Actually it is the scenario that was originally discussed. And each scenario that is mentioned here has different halochic connotations. Maybe that's why some of you don't understand what "head of the household" means, because it isn't dictator, and while it is "final say" there are many halochic caveats to it which I will explain in a moment. Sure, one can say "not a scotsman" over and over in response to that, but as religious Jews our lives begin and end and are surrounded by the Halocho of yiddishkeit and that holds true for the "head of the household" as well.
Let me explain.
Let's look at it three ways. Halochically, hashkofically and western world way.
Situation one: Mister adventure guy, he wants to move because has ants in his pants.
Situation two: Mister career Offered much better job, wife happy in old place but much more money and comfort for family in new place.
Situation three: Mister worker terribly unhappy, place of living or job stressing him out terribly taking toll on him, family etc. wife happy in old place.
Note: none of these situations have any of the following variables: 1) wife important, equal, or major breadwinner 2) wife near family which is providing a lot of financial or physical help with the kids or expenses 3) Moving from a place of torah to a place with no Jewish amenities and basics which include Jewish school for the children and/or mikva and/or kosher food and/or Orthodox shul and minyan.
Because they will all change the equation halochically.
So let's look at the situations.
1) Mr. Adventure - halochically and hashkofically wife is obligated to move. If not, and husband wants to go to beisdin technically she can be called a moredes and forfeit her kesuba. BUT looking at a man like that who can't give any real reason for his move other than "ants in his pants" dayyonim will, in practice, tell them to go to a therapist to try and straighten out why he feels that his "ants in his pants" outweigh his wife's desire not to more and most imporant, will NOT grant a get unless the woman also wants one.
Western world? If a woman is married to a type like that even if she isn't Jewish, if she doesn't want to separate or want a divorce? And he insists that she goes along and won't agree to commuting for her or him? She doesn't have a choice either. Because someone like that isn't going to listen to anyone, isn't going to compromise about it.
Basic premise question - is this a new situation? Did she not see what kind of person he was before they married? Did they not discuss what they would do if such a situation came up? One time compromise to what she wanted, once to what he wanted or whatever works for them?
In short, in situation (1) this guy isn't going to take "no" for an answer and if he will "knuckle in" (in his view) to his wife and not move, more likely than not that he will drive her crazy about it on a daily basis making her life he$$ anyhow. So what has she gained by not moving? A nice life? Who are we kidding.
Situation 2: Mr. Career. Halochically and hashkofically once again, wife is obligated to move. If she doesn't beisdin CAN call her moredes but in practice will once again send to therapy or evaluation to see why, if they don't have enough money to live, the wife still won't move and if they do but it's just a career move, the husband isn't willing to wait to make his wife happy. This is of course in a situation where the husband wants get and she doesn't. The beisdin will not automatically allow him to divorce her.
Western world - Here are the facts of life. If a family needs money and the husband is the main breadwinner, one almost always ends up moving to where there is parnosseh. If it is his ego for a promotion that they don't need to live on, once again, the couple can reach a compromise if it is geographically possible. But if it isn't? Someone is going to have to give in. In most cases when it is a real money issue, the partner earning much less will have to give in logically. If there is no logic in it...back to square one and to beisdin.
Situation 3: Mr. Worker. Job stressing his health. No question here. Halochically, hashkofically they move. Beisdin will uphold absolutely if there is proof his health is deteriorating.
Western world Any wife who prefers to stay where she is under such situations is looking to cash in on her husband's insurance policy.
What you ladies opposing the concept of "head of the household" don't understand is that it is far from being a dictator. As the Prime Minister once said to me in a disucssion, don't kid yourself that I am independent and "ruling the country", the higher you get, the more rules and people actually pull the strings in your lives and decisions. And he was right. Lehavdil The higher up I am climbing at work, the easier the daily drudgery is, the greater the responsibility, and the more I realize that my decisions as much as I think they are mine, really aren't because my possibilities to choose from are usually laid out by others.
Same halochically. A husband who tries any of these scenarios with the three or four caveats that I mentioned? Beisdin will NOT uphold. Not moving to a Jewish wasteland, not moving a way from wife's family which provides not only emotional support but real services, and not when wife and husband are equal breadwinners or even close. And beisdin takes into account future earning potential as well. I have seen these cases play out in practice and I am speaking from knowledge and experience here.
