Who says people are equal? Equality is sort of a false word.
But my husband does not have AUTHORITY over me. We are partners. He does not have the final say and neither do I.
Can you please explain to me the importance of a halachic will?
If you didn't decide to forego spousal support in favor of keeping the money you earn, he would have both authority and final say in finances, if nothing else.
Here's a brief explanation of halachic will- you can read the first couple of paragraphs for the basics.
Saw, you can't halochically absolve as you want when it comes to your finances.
The bechor inherited double for several reasons including the fact that he was the one who was supposed to support the mother. When someone dies intestate in EY today his wife inherits 50% and his children inherit 50% by Israeli law. By Jewish law she inherits her kesuba, the things that she came into the marriage with (nichsei tzon barzel) and her clothing and personal items and nothing else. Her husband can gift her things a minute before he dies and that's what a halochic will is and many of us have one.
The will stipulates that when we die we aren't giving our children or spouse anything as that goes against halocho but rather that a second before we die, a clause goes into affect "gifting" things to people as we wish. That's how you get around the halocho of a bechor inheriting or a wife NOT inheriting. And yes, many many frum jews here in EY and outside too have wills like that.
I have a feeling that some of you posters aren't reading what I am writing as I seem to be the last mohican here writing about a father being the head of the household.
So when I say "HEAD" some of you are reading that as DICTATOR, others are reading that as BOSS and some are reading it as BENEVOLENT DESPOT or any kind of DESPOT or whatever word you want to use.
Please note - for precision's sake, I wrote and have only written and will only continue to write one word that means something TOTALLY DIFFERENT (YES I AM SHOUTING MAYBE THAT WAY PEOPLE WILL FINALLY READ WHAT I AM WRITING AND NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO READ!!!!!) than "Head".
The head of the household can be a nominal head if the couple agrees it to be such, but the husband remains the head for reasons of derekh eretz to husbands and particularly to fathers. There is much less of a problem or issue or any other word you want, if someone is referring only to the relationship between husband and wife. But as soon as children come into the equation it becomes a lot more compelx. And today especially when there is so much mixup and so little authority of the best and most positive kind, the kind of authority that is full of responsibility as per "the buck stops here", the "final instanzia" the person one turns to and one relies upon etc. it is so important in a family that it be a father.
Otherwise...basically a father (who is also a man, let me remind you) is being emasculated. No matter how you turn it. Because men and women aren't equal. I hate to bring in a horrible example, but that's why usually it is = may we never know from it - men who rape women and not the opposite, and if you want to take seks out of it, men who rob women and not the other way around usually and lots of other things. It's a form of trying to use force (sekx is voilence in this case, nothing more than that) to show dominance because it comes with the testosterone territory.
NO DO NOT READ ME WRONG. I am NOT condoning any act of violence by anyone, any time. What I am saying is that the way the world is build, not in terms of social convention ( I'm big on that one as you know) but biological and hormonal convention (testosterone versus estrogen/progesterone), male characteristics are, among other things, authoritative. And when a man doesn't get some type of recognition of that, it is a form of emasculation. That's what we all talk about with role modeling here which is what we do with our kids in judaism all the time. Men have roles, women have roles and they ARENT the same roles. Women aren't chayav to go to minyan, learn torah for torah's sake, keep mitzvos aseh shehazeman graman, and...men are given the halochic authority over many family fields.
That isn't to say that a couple can't decide together what works for them in terms of division of responsibility. But in front of children, part of role modeling at least for me and as I was taught good Jewish role modeling is, consists of the father being the "head of the household".
NOT the boss. NOT the dictator. I can't even begin to express what "head of the household" means but it isn't any of those things. It is a special kind of respect that he should receive that is no MORE but nevertheless DIFFERENT than the kind of respect that women receive.
Let me end this incredibly long post with something I was taught.
There are two places that father and mother are mentioned as part of a torah injunction.
One is Kabed es ovicho vees imacho - Honor thy father and mother.
The other is "Ish imo veoviv tirau" - a man (person) should fear his mother and father.
