Gender separation is sexist? The news media and the Erev Rav are the sexists!

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

"do you think it's ok to eat pig?"

[muman613]

I was not talking about the buses when I said that women are breaking down barriers. Indeed I did bring up the bus issue in another thread because a 'Rosa Parks' made the news recently by not respecting the request on a bus to move.

I do not suggest that all buses require separation but I do respect those who would like to avoid the contact if possible. I thought that there could be a way to satisfy all parties. I believe the Rabbis recently said that it was permissible for private buses to cater to those who want to ride without seeing women.

I want to protect the ability for men to be able to avoid being tempted to think thoughts which lead to sin. I know you don't agree with me on these laws but there exist a lot of Jewish law to prevent contact between the sexes, and a lot of sages whose wisdom indicate that such thoughts are not good for the soul of a Jew. But leaving that all aside I agree that Jews cannot force observance on those who don't know or have not learned the Jewish ways. I do not suggest that everyone can be expected to respect those who want to keep such things from occurring.

As you saw from my response to Tag Mahir I was satisfied with his explanation of what you said. You may have more knowledge of what happened but that doesn't necessarily give you permission to act in such a hostile manner with me. I am not your enemy and I do not seek to discredit your opinion...

I will add that observance of these laws may be a strict interpretation but still I respect that opinion..

[muman613]

Here is what AskMoses says on the topic of men looking at women:

http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/405,81303/Why-do-very-religious-Jewish-men-avoid-looking-at-women.html

Why do very religious Jewish men avoid looking at women?
by Rabbi Baruch Emanuel Erdstein

Every ism in the world acknowledges the power of sexuality. Every spiritual tradition thus demands of its spiritual masters either complete self-denial or the channeling of one's sexual energy in one way or another. Unlike other cultures, in which a select few remove themselves from the general society in order to attain "perfection," Judaism encourages each one of us to not only aspire to be a spiritual master in our own right, but to do so within a productive worldly context. But because the holy creative potential of sexuality is so great, it is that much more susceptible to perversion and must be carefully guarded.

The root of all aspirations for holiness begin with sanctifying the mind, and more than any other sense, that of sight has the most influence upon one's thoughts.

For a person who has come to develop his spiritual stature, having refined his sexual energies, it is that much more apparent that sights which might distract one's spiritual focus are to be avoided, even at great expense. Especially in modern society, where so few are attuned to the holy creative power of sexuality, often dressing immodestly (or even intentionally provocative!), many choose to protect themselves by not even glancing in the direction of a strange women.

This should not be taken as a sign of arrogance or disdain. However "unfriendly" it may appear to someone less familiar with the importance Judaism stresses upon guarding our sexuality, great respect is due to those who maintain their steadfast commitment to their spiritual path.

It should be noted that Halachah does not require a man to turn away his eyes at the sight of a woman. However, it is forbidden for a man to stare at a woman other than his (prospective) wife.

From the Daf Yomi:

Sanhedrin 75

http://www.dafyomi.co.il/sanhedrin/halachah/sn-hl-075.htm


1) THE ISUR TO LOOK AT WOMEN (a) Gemara

1. Once, a man was eyeing a woman, and he became sick from desire for her. Doctors said that his only cure is if he will have relations with her.
2. Rabanan: It is forbidden, even if he will die.
3. Doctors: Let her stand naked in front of him (perhaps this will help)!
4. Rabanan: It is forbidden, even if he will die.
5. R. Yakov bar Idi or R. Shmuel bar Nachmani said that she was married. The other said that she was Penuyah (single); nevertheless, Chachamim were stringent because it would have been embarrassing to her family, or to preserve the Kedushah of Benos Yisrael.
6. Avodah Zarah 20a (Beraisa): R. Gamliel was in Har ha'Bayis, and he saw a beautiful Nochris. He said "Mah Rabu Ma'asecha Hash-m."
7. Question (Beraisa): "V'Nishmarta mi'Kol Davar Ra" - one may not look at a beautiful woman, even a Penuyah, or at a married woman, even if she is ugly. One may not look at a woman's colored clothing.
8. Answer: He saw her (suddenly) when he turned a corner.
9. Shabbos 64a (Tana d'vei R. Yishmael): The soldiers who defeated Midyan needed a Korban to atone for pleasure from seeing forbidden women.
10. (Rav Sheshes): The Torah lists external Tachshitim (e.g. rings) with inner Tachshitim (girdles) to teach that one who looks (for pleasure) at a woman's pinky needs atonement like one who looks at her Ervah.
11. Berachos 24a: If two are sleeping on a bed, each may turn his head away to say Keri'as Shema, even if their buttocks touch the other!
12. This supports Rav Huna, who says that buttocks are not Ervah.
13. Support #2 (Mishnah): A woman can sit naked and take Chalah (with a blessing), for she can cover her Ervah (even though her buttocks are exposed).
14. Rejection: The case is, her buttocks are recessed in the ground.
15. (R. Yitzchak): An exposed (square) Tefach of part of a woman's body (that should be covered) is Ervah.
16. He need not forbid looking at it. Even gazing even at a woman's finger is like gazing at her Ervah! Rather, one may not say Keri'as Shema facing his wife if a Tefach is exposed.
17. (Rav Chisda): A woman's thigh is considered Ervah.
18. (Rav Sheshes): A woman's hair is considered Ervah.