Hashkofically - that's what "head of the household" is about, not so much halochically as there are so many areas (domestic) under the wife's jurisdiction where even in terms of halocho the wife draws the line.
Even halochichically and hashkofically women ALWAYS have a choice. No one is standing over them with a whip. If they aren't able to convince their husband to see their side of things and not move, they can decide NOT to move and bear the consequences. If they are smart, before they married they took care of themselves financially and therefore they won't lose everything financially. Same BTW goes in terms of children. Make a prenup. You can find them even online. Halochically accepted by many if most beisdins today and mandated even by some! And you can put in a clause that deals with future child jurisdiction, achzaka (forgot the word in English, it's who gets the kids) and support. So BE SMART. But isn't that feminism as well?
And if we are going to be realistic - western world? Meaning feminism? Your choices are still exactly the same but you dont even have a beisdin to support you if he wants to take you to a Jewish wasteland and you refuse (where the beisdin will mandate that if he goes and you refuse he has to continue to support you, the children, etc. in a place of torah for them).
You can either go or not. You can either try to convince him or not. But feminism does NOT mandate that he HAS to compromise. That's between the couple in the first place, their personalities and the right match.
Which brings us back to the exact same square one. Except that by not mandating that he is "head of the household" there is a modicum of respect that he will NOT necessarily get which is maybe "ritual" in some of your eyes (the not sitting in chair, kids and/or wife getting up when he enters, serving him first etc.) which some of you obviously see as encouraging him to feel that he is a "dictator" while those of us who do it see it as an outgrowth of tremendous love we have for our husband.
These are ritually mandated expressions through halocho and tradition. You don't like it? You don't have to keep to tradition but if you are frum Jews, then you aren't keeping to those which are halocho. Your problem.
And if you don't have that kind of love...ladies...whether you express it that way or not, and whether you are feminists or not, your marriage is not in good shape.
Just read the stuff posted as I was writing my gigantic post here so a few more comments if I may:
HR if you believe G-d gave us the torah and is the guiding force behind halocho, then es, Man is Master of his wife, that's what the word ba'al is all about. There are issues in which he has the right to do many things and make many life altering decisions. You don't like that? Sorry it's Judaism. At least halochic judaism.
Being the head of the household doesn't mean dictator but I can say that until I am blue in the face and no one is hearing me or really understanding what "head" involves. Maybe because you really HAVENT been in that place. I have.
Women are not powerless even according to the head of the household system. But why do you think that in the western world men compromise so much while the same western men living within the realm of halocho in western countries will all of a sudden turn into Achmed dictator of Saudi Arabia? The same he-men won't go along with feminism and westernims either if it is their personality, and the same nice and wonderful, caring husband will definitely take his wife's needs into as much if not more consideration as is own whether he is a feminist or keeping to the halochic status of "head of the household".
It's all in the person, not the system. The system give one ritual acts to perform, like Judaim is basically a bunch of ritual acts that we perform, while believing in the importance of those acts, the fact that they are either G-d given or taught to us through people with ruach hakodesh (chazal) or through a legal system whose basis is G-d given (and even the most intellectual religious Jews accept THAT about halocho!) What's important is both believing in the premise of the system and carrying out the ritual acts correctly. That's what yiddishkeit is all about. All the philosophies are wonderful but they are the icing on the cake, the cake is the ritual. Mutar. Ossur. Potur. Chayov. And believing in the Ribono Shel Olam as the one and only G-d who gave us the system in the first place. Period.
Same in terms of man as being "head of the household". You have to accept the system, and the premise behind it, that Hashem made the husband the baal of the woman. That marriage is a kinyan. That there are legalities which go along with this kinyan. That there are many ways that a smart woman knows to protect herself in this system legally, physically, halochically. And if she is too young to know, then her mother or both her parents (that's US!!) should know what to do for her and what to teach her before marriage.
For those of you who don't believe that any of us are living like that, so you have it from the horses mouth.
WE LIVE LIKE THAT. Freidasima and Mr. Freidasima live like that.
And yes, I have given life altering decisions about MY life and my family's life to my husband.
Here are just a few of the past 20 years. (pays to be old...)
