# Female? Back of the bus please.



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 21, 2008)

*Israel "back of the bus" rule sparks religious row*


By Rebecca Harrison


       JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Every time Israeli student Iris Yoffe takes the bus to Jerusalem, she has to be ready for abuse from ultra-Orthodox Jews who say she should be kept off because she's wearing trousers.


       Assuming she makes it onto the bus at all -- on several occasions groups of Orthodox men have tried to block the door -- Yoffe, 24, heads for the "women's section" at the back of the bus, keeps her head down and tries to ignore the insults.


       "I end up feeling helpless and humiliated, like an outsider," said Yoffe, whose public bus from her home in northern Israel to Jerusalem has separate male and female seating because it runs through an ultra-Orthodox community.

Rest of story at

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSL1417084320080115?sp=true


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 21, 2008)

This is the type of story I'd associate with Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan or Afghanistan, not a "Western" nation.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jan 21, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> This is the type of story I'd associate with Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan or Afghanistan, not a "Western" nation.


 What would make Israel a western nation. Just because they worship Yahweh and not Mohammed? They would still stone a woman for adultery or ostracize her for not adhering to some ancient law. Sure the women there have a bit more freedom than their Muslim counterparts but some of the old ways still apply. 
That part of the world has a ways to go to catch up with the rest... provided they want to.


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 21, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> What would make Israel a western nation. Just because they worship Yahweh and not Mohammed? They would still stone a woman for adultery or ostracize her for not adhering to some ancient law. Sure the women there have a bit more freedom than their Muslim counterparts but some of the old ways still apply.
> That part of the world has a ways to go to catch up with the rest... provided they want to.



Yeah, the "Western" Jews are here... making sure we send plenty of money and guns to Israel.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 21, 2008)

All religions have their fanatics, don't judge all Jews by the actions of the Ultra Orthodox. The rest of us even those in Israel don't behave as they do. They are actually a minority though a noisy one.
There are many schools of belief and thought in the Jewish religion, take time to look it up rather than condemn all of us.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jan 21, 2008)

Doc_Jude said:


> Yeah, the "Western" Jews are here... making sure we send plenty of money and guns to Israel.


Well, yeah, because despite being a nuclear carrying nation they need it. They're out numbered and surrounded by nations that hate their race. So... I think it'd be in OUR (U.S.) best interest to help them. But they do still need to grow up and get with the program as far as equality for women are concerned.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 21, 2008)

Every ethnic group in the US seeks support and sends same to their ilk at "Home". This has happened since before the US was the US. But that's a debate for another thread I think.

Story just struck me as very outdated mindset from a country I wouldn't have expected it from, based on what I know so far. 

As to "Western Nation" I base that on that's how I've heard them referred to, their technological advancement as well as government type.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 21, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Every time Israeli student Iris Yoffe takes the bus to Jerusalem, she has to be ready for abuse from ultra-Orthodox Jews who say she should be kept off because she's wearing trousers.



Is it really that different then the reaction some people would get in some of the more fundamentalist Christian leaning areas?  I'm thinking Gays, transvestites, Arabs, abortionists, etc.

Even the Rosa Parks incident was only 52 years ago, The US was Nuclear armed and had basically the same government structure then.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 21, 2008)

Good point.


----------



## Kacey (Jan 21, 2008)

The Ultra-Orthodox, while a numerical minority in Israel, control quite a bit of the legislature, and this can be seen in many of the laws and the way the laws are interpreted and implemented.  There are quite a few other laws that affect _only_ Jews; the marriage laws are different for Jews, for example (which is a long, detailed discussion that bears little on this actual topic). 

As far as segregation on the buses go, Orthodox men cannot come into contact with menstruating women, or with any item that a menstruating woman has been in contact with; if they do, they become ritually unclean.  In NY, they deal with that by never sitting down on public transportation.  In Israel, they deal with that by segregating the buses.  Now, they could get the same effect by splitting the buses down the middle... but the Ultra-Orthodox are rather patriarchal in this regard.

In creating a Jewish state, a great deal of dissension was created within the Jewish people.  A large segment of the Jewish population of the world was actually _against_ the creation of Israel at the time it occurred; according to the Bible, the creation of a Jewish state would occur in God's time, at God's bidding, and people should not have taken that task away from God.  Once Israel was established, however, the Ultra-Orthodox decided that, if it were going to be done, it had best be done according to Biblical law, and quite of a few of the laws passed were based on that.  For example, in the Bible, it is mandated that fields lie fallow every seventh year (which is sound, from a farming perspective, especially at the time) - but this is the seventh year, and quite a few things that are usually grown in Israel cannot be grown this year because the fields lie fallow.  Now, from a modern perspective, rotation of crops would make more sense - but the Biblical law was written into the laws of the country, and it is enforced as written.

Does it seem outdated?  Certainly.  Does every Jew in the country (or the world) agree with it?  Not at all.  But until the governmental laws change, which won't happen until some other group takes a bigger role in the government than the Ultra-Orthodox, or they change their views (unlikely, IMHO), that's the way it is, and that's the way it's going to stay.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 21, 2008)

In adition toKacey's excellent summation, I want to add that this only occurs on a handfull of bus routes that go through Ultra-Orthodox neighbourhoods. The segregated buses are marked as such. And contrary to what many would believe, the women in those communities are not fighting against the arrangements.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 21, 2008)

This has less to do with Judaism and more to do with the fundamentalist mindset, which can be found in any religion, or even causes outside religion.  As Kacey notes, they Ultra-Orthodox have outsized power for their numbers in Israeli society.  This is especially jarring as the majority of Israelis are not particularly devout or observant Jews.

One of these days Israel will have to figure out whether they are a religious or a secular state.  I don't envy them the task given the resonance that the state of Israel has with the Jewish identity.


----------



## Steel Tiger (Jan 21, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> All religions have their fanatics, don't judge all Jews by the actions of the Ultra Orthodox. The rest of us even those in Israel don't behave as they do. They are actually a minority though a noisy one.
> There are many schools of belief and thought in the Jewish religion, take time to look it up rather than condemn all of us.


 
Extremism is a part of all religions and its adherents are usually unpleasant in some way (except maybe Jainism).  

You certainly can't judge the whole car on the squeakiness of one of the seats.