(b) Rishonim

1. Rambam (Hilchos Isurei Bi'ah 21:2): One may not gaze at the beauty of a (woman forbidden due to) Ervah. One who does is suspected of Arayos. If he does so for pleasure, he is lashed mid'Rabanan. Looking even at the pinky for pleasure is like looking at the place of Ervah.
2. Rambam (ibid. 21): One may not look at women hanging up laundry. It is even forbidden to look at colored clothing of a woman he recognizes lest he come to have thoughts.
i. Ba'al ha'Ma'or (18a): One may not look at a naked woman, even in a case of mortal danger. If she is married, this is letter of the law. One may transgress Arayos when the Me'anes (one who threatens to kill him if he does not consent) seeks his own pleasure.
ii. Rebuttal (Milchamos Hash-m): Chachamim did not allow the girl to help cure the man, even though he intended for his own benefit!
iii. Hagahas ha'Bach (10): The Ba'al ha'Ma'or forbids when one wants to benefit from the Aveirah itself. Also Chidushei ha'Ran (Pesachim 25b DH v'Hevi'u and Nimukei Yosef (Bava Kama 43b) distinguish like this.
iv. Suggestion: One must forfeit his life rather than benefit from Ervah, e.g. to go to a beach where women are not covered properly.
v. Rebuttal (Igros Moshe EH 1:56): This is unlike the Ba'al ha'Ma'or's case. There, he wanted to benefit from Ervah to cure his lust for sin. This is worse than one who seeks to save himself from a Me'anes. One may not look at her naked to cure himself, even though it is not a concrete Isur, but if he was threatened 'look at her or be killed', perhaps it is permitted, since he need not touch her. The Ramban could admit, for it is not a concrete Isur. Without intent for pleasure, it is a light Isur; even touching, hugging and kissing have no Lav or lashes then Shach (YD 157:11). Also, the Isur Arayos of looking is like the case in Sanhedrin, when she is brought for him to look at her naked. When he goes to where women are naked, this is a different Isur of bringing himself to Hirhur, which could lead to a seminal emission. (One must forfeit his life only for Arayos.)
3. Rashba (Berachos 24a DH v'Ha d'Omar): The Rif did not mention an exposed Tefach, thigh, or hair (regarding Kri'as Shema). The Ra'avad says that the Rif holds that since we said that buttocks are not Ervah, all the more so these. The Ra'avad himself says that we are not concerned for buttocks because they do not distract a man.
i. Beis Yosef (OC 75 DH Kosav ha'Rashba): The Rambam does not mention these regarding Kri'as Shema. It seems that he holds that they are forbidden to hear or see; the Isur was not said regarding Shema. L'Halachah, we hold like the Rambam, but l'Chatchilah one should be careful at the time of Shema.
4. Yere'im (45): Chachamim warned not to look at Arayos; an Asmachta is "guard yourself from every evil matter." The soldiers needed Kaparah for Hirhurim.
5. Yad Ramah (Bava Basra 164:52): The Aveirah of Hirhurim is even concerning a Penuyah.
6. Kolbo (64 DH ha'Megale'ach): One who transgressed Arayos or spilled his seed must be extra careful to avoid anything that causes Hirhurim, e.g. looking at a women's face, or the areas near the Ervah or breasts, or her clothing even on the wall, or have any thoughts of women other than his wife.