Chazal ask why the reverse order? And answer that because a child is closest to his mother it is natural that he gives her honor but as he is usually more removed from his father it is more natural that he fears his father. Therefore Hashem tells us that we have to work on just the opposite. To first honor our father and then our mother, because the other way around comes naturally, and to first fear our mother and only then our father, because the other way around, to fear daddy and not mommy (to whom you are close on a daily basis at home being brought up by her, hence you fear her less - familiarity breeds...less fear I guess) first is natural.
What do we learn from this? That the torah way was for a child to be closer to mommy than to daddy and to honor mommy more because he is around her more. Therefore a child (and who does a child learn from if not from mommy who is around more) has to be given an example to honor daddy more AS HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD and it is important for him to see mommy do so as well. Children learn to get up for their father when they see their mother do it as well. When it's just a couple alone, a woman doesn't have to get up for her husband, but it is a lovely gesture of respect. Nothing says that a husband can't get up for his wife as well (as my husband does for me always) to teach children ALSO to stand up for mommy.
Which brings us back to what I wrote. Don't give it a peirush rashi which they you can knock down as a straw man. I didn't say BOSS I didn't say DICTATOR. I said HEAD.
If you marry a boss or a dictator -your problem. Head is something totally different. Someone that not only CAN you respect but you WANT to respect. Not only someone that you CAN honor but that you want to honor. And someone that you LOVE so much that you want to do everything possible to give them the kovod and position - out of love - that they deserve from you.
Who says people are equal? Equality is sort of a false word.
But my husband does not have AUTHORITY over me. We are partners. He does not have the final say and neither do I.
Can you please explain to me the importance of a halachic will?
If you didn't decide to forego spousal support in favor of keeping the money you earn, he would have both authority and final say in finances, if nothing else.
Here's a brief explanation of halachic will- you can read the first couple of paragraphs for the basics.
Sorry, I used the wrong term. I wasn't talking about that kind of halachic will. I meant the way wills were originally handled (double to the bechor etc).
Who says people are equal? Equality is sort of a false word.
But my husband does not have AUTHORITY over me. We are partners. He does not have the final say and neither do I.
Can you please explain to me the importance of a halachic will?
If you didn't decide to forego spousal support in favor of keeping the money you earn, he would have both authority and final say in finances, if nothing else.
Here's a brief explanation of halachic will- you can read the first couple of paragraphs for the basics.
Sorry, I used the wrong term. I wasn't talking about that kind of halachic will. I meant the way wills were originally handled (double to the bechor etc).
I don't know much about bechor vs younger sons. I was bringing up wills with regard to allowances made for wives and daughters, who are not considered heirs according to halacha.
Who says people are equal? Equality is sort of a false word.
But my husband does not have AUTHORITY over me. We are partners. He does not have the final say and neither do I.
Can you please explain to me the importance of a halachic will?
If you didn't decide to forego spousal support in favor of keeping the money you earn, he would have both authority and final say in finances, if nothing else.
Here's a brief explanation of halachic will- you can read the first couple of paragraphs for the basics.
Sorry, I used the wrong term. I wasn't talking about that kind of halachic will. I meant the way wills were originally handled (double to the bechor etc).
I don't know much about bechor vs younger sons. I was bringing up wills with regard to allowances made for wives and daughters, who are not considered heirs according to halacha.
I don't know anyone nowadays that writes their spouse or daughters out of a will (or rather, just leaves their assets to their sons). IMO, its not applicable nowadays really and I would never do that to my daughter. Times are different and finances are handled differently.
Who says people are equal? Equality is sort of a false word.
But my husband does not have AUTHORITY over me. We are partners. He does not have the final say and neither do I.
Can you please explain to me the importance of a halachic will?
If you didn't decide to forego spousal support in favor of keeping the money you earn, he would have both authority and final say in finances, if nothing else.
Here's a brief explanation of halachic will- you can read the first couple of paragraphs for the basics.
Sorry, I used the wrong term. I wasn't talking about that kind of halachic will. I meant the way wills were originally handled (double to the bechor etc).
I don't know much about bechor vs younger sons. I was bringing up wills with regard to allowances made for wives and daughters, who are not considered heirs according to halacha.
I don't know anyone nowadays that writes their spouse or daughters out of a will (or rather, just leaves their assets to their sons). IMO, its not applicable nowadays really and I would never do that to my daughter. Times are different and finances are handled differently.