----------



## chinto (Jan 21, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> *Israel "back of the bus" rule sparks religious row*
> 
> 
> By Rebecca Harrison
> ...




ok,, simple thing folks.. you go to some one else's country you play by their rules! simple.. they come here they play by our rules!  If you do not agree with their rules, then do not go there and spend your money.  its simple.  there are a lot of country's I will not visit for that reason.  but if you do go there .. DO NOT COMPLAIN! you agreed to it as far as I am concerned when you went to their country .  If you do not agree do not go!  simple.  most islomic country's have things I find offensive and so will not visit and spend my money in..


----------



## BrandiJo (Jan 22, 2008)

Human rights should be equal no matter where you live tho. Having to endure a beating being spat on and insults because you got on a bus while wearing pants is horrid, regardless of what religion it is for.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 22, 2008)

BrandiJo said:


> Human rights should be equal no matter where you live tho. Having to endure a beating being spat on and insults because you got on a bus while wearing pants is horrid, regardless of what religion it is for.


 
She doesn't say she was beaten. As we've already been told the segregated buses are marked as such so she has a choice. It could be taken that she is insulting and challenging their beliefs and values by going on a bus clearly marked as segregated, wearing trousers.I agree that being insulted isn't pleasant but there are two sides to this story. The men may feel that she is equally insulting to them knowing what they believe. It's on a par with injuring cows to Hindus, offering pork to Moslems, or burning the American flag to Americans etc. for her to wear trousers on an Ultra Orthodox bus, to them women don't wear male clothing, it's the Law to them. I don't think people realise how upsetting to them (and such a small thing to us) it is.The fact this is in the news may mean that someone is trying to be provoking. 
A friend of mine goes to a Shul that separates men and women with the women going to the balcony, I asked if she didn't want to be downstairs with men and women being equal. She looked at me very strangely, why on earth, she asked, would the women want to be equal with the men, it would mean lowering themselves to their level! don't assume the Ultra Orthodox treat their women badly and remember Judaism has a matriarchal society.


----------



## Cirdan (Jan 22, 2008)

Wearing a skirt and sitting in the women`s section seems to be voluntary. 
If this is the case I have little problem agreeing with those who describe the abuse as "bullying women in the name of God". It is all to typical to see religious people wanting the right to spit on those who do not neccecarily share their beliefs.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 22, 2008)

It's always ineresting to see that in all those instances, it's outsiders trying to 'liberate' the Orthodox women. It's not like there is an uprising of Orthodox women against the established rules of the community. 

What idf people decides to go into Amish communities and act against the standards of that community? 

We have strict rules on modesty. Don't come into my community to break those rules and act surprised if you don't seem welcomed.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 22, 2008)

This is all about seeing a situation through someone elses eyes and at the moment most people are jumping on the band wagon condemning those they think are wrong. What happened to the expression walking a mile in someone else's shoes? 
This young woman chose to use a segregated bus where she knew wearing trousers would upset the occupants.I guarentee she would have at first been asked politely to refrain from getting on the bus thus attired, she continued to try to get on this particular bus day after day. The Ultra Orthodox don't go on the beaches where people are in skimpy beachwear and harangue them, they stay away so why does this woman insist on going into their 'territory' to continually insult them? she could easily wear her trousers on a non segrated bus and have no problems at all. All those who don't believe in religion don't go in bikinis and swimming trunks to their local Catholic church's Mass, you wouldn't walk into your black neighbours house wearing KKK rigout would you? 
You don't have to understand or agree with what people think and believe but then you don't have to continually insult them. In another thread there is a discussion about burning flags, as I've said burning national flags means nothing to me, it's a piece of material but there is no way I would come to America and stand and burn your flag because I know how many of you would be upset, I wouldn't have that for the world. If I'm looking around a Christian Cathedral I wear a skirt and cover my arms and in some places in Europe a headscarf, I wouldn't wear skimpy shorts and tshirts. In Israel I wouldn't get on a segregated bus but if invited to an Orthodox home I would wear a long skirt and modest top. 
It's not spitting on someones beliefs nor is it bullying to expect people when entering 'your world' to respect the way you live. This woman entered a place for the orthodox, she has a choice and she is the one doing the insulting.
On the role of the Ultra Orthodox women,how long do you think that the Ultra orthodox society would last if the women didn't support it? It is admittedly a closed world to most including most Jews but while they are different please don't jump on the band wagon and automatically conclude they are in the wrong here (though I and most Jews don't condone the insults and jostling) think how it would be if something you strongly believed in was trampled on and thrown in your face _in your own backyard!  _


----------



## aedrasteia (Jan 22, 2008)

Your comments are interesting and some are valid. They certainly made me think and remember. 

Respect for the choices of others, particularly for their private conduct and family relations, is important. And control of those personal choices is theirs. I think you may be confusing public and private choices. But similarly, the Israeli government has also mixed them. It has been forced to publicly accommodate (and pay for) the private choices of Ultra-Orthodox people and require non-Orthodox people to accommodate those choices also. Accomodation here, means agreeing to run segregated public buses demanded by a small minority, operated and paid for by the transportation system that serves the entire public, but which all members of the public (if of the wrong kind) cannot use without harassment or assault. 

A public bus is not their world. According to the transportation ministry the segregation by gender is voluntary. The Israeli student is absolutely within her rights to ride on any public bus. Those who harass her are violating the regulations on public bus travel.

Travel on a public bus is not a choice of private conduct. The key is that public accommodations and public transportation are exactly that: public. And anyone using a public bus is governed by regulations that cover everyone else, including those regarding dress and harassment.

Your analogies are misplaced. An Orthodox person at a public beach has every right to voluntarily be there, but cannot harass others. Visiting an Orthodox home means accepting/respecting their preferences within their own homes or they can legally ask one to leave, a black family in their own home can control who enters. A church/synagogue/mosque is not a public space (it is open to all by decision of those with religious authority; those persons can make decisions about individuals/appropriate dress on their property). 

_(quote from news story) "I end up feeling helpless and humiliated, like an outsider," said Yoffe, whose public bus from her home in northern __Israel__ to __Jerusalem__ has separate male and female seating because it runs through an ultra-Orthodox community._

The Ultra-Orthodox can certainly run their own private transportation services where they could fully enforce their preferences without any opposition and without infringing on any others. But they do not. In this case (as in many, many others) they have compelled the civil authority to enforce (and pay for) their private, religious preferences and on people who do not share them, (but who must also pay for them if they pay taxes). It is a problem Israel has never been able to solve. Reasons for that inability are well worth another thread.

But here is a thought experiment, for all of us.

