished that someone who grew up in Ireland would take such a view of a woman's role.

I am also astonished that you would make excuses for people being arrested for praying. By "causing a scene", what you actually mean is that they prayed in the same way men pray. Just because some people don't think women are equal to men doesn't mean that in a democratic society, women should be arrested for praying! YOUR interpretation of what it means to be a Jewish woman and their interpretation are different - and with all due respect, they are Jewish by birth, and have as much right to hold their beliefs about Judaism as someone who hasn't been a member of the religion for twelve months...

Again, regarding sensuality, surely it's a matter of opinion. I can think of many men whose curly locks make me swoon... :pac: If a woman is married, she's taken anyway, so what does it matter what other men think of how she looks? If she loves her husband, the admiration of other men won't have the slightest affect on her. In any case, many orthodox women wear wigs which are as nice, if not nicer, than their original hair, so the whole point of covering their hair is lost.

Regarding divorce, a woman can demand a divorce from her husband in exceptional situations, but he doesn't have to agree to it. He has to be taken to court and she has to make her case before an all male panel. Whereas he can divorce her for any reason or none.
Even the marriage contract shows the inequality in the relationship. He signs the contract, she is a passive participant in the event. In a civil marriage and in Christian marriage, both parties sign the register, because they are equal partners.

I'm glad to hear it's not an obligation on the woman in a marriage to do all the housework. I'm puzzled, though, why it's an obligation for a man to study Torah and not a woman. Surely it's everyone's duty to study their religion and better their knowledge, to the glory of God? If a woman wants to study Torah, is it her husband's duty to support her by taking on the burden of housework? If not, why not?

I'm sorry, but you may have yourself convinced, but the more you tell me, the clearer it is that men and women are not equal in Judaism. Nobody's careers should be at the expense of their families - that applies to men and women equally. A loving, supporting couple who see each other as equals can devote themselves to their family and support each other's life choices.

gzoladz

Would you know how many other Irish Jewish Orthodox people are in countries other than Ireland? Does such community exist? If so, have you considered doing anything to facilitate the exercise of the faith of the irish resident jews?

I went to Israel nearly 20 years ago and found it fascinating. Do you mind me asking in what part of the country you live?

Very insightful answers, thanks for taking the time to share your experience.

ballsymchugh

i think katydid just posted what many posters wanted to post, but were just tiptoeing too much about the place.

catallus

katydid wrote: »

Nobody's careers should be at the expense of their families - that applies to men and women equally...

Should that not be "nobody's family should be at the expense of their career"?

Just because you've been raised to believe that your career is more important than your family life doesn't make it true.

Mr. CooL ICE

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

Call it anti-feminist, but I strongly agree that in life men and women both need to fulfill their separate roles to the best of their ability.

katydid, she has answered your question already. You don't have to agree with her, but I don't think there is much more that can be said than that.

Pride Before Ignorance

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

katydid, she has answered your question already. You don't have to agree with her, but I don't think there is much more that can be said than that.

Agree. Katydid, you should learn when to give it a rest.

Nicolas Cage

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

katydid, she has answered your question already. You don't have to agree with her, but I don't think there is much more that can be said than that.

Yes, what I'm taking from it is that the mans and womans roles are equal, but different and rather rigid. I don't think it's that one is lesser than the other, although the divorce thing is a bit unfair, it's more that gender roles run on tramlines.

gzoladz

ballsymchugh wrote: »

i think katydid just posted what many posters wanted to post, but were just tiptoeing too much about the place.

Were posters expecting to agree with a choosen way of life? I dont think the AMA is for that. I find this a very interesting thread and I would respectfully ask you to enjoy it, learn what you like and agree to disagree what you don't.

Nobody is selling anything here, it is about sharing an experience.

I don't want the AMA will get ruined (as it happened with other AMAs).

