If DH told me "you can't sit on my chair, that's my minhag", well I would respect it. I just asked him "you never gave me permission, do you mind??", he said he really dislikes this (even more for the wife than the kids) and he actually already told me so before marriage (I forgot!!) and anyone can sit anywhere in his house and he claims no chair. Again, if you are among those who met my dh, you know he is not "progressist" or "feminist" or "laxist", just not for making life more complicated.
He also doesn't think a husband and wife need such formal relationships. He grew up with a VERY cnservative father (Italian Yekke, war survivor, son of army commander, you get the picture). He had his place at the table that he liked and wanted when he was there, but anyone could sit on it when he wasn't at the table. He had to be greeted when he came home but no standing thing.
At his OWN father, the army commander, there was a bell for meal time, you had to come NOW; no leaving the table before the father had finished. After, you had to ask to get up. Children (him, cousins, etc) had to ask permission or be spoken to to speak.
For info, the rules were only for the children. The mother was equal except she was served after the father - but the father waited for the mother to be served to eat. This was 1930's Italy, conservative enough? It petered out after the war, finished after the 50's.
If anyone wants I can email my grandparents and ask about the chairs and standing in their and their own grandparents households.
But focusing on the other's needs is the OPPOSITE of dividing the life into male sphere and female sphere when in many couples it is actually easier to be more easy going, or even to have the dh do a few female things and the dw a few male things that they happen to enjoy or do better while the other hates it.
If suddenly I decide what dh eats, who he sees, what he wears, who we invite, who we go to... I would be the opposite of focusing on his needs.
Quote:
Of course there is a hierarchy; it goes, parents, children. It doesn't have to go Husband, wife, children.
That.
I'm ok (and even think it is good) with dad being the symbol of authority, especially since he's stricter than me, for the KIDS. I certainly don't see it as my authority. I do see him as my posek and trust what he tells me as much as when I ask a rabbi (as I know he BH knows a lot, and asks shailos when needed). But I don't feel inferior or serving or ruled by my rav, or my husband, as a person. I do not think I was put on this world only to help him, or at all to serve him.
Yes, it' s a whole different ballgame. We're not talking about when a dh and a wife disagree on two almost identical options. We're talking about situations where each spouse thinks the other's decision is misguided, invalid, dangerous to the family. Who wins? These are the big ticket decisions, this is what we're talking about.
If it's a monarchy, then I stand by what I said before, most dhs will want to see their decision win out, since they obviously think the dw's decision is misguided. If both have equal say, then they will have to somehow compromise.
First of all, how many times does this come up in a normal marriage? Second, everyone here has been shouting about compromise. Saying there is always a solution. So, tell me, what do you do in that case? Personally, that would be the perfect case for a rav in my books. If you're talking misguided, invalid, dangerous, you don't defer.
I can think of one example where I deferred to my husband. We were considering buying a certain apartment. I didn't like it for various reasons, he thought it made sense. Given our circumstances at the time, I agreed to go for it even though I didn't like it. Financially, it made sense. There was no danger involved. I just didn't like the apartment. He didn't insist; he asked for my input and would not have done it if I said outright- NO. Still, I made the decision to go with his choice. Ultimately, G-d did not make it work out, and we ended up in an apartment we BOTH loved.
OK, but if you had bought the apartment, and lived there the next decade, you might feel resentful. Not you specifically, just the general you, women in general.
In any case, these things do come up once in a while in a normal marriage. Unless its' a shidduch with someone who was raised exactly like you who holds exactly the same way, and you both agree to go to the exact same rav if you have a disagreement. But most people I know are not like that, and in my circles no one, but no one, goes to a rav to ask him to decide for them on a school or a city or a kitchen cabinet because they can't seem to agree.
So these things come up rarely, but when they do come up, they are life-altering. It's no small thing to 'let the dh decide' the big stuff. It means he's deciding the life-altering stuff. What do people do? Compromise, or let one decide this one, one the next. For example, if the argument was over a tv - the wife opposed, the dh wants; the wife thinks it's dangerous to have one, the kids will go OTD, the dh thinks it's dangerous not to have one, the kids will grow up provinicial hillbillies - they can compromise, maybe only certain tv shows, maybe no cable, etc.
Or - each makes a major decison. I have some close friends where the dh really really wanted a 3rd child. They could afford it, he promised to help as much as possible, but the wife didn't want. At the same time, she wanted to leave the hometown they had lived in for 10 years and move to the big city where there were better chinuch and employment options. He really didn't want to leave his family and friends. Both were adamant about both decisons. But it wasn't a monarchy. The dh didn't get to have the final say in both cases - they each gave in. Ultimately they moved and that same year she decided to get pregnant.