Rewrite your post and make one tiny change. Write as if discussing the segregated public buses of Montgomery, Alabama (USA) in 1955  a similar public bus system, in a strongly religious community where many people had deep beliefs that racial segregation was required (often based in their religious values).  Given your argument, perhaps the city of Montgomery (and all taxpayers, including black people) should have agreed to pay for public buses that were completely segregated so that white men and women would not have to travel in the same spaces as blacks? Black people in Montgomery certainly had to pay for buses in which they were required to be segregated. It was not voluntary. And write as though you were describing Rosa Parks. Perhaps seeing the situation through her eyes. 

What are your thoughts ? Especially regarding public enforcement of private preferences. And FYI, Im white, a female and I rode on buses that were segregated in my southern city till long after the Montgomery boycott succeeded in Alabama. Not until the Public Accomodations Act of 1964 did the law across the US change  and in the real world, segregation in public services like buses and schools slowly changed into the late 60s and 70s and were fought every step of the way.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 22, 2008)

aedrasteia said:


> Your comments are interesting and some are valid. They certainly made me think and remember.
> 
> Accomodation here, means agreeing to run segregated public buses demanded by a small minority, operated and paid for by the transportation system that serves the entire public, but which all members of the public (if of the wrong kind) cannot use without harassment or assault.
> 
> ...


 
The Israeli 'public' transportation system is run by a private company. The segregated buses are thus private. They are also identified as such. 

you are right, in the South, the blacks fought segregation. This is completely different. Orthodox women are not out there fighting the system. It is outsider, very often secular outsider, with an agenda that want to 'liberate' Orthodox women. I have news for you. Orthodox women don't want to be 'liberated'. The system works very well for us. My wife would be incredibly offended if someone told her she was being demeaned by our way of life. She is an educated, professional woman that functions as well if not beter than a lot of women in the world. She just happens to be an Orthodox Jew, and is bound by some rules. Don't start passing judgement on a community and a way of life you know nothing about.


----------



## Kacey (Jan 22, 2008)

aedrasteia said:


> What are your thoughts ? Especially regarding public enforcement of private preferences. And FYI, Im white, a female and I rode on buses that were segregated in my southern city till long after the Montgomery boycott succeeded in Alabama. Not until the Public Accomodations Act of 1964 did the law across the US change  and in the real world, segregation in public services like buses and schools slowly changed into the late 60s and 70s and were fought every step of the way.



For what it's worth... I'm female, middle aged, and Jewish - Reform, rather than Orthodox, but still Jewish, and therefore more familiar with Judaism (Orthodox or otherwise) than most people. I have quite a few friends who are Orthodox Jewish, and while I would not choose to follow the religious guidelines that they do, I respect their beliefs, their practices, and their right to both.  When I eat in their homes, I am very careful about where I place food, dishes, or utensils, lest I unintentionally place something in the wrong area (meat in the milk area or vice versa), leading them to need to re-kosher the kitchen.  When I visit their shul, I stay out of the areas reserved for men, just as the men stay out of the areas reserved for women - because I respect their beliefs.  Likewise, when I visit their homes, I wear a skirt; the Orthodox requirement is that people (men and women) dress modestly - meaning, in the current interpretation, that clothing covers them _at least_ from the base of the neck to below the knees and the elbows, in cloth that is not form-fitting and is completely opaque; in addition, women are enjoined to wear skirts _so that men who deal with them are not distracted by their charms, and placed at a disadvantage in business dealings_.  Not to subjugate them - but so that women do not have an unfair advantage over men by distracting them with revealing clothing.  Please note, again, that the modesty laws apply to both genders, not just women, and the only real difference is that men wear pants and women wear skirts.

If this were about oppression, that would be a different issue - but it's not about oppression, it's about religion.  As I stated previously, in Orthodox tradition (as in the traditions of many religions), women who are menstruating are ritually unclean, and so are any men who come in contact with them - even if the contact is second-hand through objects.  The purpose of the segregation of the genders is not to oppress or elevate either gender; it is to ensure that accidental contamination does not occur.  

I would no more force contact with myself or objects known to be handled by men (such as bus seats) on members of the Orthodox community than I would force a Muslim to eat pork.  Is the woman in the article being derided for wearing trousers?  Yes, she is... for clearly, visibly, wearing clothing that the Orthodox community finds to be offensive.  Do _I_ find it offensive that she wears trousers?  Hardly - I can't remember the last time I work a skirt _except for the times I've been to my Orthodox Jewish friends' homes_.  

Would it be inconvenient for her to wear a skirt and change when she gets to her destination, or take a different bus route?  Probably.  But it is a private transportation system, and they can make, and enforce, whatever rules they like, as long as they don't violate the laws of the country - and they're not.  The woman on the bus, on the other hand, is deliberately insulting the moral sensibility of this group of people - and whether you agree with their practices or not, they have a right, in this situation, to let her know that they don't like her doing it.  

You obviously don't like this situation - and that's your choice - but before you compare it to the segregation that occurred in this country, something you apparently feel passionately about (and with good reason), and even more,  before you deride it - you need to understand that while it appears the same on the surface, it's really not.  

Would you require a Muslim woman to eschew her hajib because _you_ think it's offensive?  I wouldn't, not if the woman was comfortable with wearing it - no more than I would require her to wear it if she wasn't comfortable in one.  But were I to visit a country in which it was customary for women to wear hajib, I would do it - I would be uncomfortable, I would feel odd, but I would do it, to respect the preferences of the community.  

Do I think that this community is taking the best route for expressing their displeasure?  Not really... but neither do I see this woman's response (refusing to change her habits while decrying their actions toward her) as being appropriate either.


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 23, 2008)

Sad to say I have no time to make a long and considered addition to what looks to be a fascinating thread - good input from several viewpoints ladies and gents :rei:.

I'll fire off a couple of comments that may or may not be contentious and I'll try and get back in here tonight after work for a more thoughtful contribution.

Firstly, allowing religion to stand as a reason for any form of segregation or stratification is an inherently bad idea.  As soon as something becomes done "Because God says so" you're on a slippery slope.

