Thursday, July 14, 2016

An immodest prohibition: Does a strong concern with modesty lead to an increased unhealthy awareness of sexuality?

JPost  by    SEYMOUR HOFFMAN
The writer is a supervising psychologist at the Marbeh Da’at Mental Health Center, Mayanei Hayeshua Medical Center. He edited Rabbis and Psychologists: Partners or Adversaries (2014), Reader for the Orthodox Jewish Psychotherapist: Issues, Case Studies and Contemporary Responsa (2014) and authored Thinking Out of the Box: Unconventional Psychotherapy (2015).
‘...we no longer aim to produce a community of pious persons. Rather, we are striving to engineer a community where men simply never see women’ – Dr. Nachum Klafter

Jewish law insituted prohibitions, guidelines and safeguards regarding the interaction between men and woman – prohibitions of abiding alone with, touching and looking at a person of the opposite sex. It did not institute separate sides of the street for men and women to walk on, or separate hours for men and women in supermarkets. It did not obligate women to sit in the rear of buses.

Dr. Nachum Klafter, a prominent Orthodox American Jewish psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and academic, opines that “severe standards for modesty and gender separation have lowered the threshold for sexual stimulation, which has led to an increase in sexual problems. Gender separation, when it becomes so extreme, causes a shift in the locus of control from internal to external. With this approach, we no longer aim to produce a community of pious persons. Rather, we are striving to engineer a community where men simply never see women.”

Ultra-Orthodox publications do not include pictures of modestly dressed women and even altered the photograph of the new Israeli government so that the faces of the female ministers were either pixelated or removed entirely. In Beit Shemesh, the word “isha” [woman] was spray-painted over on a sign for a women’s health clinic.

In the article, “An immodest obsession: Vanishing Women,” (The Jerusalem Post, August 14, 2015), Shoshanna Keats- Jaskoll highlights the dangerous trend of erasing women from the public sphere in haredi communities in Israel and the US. In the article, Keats-Jaskoll interviews Menachem Schloss, a Beit Shemesh haredi psychotherapist. “A clear result of extremes in tzniut [modesty] is, ironically, pornography,” Schloss is quoted as saying.

“People with such mind-sets [that women should be hidden from view] are far more likely to perceive normal human drives as an addiction issue.”

As a result of this approach, young haredi men absorb the message that women are primarily sexual objects, and one has to be always on guard not to fall prey to their temptations. These men do not have the opportunity to learn how to interact respectfully with women or to appreciate and value them for their intelligence, personality traits, talents and contributions to society. Many young haredi men feel uncomfortable speaking to females, and they avoid looking at them even though these women are modestly dressed.

Recently, Rabbi Yitchak Zilberstein, a highly respected arbiter from Bnei Brak, in reply to a question raised by a haredi psychiatrist, recommended that limits for the sake of modesty should be placed on treatment by psychotherapists of patients of the opposite gender. Klafter, in an excellent article titled “Psychotherapy Treatment with Patients of Opposite Sex,” wrote: “It has been suggested to me that perhaps Rabbi Zilberstein’s advice is appropriate for a therapist who lives in the type of hassidic or haredi community where such efforts are made to prevent any interaction, public or private, between men and women.”

Keats-Jaskoll, in her article, points out that Rabbi Haim of Volozhin (18th century), one of the outstanding Torah scholars of his day, discusses the paradox of lustful thoughts, maintaining that when a man commits to never looking at a woman, his desire will burn like fire. “The very thing he seeks to avoid will come to dominate his mind,” she writes. [...]

In a responsum dealing with the inevitability of seeing and coming into contact with women in public places, the above author refers to Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, the most respected halachic authority of the last century, ruling that “one should be capable of riding on buses or subways in close contact with women without becoming sexually aroused.”

He adds that if an individual is not capable of doing so without becoming sexually stimulated, he would indeed be obligated to avoid being around women, but would also be obligated to take steps to change himself. “If one knows that he has a lustful nature and that he will become sexually aroused – then it is prohibited even if he needs to travel on buses and subways. But Heaven forbid that a person should be that way! This is a result of idleness.... therefore one needs to be involved in Torah study and in work, so he will no longer be like this.” [...]