HY, the point is that you CHOSE to listen to your husband's opinion
you had a choice
thats the point
I often CHOOSE to listen to my husbands opinion because I have a lot of respect for him
but sometimes I CHOOSE not to listen to his ideas and he listens to mine instead
Yes, people choose to have the setup in their home to defer to their husband when possible.
No healthy marriage is a dictatorship. That doesn't contradict the hashkafah of the man being the head of the household and having authority on things that line in his realm.
Yes, it' s a whole different ballgame. We're not talking about when a dh and a wife disagree on two almost identical options. We're talking about situations where each spouse thinks the other's decision is misguided, invalid, dangerous to the family. Who wins? These are the big ticket decisions, this is what we're talking about.
If it's a monarchy, then I stand by what I said before, most dhs will want to see their decision win out, since they obviously think the dw's decision is misguided. If both have equal say, then they will have to somehow compromise.
But the breakdown can be split evenly and there is no "monarchy". If my husband is in charge of the ruchniyus, that means he'll have the final say with guidance if I didn't trust his judgement (which it sounds like a wife wouldn't in such drastic cases). If I'm in charge of gashmiyus, I'd have the final say on which home to live in...
When it comes to major life decisions as what city to live, there are aspects of both sides where both parties by definition of their responsibilities will have a say -- the aspects of how money is spent, what the Jewish atmosphere is like, if it's liveable for the mother in the home to be able to live life practically....that's all a mixed bag.
Very few major discussions lie solely with one party.
Again, you are in essence deconstructing the whole husband is Head if you are then clarifying that he is only Head in certain areas, and only sometimes, and if the wife's domain is involved then she gets to decide....so he's not really Head.
Of course I don't agree with the whole ruchniyot/gashmiyut split, but that's another issue. And in any case, almost every decision is a mix of ruchniyot and gashmiyut, so it's never clear cut anyway.
Maybe I missed a few pages and am therefore missing some context, but where did anyone claim that the man has the final say on EVERYTHING.
A man finishes reading a book titled "Man Of The House" and goes over to his wife to lay down the law. He tells her that he expects her to cook him a gourmet meal and bake him a delicious dessert. Afterwards, he tells her that she is to draw him a nice warm bath.
He asks her, "Do you know who will bathe me and comb my hair?"
A man finishes reading a book titled "Man Of The House" and goes over to his wife to lay down the law. He tells her that he expects her to cook him a gourmet meal and bake him a delicious dessert. Afterwards, he tells her that she is to draw him a nice warm bath.
He asks her, "Do you know who will bathe me and comb my hair?"
This is what happens when I get called away from Yerushalayim to a levaya of a zadekes in Bnai Brak and I only get back now to Imamother...five pages that I have to answer!! (more on the levaya in another minute, it has bearing on this thread...).
A few misconceptions to clear up.
Table - Israeli inheritance laws are problematic halochically and there was a big fight in beisdin about it. When a man dies without a will his wife inherits half, and his children equally inherit the other half. Why? Because they figured that so many non religious women had no kesuba of worth, and there was such terrible inflation that even if someone put in a sum in shekel forty years later it was worth borscht. So this was the way to protect the wife and give her something instead of her kesuba. The kids inherit equally because the din is that the bechor only inherits a double portion if he follows the Jewish way. If he is an apikores for example by Jewish law he forefits his rights. As there were so many frei in the country that could be called apikores, this was the beisdin's way around not giving the bechor ANYTHING by Jewish law. So all children inherited equally if there were no parents or inherited half equally if the father died without a will. There is a method to the maddness and the method was halochic.
Whoever wrote the business about it's fine to let a man be a head if he is a mensch and will not abuse his authority and then the final say can be with him because you never have to worry about his abusing it....but that only 5% of men are menschen.
ARE YOU SERIOUS? That's what you think of Jewish men? So little? They are all childish egotistical maniakim??? Interested in what THEY WANT NOW and nothing else? Next you are going to tell me that they are just led by their "joysticks" and never use their pea sized brain??
Wow, you really think little of Jewish men. But then again, what do you think of Jewish women? What type of woman would marry such a man? (Probably one who then has to take zedoko for camp as he isn't supporting her correctly? See, we mention camp on this page so we don't have to again for another 20 posts, rights?).