1. Not having another child. I was willing to try. The doctors warned against. Dh adamantly said no, so adamantly that until I promised that I would "listen to the doctors" (as those of you know from reading my various threads we are of the shita that bc is a woman's issue as long as she doesnt discuss it with her husband and we never do or did outright, this was about the closest we came to it) he refused to come near me out of fear that I would try to get pregnant.
His decision. He was right. I would probably have died. I wanted half a dozen. Oh well. He was right. His decision. I kept to it.
2. Parnosseh and moving. Several years ago I was offered the job of a lifetime abroad. But really the job of a lifetime. Without going into details, someone in a very high ranking office in my field somewhere in the wesern world retired and they were looking for candidates all from all over. After a year of deliberations and lots of other things behind the scenes that I didn't know of, I was offered the job.
I was debating it very seriously. My mother was b"h still healthy then, I could leave her. My kids were mostly already pretty grown up. Three were out of high school already. One more on her way out, and my youngest was very independent and going into middle school. My mother offered to help with everything including move with us if necessary (you see how much I owe her?).
The kind of money being offered would have allowed me within my three year contract to put enough away to buy apartments (at that time) for four of the five kids. CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT KIND OF MONEY THAT WAS??? I'm not even talking about what it would do for me professionally.
And the location was not a wasteland by any means. I offered my husband that I would go without him and leave them all here and I would commute coming back once a month. With what I would be earning he could come over to me for another weekend once a month. Meaning we would be together almost seven days out of each 28. heck the whole family could have come over to me for a long weekend.
If he wanted to go the kids all said "leave us here we are fine, go as a couple." My youngest two couldn't wait to go and live with Bubbeh who would spoil them rotten.
But. My husband had just started building a new place. He had moved from straight teaching to educational administration and was building up something new for yiddishkeit so it really wasn't an option that he would go with me.
I gave the entire decision over to him. Told him it is his decision. Whatever he says, goes.
He said that if I really want to go, he won't stop me but he doesn't want me to take the job for a whole bunch of reasons that I won't go into now. To turn it down period.
I turned down the job. My four youngest kids still don't have apartments. So be it.
Did I have any trouble accepting that decision? Absolutely not. I understood his reasoning completely and he saw things I would never have seen until I got there. Smart smart man. That's why I married him.
One last example. Years ago he was offered a terrific job back in America. I was all for us going for a while. He said no although it meant years of struggle financially for us. He has one thing to say: I am not leaving eretz yisroel for money when we have enough to pay for food, housing and decent Jewish education for our children. Period.
Heck, it's the 9 days, shabbos comes out of the freezer entirely. I don't have to clean. No kids home. Hubby learning in the other room preparing a shiur. Don't have any case files to go over and now at noon can finally go over and see how my mother is before shabbos.
What else is there to do on such a day other than go on to imamother for relaxation?
I don't have time to respond to all you wrote FS. Just a couple of comments - you may feel that your husband ultimately makes better decisions than you. That all those important decisions he made were, in retrospect, the right choice. Not all of us feel that way. Most of us are married to mortal men who do not possess any more nevuah than we do. Probably most of us feel we are approximately on the same intellectual level as our dhs - or maybe one is better when it comes to logic, one when it comes to emotional intelligence. But it all balances out. So it's strange for us to hand over the power of decision to someone who is no more capable.
Men (like women) often make stupid decisions. About jobs, about moving, about chinuch. Apparently your dh is not one of them. That's lucky for you. For the rest of us, we don't necessarily feel we are in better hands if our husband is deciding. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Also - I don't understand. If this 'halachic' HOH business is so wonderful (I'm not sure how halachic it is today, but that's not my point)-- if it's so wonderful, why the need for women to go so out of their way to protect themselves? Isn't the wonderful system supposed to protect them? Why the need for pre-nups and money set aside and agreements? Why the need to marry a great man, otherwise the whole thing falls apart?
Finally, in western world marriages a number of factors play into each decision. There's more drive for compromise if one spouse can't just automatically decide. Say, an adventurous dh will maybe agree to channel his adrenalin into annual jeep trips in the Sahara with his friends, if his wife doesn't want to move to Africa. Etc.