As I understand it, the issue is not about writing people out of a will. Rather, according to halacha, women are not heirs, even if the secular will names them as such. To get around this, a Halachic will creates a debt to selected female members of the family, which goes into effect one minute before the death. So whoever is considered an heir according to halacha is required to ultimately share the inheritance by way of paying back the debts he inherited. It is absolutely applicable today, and all frum people are encouraged to do it this way. When in doubt, CYLOR.
You can write your will however you want, but if it's not valid according to halacha then your heirs will be committing geneiva by taking their inheritance.
Saw why do you keep bringing up dictator? A head of the household is not a dictator by any means.
A dictator decides and either can listen or not listen to anyone else.
A head of the household as such MUST listen to his wife's needs and those of the other household members.
You really have no idea what a head of the household is.
There is no such thing as two equal partners. Because when there is a decision to be made you can't make it unless you have THREE equal partners. Otherwise you may end up with a 50% - 50% and that's no decision. Sure you can say that in a marriage there are three partners, Mommy, Daddy and Hashem. But Hashem, in his torah, has already made the man the top partner in almost everything hence it's always going to be two against one by definition even if man and women are partners because you cant take HASHEM, meaning torah out of the equation if you are frum.
And according to torah, the man decides about everything other than the nichsei tzon barzel that his wife brings into the marriage, and she must according to torah, go along with his decisions except if he decides something that is AGAINST halocho in which case of course she should not listen.
So either you are frum or you are two equal partners. Because if you are frum then you are THREE partners, like in haveing a baby, as marriage is a sacrament or if you prefer, a financial contract (kesuba) in which a man is given rights over all his wife's possessions, her earnings, and household decisions.
And as for emasculating, you know, men like to be men. Otherwise they are nekeivahs. Which is why every morning a man davens to Hashem to bless him for NOT MAKING HIM A WOMAN. Think about it. Does your husband say that brocho every morning? Ask him why if you are equal partners in everything. What's wrong with being a woman if you are equal partners. Only in the torah world, you aren't, no matter how many times you say you are and act daily as if you are.
I'm telling you Pink, it's not generational, it's hashkofo.
That's SHTARK MO as opposed to regular MO. The Shtark part of our orthodoxy is what all of you are reading here when I say that for me a husband is the undisputed head of the household.
Which does not stop me from having a tv at home including cable, or women's magazines in the bathroom (women's world, people's friend...bet only the English here know that one and maybe only the Scots)...or having university degrees from mixed gender universities and seeing nothing wrong with it (which is the Shtark part of Modern for me) and other things.
What do you all think of the fact that men control finances in Judaism? If a married woman works, her earnings belong to her husband unless she waives her right to spousal support. If a man dies, his son inherits all, unless a halachic will states otherwise. If a woman marries, her husband has the right to control any property she owns. These are halacha.
The second one isn't quite right, as friedasima already said. A man's sons inherit whatever's left after his wife gets her ketuba, and IIRC, after his daughters are provided for if necessary (if they're unmarried, maybe? not sure).
I'm not bothered by men controlling finances, since that's in a situation where the woman decides she wants the man to have the obligation of supporting her. IMHO it's only fair that either way, if one spouse is responsible for finances, they also get to be in charge of finances. It wouldn't be fair for a woman to decide to take on a job with all the expenses that entails (daycare, transportation, work clothes, etc) but then keep her earnings and insist that her husband pay for everything with his salary (it also wouldn't be fair if a man did the same).
A woman can also decide that she prefers financial independence over mandated support, which to me seems to indicate that if anything the man's role in the family isn't a set thing, but something couples can decide together to some extent.
Saw why do you keep bringing up dictator? A head of the household is not a dictator by any means.
A dictator decides and either can listen or not listen to anyone else.
A head of the household as such MUST listen to his wife's needs and those of the other household members.
You really have no idea what a head of the household is.