Secondly, tolerance of any sort has to be a two way street.  For one group to to demand that their ways are accepted and not hindered but another groups mores and codes are not so protected is inherently unjust.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 23, 2008)

What I'm finding interesting is the different perspectives here on this, and how y'all have been better able to explain the whole situation, from several perspectives, better than some so-called professional news people. Always thought we had some darn good people here


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2008)

Thank you for the criticism of my post which surprisingly enough I will not be rewriting. It's clear that there is a great amount of misunderstanding about this. As with all media reports it is worth while reading beyond the words printed there. 
I think one of the misleading things is the word 'segregation', many people take this to mean the forced separation of one people from another - apartheid. Perhaps a better phrase would be a _'voluntary separation of_ _the sexes'_, *agreed and put into practice by all concerned*. It's not about forcing one side or another into a disadvantage, they sincerely believe that women when menstruating should be avoided. They also believe either sex shouldn't wear the clothes of the other sex. It's not about demeaning women, in fact as Canuck pointed out you would demean an Orthodox woman at your peril. There are a lot of advantages you know in banishing the men off to do their thing! Ah I see, you haven't thought that it may actually also be the other way round, that the women send the men off so the women can also do their own thing? Perhaps that would put a different complexion on things? 
As has been stated, the bus companies are privatly owned, they are not 'public' transport as such. There is a choice. Get on a 'separated by sex' bus or not, up to you. 
If you can delve deeper into the Laws the Orthodox live by, I think you would be very surprised how fair and even handed they actually are. How about the Law that states if you lend someone money you are forbidden to ask for it back if they don't repay you lest you make them feel bad? or the fact that a husband and wife should make love on the Sabbath night and they should enjoy it? The laws about menstruation are also about more than being unclean, they are there to make a man appreciate his wife is there for more than sex, he is to think about the time when she cannot be touched and realise all her other qualities. Women are also not expected to go to Shul nearly as often as men as their are 'more spiritual' than men and they are busy enough as it is! 
Please don't judge this situation by comparing it to forcible apartheid, it's nothing of the sort, no one is demeaned and there is a choice. It may be  because God says so but *Jewish people have long known that we can choose* *whether we follow that Law or not. *


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2008)

It's also occurred to me that Americans can define 'public' differently from us, we have public schools which are in effect your private schools. In many countries in Europe, UK and Israel included our 'public' bus systems are run by private companies. We will have different bus companies running buses on the same routes. Ah the joys of living in Socialist Britain lol! Our train services are also privately run, again trains from different companies running the same routes.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2008)

BrandiJo said:


> Human rights should be equal no matter where you live tho.


 
True... but it is not and when you are in thier house you live by thier rules or you have problems. And if you choose not to live by thier rules, expect problems



Tez3 said:


> She doesn't say she was beaten. As we've already been told the segregated buses are marked as such so she has a choice. It could be taken that she is insulting and challenging their beliefs and values by going on a bus clearly marked as segregated, wearing trousers.I agree that being insulted isn't pleasant but there are two sides to this story. The men may feel that she is equally insulting to them knowing what they believe. It's on a par with injuring cows to Hindus, offering pork to Moslems, or burning the American flag to Americans etc. for her to wear trousers on an Ultra Orthodox bus, to them women don't wear male clothing, it's the Law to them. I don't think people realise how upsetting to them (and such a small thing to us) it is.The fact this is in the news may mean that someone is trying to be provoking.
> A friend of mine goes to a Shul that separates men and women with the women going to the balcony, I asked if she didn't want to be downstairs with men and women being equal. She looked at me very strangely, why on earth, she asked, would the women want to be equal with the men, it would mean lowering themselves to their level! don't assume the Ultra Orthodox treat their women badly and remember Judaism has a matriarchal society.


 
Nicely said


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 23, 2008)

It is certainly true that it behoves upon us as civilised beings to take into consideration the feelings and moral codes of those with whom we would associate and I would not argue that if I were to go to the home of another that I should try not to offend them with my behaviour, demeanour or my manner of dress.

However, at the risk of diverging away from the precise point of the OP, as I noted above, tolerance and a willingness to compromise our individual mores for the greater social good has to be a bi-directional process.  If it is not then, however mildly expressed or enforced, it is discriminatory.

When those mores and codes come from religious roots then there is a serious danger of what started out as perfectly rational behaviours in their original cultural context to descend into dogmatic prohibition.  When that occurs then you get societal gulfs wedging their way into the fabric of a community.  

Let those sit for long enough without challenge or removal and their importance and permanence swells out of all sane proportion.  Before you know it we're setting fire to each other in the name of {insert name of mythical being here}.  

We (as in the English) went through it not so long ago with the atrocities committed by various monarchs of Catholic or Protestant persuasion over dogmatic issues that were not all that much more major than the one under discourse here.  For a while it looked as if we would follow an intelligent and rational path into the future but it seems we've left behind our particular Invisible Sky God and replaced him with the no less plausible Free Market Capitalism.

What I'm staggering towards in my usual clumsy fashion is that to simply 'blanket' excuse an action because it's a 'religious' matter or, even worse, paint the 'victim' as being in the wrong sets a dangerous precident.

In the specific case under discussion here I have no way of knowing if the young woman is being deliberately provocative or not.  It may be that she has legitimate religious reasons of her own to 'tilt at the windmill' of segregated seating on buses.  If she does, are *her* beliefs less valid than those she confronts?  If she doesn't and she's tweaking the nose of the Orthodox for pure devilment, then it still should not be a matter for furore (altho' a little public censure for inconsiderate behaviour might not go amiss)

But of course most world religions, despite protestations to the contrary, are not tolerant of challenges to their canon, no matter how petty - and therein lies the whole problem.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 23, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> ...and remember Judaism has a matriarchal society.



Matrilineal, not matriarchal.  The structure of the rules and regulations, especially if taken straight from the Hebrew bible, is heavily patriarchal.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 23, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> In the specific case under discussion here I have no way of knowing if the young woman is being deliberately provocative or not. It may be that she has legitimate religious reasons of her own to 'tilt at the windmill' of segregated seating on buses. If she does, are *her* beliefs less valid than those she confronts? If she doesn't and she's tweaking the nose of the Orthodox for pure devilment, then it still should not be a matter for furore (altho' a little public censure for inconsiderate behaviour might not go amiss)


 
Her beliefs are just as valid. What is objectionable is her going into an Orthodox neibhourhood and trying to impose her worldview. You would be the first one to protest Orthodox Jews going to the beach and trying to force rvrybody to cover up. Why is it so  hard to respect our mores?

There are only a handfull of lines served by segregated buses in Jerusalem. Those that also serve stops outside the Orthodox neighbourhoods also have non-segregated buses running at the same time.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 23, 2008)

CanuckMA said:


> What is objectionable is her going into an Orthodox neibhourhood and trying to impose her worldview.