I want to add an example I just remembered. A very good friend of mine was debating about whether to buy a house a few years back. Her dh wanted to continue to rent an apartment, she wanted to buy a house. Each was adamant. The dh wanted to keep the money they had in the bank, she wanted to use it for a downpayment. Eventually she 'won' because it was so very important for her to own her own place. They bought a house although the dh was extremely hesitant; housing prices in Israel had already started to climb, and the dh wanted to wait a few years until they went down again. The dw was worried they would continue to climb until they were priced out.
The rest obviously is history. The house is worth maybe half a million or a million NIS more than it was when they bought it. There's no way they could have even bought an apartment with today's prices. Of course real estate could go down next year, but in general, it seems like they made a very wise decision.
I don't even know why it's necessary to provide an example that women very often can make better decisions. If the above couple had operated as a hierarchy, there's no way they'd have any house of their own now. And this seems like a decision that a HOH man would not allow his wife to make, especially as he was the main breadwinner.
Table - this just shows you have no idea how the whole HOH thing works. We had the same situation. We weren't planning on buying right away. Our plan was to rent for a few years, and then buy out of Yerushalayim. I ended up with a "meshugas" to buy an apartment in Yerushalayim, in a "mitchared" area. We did, and by now our apartment doubled its worth. But I don't feel that I "won", and that we bought the apartment IN SPITE of the fact that my husband is the HOH. We discussed it back and forth, he saw how strongly I felt about it, and the ultimate decision was his. (I still gloat, btw.)
A smart wife knows how to get her way while still making her husband "the king".
Most of us are married to mortal men who do not possess any more nevuah than we do.
Maybe not more nevua, but more clearheaded da'as Torah to see what is ultimately the best spiritual decision for our families.
I haven't followed exactly who said what, but I maybe we have a connection here between those whose husbands are serious about learning every day and their wives seeing them as someone worth deferring to for important decisions. I don't know if the correlation is 100%, but it seems pretty high on this thread - those who think Torah learning for men is optional/ a nice thing if you can/ a luxury/ a good idea if there are no dishes in the sink, also don't see their husbands as being any wiser than them.
I truly believe my husband can make a better decision based on Torah when it comes to choosing which school to send a child, where to live, how to spend our money/time (though we definitely discuss important decisions and allow input from my bina yeseira too ). And he, in turn, will defer to our rov when we need further input from da'as Torah.
Table - this just shows you have no idea how the whole HOH thing works. We had the same situation. We weren't planning on buying right away. Our plan was to rent for a few years, and then buy out of Yerushalayim. I ended up with a "meshugas" to buy an apartment in Yerushalayim, in a "mitchared" area. We did, and by now our apartment doubled its worth. But I don't feel that I "won", and that we bought the apartment IN SPITE of the fact that my husband is the HOH. We discussed it back and forth, he saw how strongly I felt about it, and the ultimate decision was his. (I still gloat, btw.)
A smart wife knows how to get her way while still making her husband "the king".
I get it. In your case, maybe you convinced him - which can happen in any household, HOH or not.
If he's HOH, he ultimately decided to buy because HE thought it was best (after you managed to convince him). Never did I say that a HOH can't be convinced by someone (his wife or someone else). We're just debating who gets the final word.
If you hadn't convinced him, you wouldn't have bought. You would not have the final say. Not OK in my book.
I also dislike the 'smart wife has her way' attitude. It seems to be slightly manipulative (nothing to do with your case specifically, just in general). This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned 'lip service' a few pages back. Either the dh is HOH and makes the final decision, or he doesn't.
Most of us are married to mortal men who do not possess any more nevuah than we do.
Maybe not more nevua, but more clearheaded da'as Torah to see what is ultimately the best spiritual decision for our families.
I haven't followed exactly who said what, but I maybe we have a connection here between those whose husbands are serious about learning every day and their wives seeing them as someone worth deferring to for important decisions. I don't know if the correlation is 100%, but it seems pretty high on this thread - those who think Torah learning for men is optional/ a nice thing if you can/ a luxury/ a good idea if there are no dishes in the sink, also don't see their husbands as being any wiser than them.
I truly believe my husband can make a better decision based on Torah when it comes to choosing which school to send a child, where to live, how to spend our money/time (though we definitely discuss important decisions and allow input from my bina yeseira too ). And he, in turn, will defer to our rov when we need further input from da'as Torah.