Ladies, before you marry someone, if you haven't checked out that he isn't the type to abuse his being the head of the household YOU are the stupid ones. That's called MENSCHLICHKEIT and if it isn't one of the most important traits that a woman wants in a husband at any age then they are a dam$ed fool!!!
Chairs - It is derived from the line "al kiso lo yeshev zar". A stranger may not sit at his place. And yes, no one including a wife is allowed to sit in a husband's seat unless receiving permission. As mentioned, for a wife she just has to ask once. No there is no similarity to a wife's place halochically, but it is CUSTOMARY for children not to sit in their mother's place unless asking (in our house the kids ask) IF she has a kavua place.
Table - most people that I know of who have rectangular tables at least in EY with space problems often have one end pushed against the wall like we do, and only move it out when we get more people. Therefore the wife's seat is next to the husband, caddy corner. Meaning my husband is at the head of the table, and I sit at right angles to him on his left (because the kitchen is on the left, had it been on the right I would have sat on his right). And so sit almost everyone that I know as a couple. Why should one want to sit far away from one's husband? How can you serve him if you are far away?
And yes, I serve my husband or at least hand him the serving plate or put it before him when I can't hand it to him if he for some reason wants to choose what piece of chicken he wants by himself. It's all part of showing public respect for him. To make my life easier for example, if it is a day we happen to both be home for lunch, which occasionally happens and always on Fridays, then he will set the table davka and clean off to make life easier for me as I am so busy with the food in the kitchen.
Whoever said that a woman or man can opt out financially (five pages back), halochically the woman can't opt out of her husband supporting her without express agreement of the man.
Hashem Ya'azor - I'm all for what you are writing about spheres. And if someone reads all my long posts they will see the same thing over and over. That in my world (and in the traditional Jewish world) men and women had and still have different spheres. Men usually do NOT interfere in domestic choices and most of our choices in life are domestic choices. Their sphere is the non domestic one, however domestic encompasses A LOT including chinuch of girls. Yes the male sphere is chinuch of boys, limud torah, and parnosseh. They are permitted to comment and request of their wives things that have to do with tznius. A wife is required to take on her husband's minhogim except in TH and intimate things unless she expressedly asks permission to maintain her minhogim and he agrees or if they both agree to adopt her or any other minhogim. That's halocho. If you don't like it, try a different religion.
Table you bring the example of the wife who didn't want another child but wanted to move. So here, according to the shita that includes a man being the head of the household, the choice of children is HERS. That's domestic. He cant' force her to accept his will on that. Moving? Legally the decision is his but there are circumstances where that decision is not, I won't go into them, they are complicated halochically. However any man who will force his family to move without taking his wife's needs and desires equally into consideration as his own is, once again a dam$ed fool.
Didn't know that you ladies are all marrying dam$ed fools all the time.
And there are even compromises about moving, such as if a man has to do it for parnosseh he commutes, or his wife commutes or if commuting isn't possible they live separately and get together once a month or once every two months if it is so important to her to remain where she is and he MUST move. Yes he has to agree. And if he doesn't and she insists that she won't move with him it is as if she is moving out and halochically he can divorce her as a moredes.
But question - under such circumstances, HOW MANY MEN EXACLY WILL GO TO A BEISDIN to declare their wives a moredes and start divorce proceedings???
And the man who WOULD Do that....would you want to be married to him in the first place?
And what do you exactly think a beisdin would do under such circumstances if the wife had a justified reason for not moving (parnosseh when a man can't support them to the degree of both his previous salary PLUS her previous salary, PLUS benefits, PLUS lots extra to make up for the ogmas nefesh to her of moving - that BTW is the din.... or if it is that she needs to care for elderly family members etc? No beisdin will award such a man the right to give his wife a GET without tremendous and I mean TREMENDOUS financial compensation, if it is a genuine beisdin but don't get me started about some dayyonim, it's been a hard day).