She isn't imposing anything.  Trying to force other Orthodox women to wear pants, now that would be imposing.  Choosing how to dress yourself doesn't force anything on anyone else.

Perhaps the Orthodox on the bus should take the same advice offered here to the non-Orthodox and not bother someone that doesn't share their beliefs.

As it is, they're lucky they live in Israel and not most other first world nations.  A segregated bus line, private or public, wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in Hell in North America or Europe.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> As it is, they're lucky they live in Israel and not most other first world nations. A segregated bus line, private or public, wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in Hell in North America or Europe.


 
And they do not live in North America or Europe and as much as we may not like it the rest of the world is not America either and in many cases wonders why we care, but that is another topic.

I have no idea if this still goes on but in the Orthodox section of Jerusalem they stand on the streets and throw stuff at cars that drive by because it is against there philosophy of no electronic or mechanical or whatever it is operation from Friday to I think Sunday. But there is no one writing stories about this and this has been going on for a lot longer and is much more violent. 

And please anyone feel free to correct me if I am wrong on any point I do not know all that much about the beliefs of Orthodox Judaism I only know what I saw on a documentary about Jerusalem a year or so ago on I believe PBS.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2008)

A few years ago someone told me they knew all about Jews... they'd watched Fiddler on the Roof. I feel in that situation now along with a couple of you that others are telling us what our own religion, race and society is. Empty Hands I don't tell you what your society is, my society is matriarchal, trust me. yes it's matrilineal as well but dear me don't make the mistake of thinking it's not matriarchal.

Okay, the Ultra Orthodox run the company that owns the buses so that they can run them how they wish, people are welcome to use the buses if they respect the views of the people who run the bus company. It's that simple. Therefore by wearing trousers on the aforesaid bus the girl is trying to force her views on the others. If the Orthodox travel on other peoples transport they abide by the rules of that bus company. 
And there are many places in this country and in Europe where segregation of a more forcible type is allowed, but that's going to get into a whole different argument.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 23, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> I have no idea if this still goes on but in the Orthodox section of Jerusalem they stand on the streets and throw stuff at cars that drive by



Not heard of that, but really not that different from some of the things that happen over hear.  The red paint at people wearing fur springs to mind.  Or the anti-abortion crowd, there was even a group protesting at a military funeral not too long ago.

Fundamentalists can be a pain on every continent...



> because it is against there philosophy of no electronic or mechanical or whatever it is operation from Friday to I think Sunday. But there is no one writing stories about this and this has been going on for a lot longer and is much more violent.



Work is not allowed on the Sabbath, that I got.  But I am surprised throwing things at cars doesn't fall into that category.  I am also surprised they car, my understanding was that while they are not allowed to do work, or to have someone do work for them, someone else doing so in a way that doesn't effect them is perfectly fine.  

Judaism doesn't have that "convert everyone" mentality that Christianity or Islam has.  So non-jews not observing the rules really shouldn't be a problem?


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 23, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Empty Hands I don't tell you what your society is, my society is matriarchal, trust me. yes it's matrilineal as well but dear me don't make the mistake of thinking it's not matriarchal.



Ritualized disgust at unclean women is not matriarchal.  Barring women from furthering their educations is not matriarchal.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/808316.html

Courts composed solely of men who convene to decide whether or not a woman's clothing store is proper is not matriarchal.  Nor is vandalizing those stores, or attacking women who wear "improper" clothes.
http://www.koshernexus.org/?p=821

Almost completely preventing women from being rabbis or cantors is certainly not matriarchal.

Can Orthodox women "run the house", or even be dominant over their husbands in certain cases?  Certainly, but that does nothing to change the patriarchal standards of the general system in which they operate under.  Also, "running the house" is actually a pretty common role for women in decidedly patriarchal societies and times such as feudal Japan.  This, of course, limits the participation and power of women in the wider world.

It also changes nothing that Orthodox women support or even enforce patriarchal standards.  I've even read of a few black slaves that praised their own servitude as a rescue from heathenism to Christianity.  That still does nothing to change the character of the system.


----------



## Kacey (Jan 23, 2008)

Like so many other topics that come up in the news - we only have one side of this, that of the reporting newspaper.  As Andrew said, there are fundamentalists everywhere you go - and whether or not you agree with their actions often depends on how much you agree with their views.

Do I understand the viewpoint of those who dislike this young woman's mode of dress?  Certainly.

Do I think that they have the right, on a private conveyance, to let her know that they dislike her mode of dress?  Again, yes.

Do I think that the methods they have apparently chosen are over the top? You betcha.

Were any of us there to know what is going on that was _not_ in the article?  It doesn't look like it - so there's probably something going on there that we don't know about.

There are plenty of religions that have moral guidelines - it's only when those guidelines go against your own beliefs that people disagree with them.  The men who are decrying this woman's mode of dress are fighting to preserve their own religious and cultural identity - and they're doing it in an area in which they are both the majority and legally allowed to preserve that identity.  Do I agree with how they've apparently chosen to go about it?  No - but I would no more tell these ultra Orthodox that they have to _like_ women in trousers on private buses through the Orthodox enclave than I would go into an Amish community and tell them that they _must_ start dressing like the people in the communities around them - nor would I be particularly surprised if they complained - loudly and vigorously - if I showed up in my usual blue jeans and sweatshirt.

As far as the articles Empty Hands quoted - I _understand_ the ultra Orthodox, their backgrounds, viewpoints, and so on; that doesn't mean I agree with them preventing women from attaining, or demonstrating, equal status with men.  And he is correct; like other Biblically based religions, Judaism is patriarchal in nature, although descent is, indeed, matrilineal.  But that change must be desired from _within_ the community as well as without, or no change will occur.  The Amish have avoided this issue by attempting to isolate themselves completely - but such isolation is increasingly hard to maintain... but that doesn't mean that those who prefer to isolate themselves have to like it when the world intrudes.  By isolating themselves from others, they maintain the cultural standards of an earlier time - only as the world continues to push into their enclaves will they come into the 21st century - but they will no doubt do it kicking and screaming, just like any other group that finds itself forced to be inclusive.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> Ritualized disgust at unclean women is not matriarchal. Barring women from furthering their educations is not matriarchal.
> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/808316.html
> 
> Courts composed solely of men who convene to decide whether or not a woman's clothing store is proper is not matriarchal. Nor is vandalizing those stores, or attacking women who wear "improper" clothes.
> ...