Ok. So this is where we part ways. I am not 'allowed input' in our decisions. I am an active and equal partner.
And FTR, my husband studies every day. I just don't think that makes him more well-equipped to decide things like career, which city to live in, which house to buy, which school to send to.
Of course if one feels dh ALWAYS makes better or equal decisions in everything, why not give him the decision? or if one likes being "led", not make choices.
I don't mind giving a lot of decisions, but decisions about moving, kids, whatever, I definitely want equal say. Even if I listen to him because I trust him very much, sometimes I can also be right or see something he didn't. BTDT. I have made mistakes, and I have also been right.
If it's a halacha decisions I generally don't even participate and I let him deal with it, unless I think I may have read or heard something he didn't. Generally I'm wrong and he already knew it.
While I certainly agree with more daas torah as an average by the man, if a fresh BT marries the daughter of a gadol, you can be sure it would be sad to hand him religious decisions.
Quote:
I also dislike the 'smart wife has her way' attitude. It seems to be slightly manipulative (nothing to do with your case specifically, just in general). This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned 'lip service' a few pages back. Either the dh is HOH and makes the final decision, or he doesn't.
I went ahead and emailed my grandma about the respect issue. I asked her to answer about her OWN grandparents, and to ask my saba for the same.
"No, our grandmothers did not stand up when the husband entered the room and children did not stand for their father. We stood when our father blessed us by putting his hand on our heads, before the erev shabbes meal".
I like to think my grandparents' grandparents were not modern, feminist or egalitarian...
Don't they look dangerously subversive?
Heck, it's the 9 days, shabbos comes out of the freezer entirely. I don't have to clean. No kids home. Hubby learning in the other room preparing a shiur. Don't have any case files to go over and now at noon can finally go over and see how my mother is before shabbos.
What else is there to do on such a day other than go on to imamother for relaxation?
Actually, I meant the content, not the volume.
But here's some more for being ready for Shabbos before chatzos and going to do kibbud eim.
OK, I kept on thinking of this topic as I made our Shabbat chicken soup. And I remembered the women of the Tanach, the imahot, and tried to recall if they 'deferred' to their husbands' opinions automatically. Quite the opposite, it seems; Rachel arranged for her husband-to-be to marry someone without asking his consent. Rivka arranged for her husband to give the bracha to the son SHE thought was most deserving, although Itzhak held the exact opposite opinion. In both cases, the imahot decided they knew what was best and didn't even bother trying to convince the man. They just went ahead and acted.
Not that I am advocating such an approach. Far from it. I think spouses should be above-aboard (in general, in most cases) and act together. I just think it's amusing that the greatest Jewish women certainly did not award their husbands automatic authority.
Most of us are married to mortal men who do not possess any more nevuah than we do.
Maybe not more nevua, but more clearheaded da'as Torah to see what is ultimately the best spiritual decision for our families.
.
First, being a great Torah scholar does not make someone great and smart in all areas of life. It does not mean someone is smarter in finances or education or emotional intelligence or social affairs. Etc. That's precisely why when we have a personal family question (such as whether to buy a new car, say), we do not go ask the rav, as so many here on imamother seem to do. I just don't think the rav is any more equipped to answer that question than we are (if anything, far less, as he's an outsider). So I don't think my dh is wiser in these issues just because he learned more Torah.
Even on Torah issues - there are shivim panim, and not necessarily does the wife have to agree with her husband. Just because he learned more doesn't always mean he's right....say if he wants her not to wear tights, and she wants to- well, there are poskim backing each opinion. And as usual, it's not a black and white halachic issue, there are emotions involved, and culture - and I see no reason why the weight of the decision should go to the dh. I realize most people here probably don't agree with me.
Finally, if a man has more Torah (sometimes) to recommend him, a woman has binah yeterah, so it evens out. Looking around me, I honestly don't see that men are more suited to make big decisions. Not at all. It all depends on the marriage, the people involved, and the specific decision at hand.
OK, I kept on thinking of this topic as I made our Shabbat chicken soup. And I remembered the women of the Tanach, the imahot, and tried to recall if they 'deferred' to their husbands' opinions automatically. Quite the opposite, it seems; Rachel arranged for her husband-to-be to marry someone without asking his consent. Rivka arranged for her husband to give the bracha to the son SHE thought was most deserving, although Itzhak held the exact opposite opinion. In both cases, the imahot decided they knew what was best and didn't even bother trying to convince the man. They just went ahead and acted.