In short, back to today's funeral. I went to the funeral of a zadekes. She wasn't even 75, she was a Holocaust survivor as a young girl, she had three daughters and a husband. The rov of their beismedrish, son in law and oldest grandson were maspid her. The son in law, who is the husband of my dear friend, is a choshuver rov and gave in incredible hesped which was no exaggeration. This woman spent her life helping her family, doing for them, a true aishes chayil. She took almost nothing for herself so that she could do for everyone. She would shlep with four buses once a week for five hours each direction to Nahariya from Bnai Brak to bring food to her widowed father. She eventually cared for him when he retired and moved to Bnai Brak and then took care of her step mother in law in the days that there were no filipiniyot and would do absolutely everything for her daily including changing her linens and personal garments and keeping her clean and wiping her. Daily. And besides that she was metapelet to al lher grandchildren until they were two and went to gan as her daughters all worked and her son in laws learned. That's something like...20 granchildren. For years and years. She took these babies with her everywhere. When my friend was pregnant with her children she had shmirat herayon and wasn't allowed out of bed for 7 months, she laid at her mother's and her mother took care of her day and night and her kids and made food for her son in law to have at home and of course cared for her husband...making sure he would have everything he needed. He was the head of the houshold in all senses and he worshipped the ground that she floated on, as he used to say to me. She would wait for him to eat, he worked to support all these sons in law and grandchildren, he bought all of them apartments and worked incredibly hard, would learn torah on the bus to his factory, and when he came home he would learn chavrusa with his father before supper because as he said, maybe he would be tired after supper and wouldn't be able to give TORAH his utmost. So he would come home from the factory at seven but only eat supper at nine after learning with his elderly father for two hours. And his wife, the zadekes, would chap a fruit or something but would wait for his supper and only then sit down with him to eat so that he would never eat alone and always have someone there.
And he, he worshipped her. He never did a thing without asking her. She laid out his clothes, she bought his clothes and shoes, he cared about nothing but making enough money to support them, making his wife and children happy, and , of course above all, learning torah.
As his son in law said, they never went on vacation, they never bought anything for themselves until the children forced them to get an air conditioner, and even then they put it in the dining area so that when the grandchildren came to eat and play THEY would have it cool. Everything went for the children, for zedoko, for Torah.
Two years ago she had a complicated operation and never woke up right, she drifted in and out, after a long coma, and spent the past year and a half in a rehabilitation home, barely opening her eyes and not able to talk to people.
This evening at the levaya in front of the house, her 80 year old husband stood there, surrounded by his sons in laws, numerous grandsons and great grandchildren. He listened to the hespeds of all her good deeds and then said kaddish for her. After each posuk he stoped. Cried "ay yay yay yaya" heartbreakingly, and slowly continued. This was in front of the hevra kadish ambulance holding her body on a stretcher. After the kaddish he bent into the ambulance and put his arms around her body for one last time crying "my wife, my home, my dear life!! - mein veib. Mein shteib. Mein tayereh leben!!"
A zadekes. A head of the household who worshipped his zadekes and would have given her the shirt, no, the skin off his back had she just give him a look that would have meant that she wanted it...."
I don't think I've read a post of yours in entirety in a while, FS. Good post
(I don't live in E"Y and also sit caddy corner, as did my mother...not sure what that has to do with losing power in the home though. Who cares where I sit? My kids know I'm the boss together with Abba, no matter where I choose to sit.)
FS, I have to say that I often disagree with you, but I really appreciate your perspective here. I also think that you can repeat yourself until you're blue in the face, but some posters will find one word in your post to distort- they don't want to understand this point, and whether or not they do, they won't admit it. I will say that I understand their side, but I don't agree that it can be consistent with a Torah lifestyle. That's where I stand.
I don't really understand public kavod. First people don't look so closely what you do...
Second, if you think he must be served (putting the plate near him, that's something else), why not always?
To each their rabbanim. If boy's chinuch is the male sphere because it is his mitsva, then same for having children, or even more, as you can delegate chinuch but not children. Your rav rules differently, that's perfect.
There are just so few families where it all would work. What, no domestic choice to the man? No external choice to the woman? and children choice for the woman? No, I can't think of 1 family out of MANY MANY where it would work without big issues or worse. At best life would "just" be made much more complicated because people don't use their G-d given abilities for what they could.
The ladies like you describe are extremely special, and so are their husbands generally. People write books on them, like the rebbetzin Kramer. If Hashem wanted us to reach this level, he would give us the same koyech and the same everything. 99.99% don't and would crumble under the task. So they just have to be the best THEM.
People should respect others' rabbanim if they want others to respect theirs...
Ruchel, why do you have to bring up respecting your rabbanim in every post? If you have truly asked your rav everything, just say so, and move on. Don't argue with someone else if you are confident that you are following your rav. If you didn't say you asked your rav, why would anyone assume you have? We assume you are stating your opinion, which is fair game.
ETA I am not required to respect your rabbanim, and you are not required to respect mine. If you bring up your rav, I will not tell you that you can't follow him. But I don't have to respect him.
Well, my opinions on halachic matters are halachic, too, because my opinion is just my opinion and not relevant to a discussion about halacha. I know I'm not into looking very traditional, but it doesn't mean I don't learn or ask shailos.