 

Are all Christians the same them? do Catholics and Protestants follow the same rules? what are Methodists, Baptists, Quakers,Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox,  Revivalists etc etc.Trust me we have as many different beliefs in Judaism as you have in Christianity  Do you actually know what you mean when you say Orthodox? You chose one sect in Judaism and tar us all with the same brush. For the record I am Orthodox, I don't shave my head, I have a degree and my society is very much female led, yes we have female Rabbis. It's not the Orthodoxy of which you have singled out for scorn and derision I think you need to google some more and find out much more about Judaism before you attack me. These are the Ultra Orthodox of which you speak, they are seen as fanatical by many but they are not "the Orthodox". they are also well able to defend themselves.

http://www.religionfacts.com/judaism/denominations.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_denominations


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 23, 2008)

Kacey said:


> Like so many other topics that come up in the news - we only have one side of this, that of the reporting newspaper. As Andrew said, there are fundamentalists everywhere you go - and whether or not you agree with their actions often depends on how much you agree with their views.
> 
> Do I understand the viewpoint of those who dislike this young woman's mode of dress? Certainly.
> 
> ...


 
What a good response!

I understand too the views of the Ultra Orthodox and while not agreeing with them I understand why they believe as they do, it's very much to do with history.They are fanatical about Judaism and the preservation of our religion albeit as how they see it. Their beliefs are very much born of suffering, coming from the ghettos of Eastern Europe. It doesn't necessarily make them right of course but understanding where that fanaticism comes from may help people see where they are coming from.
Each Jewish community is unique in it's experiences and I'm sure while Kacy and I will agree on things, we have experienced being Jewish differently. My Jewish community is matriarchal as is many I know, of course we have communities who are not.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 23, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> You chose one sect in Judaism and tar us all with the same brush.



No, that is exactly what I am not doing.  I have made no general comments about Judaism, only the strain we are talking about in this thread.



Tez3 said:


> For the record I am Orthodox, I don't shave my head, I have a degree and my society is very much female led, yes we have female Rabbis.



That's good to hear.  However, I already made the comment that individual situations and attitudes do not change the nature of the system.  No matter how you want to slice it, you certainly cannot fairly describe Orthodox Judaism as "matriarchal."



Tez3 said:


> ...I think you need to google some more and find out much more about Judaism before you attack me.



I have not attacked you.  Claiming that Orthodox Judaism is patriarchal (a stance that Kacey for one confirmed) is no personal attack on you.


----------



## Live True (Jan 23, 2008)

Thank you for this fascinating thread and the food for thought.  Thank you Kacey, Tez, and Empty Hands for keeping a fairly civilized and interesting debate that has brought out many good points to consider.

I think a key point that was stated earlier and perhaps overlooked is that there are several other non-separated bus lines that run the same schedule and the same route.  So, my question would be why she repeatedly chooses a seperated one?  It's not like she'd be later or inconvenienced...or did I miss something there?

Again, thank you for broadening my understandings and giving me more to ponder.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 23, 2008)

Andrew Green said:


> Not heard of that, but really not that different from some of the things that happen over hear. The red paint at people wearing fur springs to mind. Or the anti-abortion crowd, there was even a group protesting at a military funeral not too long ago.
> 
> Fundamentalists can be a pain on every continent...
> 
> ...


 
My mistake, I had to go double check it is not orthodox it is Hasidic Judaism and in that section of Jerusalem form Sundown Friday to sundown on (I am not sure) Saturday or Sunday, no driving or other mechanical things. And at that time when people were driving through the Hasidic section they were lining the streets and trying to stop traffic and throwing insults and objects at those that drove through. My apologies but I am not up on the various types of Judaism.

It was not a convert everyone it was a don't come here and offend us by going against our way kind of thing


----------



## Kacey (Jan 23, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> My mistake, I had to go double check it is not orthodox it is Hasidic Judaism and in that section of Jerusalem form Sundown Friday to sundown on (I am not sure) Saturday or Sunday, no driving or other mechanical things. And at that time when people were driving through the Hasidic section they were lining the streets and trying to stop traffic and throwing insults and objects at those that drove through. My apologies but I am not up on the various types of Judaism.
> 
> It was not a convert everyone it was a don't come here and offend us by going against our way kind of thing



Hasidism is an ultra Orthodox sect of Judaism that originated in Eastern Europe.  Like other highly observant Jews, the Hasidim follow the laws in Leviticus - including on banning 39 forms of work on the Sabbath.  Anything electrical is included in that ban, as 2 of the banned forms of work are lighting and putting out fires; as the use of electricity spread, it was determined that anything with a spark (of any size), no matter the ease of use, fell under the guidelines for fire.  

Because of Jewish belief and tradition, the Sabbath is from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday (in Genesis, it states "and there was evening and morning, the first day - thus, days are measured from sundown to sundown); because Israel is a Jewish nation, it shuts down for the Jewish Sabbath the way other countries shut down for the Christian Sabbath (or used to - remember blue laws?).  The shift from sundown to midnight occurred in Europe with the advent of clocks - until then, the Christian churches also measured "days" from sundown to sundown; that's why major holidays have "eves" - Christmas Eve, for example - because they started at sundown.  The Christian churches also used to follow many of the same rules for not working on the Sabbath.

Should the Hasidim have thrown things at people who drove through their area during the Sabbath?  No... but neither should people have disturbed the peace of their day of worship if other alternatives existed. I can't say if they did or not.  All parties in this case were in error, I believe.


----------



## grydth (Jan 24, 2008)

What goes on in Israel is their own affair. I happen to generally like the country, and far prefer Israel to the anti-semitics who'd like to destroy it. I suspect outside criticism is viewed by them much as I view posts by congenital USA haters from outside: who cares?

This is primarily a martial arts forum, not an international affairs market. I bring this up because I strongly feel one answer to violence against women is martial arts training.... not only fighting skills, but the assurance that "I don't need to take that."  

My daughter was putting up with a larger and senior male student taking cheap shots in sparring, had enough, and laid him out with a left jab and right hook punch. I told her in no uncertain terms that if I ever saw her do that again, I was going to pull her off the mat and take her shopping at Hollisters.

There are efficent answers to those who spit on women (or returning soldiers). Some of these are called jabs, uppercuts, back fists....when the spitters find themselves next spitting blood and teeth, the assaults generally stop. When other women, and men, stand up for the woman, then make that "almost always".