Not that I am advocating such an approach. Far from it. I think spouses should be above-aboard (in general, in most cases) and act together. I just think it's amusing that the greatest Jewish women certainly did not award their husbands automatic authority.
Back from my mother who sends her regards to all the imamothers and said that if she weren't almost blind she would be on here too and then you wouldn't only have Freidasima but you would have Freidasima's ima who is also the "real" Freidasima's daughter and two of us on this board would be too much for anyone.
Because if you don't like what I have to say, believe me you would like even less what my mother has to say. Especially about this.
Chazal say that the imahos did what they did because at that moment the Ribono shel olam stepped in personally and directly to guide them. Today we do NOT believe that the Ribono Shel olam does that for anyone, either men or women. Which is why when Sarah wanted Avraham to exile Hagar Avraham was told to listen to his wife. As she at that moment had ruach hakodesh.
So that's not an example applicable to today.
When there are debates between a couple there is no such thing as an "equal partner" in reality. Because one will have to give in if it's an either-or situation and who gives in will be based on personality. And personality doesn't have any bearing on whether one is frum or frei or even Jewish, although we would hope that Yiddishkeit teaches self constraint and eidelkeit.
If you have a bossy man and a meek woman the man will win. If you have a bossy woman and a meek man the woman will win. If you have two meek people they won't fight about it in the first place and if you have two bossy people you have he$$ on earth no matter who and what they are and what they are fighting about.
So what does that have to do with anything? Women make better decisions than men? Not always. Women are smarter than men? Not always. But if a woman is so smart she knows how to take care of things so that she gets her will. That's normal. Not trickery, but using your brain.
Table you ask why all the need for women to go out of the way to protect themselves if HOH is halocho? Simply because the torah knows that we are human beings and not malochei hashores. Meaning some people still remain base awful human beings in spite of their torah learning. And so women are given the halochic right to defend themselves just as there are laws about how people can halochically circumvent things which exist but can be used by evil people to do bad things which the torah did not mandate.
For each of the examples you bring, I can bring one to the contrary.
And bottom line, there is ALWAYS a person in a couple who makes the final decision if there is a question being argued. You can say that in feminism it's what? Always the woman? Always BOTH? It can't ALWAYS be BOTH.
so you can say that in feminism once one gives in and another time the other gives in. Is that MANDATED? No it is not. There is rarely a couple which signs a feminist contract when they marry mandating that they will take turns making major decisions. It's all an agrement betwen the couple. Which it can be halochically as well. Free will exists.
Bottom line - if a man halochicially wants according to some of you to exericse his right of HOH over and over to trample his wife's wishes and not take them into consideration when making a family decision or not consulting with her to reach a mutually acceptable decision, he is not "exercising his HOH right" but being a halochic tyrant. And under such situations a woman HAS recourse. Even if she hasn't been smart enough to care for herself milechaschila if it gets bad enough that she can't stand it she can go to a beisdin and demand her rights. And she has many.
In every couple there are always disputes. HOH does NOT mean that a man makes a final decision on his own without taking everything into account including his wifes wishes and what she will do if he decides againt her desires. And if he tries to, she has where to go and what to do.
Tell me, in a non halochic marriage (meaning non HOH) what legal recourse does a woman have that she doesn't have in a halochic marriage? Not to move? A woman with a HOH can not move just the same way. Not to give her husband her money? Well if it is in a joint acount the only thing she can do in a non halochic marriage if he has signature on the money and does it nonetheless, is to file for divorce. And ultimate split of property. But hey, she can do that in a halochic marriage as well. If she is frum, in both cases she needs a get and that is dependent on the husband and beit din. So maybe she isn't frum? And will suffice with a civil divorce? But that isn't our discussion
The point is that if you married a normal person he WON'T decide to pick up your family and move to Honolulu one morning if you don't want to.
Who's talking about moving to Honolulu? (Although even normal people do sometimes decide to do something drastic).