Neyite

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

Neyite, I think my computer's filter has blocked your post, but if you can message it to me (and possibly remove problematic words? Sometimes it does this without any real reason) then I'd be happy to answer you

I've rephrased it below, hopefully it will get through:

Neyite wrote: »

You mentioned that a man cannot touch his wife the week of her period or a week after. So for approximately half of her fertile life, she cant be touched? Does that refer to only intimate contact or does it apply to things like touching hands, or accidental touching?

What is the procedure if a man inadvertently or deliberately touches his wife out of necessity during this time (like she trips or faints or something)? Does he go through a cleansing or prayer ritual?

What about her children and touch during this time? Her dad? Her teen son? Or is it just her intimate partner that cannot touch her.

That a man cannot touch his m**struating wife suggests that it's perceived as unclean or dirty, and that she must be cleansed in the Mikvah before resuming physical contact. Is this the case?

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA

Hi folks,
I was just posted Neyite's post, as it was blocked by my internet filter.

When I say that a man cannot touch his wife for the week of and week after her period, I mean any kind of touch. Even touching her clothes. Judaism understands that these feelings between men and women are very strong and it doesn't take too many triggers to get to a place where both sides become frustrated. I personally have felt that this time has been wonderful for allowing myself and my husband to grow closer to each other emotionally and spiritually, as the physical aspect is put aside and we're compelled to look more deeply into our relationship.

Of course, being pregnant, this condition no longer applies. Many feel that the quality of relations between husband and wife diminishes during this time as a result of being constantly 'available'- we've had to make more of an effort to keep our relationship fresh over the past few months.

If a man inadvertently touches his wife, there is no punishment or cleansing ritual. If necessity compels him to touch her, it's his duty to touch and help her. During labour, a husband should not touch his wife because she is bleeding, but if his touch is the only thing that can calm her and she's hysterical, he is allowed. I personally want to hire a doula for the birth and would rather he kept his distance for the whole affair!

Restrictions on touch only apply to her husband.

These restrictions aren't the result of a physical, but rather a spiritual impurity. Anything associated with death requires cleansing. For example, after leaving a cemetery one must ritually wash his hands. A woman's period is symbolic of potential for life which was not fulfilled, and for this reason she requires immersion. That said, women are not expected to be permanently pregnant for their whole lives and non-barrier birth control such as the pill and coil are allowed.

secondrowgal

Thanks for all your answers so far, it's a very interesting topic!

I would also like more insight into the non-touching of a woman for two weeks and then her immersion in the water. What is the reason for this? It looks like a cleansing ritual to me, and to be honest, if that's the case, I have a serious issue with that.

I don't understand how a woman menstruating is seen as unclean (not just in Judaism but that's the topic here), whilst it's perfectly "clean" for a male to insert his penis (outside of the body appendage, through which he also has to urinate), inside a female's vagina (inside the body, sterile, etc.) and that this is not seen as "unclean". I've tried to word this as anatomically as I can, but it's a genuine mystery to me.

secondrowgal

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

Hi folks,
I was just posted Neyite's post, as it was blocked by my internet filter.

When I say that a man cannot touch his wife for the week of and week after her period, I mean any kind of touch. Even touching her clothes. Judaism understands that these feelings between men and women are very strong and it doesn't take too many triggers to get to a place where both sides become frustrated. I personally have felt that this time has been wonderful for allowing myself and my husband to grow closer to each other emotionally and spiritually, as the physical aspect is put aside and we're compelled to look more deeply into our relationship.

Of course, being pregnant, this condition no longer applies. Many feel that the quality of relations between husband and wife diminishes during this time as a result of being constantly 'available'- we've had to make more of an effort to keep our relationship fresh over the past few months.

If a man inadvertently touches his wife, there is no punishment or cleansing ritual. If necessity compels him to touch her, it's his duty to touch and help her. During labour, a husband should not touch his wife because she is bleeding, but if his touch is the only thing that can calm her and she's hysterical, he is allowed. I personally want to hire a doula for the birth and would rather he kept his distance for the whole affair!