(c) Poskim

1. Shulchan Aruch (EH 21:1): One must distance himself very very much from women. One may not look at an Ervah's beauty. Looking even at the pinky for pleasure is like looking at the place of Ervah. It is forbidden even to see her hair. One who does any of these is lashed mid'Rabanan.
i. Beis Yosef (DH Kasuv b'Orchos, citing R. Yonah): The Torah forbids looking at a married woman - "v'Lo Sasuru... v'Acharei Eineichem". Kesuvim forbid looking at a Penuyah - "Bris Korati l'Einai u'Mah Esbonen Al Besulah." One who withholds his eyes from looking will merit to behold the Shechinah, Midah k'Neged Midah - "v'Otzem Einav me'R'os b'Ra; ...Melech b'Yafyo Techezenah Einecha" (Vayikra Rabah 23:13). The Torah forbids thinking even about a Penuyah - "V'Nishmarta mi'Kol Davar Ra" - do not have thoughts during the day, for they lead to Tum'ah at night.
ii. Beis Shmuel (2): The Rambam forbids looking at a married woman only mid'Rabanan. All agree that looking at a Penuyah is forbidden from Kesuvim, and that the Torah forbids Hirhur even about a Penuyah.
2. Shulchan Aruch (ibid. 4): One may look at Ishto (his wife) Nidah, even if it is pleasurable. Since she will be permitted later, he will not sin.
i. Source (Beis Yosef DH v'Chen): Shabbos 64b permits a Nidah to adorn himself lest she become repulsive to her husband. We infer that he may look at her.
3. Shulchan Aruch (OC 75:1): One who faces an exposed (square) Tefach (in a place that is normally covered) of a woman may not say Shma.
i. Question: At all times it is forbidden to look even at the pinky!
ii. Answer (Bach DH Tefach): At other times it is forbidden only if he intends to look, for then he gets pleasure.
iii. Question: This implies that one may see areas normally exposed without intent for pleasure. If so, why didn't the Gemara answer that R. Gamliel did not intend for pleasure?
iv. Answer (Igros Moshe OC 1:40): R. Gamliel blessed 'how great are Your works', i.e. he got pleasure. Therefore, we needed to answer that he turned a corner and had no time to close his eyes. One must always strive to avoid looking at women, lest it be pleasurable. When walking in the street one should try to look down unless this would make him prone to injury.
4. Shulchan Aruch (YD 195:7): When one's wife is Nidah, he may not look at her heel or parts that are normally covered. He may look at places that are normally exposed even if it is pleasurable.

See also Baba Basra:

http://www.dafyomi.co.il/bbasra/halachah/bb-hl-016.htm

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

I want to protect the ability for men to be able to avoid being tempted to think thoughts which lead to sin. I know you don't agree with me on these laws but there exist a lot of Jewish law to prevent contact between the sexes, and a lot of sages whose wisdom indicate that such thoughts are not good for the soul of a Jew. But leaving that all aside I agree that Jews cannot force observance on those who don't know or have not learned the Jewish ways. I do not suggest that everyone can be expected to respect those who want to keep such things from occurring.

As you saw from my response to Tag Mahir I was satisfied with his explanation of what you said. You may have more knowledge of what happened but that doesn't necessarily give you permission to act in such a hostile manner with me. I am not your enemy and I do not seek to discredit your opinion...

Muman, no offense dude but there have been many times that you have appeared hostile on this forum, both to Jews and to Gentiles and on occasion even Chaim himself. You have tried to discredit other peoples' opinions. I really don't need to provide examples. Maybe sometimes you have been legitimately upset but at other times, antagonizing has almost appeared to be a game for you. Tag and KWRBT are very religious Jews and I'm sure that they are a whole lot like you, so I'm not sure why there would be a conflict with them. I don't see anybody here defending immodesty in any way, certainly not them. I think you need a fresh start with them.

[muman613]

Muman, no offense dude but there have been many times that you have appeared hostile on this forum, both to Jews and to Gentiles and on occasion even Chaim himself. You have tried to discredit other peoples' opinions. I really don't need to provide examples. Maybe sometimes you have been legitimately upset but at other times, antagonizing has almost appeared to be a game for you. Tag and KWRBT are very religious Jews and I'm sure that they are a whole lot like you, so I'm not sure why there would be a conflict with them. I don't see anybody here defending immodesty in any way, certainly not them. I think you need a fresh start with them.

Thank you for the opinion but I am sure that we are all on the same page. Having a debate as to what extent tznuit goes and the wisdom of the Talmud is just something I like to do. I hope it is not seen as antagonism against them.