There is no such thing as two equal partners. Because when there is a decision to be made you can't make it unless you have THREE equal partners. Otherwise you may end up with a 50% - 50% and that's no decision. Sure you can say that in a marriage there are three partners, Mommy, Daddy and Hashem. But Hashem, in his torah, has already made the man the top partner in almost everything hence it's always going to be two against one by definition even if man and women are partners because you cant take HASHEM, meaning torah out of the equation if you are frum.
And according to torah, the man decides about everything other than the nichsei tzon barzel that his wife brings into the marriage, and she must according to torah, go along with his decisions except if he decides something that is AGAINST halocho in which case of course she should not listen.
So either you are frum or you are two equal partners. Because if you are frum then you are THREE partners, like in haveing a baby, as marriage is a sacrament or if you prefer, a financial contract (kesuba) in which a man is given rights over all his wife's possessions, her earnings, and household decisions.
And as for emasculating, you know, men like to be men. Otherwise they are nekeivahs. Which is why every morning a man davens to Hashem to bless him for NOT MAKING HIM A WOMAN. Think about it. Does your husband say that brocho every morning? Ask him why if you are equal partners in everything. What's wrong with being a woman if you are equal partners. Only in the torah world, you aren't, no matter how many times you say you are and act daily as if you are.
FS, maybe YOUR husband doesn't feel like a man unless you're considered to be lower, or subservient to, him, but other men -- REAL men -- don't need that.
A person who gets to make all of the decisions is a dictator. Period. You can put whatever nicey-nice little words you want to it, but that's what it is. Its like saying there are free elections in Arab countries. Sure, you can go to the polls and vote for the guy who is going to win, or you can risk being thrown in prison. Or in this case, you can have your say, but its worth as much as that Arab vote if the dictator, head, whatever you call him, disagrees.
*Most* marriages in which the spouses are equal partners don't degenerate into the type of open warfare that you anticipate, where the partners can't agree and neither is willing to yield. Usually, they discuss their points of view and compromise. Or one acknowledges that the issue is more important to the other and yields. Sometimes its one partner, sometimes the other.
If having an equal and loving partnership with my husband makes me not frum, then I guess I'm not frum.
ETA -- every time I'm told I can't be frum if I don't act like someone else, I start singing Satisfaction, "he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke the same cigarettes as me." Thanks, Mick.
He said first, this is the Biblical way (mainly land to keep together and in the tribe hence boys) by many it changed a loooong time ago. And even if you do that, the sons have to support mom at her previous level forever or until she remarries, and same for sisters. And he is not quite a feminist...
For those of you who want your husband to have the final say in all decisions, do you also want him to be able to take a second wife if he wants to? That's also in the Torah.
He said first, this is the Biblical way (mainly land to keep together and in the tribe hence boys) by many it changed a loooong time ago. And even if you do that, the sons have to support mom at her previous level forever or until she remarries, and same for sisters. And he is not quite a feminist...
I have no idea what his basis is for indicating that a Halachic will is not necessary for women who would like an inheritance while adhering to halacha. AFAIK, it is widespread and recommended by all poskim today. Women are not Halachic heirs, whether in biblical times or in 2011. Married daughters would not be entitled to anything according to halacha otherwise.
Becaucse of the thread I asked my husband if he was the head of the household. He said "I am supposed to be, aren't I?" So I said "but you call me the boss"
We both laughed. DH has his domain and I have mine. I do agree that a man does needs to feel like a MAN. Sitting at the head of the table is not the only thing a man should do.
Sadly I think alot of women emasculate their husbands in the bedroom the most.
Becaucse of the thread I asked my husband if he was the head of the household. He said "I am supposed to be, aren't I?" So I said "but you call me the boss"
We both laughed. DH has his domain and I have mine. I do agree that a man does needs to feel like a MAN. Sitting at the head of the table is not the only thing a man should do.
Sadly I think alot of women emasculate their husbands in the bedroom the most.
DH calls me the boss too lol. When it comes to the kids, I insist they respect him and he insists they respect me. We make decisions together. Sometimes he has the final say, and sometimes I do.
For those of you who want your husband to have the final say in all decisions, do you also want him to be able to take a second wife if he wants to? That's also in the Torah.
Discuss amongst yourselves.
This should be good for a few more pages.
The cherem may have expired but no one's acting on it. And I don't think it's just because of dina d'malchusa dina.