I'm just fed up of reading "halacha is you should do this or that, it is the Jewish say, blah blah", when many rabbanim don't enforce all this. So since it is an Orthodox forum, I bring up Orthodox opinions.
Well, my opinions on halachic matters are halachic, too, because my opinion is just my opinion and not relevant to a discussion about halacha. I know I'm not into looking very traditional, but it doesn't mean I don't learn or ask shailos.
I'm just fed up of reading "halacha is you should do this or that, it is the Jewish say, blah blah", when many rabbanim don't enforce all this. So since it is an Orthodox forum, I bring up Orthodox opinions.
I don't really understand what you're saying. If you say "I learned that halacha requires xyz," well that's that. If you say- "I never learned that," well, that doesn't mean it isn't halacha. If you say you think halacha should be different, well, you are not actually authorized to make halachic decisions. So no, I don't have to respect that as anything other than non-halachic opinion.
TO EACH THEIR RAV. PERIOD. I don't care to take on various psaks from other rabbanim, mine are enough for me.
Right. But if you don't say that something is coming from your rav, I assume it's coming from you. Most of what I say here is based on my own opinion. When I'm stating something I learned as halacha, I will be clear and say so.
When it is a debate on favourite colour, well yeah it's my opinion. When it is a debate of halacha, as it is here, obligations, wills... I wouldn't have an opinion without a halacha basis, as it is halacha. I'm pretty sure other posters here are in the same case!
Thank you Hashem Yaazor and Ma Belle Vie...I've got to tell you that during that levaya standing there in the heat in this levaya sweating through my stocking and skirt dripping on to the sidewalk (how do people LIVE in that humidity?!) I was thinking about this thread.
Hearing her son in law speak about aishes chayil and giving a fascinating peirush to Marvadim asisa lah, I thought of this thread and what we are talking about, from beginning to end (long hesped). Why does it say "lah?" to her" Marvadim asisa - she made special fabrics...but for herself? And his peirush was that the marvadim are not tangible things, they are her jewelry, her tachshitim, which are her children, her grandchildren, her maasim tovim. Because in doing that she is doing it for HERSELF, that is her joy, her continuum. Otherwise how can we understand that the continuation, shesh veargaman levusha, that she is wearing the colors of kings? So much fabric? How much sewing is an eishes chayil doing? And the continuation of the posuk explains it all ....noda basheorim ba'alah...the fact that her husband is known in the gates (as a talmid chochim) is ALL due to her. He is the head of the household and is what he is because SHE did it. And thus her zechus is as great as his in torah through him but he could never have gotten there without her.
This is what a Jewish man, a frum Jewish man sings to his wife every friday night. So for those of you like me who DO relate to aishes chayil, the men who should relate to it, learn a weekly lesson. Anything that they are, is because they have an aishes chayil. They are the head of the house because they HAVE a house, their wife is their house and they have to cherish her and put her considerations higher than their own otherwise they are NOTHING. One sentence in all of aishes chayil about the husband, and only to say that he is what he is because of her. And this, is , of course, the last thing that one recites while carrying a woman's body to her grave at her funeral. The first aishes chayil she hears is - according to one minhog - as she sits on the chair before her chuppa it is sung to her, and according to the more prevalent minhog, on her first shabbos as a married woman. The last eishes chayil that is sung to her, is while accompanying her body to its final resting place.
How fitting. I did not go to the burial as this was an only men one, But I can imagine her husband shedding bitter tears as he walked his wife to her grave and as he said through those tears a final aishes chayil to her.
That is being a head of a houshold. That is cherishing your home, your wife.
Despots anyone? Dictators? Madmen! What woman would marry a Jewish man who would act like that.
Parents - teach your daughters well. And help them look for the right man. Teach your sons how to respect, honor and cherish their wives and listen to them. Even a rebbe sometimes has to be taught how to be a rebbe.
No there is a thread about paying for playgroup for a SAHM. Can we debate that in this thread? If you think its lame to have tzedaka for camp what about school for a 2 year old?
When it is a debate on favourite colour, well yeah it's my opinion. When it is a debate of halacha, as it is here, obligations, wills... I wouldn't have an opinion without a halacha basis, as it is halacha. I'm pretty sure other posters here are in the same case!
Everything I say is based on my perspective on Torah, which is shaped partly by what I have learned and partly by what I have concluded on my own. That is not the same as labeling it "halacha," which only comes from outside, greater sources.
