Why is it okay to discriminate against women for religious reasons?

[brer cat]

Not very long ago I met a young man at a business function. “Hello, I’m Amanda,” I said, sticking out my hand in greeting. He kept his arms glued to his side. “I don’t touch women,” he said.

He was, I realized belatedly, a deeply Orthodox Jew whose tradition prohibited even minor physical contact between men and women outside their families. I nodded politely and moved on. But the encounter deeply troubled me, then and now. Faced with someone who refused to shake my hand because of who I was, I defaulted to social courtesy, wishing neither to make a fuss nor disparage this young man’s religious beliefs.

Yet later I wondered: Why are biased acts against women — even religiously motivated ones — considered so much less toxic than biased acts of any other kind? Why do women often demur and accept humiliation rather than make a fuss? Why does respect even for admittedly extreme religious beliefs trump respect for half the human race?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-it-okay-to-discriminate-against-women-for-religious-reasons/2015/04/19/95939e9e-e519-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html?hpid=z3

Interesting read. I was brought up to respect all religious beliefs even those that were blatantly discriminatory against women, and not to knowingly behave in any manner that would be offensive. That is so ingrained that I would demur without even thinking about it if, for example, I was asked to move to another seat on an airplane to accommodate an Orthodox Jew who would not sit beside a woman. Only later I would stew about it.

Amanda Bennett goes on to ask the obvious question: "Would such blatant behavior be treated merely as a social choice, a courtesy issue or an awkward airline customer-service problem if the targets were anyone other than women?" The answer is obviously "no" yet many find it OK when it is women.

Where do we draw the line in social situations?

[marym625]

1. K&R

[Novara]

2. At this point in my life I hope I'd call it out whenever I see it.

If a man said that to me I don't think I could keep myself from saying "Oh for fuck's sake" and calling it out as ridiculous. I was also brought up to be highly respectful of other's beliefs but that ends now. I don't give a shit about your beliefs when it infringes on me.

Honey, ain't nobody got time for that.

[img][/img]

[brer cat]

9. lol Love that meme!

I appreciate your view, although I don't think I could bring myself to do it over something I consider insignificant like a handshake. I have changed seats on airlines to accommodate families who didn't have seats together, but that has nothing to do with gender. I think I am past the point where I would move to accommodate a man who doesn't want to sit next to a woman for any reason.

[seabeyond]

15. i can easily see me putting hands on hip, lean back, and smile and say.... really?

letting it be know, i do not respect his pov in a less the confrontational manner.

[seabeyond]

16. i would not change seats. they can get him a different seat. nt

[KitSileya]

3. I find this interesting.

In consent culture, he absolutely is allowed not to shake hands with anyone he doesn't want to shake hands with. Many cultures don't touch when they greet each other. As long as he does something (a nod, a bow, a smile) to acknowledge the person he is greeting, I say ok. He cannot refuse to be served by a woman either, when the services don't involve nudity (doctors) or food.

As for discriminating, that's another matter. Some positions are inherently discriminating - Catholic priests, for example. Others should not be. Jobs driving buses around ultra-Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods, for example. They get licences from the city, so no gender discrimination there. In public transport, like a plane, if you want to make sure you don't sit next to someone specific, buy the tickets of the relevant seats. Don't ask women to move to accomodate you, pay up, or don't travel.

[brer cat]

8. That is where I am coming down.

I don't have a problem with someone not shaking hands; I can extend courtesy that far. The airline seat issue is different. I don't think a woman should be asked to move to accommodate a man's religious beliefs. He can either make arrangements with the airline before hand, or not travel if he can't bring himself to sit next to a woman.

[malthaussen]

4. My question has always been why he should be accomodated and not she.

The Orthodox Jewish man refuses to sit next to a woman? Okay, fine -- but why then should she be the one to move? He's the one making trouble.

Wonder, too, what would happen if she refused to shake hands because she doesn't touch Orthodox Jews. Funny how that works out, isn't it?

-- Mal

[Scout]

12. yes, funny how that works!

"Wonder, too, what would happen if she refused to shake hands because she doesn't touch Orthodox Jews. Funny how that works out, isn't it? "

i can hear the wailing now!