39 comments:

  1. See Rashi Yeshaya 3,19 vehar'alos

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nonsensical look at the torah.
    "Many young haredi men feel uncomfortable speaking to females, and they avoid looking at them even though these women are modestly dressed."
    The writer seems to indicate that this is something to be ashamed of. On the contrary, it's somting to be celebrated.
    This obsession with the way charedim live is unhealthy, me thinks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Politically IncorrectJuly 15, 2016 at 3:33 AM

    I'm amazed that people like him or Shoshanna Keats-Jaskoll call the shots. ...actually, I remember once when she came to our blog to protest our protest against the bogus Tamar Epstein heter, she basically whined that we are trying to stop it, logical argument was beyond her scope. ..even an argument of who used offensive language first, was too much for her. With all polite requests to set the record straight, she stopped responding. ....I guess that they only call the shots on *their* blogs, or to like minded individuals, here, for example, they won't last a minute. ....

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why is th author and or dr klafter addressing this to the general public? They should be addressingcthis to the characterdi leadership

    ReplyDelete
  5. Regarding the rav zilberstein question, wouldn't having a therapist of the opposite gender only complicate the therapy? (Unless one ofthe purposes is to acculturate the patient to the opposite sex.)

    ReplyDelete
  6. There was a case of a chassidic child being interviewed for (turned out to be unfounded) abuse, where the child claimed he was subjected to nudity. Turned out, in his mind, a female dressed what we call inappropriately, but society accepts (say short sleeves, short skirt or pants), is considered naked.

    ReplyDelete
  7. thanks for sharing - I am interested to know the source of the R' Chaim Volozhin's quote - paradox of lustful thoughts, maintaining that when a man commits to never looking at a woman, his desire will burn like fire. It sounds like - what you resist persists and explains why at the same levels of frumkeit , there are many more ' nifgahei technologiah' in the charadie community than elsewhere

    ReplyDelete
  8. There are a number of quotes which indicate that in order to maintain bechira - a strong focus on avoiding sexual temptation increases the temptation.

    These are from volume II of my Child and Domestic Abuse.

    Avnei Milium (Introduction):… Our Sages say that whoever is greater his yetzer is greater. That is because there is no comparison of one who has bread in his basket to one who doesn’t. When the spirit is closed in, it makes a greater effort to break through the restrictions and escape. Therefore one who holds to the path of Torah without letting his lust to express itself – the yetzer harah does not have bread in his basket because it is highly unlikely for the person to do a really disgusting sin. Therefore his yetzer harah becomes stronger and the power of his lust which is being restrained is aroused to escape the restraints and act. It is different with a person who is not a tzadik since his yetzer harah has bread in its basket. Meaning the yetzer harah has the ability to influence through lust. Since the yetzer harah is not locked in, it doesn’t make efforts to go out. This is what Tosfos (Kiddushin 31a) concerning that the one who is commanded has a greater yetzer. That the one who is not commanded to do the mitzva has bread in his basket because if he wants he can ignore the mitzva. However this picture changes over time. That is because it is well known that one who gets habituated to constant pleasure that it is no longer pleasing to have the same thing everyday. Therefore the power of lust and its strategies change everyday as is known that the way of drunkards is to search new ways to get pleasure…

    Habituation reduces lust
    Levush (O.H. Minhagim 36): It says in Sefer Chasidim (393), “Any place where men and women can see each other e.g., a wedding meal – one should not say the beracha shehasimcha bim’ono. That is because there is no joy before G d when there are lustful thoughts.” However we do not observe this practice today. Perhaps it is because in contemporary times it is normal for men and women to be together and therefore seeing women doesn’t produce significant lustful thoughts. Because of this happening regularly we have become habituated to women and view them as if they were “white geese”. Therefore since we live in these circumstances there is no problem for saying the beracha.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks - I like especially what the Levush says - I was wondering in what sefer , page etc does R' Chaim Me'volozhin say his words