Normal people move all the time. For normal reasons. And normal spouses often disagree on this issue, even if they were both exactly on the same page when they got married. Circumstances change. Children change the picture. Elderly, aging parents change the picture. Rising prices of real estate change the picture.
I don't see why people are taking this to extremes, as though any dh (or dw) who wants to pick up and move the family is doing something crazy. As though a 'mensch' wouldn't reach such a situation. A mensch might think it's crucial that his kids grow up near nature, and want to move to the country, whereas his wife might think it crucial that the kids grow up near their cousins and good schools. Each is insistent. In most marriages, at some point a compromise is reached, or one person 'gives in' to whoever is more affected, or one spouse gets to decide this, the other gets to decide which house they buy. Etc. In the HOH marriages you are describing, the dh would have the final word. OK, OK, we understand the dh should be a mensch, he should take his wife's perspective into account, but still, he has the final word. Maybe a few true menschen would 'let' their wives make the decision (how condescening that is at heart, the verb 'let'), but most regular guys would want things to go their way. That DOESN'T mean they're not good guys. It means they are normal. People tend to think their opinion is the really valid one, and if they have the power to 'gently' enforce it, why not.
Honestly, though, I have yet to see one household where this is the way things are run. I have the feeling that even among posters here this is all theory. I'd love to hear specific examples of women who just handed over huge, life altering decisions to their dhs, and let them decide because they were HOH. I'm not talking about cases where the wife really didn't know what to do or was indiffferent. But I'd love to hear from a poster who really and truly wanted to do or not do something big (like move) and just let her dh have the final say because he's the dh (not because he convinced her he's right - that happens in all marriages).
I mentioned an example of that-agreeing to buy an apartment I didn't like. You said I would have felt resentful for the next twenty years. Let me explain why I wouldn't have:
1. My husband knew that I didn't like the apt. Even though he chose to buy it anyway (with my verbal agreement that I was leaving the decision in his hands),he loves me and wants me to be happy. So he would have done everything he could to turn the apt into one I COULD like.
2. Ultimately, I did not feel coerced into anything. I fully trusted my husband to make whatever decision he felt was right, and ensure that the consequences were beneficial to our family. I would not have known that a year later another apt would be on the market, even nicer and just as affordable. I would have made peace with his decision, and resolved to be happy with what he chose. Because I truly believed he had the right to make that decision.
If someone feels very strongly about something her husband wants to do and especially if she feels that it is foolhardy, dangerous, or will have long term negative implications on her family, it is incumbent upon her, morally, halochically, hashkofically and in just plain sechel to do everything she can in order to convince him not to do it.
And anyone, any woman worth her salt, whether frum or frei, Yid or not, would probably do that wouldnt they?
In the long run though, who makes the decision? All of you who talk about equality. Tell me that. You keep saying "we make the decision together".
But what do you do when you still talk and talk and talk and can't come to a mutually acceptable conclusion? Who do you go by? Sometimes one and sometimes the other?
How exactly does that work? It only works if the "other" meaning the one whose wants aren't going to be met in a case where there has to be decision without compromise, agrees to accept the decision of the other party as binding.
Who says you can't do that in a halochic household? It begins and ends as I keep writing, with the agreement between partners of how things should be done. If a man keeps "exercizing his rights" to be HOH and lord it over everyone by doing just what he wants? That's not halocho, that's his personality. If he weren't jewish or weren't frum it would STILL be his personality.
So what's a feminist to do if she is married to someone like that?
Aha, she WOULDNT be married to someone like that right? Because before she got married she would check over and over and her husband would be the kind of person to run a mutually equitable household when it comes to decisions. But he would have to AGREE to that, wouldn't he?
So...religious feminists, stop being so afraid of HOH and just make sure you marry a man that feels as you do, that doesn't stop him from being HOH. If he decides that he waives his right as HOH to be served first, or not to have anyone sit on his chair or to be stood up for, that's also allowed. He has to say it though. And if he is an equality person and a feminist or these things are alien to his upbringing and the way he conducts his life, no problem, let him waive his rights. Marry a feminist woman and be happy and sholom al yisroel.
But that doesn't stop those from being the rights of the HOH.
Ladies - check who you are marrying more than if he has a nice looking beard.
freidasima!
). And he, in turn, will defer to our rov when we need further input from da'as Torah.