[ismnotwasm]

5. It's ridiculous

Part of it is inherent in religion itself, part of it, and as I've often pointed out there is there is not single major (and most minor as far as I can tell) religion that doesn't have something crappy/discriminatory to say about women in its religious texts--- and part of it, well it reminds me of the ancient Egyptians and their Gods. As time went on they had an unwieldy pantheon, because they never removed old Gods. I think the stricter forms that endorse misogyny are like that--they kept too many stupid rules. Lost tract, misinterpreted, allowed patriartical forms to influence religious ones.

As religion evolved, often through war and conquest, women were pawns and property as they took social status from men. There are plenty of indications this was not always so, but that hardly matters today.

So I draw the line at the point of oppression. Like Mal points out, If a particular religion proscribes touching or being around women outside of its churches, women aren't the ones who should move, or absent themselves from any given situation. That is not being disrespectful it is being fully human.

On another note, If women are wearing the hajib, it's often as religious and cultural choice. Muslim men are supposed to be modest as well. The problem is one of choice. It's horrifying not to have choice in religious matters, I understand and respect, spiritual discipline. But spiritual baggage--not so much.

[brer cat]

11. Choice is essential to me.

I am a person of faith, but I would not attend a church that discriminated against women, hated gays, or excluded people of color. However, if I am a guest in another church, say attending a funeral or wedding, I make every effort to be respectful. I do avoid certain situations because I know that I cannot sit quietly and listen to total bs. I have Catholic friends, but I long ago gave up attending any services because I am not going to tolerate a sermon telling me women need to have lots of babies, stay home to raise them, and go to hell if they have an abortion.

[malthaussen]

14. The point, to me, is exactly choice

The bigoted follower of a religion who applies its tabus to others is making a choice. Yeah, he may be subject to any amount of brainwashing, legal restrictions, or whatever to enforce that choice, but ultimately his decision is a choice. The woman (or other discriminated-against party) is exercising no choice: she is what she is, bigod. It seems to me to be fundamentally absurd that something which is (logically) contingent should take precedence over something that is (logically) necessity. Not only absurd, but infuriating.

-- Mal

[CrispyQ]

6. That was an excellent article.

Now I'm prepared. If a man refuses to shake my hand because I'm a woman, I will state, "That's okay, because I don't shake misogynist's hands."

As for the "I can't sit next to a woman" bullshit. Grow the fuck up & get in the 21st century you bigoted relics or go join a monastery.

[ismnotwasm]

7. On that topic--at least in the ballpark

Dozens of women joined in prayer Monday at Jerusalem’s Western Wall and took part in a first-of-its-kind reading of Torah portions from a full-sized scroll in the women’s section, a practice which is officially banned by the rabbinic authority at the site.


The women were handed a Torah scroll by supporters of their cause in the men’s section, even as other worshipers at the site attempted to block the transfer. Security forces detained one of the men who passed the scroll to the women’s section, and likewise prevented male worshipers from entering the women’s section to disrupt the Torah reading.


In April 2013, an Israeli court ruling formally acknowledged women’s right to pray according to their beliefs at the Western Wall, claiming that this does not violate “local custom,” which hitherto had been cited as the foundation of banning some prayer rites women wished to engage in as a group. However, the rabbinic authority at the site nevertheless dictates that Torah scrolls must not enter the women’s section, citing concerns of possible theft.

There are over 100 Torah scrolls designated for public use at the Western Wall.

The Women of the Wall organization, which meets at the Western Wall once a month for prayers, has in the past manged to smuggle a miniature Torah scroll into the site. The feminist group advocates greater equality for women to engage in ritual observances at the Western Wall, including permission to read from and dance

http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-first-women-of-the-wall-pray-with-full-sized-torah-scroll/

To coin a phrase--we're everywhere

[treestar]

10. What an odd religious thing to have still in the 21st century

I would hope the women in that religion leave it in droves. Must suck to be married to one of those men or to be a female person of that religion. Though it might not be so easy due to economic factors.

[malthaussen]

13. There are a few religious tabus still extant about touching women.

Orthodox Jews are not alone in this peculiarity, and I agree it is pretty goddam odd, to say nothing of stupid.

-- Mal