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2008)

I will reiterate, most forms of Judaism *I am familiar* with are not patriarchal but matriarchal, As i've already explained, different places have different experiences.
Empty Hands you have said _Orthodox Jews_ do this and that, they don't, _Hasidic Jews_, the 'ultra orthodox' as you know them are responsible. We are two different things, therefore you were aiming your comments on the way they behave at me, an Orthodox Jew. I still think you need to know the difference between us all before you can start directing comments at us. My Orthodoxy is probobaly very different for example from what Kasey knows as Orthodoxy, we have the same beilefs of course but the practice of them and of how our societies are formed are very different.
The Hasids can also be different from each other depending on where they originally come from. They don't all agree with each other either so you would actually need to know which group is the one saying women can't be educated etc. 
This is a hugely deep and complicated subject far more than I think people realise and I apoligise that iI cannot do justice to it in a few posts. 
There is a Jewish joke whch isn't very funny but does explain a lot.
"Two Jews were shipwrecked on a desert island, they managed to survive and live quite a good life for a few years, being religious they'd built a synagogue as well as shelter for themsleves however when they were at last rescued it was noticed that they actually had two synagogues. When asked why one of the Jews answered, well I didn't like the way things were done in that one so I built my own to go to.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 24, 2008)

And it's a small subset of Ultra-Orthodox that do those boneheaded things. Generally young yeshiva students. Not very different from any other 18-19 year olds. I don't condone what they do, but I do understand it. Somebody brought up tha throwing things at cars. It's not like they line up random streets in Jerusalem and pelt cars. They have been known to do it in Mea Sharim, an Ultra-Orthodox neighbourghood of Jerusalem. Drivers can go around it. Because the entire neighbourhood is Ultra-Orthodox, they are often outside walking and kids playing in the streets in Shabbat. Cars driving through are annoying and also a safety concern. 

Anz Tez3 is right. Most of Judaism is matriarchal in practice. While some of the Laws mention obligations on men, it's the women who rule the house. And Judaism is very much a home focused religion. We don't need a Rabbi to conduct services, and sve for a few prayers, most of our service can be done alone. In a Jewish home, what the wife does and says and the final word.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 24, 2008)

Kacey said:


> Hasidism is an ultra Orthodox sect of Judaism that originated in Eastern Europe. Like other highly observant Jews, the Hasidim follow the laws in Leviticus - including on banning 39 forms of work on the Sabbath. Anything electrical is included in that ban, as 2 of the banned forms of work are lighting and putting out fires; as the use of electricity spread, it was determined that anything with a spark (of any size), no matter the ease of use, fell under the guidelines for fire.
> 
> Because of Jewish belief and tradition, the Sabbath is from sundown on Friday to sundown on Saturday (in Genesis, it states "and there was evening and morning, the first day - thus, days are measured from sundown to sundown); because Israel is a Jewish nation, it shuts down for the Jewish Sabbath the way other countries shut down for the Christian Sabbath (or used to - remember blue laws?). The shift from sundown to midnight occurred in Europe with the advent of clocks - until then, the Christian churches also measured "days" from sundown to sundown; that's why major holidays have "eves" - Christmas Eve, for example - because they started at sundown. The Christian churches also used to follow many of the same rules for not working on the Sabbath.
> 
> Should the Hasidim have thrown things at people who drove through their area during the Sabbath? No... but neither should people have disturbed the peace of their day of worship if other alternatives existed. I can't say if they did or not. All parties in this case were in error, I believe.


 
Thank You, I believe it was a rather main road in the city and I do know they had dispatched police to try and keep things calm but I am not sure if there was an alternate route or not.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2008)

Sometimes we let the men have the last word....usually "yes dear"!

I wouldn't want to be a Chasidic Jew but I have a soft spot for them. In perhaps martial arts terms they are the old school Japanese masters struggling against modern times and trying to keep the medieval ways, the old ways alive, where everyone knew where they stood in life. They have known so much suffering over the centuries they have turned inward and insular.Their Rabbis pulled the remnants of their people out of the ashes of post war Europe, mending the people and bringing them back to life. Believe it or not they are actually gentle and very decent people, as Canuck says though the young, perhaps as they should be, are hot headed and full of passion. For many the way they go about expressing that is wrong but their motives are at least better than many of the youths we find in British streets, drunk out of their minds, having sex on the street,vandalising anything in sight, throwing up and fighting.  
I'm not apologising for them, I don't think they need people to do that for them but I would like people to understand where they come from.


----------



## aedrasteia (Jan 24, 2008)

Thanks to all for a thought provoking discussion.

Here is some information that I believe is important. My perspective is based in part, on the public status of bus transportation and the 'voluntary' nature of seating on these buses. 

I will and have defended those in my community who are subjected to ridicule or harassment in public - based in religious bias or any other. I believe and act on my sense that all people in the public domain must not be subject to the coercion or use of force by any other person (a woman must not be forced to remove or add a veil, for example nor a man wearing religious clothing, same for verbal harassment). On a public conveyance, seating is voluntary. If seating choices are not voluntary then they are governed by the preferences of one group. Exceptions regarding seating (such as disabled, elderly) are governed by publicly acceptable regulations applicable to all regardless of race, ethnicity etc ). Please see below. i have added sources and links. If there is a problem accessing these please PM me and I will do all i can to help.

*Bus services *www.cafetorah.com/gallery/index.php?cat=7
Israel agency of media, news and tourism 

*Israel has an extremely developed bus route system, as buses are the country's main form of public transportation.* The Egged Bus Cooperative is Israel's largest bus company (and the second largest in the world), and operates routes throughout the entire country. In each major city or region*,* there is also a local bus company, the largest being the Dan Bus Company, operating routes in Gush Dan. Kavim is the next largest.



www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/source/Economy/transport.html
Take the Bus
When Israelis aren't driving, their *preferred mode of transportation is the bus.* Even though it serves a population of just over six million people, Egged Israel Transport Cooperative Society Ltd. is the second-largest bus operator in the world, after London Transport. Organized as a cooperative, Egged has 3,250 members and 4,550 salaried employees, operating 4,000 buses on thousands of scheduled routes as well as special trips. Egged carries around one million passengers every day.

The first public buses appeared in the country after the First World War, fashioned from converted trucks. Bus drivers gradually united into cooperatives that reflected their social ideals of freedom, independence, productive labor, mutual aid and equality. Each member had an equal standing and say in management. Egged itself was founded in 1933 in a merger of four smaller bus cooperatives. Its name, which means "linked together," was proposed by the national poet Hayim Nahman Bialik, and was intended to express the close bond between the cooperative's members.

