Heart prints on clothing for girls, is it a problem?

amother

↑ PlumPink ↓

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 10:21 pm

amother Diamond wrote:

Chas veshalom someone should think someone loves you or you love someone. Because love obviously means forbidden romantic boy-girl relationships. (There is no other kind of love, apparently.) In which case I'm surprised no one has raised objections to untzniusdik diamond engagement rings, which are nothing if not a very very public demonstration that some male loves you or lusts after you enough to want to marry you and you love or lust after him enough to agree. Shameful, disgraceful and a shandah.

Sarcasm alert.

Personally I think kids shouldn’t be allowed on the street because they’re proof that their parents had s-x

↑ Tao ↓

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 10:22 pm

amother Diamond wrote:

Meanwhile, your amother name is Diamond. So there's that.

↑ Tao ↓

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 10:23 pm

amother PlumPink wrote:

Personally I think kids shouldn’t be allowed on the street because they’re proof that their parents had s-x

So are their parents though. In fact anyone unless you're Adam or Eve.

↑ Tao

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 10:26 pm

amother PlumPink wrote:

Personally I think kids shouldn’t be allowed on the street because they’re proof that their parents had s-x

As crazy as it sounds I have heard this idea with regard to hiding a pregnancy, not talking about it/making it a thing. Because, we all know how a pregnancy got there. And I'm like, oh, so once the kid's born, no relations took place? Just trying to make sure I understand it

amother

↑ Opal

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 11:01 pm

People are replying with strong sarcasm. Because on the one hand, in today's day it's such a neutral symbol.

But on the other hand, to please be dlcz to those who are making inquiries, the reason for seemingly super-sensitive curiosity may have to do with shape of the heart's origins which perhaps a long time ago was connected to fertility, lust, & alluding to women's anatomy

So again, so very neutral today, & I'm personally opposed to hypersensitivity which I believe leads to hyper-$exualization (ie women's faces bring erased is something I'm opposed to for that very reason) & today hearts are sweet, feminine shapes adorning delicate jewelry, kids pencil bags & girls adorable pink baby blankets. Context is important.

However there's a basis to inquiring, & to pointing out it's more - is there a word like "etymological" for symbols? - there's something perhaps to it's origin, which seems totally irrelevant in today's day.

amother

Floralwhite ↓

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 11:44 pm

Wasn't there once a similar thread on here from which I learnt that the two rounded areas of the heart shape represent a woman's bust?

If that is indeed true, I can understand the question, but wherever it was that I read it, it was the first and only time I had ever heard such a thing, and I'm sure that most people have never and make no such associations.

amother

DarkCyan

Wed, Feb 21 2024, 11:55 pm

amother Floralwhite wrote:

I have never heard anyone associate it with that, and it would never occur to me or probably most people

Also, how many Jews walk around wearing Moose Knuckles coats..

amother

Quince

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 12:08 am

Ok I'll bite.

25 years ago as a newlywed I read Rabbi Falk's book Oz vehodor levusha. Please don't bash this book. For those whom it is hashkafically appropriate for, it is very good. If it's not your speed, don't read it, just don't be negative about it please because he was a talmid chochom and was coming from a good place.
this book has been discussed here before at length with lots of lashon hara involved, so let's not get into lashon hara on this thread.
I'm just mentioning it to explain why I voted for 'no , hearts are a problem'

Basically, Rav Falks opinion is that hearts are a symbol of tumah for the outside world. 60+ years ago, or maybe longer ago, as we all know, people in the non-jewish world were less crude, less immodest.
The heart symbol has become a symbol of tumah, he says.

so I know most people don't agree with that, and thats fine . But I agree with what he says and I have that sensitivity. In my house, I quietly avoid buying clothing with hearts on for my girls. especially big hearts. My girls have never commented on it, and have never asked for clothing with hearts on specifically, as I buy them plenty of other nice stuff instead.

there you go, theres an explanation about what your neighbor was talking about, OP

essie14

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 12:37 am

This is exactly the line of thinking people have on every other topic. Because a Rabbi never told you that a heart shape is absolutely OK, you decide that it must not be ok.
The whole world isn't forbidden to you unless a Rabbi says it's ok!
Why oh why do people think this way?

Dolly Welsh

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 12:52 am

To me, no heart symbols on girls or women or anybody.

I would stay with other prints or polka dots.

It's too literal. It means something. Its too much like signage for me.

I just don't think it's classy or correct.

Not that it's the crime of the century, but I would wrinkle my nose a little, on the inside, to see that on a frum girl.

Maybe on a teensy tiny baby girl. Not older than that. Not on a toddler or older.

amother

Amaranthus ↓

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 12:54 am

My daughter is 5 and wears long sleeves, knee socks, no denim, and no red.
Yet she has lots and lots of clothing with hearts. I think it's adorable on a younger girl. Never heard of it being an issue.

amother

↑ Amaranthus

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 12:56 am

amother Floralwhite wrote:

Google says it represents a woman's buttocks.
I'm choosing not to let that bother me since nobody seems to be aware of that.

Volunteer

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 1:23 am

amother Amaranthus wrote:

Google says it represents a woman's buttocks.
I'm choosing not to let that bother me since nobody seems to be aware of that.

Why would it represent a butt? It's literally called a heart.
Unless some people's heart is in their backside...

Lol, the things you can find on the internet. This is too funny, thanks for sharing that.

The two rounded parts are the atria and the triangular pointed bottom is the ventricles. It's an abstraction of a human heart. Which was considered the seat of noble love.

amother

Azalea

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 1:47 am

amother Amaranthus wrote:

Google says it represents a woman's buttocks.
I'm choosing not to let that bother me since nobody seems to be aware of that.

Are men’s much different? Really, if no one knows no need to create issues. Our girls are restricted enough as it is

amother

↑ Diamond

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 1:51 am

Tao wrote:

Meanwhile, your amother name is Diamond. So there's that.

Nothing objectionable--in the sense we're talking about on this thread--about diamonds as such. Diamond earrings, bracelets, necklaces, tiaras, watches, shirt buttons and shoe buckles aren't internationally recognized betrothal symbols, even if nowadays charedi kallahs do expect diamond bracelets in addition to diamond engagement rings.
Now if you want to discuss the suitability of wearing flashy diamonds altogether, that's a topic for a different thread.

BatZion

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 1:52 am

Putting this out there as someone who doesn't buy things with huge hearts in the center because I just don't think it's tasteful but will definitely buy clothing that has smaller hearts, etc...for goodness sake, can we stop throwing our theories out there at other people who are happily going about their life. Honestly.

I respect the lady who shared R' Falk's take on hearts, but, as she pointed out, there are those who go by that and those who don't. Even if I were to go by R' Falk, I wouldn't tell a neighbor or a friend that I think their heart-adorned clothing/jewelry/whatever is cause for a halachic question. Let's be holy in our own homes and own bodies and stop sticking our noses into other people's...'k?

singleagain

Thu, Feb 22 2024, 2:33 am

amother Opal wrote:

However there's a basis to inquiring, & to pointing out it's more - is there a word like "etymological" for symbols? - there's something perhaps to it's origin, which seems totally irrelevant in today's day.

Definitely is the study of symbols and origins. Robert Langdon from Dan Brown's DaVinci Code anyone.... Totally forgot what his job title is but it exists

I agree with you however that the origin of the thing is less important than the symbolism it means. Today there are a lot of words for instincts that started off as innocent but are slurs today and would be very offensive if said and the opposite things that had meaning that have lost their meaning over time.

More important I think is to consider how it is perceived in society today rather than stick with origin equals bad. It's just such a weird take to have.... in my opinion anyways