    ReplyDelete
  10. My original article was not addressed to the general public. It was addressed to therapists who were confused by a ruling which forbade them from treating therapists of the opposite sex (despite the fact that that hundreds of frum therapists have treated patients of the opposite sex for many decades with full support of the poskim). Rabbi Eidenson shared this article on his blog because he thought it was of interest to his readership, and Dr. Hoffman printed my article in his book, which was addressed to therapists and rabbonim. As far as the recent article in the Jerusalem Post, you'd need to ask Dr. Hoffman what his intent was. I was unaware that he was writing this or quoting from my article, and I did not learn about it until friends informed me that they had seen it. (Dr. Hoffman does not require my permission to quote from a published chapter.)
    -Nachum Klafter

    ReplyDelete
  11. Source:
    See sefer Keser Rosh - new print from 2012 page 94 (entry 135) and see foot notes on the side and bottom. Old print - page 72 (entry 195).
    The old print is inside siddur hagra ishei yisroel.

    However, the source was misquoted in the article to push Keats-Jaskoll's agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  12. can you send me a copy so I can post it?

    ReplyDelete
  13. It is also in She'iltos (78) and Hanhagos yishoros (92) of R' chaim Volozhin

    ReplyDelete
  14. Politically IncorrectJuly 25, 2016 at 5:46 AM

    Upon further thought, since my last comment, did anybody ask Keats-Jaskoll who her Da'as Torah is? Is she aware of such a thing at all??

    ReplyDelete
  15. I sent it to your yadmoshe email address

    ReplyDelete
  16. "there are many more ' nifgahei technologiah' in the charadie community than elsewhere"

    Do you know for a fact that this is so? How do you know this?

    ReplyDelete
  17. “Any place where men and women can see each other e.g., a wedding meal – one should not say the beracha shehasimcha bim’ono. That is because there is no joy before G d when there are lustful thoughts.”
    However we do not observe this practice today.
    HHUH????
    we Do observe this today more than ever' as ther is a mechitsah at chareidy weddings etc.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Have you never been at a "chareidi" sheva berachos without a mechitza? I've been at many.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I actually wrote to her and she sent me o foto of the page http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=31446&st=&pgnum=19&hilite page 19
    קצה] הסתכלות עריות ושיחתן אמר זה הכלל כל מה שינדור א״ע ויפרוש מראיה אח״כ אם יראה ויביט יבער בו היצר כאש, אלא כשדעתו לילך בשוק יתפלל ויבקש רחמים לבל יכשל ח׳יו בשום נדנוד חטא והרהור עבירה ר׳ל;
    I checked Hebrew books and on the first page the author appears to be a talmid of R' Chaim - who wrote these notes on shiurim he had heard from R' Chaim , also stories about the behaviors and actions of the Vilna Gaon and worthy behaviors he would like to remember from his teacher
    כתר ראש - הנהגותיו שנכתבו בידי תלמידו רבי אשר הכהן משערשוב. - wi

    ReplyDelete
  20. an observation of a rav working in the far east - give a chareidi and dati leumi - same level a smart phone - the chareidi has a fall - here in Israel - you hear about kids and men who within a couple of months give up yiddish keit and the smart phone is blamed

    ReplyDelete
  21. We don't observe it today. This is not only about weddings; it is about sheva brachos meals as well. Those often have no mechitza.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Is such seating therefore permitted? Just because they claim membership in the haredi club?
    Is that a heter to say 'shehasimcha be'meono"?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Politically IncorrectJuly 26, 2016 at 12:01 PM

    I am surprised that the Gemara Brochos? that says that (not exact quote) "improper thoughts are one of the 3 things that a person (at least the average one,) is not saved from even for a single day", is given consideration in the aforementioned p'sakim. True, social norms may change, but human nature for the most part (if any) does not. ...certainly a factor that would initiate unacceptable thoughts. Some chassidim (like the ones who segregate the conflicting genders to separate auditoriums) and/or Yerushalmis would definitely agree. ....