*Today, Egged provides 70 pecent of **Israel**'s public transport*; the Dan cooperative, operating in the greater Tel Aviv area, supplies most of the balance. *Egged works on the basis of a government license ( *_known as a __tender-addition by poster_* ) renewed automatically every year, with the government setting fares and conditions.* The cooperative's annual turnover is about $600 million. 

Egged is facing a number of challenges as public demand and transportation policy change. Since 1991, the number of bus travelers has fallen by two percent, as more commuters take to their cars. Meanwhile, the government has begun to chip away at Egged's monopoly. In 1999 it decided to open eight percent of Egged's *routes to competition among private operators, awarded through tenders.* An additional 25 percent of Egged's lines will be tendered by 2009. The government also wants to privatize Egged by floating shares and/or selling a stake to investors. Source: Israeli Foreign Ministry 


*http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6584661.stm*
*Israel**'s 'modesty buses' draw fire b*y Katya Adler BBC News, Jerusalem 
The other day I was waiting for a bus in downtown Jerusalem. I was in the bustling orthodox Jewish neighbourhood of Mea Sharim and the bus stop was extremely crowded. 
When the Number 40 bus arrived, the most curious thing happened. Husbands left heavily pregnant wives or spouses struggling with prams and pushchairs to fend for themselves as they and all other male passengers got on at the front of the bus. 
Women moved towards the rear door to get on at the back. When on the bus, I tried to buck the system, moving my way towards the driver but was pushed back towards the other women. 

These are what orthodox Jews call "modesty buses". The separation system operates on 30 *public bus routes* across Israel. The authorities here say the arrangement is voluntary, but in practice, as I found out, there is not much choice involved. 

Naomi Ragen is one of a group of women now taking the separation bus system to court. She is an orthodox Jew herself. "I wasn't trying to start a revolution, all I wanted to do was get home," she tells me. "I was in downtown Jerusalem and I saw a bus going straight to my neighbourhood and I got on and sat down, in a single seat behind the driver. 

"It was a completely empty bus, and all of a sudden, some men started getting on, ultra-orthodox men. They told me I was not allowed to sit there, I had to go to the back of the bus." Not only is the segregation system discriminatory, says Ms Ragen, but it can also be dangerous, she says, for those like her who ignore it. 

"I said to him look, if you bring me a code of Jewish law and show me where it's written that I have to sit at the back of the bus I'll move. "And he tried to gain support from the rest of the passengers and I underwent a half-hour of pure hell - abuse, humiliation, threats, even physical intimidation." 

Supporters of the separation system say the buses involved serve mainly religious Jewish neighbourhoods - but not exclusively. 

Many passengers are not happy. You will hear complaints at bus stops all over town. One man told me that if some people wanted segregation buses they should pay a private company to provide them. Another told me that in a society that is democratic and where the buses are subsidised by the government, a minority's concerns should not override those of the majority. 

But Shlomo Rosenstein disagrees. He is a city councillor in Jerusalem where a large proportion of Israel's segregation lines operate. 

"This really is about positive discrimination, in women's favour. Our religion says there should be no public contact between men and women, this modesty barrier must not be broken."


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2008)

I suppose you realise you are quoting again the media, this time the BBC which has a quaint tradition of being anti Israeli. I've watched Katya Adler's reports before on the news, not Israeli friendly. The Jewish virtual library link doesn't work. Again though it's someones point of view not necessarily what may be the 'truth'. Your perspective is based on the media and other peoples point of views. You haven't been there and seen the situation for yourself.
The first part just tells us what we have already said ... that there are several bus companies in Israel.
I think I've said enough on this subject, if people are determined to read things into media reports what they want there is no amount of discussion that will persuade them things, in reality, may not be what was reported. 

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Documenting_BBC_Documentaries.asp


----------



## Doc_Jude (Jan 26, 2008)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Every ethnic group in the US seeks support and sends same to their ilk at "Home".


REALLY!?! How much of our foreign aid is dedicated to Israel? NO OTHER "ETHNIC" GROUP can pull this!



> As to "Western Nation" I base that on that's how I've heard them referred to, their technological advancement as well as government type.


That label is amazing in and of itself. "Western"... because they conform with "The West".


----------



## ChadWarner (Jan 27, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> What would make Israel a western nation. Just because they worship Yahweh and not Mohammed? They would still stone a woman for adultery or ostracize her for not adhering to some ancient law. Sure the women there have a bit more freedom than their Muslim counterparts but some of the old ways still apply.
> That part of the world has a ways to go to catch up with the rest... provided they want to.


 
Judaism is a religion and not a race.  Jewish people come in all shapes sizes and colors so do christians, muslims  and buddists.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 27, 2008)

Ooo ooo , he called me an 'ethnic'! 
Ere, wat's one of them then? 
Dunno guv, is it one of them there inventors then?
Nah, them's eccentricks them is.
he means one of them aliens
Wat, little green men?
Nah, he means those tosspots from across the border!
You don't mean... gasp... not..... "them"!
Aye lass, I mean them, those damn Lancastrians! The bane of a god fearing Yorkshire Tykes life them be.
Nay lad, it'll be them doolally lot from Brum.
Youse reckons? nah it'll be them soft southerners, aye that's who'll it'll be.

All parties shake heads at thought of soft southerners.

Mebbe though it's them Scousers?
Aye robbing twats they be.
Nay lad ye'll be thinking on them Taffies.
nah then laddies,t'aint any of em,  it's that lot in t'next village!

With this sage comment ...all agree.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 27, 2008)

We are all part of an ethnic group

Ethnic
1. pertaining to or characteristic of a people, esp. a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like. 
2. referring to the origin, classification, characteristics, etc., of such groups. 
3. being a member of an ethnic group, esp. of a group that is a minority within a larger society: ethnic Chinese in San Francisco. 
4. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of members of such a group. 
5. belonging to or deriving from the cultural, racial, religious, or linguistic traditions of a people or country: ethnic dances. 

And now not to take this off post but hey it is a story related to ethnicity and maybe it is time to lighten thngs up for a minute or at least time to completely ignore me

I was once in a room full of guys that I worked with that were all African American and they were discussing a meeting that was going to take place for people of color and that they had all received an invitation and I said. Hey I didnt get one to which they all stop talking and just stared at me (my heritage is very much Germanic by the way and I look very German too) I then said hmmthen apparently I am clear and without color. They all broke out laughing.


----------