To each of you I extend apology if Axl is correct that it appears I am contradicting what you say.

I have said, and I'll say again, that extremism is a problem. And there have to be a normal found among the Jewish people as to where we are all holding. I do not expect everyone to understand the level which I aspire to reach. I just present the material which I have learned after asking questions about this issue.

As I said personally I had problems with 'looking at women' which apparently my ex-wife had problems with. I did not keep many of these laws and I saw the destruction which occurred as a result.

The problem is not the womens fault at all and I hope my opinion is not called 'misogynist' as I am sure some are thinking. I fully respect the strong Jewish woman, as we describe the perfect woman in the traditional song Eishah Chayil...

I am not seeking conflict. I respect both KWRBT and Tag and I hope that they respect me also...

[muman613]

I also must admit that since I am a recent Baal Teshuva I have had experiences where I shared hotel rooms with more than one woman {friends} but we did not share beds.... I am not the most pure when it comes to keeping the laws of separation but I do try to keep what I can. As I said I try to avoid being in a room alone with a woman behind closed doors... This is a basic law of Yichud...

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I am not seeking conflict. I respect both KWRBT and Tag and I hope that they respect me also...

 I do, and don't worry I don't get offended debating.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

do not suggest that all buses require separation but I do respect those who would like to avoid the contact if possible. 

contact?

I thought that there could be a way to satisfy all parties. I believe the Rabbis recently said that it was permissible for private buses to cater to those who want to ride without seeing women.

What private buses are there?  The incidents are taking place on public buses.  There are also some rabbis who thought egged buses should be switched to separate seating, but egged does not agree to that.

I want to protect the ability for men to be able to avoid being tempted to think thoughts which lead to sin. I know you don't agree with me on these laws

Wrong.  I agree on the actual laws.  Not new made-up stringencies which have nothing to do w the subject.

but there exist a lot of Jewish law to prevent contact between the sexes,

bus seating was never one of them.  Are you a reformist?   CONTACT does not happen from mixed bus seating, and in fact the issue proponents of separate seating are pushing is not CONTACT but actually that they will be tempted to LOOK at women.

Did you know that if women sit in the back of the bus, men can still be tempted to look at them from a little bit in front?  Did you know men could stare at women who are at the bus stop while the bus pulls up?  Did you know men could still watch the women as they get on the bus?
You cannot ban temptation or ban improper men.  If one cannot control himself, then do not go out and do not walk on the street - don't try to abuse everyone else.

and a lot of sages whose wisdom indicate that such thoughts are not good for the soul of a Jew.

what thoughts do you refer to and how do we ban thoughts?  How can seating in halves of buses prevent thoughts?

As you saw from my response to Tag Mahir I was satisfied with his explanation of what you said. You may have more knowledge of what happened but that doesn't necessarily give you permission to act in such a hostile manner with me. I am not your enemy and I do not seek to discredit your opinion...

. I know you are not my "enemy" but this is disingenuous.  You very often manage to morph what I'm saying into something completely different and then act like I am opposed to basic laws of Judaism by putting words into my mouth that I did not say.  How can you not expect a bit of hostility in response to that, especially when it happens so many times.  Quite frankly I really tried to limit hostility in my responses and actually I called upon you to get serious rather than to belabor what you were doing, how it was wrong, etc (or to ridicule it God forbid).  So what did you find hostile?

I will add that observance of these laws may be a strict interpretation but still I respect that opinion..

I don't respect those who try to force it on others.  Religious Jews like you and me are also their victims, not just some chiloni or feminista.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Just as a btw, I am seeing on facebook that the media is having success because some people are lashing out against all religious Jews due to the actions of the thugs.  I got into a long argument with one lady who was mixing up all sorts of issues into one and mixing the thugs up with all haredim (even confusing one issue -women singing to the army- that deals with religious zionists, not haredim)  just like the media is using these stories to conflate all religious and defame them all.  Very terrible situation

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

Just as a btw, I am seeing on facebook that the media is having success because some people are lashing out against all religious Jews due to the actions of the thugs.  I got into a long argument with one lady who was mixing up all sorts of issues into one and mixing the thugs up with all haredim (even confusing one issue -women singing to the army- that deals with religious zionists, not haredim)  just like the media is using these stories to conflate all religious and defame them all.  Very terrible situation

Doesn't this prove that Chaim's assessment is completely correct?