    ReplyDelete
  24. Politically IncorrectJuly 26, 2016 at 12:06 PM

    More or less true, question would be why. ...

    ReplyDelete
  25. while it is normal to have spontaneous improper thougths it is required to do you best to avoid them or stop them. Reb Moshe Feinstein has a teshuva where he paskens it is permissible to walk down the street as long as it is for some purpose and thus your thoughts are concerned with watching where you walk so that you can where you want to go. The question is whether extreme sexual segregations produces a lower amount of sexual thoughts or whether it increases it or at least goes as over sensitivity to the thoughts and is thus counterproductive. Rav Moshe's teshuva about sitting on a bus next to a woman is important because he says that there must be something wrong with you if it bothers you but that if it does you shouldn't do it.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I hear. But I think the dati leumi goes to the same fall websites but just doesn't see it as a fall and can move on with his life as if nothing happened. Whereas the chareidi can't deal with himself after looking at what he looked at. his guilt etc. But this is a totally different phenomenon, not connected to the phenomenon being discussed here.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Chareidi sheva brochos do have a mechitza.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I have been by dozens that have not. You are welcome to claim that they were not chareidi, but in fact they were, if you consider black-hat yeshivaleit, bnei Torah and rabbonim "chareidi," as I do.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Some do, some don't. I have been at both types, especially in the non-Chassidish, American community.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Just because one is chareidi does not indicate whatever he does is halachicly most proper.

    ReplyDelete
  31. the chareidi fall often is giving up on yiddishkeit , not getting back on track , this is very much of what is happening with teenagers - As I said the Keser Rosh basically says - what you resist persits - so the high profile campaign against cell phones actually builds up a passion for them - what is needed is more of building people who can see the positive and act of the positive rather than trying to control the environment -
    קצה] הסתכלות עריות ושיחתן אמר זה הכלל כל מה שינדור א״ע ויפרוש מראיה אח״כ אם יראה ויביט יבער בו היצר כאש, אלא כשדעתו לילך בשוק יתפלל ויבקש רחמים לבל יכשל ח׳יו בשום נדנוד חטא והרהור עבירה ר׳

    ReplyDelete
  32. That is neither here nor there. You wrote "Chareidi sheva brochos do have a mechitza." That, as a categorical statement, is false.
    As to your other point, if you would like to learn why gedolei Torah such as R' Moshe Feinstein disagree with your assessment of what is right and wrong, be my guest and do some research. I think there might even be a teshuva of R' Moshe about it.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "Halachically most proper" wasn't the issue. It's a red herring. The question was whether the practice is followed at chareidi sheva berachos, and the answer is not necessarily.

    ReplyDelete
  34. We're not discussing permitted or not, we're discussing practice. You want to ask shaalos, find someone else.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I see no teshuva anywhere in the Igros in any way justifying having a sheva brochos without a mechitza of some sort. Just because, even a significant number of people, who are members of whatever group do something does not indicate it is halachicly justified or proper.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Try Orach Chaim 1:41, Orach Chaim 5:12.

    ReplyDelete
  37. To what letter was Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach responding and what exactly is he referring to from the Leket Yosher?

    In hichos yichud we find that someone who is isko im hanashim is suro ra and considerd a parutz.

    I think that although in general habituation desensitizes for the good, it also desensitizes for the bad as we see that in our times there is a lot of znus going on. I don't know how to compare now to the olden days but I do know that in the most recent years since the internet, there is a lot more znus and to'aiva among Yidden and also among goyim then there was before.

    To answer the paradox I say:
    Experiences which desensitize are a bridge. So while it is true that on the other side of the bridge, meaning once you have crossed it, you are less sensitized to these stimuli, the actual bridge is the place of nisoyon.
    והבן כי הוא עמוק

    ReplyDelete
  38. Thank you. You have addressed the first 2 lines of my comment? What about the rest of what I said?

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.