Restrictions on touch only apply to her husband.

These restrictions aren't the result of a physical, but rather a spiritual impurity. Anything associated with death requires cleansing. For example, after leaving a cemetery one must ritually wash his hands. A woman's period is symbolic of potential for life which was not fulfilled, and for this reason she requires immersion. That said, women are not expected to be permanently pregnant for their whole lives and non-barrier birth control such as the pill and coil are allowed.

Hi again,

I see that you have provided more detail here on my question - I think our posts crossed in the ether!

However, again I have an issue with this non-touching rule. Above you say that a husband is not allowed to touch his wife whilst in labour as she is bleeding! This is shocking to me! Giving birth is the epitome of celebrating life, not death, so there is absolutely no basis for this restriction if the reason for no touching during a period has to do with death. And to think that when a woman most needs and wants her husband that he can't touch her unless she is "hysterical" is frankly completely wholly sexist.

I fear that all organised religions are the same

diomed

I have it in my head that Jewish people in London drove Volvo cars. They would not drive German cars. Is this true?
What is your best Jewish Joke?

nc19

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote:

This question relates to the laws of Taharat Mishpacha (family purity). We do not know the 'real' meaning of 'purity' as in the Tanach (and it certainly doesn't relate to the state of being clean or not). Basically, for the time a woman has her period and for one week afterwards, she is not allowed to be with her husband intimately. Beds are separated (this is why religious Jews have 2 single beds and not one double bed) and they refrain from touching each other, being undressed around each other or engaging in behaviour which could lead to the desire to be intimate.

So for 2 weeks of every month(half the year) you can not even kiss or cuddle or anything? Crazy.

What if there was a terrible incident and your husband or you needed consoling, you can't even embrace?
Mad!

Triceratops Ballet

secondrowgal wrote: »

Hi again,

I see that you have provided more detail here on my question - I think our posts crossed in the ether!

However, again I have an issue with this non-touching rule. Above you say that a husband is not allowed to touch his wife whilst in labour as she is bleeding! This is shocking to me! Giving birth is the epitome of celebrating life, not death, so there is absolutely no basis for this restriction if the reason for no touching during a period has to do with death. And to think that when a woman most needs and wants her husband that he can't touch her unless she is "hysterical" is frankly completely wholly sexist.

I fear that all organised religions are the same

I think people forget that Judaism is one of the oldest religions around, and it's laws were set against a very different cultural landscape than our own.

That is one of the benefits of a secular society where changing attitudes and ideas can be reflected in national constitutions. But most major religions follow rules set down centuries ago, which reflect the attitudes and ideas of the time of inception.

I'm not saying that different treatment of women is in any way acceptable, but we're not here to debate sexism in religion we're here to learn from someone with a different world view than our own.

My question is prior to your conversion to Judaism were you very involved in Catholicism and just found you were not able to devote yourself as fully as you wanted to given the attitude to the church here, or is it that you "found" religion and from learning on the subject decided Judaism was for you

secondrowgal

dottie_lottie wrote: »

I think people forget that Judaism is one of the oldest religions around, and it's laws were set against a very different cultural landscape than our own.

That is one of the benefits of a secular society where changing attitudes and ideas can be reflected in national constitutions. But most major religions follow rules set down centuries ago, which reflect the attitudes and ideas of the time of inception.

I'm not saying that different treatment of women is in any way acceptable, but we're not here to debate sexism in religion we're here to learn from someone with a different world view than our own.

My question is prior to your conversion to Judaism were you very involved in Catholicism and just found you were not able to devote yourself as fully as you wanted to given the attitude to the church here, or is it that you "found" religion and from learning on the subject decided Judaism was for you

Thanks dottie_lottie - my intention is not at all to debate sexism in religion, this was just an observation based on that particular practise.

I understand completely that Judaism is one of the oldest religions around, but everything evolves and changes, even religion. Are adulterers stilled stoned to death, for instance? I don't believe so, but I'm open to correction.