[IsraeliGovtAreKapos]

Soo? "Mehadrin" buses are not necessarily "Jewish". They are not halahically needed to begin with. If their are those who want them and the buses are privately owned fine, but if those are against them doesn't make them against Judaism necessarily.

What? Even Gentiles such as the Japanese have understood that over crowdedness is a real problem and made a seperation between the sexes in their trains. Separation in over-crowded buses is nothing but common sense, to prevent very serious Halachic, social and public problems that can happen in public places.

There's no Halachic difference between separation in buses and separation in public events held both by the Haredim and the religious Zionists. Why don't you wage Jihad against them as well?

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

It's the same as saying that being against separation in public bathrooms is not against Judaism. Even Gentiles such as the Japanese have understood that over crowdedness is a real problem and made a seperation between the sexes in their trains. Separation in over-crowded buses is nothing but common sense, to prevent very serious problems Halachically, socially and publically that can happen in public places.

Also, why did you never wage Jihad against separation in most of the public events held both by Haredim and religious nationalists?

  I don't "wage Jihad" as you put it. And my points were mostly on the subject of the school situation in Beit Shemesh.
( I know Haaretz, but still its from Rav Melamed)
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/top-israeli-rabbi-gender-segregated-buses-go-against-jewish-law-1.404200
"Melamed also stated that gender segregation is appropriate only during when performing “public acts”, and said that riding the bus is considered a “private act.”   "
 
 - Lastly I looked into this issue wayy before this even became a public issue of what it is now, and the Halacha given by Rav Bay-Hayim is that it is not needed.

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

בס''ד

I'm really disappointed to see people here join the news media lynch against Charedim. Do you also want to join the mass demonstrations organized by Shimon Peres, the media and the feminazis? Demonstrations against "religious coersion" - as if that is the problem in Israel, when in reality there is constant anti-religious coersion and always has been. You decided to side with the media and the self-hating scum against religious Jews. You joined the anti-religious mob. I tried to warn you that this campaign against religious Jews is an attack on the Torah itself.

Whenever there is a massive organized media campaign in regard to religious faith or almost any other issue, it should be obvious what the objective is. I can't believe that anyone is stupid enough to think that the media is worried about the "rights" of Jewish girls. These Jewish girls should fear the media a million times more than the Charedim. And so should any Jew with an ounce of sanity.

You saw me confront Satmar with a video that has over 2500 views. But when the monstrous media is involved, I will never help these criminals stage a propaganda war against halacha and Torah.

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

I don't "wage Jihad" as you put it. And my points were mostly on the subject of the school situation in Beit Shemesh.
( I know Haaretz, but still its from Rav Melamed)
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/top-israeli-rabbi-gender-segregated-buses-go-against-jewish-law-1.404200
"Melamed also stated that gender segregation is appropriate only during when performing “public acts”, and said that riding the bus is considered a “private act.”   "
 
 - Lastly I looked into this issue wayy before this even became a public issue of what it is now, and the Halacha given by Rav Bay-Hayim is that it is not needed.

בס''ד

The real issue is not separation on buses. The real issue is the media war against the Torah. Whether you agree or disagree with the Charedim on this issue is irrelevant. The Torah is under massive assault here by a mob of self-hating swine.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Doesn't this prove that Chaim's assessment is completely correct?

No, because real incidents took place in Ramat Bet Shemesh, which I really hope he isn't trying to deny.  It has gone on for months with these "sikrikim" and harrassing little school girls.

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

בס''ד

BTW most of the rabbis in Israel will also condemn Tag Mechir and tell you that it is against Jewish law to fight back against the Erev Rav and their Arab Nazi allies.

Most of the rabbis in Israel also are against Kahanism, against resisting expulsions, against condemning Jewish traitors.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

בס''ד

I'm really disappointed to see people here join the news media lynch against Charedim.

Good grief, is this directed at me?   Please tell me it isn't!

Chaim, are you denying that sikrikim have been harrassing little school girls in Ramat Bet Shemesh?   And also that they took over the school that was being built and damaged the property because they didn't want it built there?   Just because the media now jumped on this issue months later and made it into a circus does not make the real problem go away.

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

Good grief, is this directed at me?   Please tell me it isn't!

Chaim, are you denying that sikrikim have been harrassing little school girls in Ramat Bet Shemesh?   And also that they took over the school that was being built and damaged the property because they didn't want it built there?   Just because the media now jumped on this issue months later and made it into a circus does not make the real problem go away.

בס''ד

The claim that Charedim are "terrorizing" little girls in Israel is baloney. If there were some minor incidents this is nothing compared to what the media is doing right now. It is the media who is waging a war of terror against good Jews in Israel - literally a war of physical and spiritual terror. This war has been going on in Eretz Yisrael for over 100 years. For the media to become the big defenders of little girls is the worst obscenity imaginable. This is the same Erev Rav establishment that is responsible for the destruction of millions of Jewish souls, and this campaign is the latest chapter in their effort to discredit and ridicule Judaism.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

בס''ד

The claim that Charedim are "terrorizing" little girls in Israel is baloney. If there were some minor incidents this is nothing compared to what the media is doing right now. It is the media who is waging a war of terror against good Jews in Israel - literally a war of physical and spiritual terror. This war has been going on in Eretz Yisrael for over 100 years. For the media to become the big defenders of little girls is the worst obscenity imaginable. This is the same Erev Rav establishment that is responsible for the destruction of millions of Jewish souls, and this campaign is the latest chapter in their effort to discredit and ridicule Judaism.

I didn't claim haredim are.   It is a faction of lunatics amidst charedim.   It's not baloney!   Just ask the traumatized kids and parents who had to escort them.   This has gone on for months.   You are either in complete denial or you just have no idea what is happening there with regards to the Orot school. 

So if the media defends little girls, that now makes the little girls wrong and no longer victims?   This is a serious problem and like I said, the media should burn in hell along with the "sikrikim" who are attacking people.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

בס''ד

Most of the rabbis in Israel also are against Kahanism, against resisting expulsions, against condemning Jewish traitors.

 Just because they (the sikkarim) happen to be in the extremely small minority, doesn't make them correct in this matter and that we need to defend them.
 And this issue is not about the Torah vs. the leftists/media. I don't know if you noticed by me at least, but I have also spoken precisely against the media using this to attack religious Jews, including the victims themselves and what they represent.
 By making a clear distinction between these sikkarim and the greater religious community (including the Haredim) the issue is much easier to fight. In fact they want it to be Hiloni vs. Haredi battle in order to paint Torah Jews all in the camp of people who spitt at girls! as if its the Torah encouraging this.
 I dont believe you read all my and Kahane-was-right-Bt's posts on this or didn't understand properly.
 By not condemning them you-we are falling into the hands of the reformers who would love to get ride of Judaism all together and incite the public against it.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Meanwhile I guess you are siding with UTJ by saying it's all just a media lynch, so since they agree with you does that make you wrong by default too?   It seems there can never be complete disagreement with evil entities because sometimes even evil people report accurate facts.     So you cannot say I'm discredited just because the media has come out swinging and exposed some facts and are using it for their own agendas.   The facts aren't changed by that.

[Nekama]

Just to add my 2 cent opinion, I think my real concern is what is the motivation of the most fringe elements asserting these new rules.  What is their Mesorah (i.e., source in Jewish law)?  If there is a genuine Mesorah then so be it.  If this is just a frenzy to see who can be "frumer" (more religious) then the next (like the microbes in water which have absolutely no basis in Halachah), then this is Taliban like behavior.  If these elements are so concerned, how far away are we from Nazirs?  I seem to recall that during the time of the Beit Hamikdash, after the ceremony of the Azazzel where the red string turned white, men and women would meet and there would be many engagements (Keddushin and not Nissuin) resulting from such meetings.  If the rules being implemented now were in place then, there would have been a Shidduch crises.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

LOL watch this video including the guy in his car that gets interviewed where he "explains" why little girls are spit at.   To deny this is happening is really delusional, even if the media rhetoric is insane.   Go ahead and fast forward to 2:39 and listen to what he says.

[Chaim Ben Pesach]

בס''ד

Again the issue is not whether one Charedi spit at someone. The issue is that you are helping the media campaign to discredit Judaism. Instead of condemning the media, you are condemning the Charedim. You are outraged over a Charedi Jew spitting at someone or other (mostly exaggerated) incidents. But you are not outraged over the media manipulating this issue to destroy the soul of the Jewish people. The media is using you.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

KWRBT and others, I think it is obvious that if the NWO is hyping an "incident" that it is likely to be either a complete lie or grossly exaggerated. I already used the example that the NWO is also constantly telling us that "fanatical settlers" are harassing and tormenting Arabs. Is that true? Should we believe that innocent Arabs are being picked on by "radical" Jews?