And no matter that, if the purpose of cleansing is because of death, it still doesn't make sense since giving birth was ever about bringing life into the world.

So, my question is still about this non-touching rule - can the OP elaborate further please? Thanks!

katydid

catallus wrote: »

Should that not be "nobody's family should be at the expense of their career"?

Just because you've been raised to believe that your career is more important than your family life doesn't make it true.

No. Nobody's career should be at the expense of their family; in other words, their family is more important than their career. I should have thought it was clear.

Boards.ie: Niamh

Note:
I've just removed some off-topic posts.

Can I remind everyone that we are here to ask questions and to learn something new; we're not here to discuss sexism in religion or your personal views on Judaism. We have other forums for that if you wish to discuss it.

katydid

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

. Judaism understands that these feelings between men and women are very strong and it doesn't take too many triggers to get to a place where both sides become frustrated. I personally have felt that this time has been wonderful for allowing myself and my husband to grow closer to each other emotionally and spiritually, as the physical aspect is put aside and we're compelled to look more deeply into our relationship.

. During labour, a husband should not touch his wife because she is bleeding...

Anything associated with death requires cleansing. .

As someone in a relationship with the same person for many years, I can assure you that having an on-going close physical relationship does not mean getting bored, or doesn't take away from our close emotional bond. Just saying...

Why is touching a woman in labour not permitted? The bleeding has nothing to do with death or the loss of a potential life- it's the opposite, the sign of new life.

Neyite

What about touching other males? I can understand unrelated males - a lot of cultures have that, but could, say, your adult brother touch your hand /hug you / kiss your cheek during this two-week time?

Or your Dad, Granddad, teen son, nephew? Or is all touching by a non-husband male forbidden?

Edit: Crossed posts with Niamh.

So would the no touching during blood thing would apply with post natal lochia then? (Just so you know, mine lasted for 5 weeks.) What about a man holding a newborn with streaks of blood on them?

katydid

Boards.ie: Niamh wrote: »

Note:
I've just removed some off-topic posts.

Can I remind everyone that we are here to ask questions and to learn something new; we're not here to discuss sexism in religion or your personal views on Judaism. We have other forums for that if you wish to discuss it.

My apologies. I didn't intend to take the discussion off course. I just felt that some of her answers were unsatisfactory, and I am genuinely curious how someone raised in a society like ours can reconcile her upbringing with the inequalities she seems not to wish to acknowledge.

Benny_Cake

Thanks for answering my earlier questions, I have a few more if you don't mind!?

Do Hasidic Jews have set daily prayers or times for prayer? Or is it down to the individual?

Aside from modes of dress, what are the big differences between Hasidic Judaism and standard Orthodox Judaism?

What is the biggest misconception that you feel non-Jewish people have about Judaism?

Clearlier

I'm an Orthodox Jewish Irish woman, AMA wrote: »

My parents are completely Catholic, and their reaction to the conversion is outlined in this post. My conversion to Judaism, to make a long story short, stemmed from an encounter I had with a primary school teacher who taught us about the story of the exodus in depth. It sparked an inexplicable interest which simply grew from there. I truly feel that it woke something up in my soul which I'd been looking for all my life. In terms of coming to Israel, the only option an Irish person has to do an orthodox conversion is to go abroad. I chose Israel because I felt a deep connection and sense of belonging to the country, and haven't looked back since.

I'm wondering how long it took from your encounter with the primary school teacher to deciding that you wanted to convert? Had you any doubts about your decision? Do you still have doubts from time to time? If not, is that how you are generally in life or is it somewhat uncharacteristic?

I'm also wondering where the deep connection and sense of belonging with Israel came from? Had you visited many time before you moved?

Last question and I'll understand if you don't want to answer because it does head in the direction of political questions. I see judaism as a religion and Israel as a country but it doesn't sound that you would be hugely comfortable making that distinction?

Thanks for taking the time to answer our questions.