Talk:Jewish religious clothing/Archive 1

Archive 1

Edit warring over the appropriateness or inappropriateness of an image

To fellow-editors User:Newmila and User:תנא קמא, and others who may have taken an interest in the same, rather than engage in an edit war, why don't we simply submit here a Wikipedia:RfC on the appropriateness or inappropriateness of this image showing a woman donning Tefillin, and which are traditionally worn only by men. In this way, we can build a consensus.Davidbena (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

The article says some women do wear Tefillin, so the image is illustrative. Jonathunder (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

The article speaks about the veiling of Jewish women, but not about them wearing Tefillin (phylacteries). Here, some editors obviously think that the image may be misleading to our readership, as it is an anomaly, if you will, not practised by the vast majority of observant Jews. Some women from the Reform Movement will, however, wear them, but they do not make-up the vast majority, who frown upon the practice. We are taught in the Talmud that Michal, the daughter of King Shaul, was an exception, and would wear them. I think that a RfC will solve this dispute.Davidbena (talk) 23:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

The article does include a sentence about women using tefillin and cites a page from My Jewish Learning. I'm not sure about the scope of the RfC. Should we ask whether the image should be included in the article at all, or whether it should be in the section on men's clothing? Would it make more sense to reorganize the article around specific garments, rather than the current broad division of men's and women's clothing, to reduce the confusion caused by a picture of a woman in a section about men's clothing? Ibadibam (talk) 00:05, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Ibadibam, in my view, if we submit a RfC, our question should be whether or not such an image is appropriate at all, since it does NOT reflect traditional/religious Jewish clothing for women.Davidbena (talk) 00:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I must have overlooked it when reading. I have crossed-out my previous remark. In any case, in an article that speaks about "Jewish religious clothing," with an emphasis on "religious," do we want to portray an image that does not reflect the traditional view or religious view of what is appropriate for Jewish women to wear? It seems to run counter-productive to what we are trying to achieve here. That, however, can be determined by a wider range of views from contributing editors.Davidbena (talk) 00:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

There's currently a photo of a woman wearing them--you want to remove that so you can assert they don't? I guess we need more references that some women do. Jonathunder (talk) 00:10, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

As we can all see, we, the editors here, are disputed about the appropriateness or inappropriateness of this one image. We should, therefore, seek a consensus, as Wikipedia rules require of us in cases like this. Personally, I think an image of "unorthodox apparel" is tantamount to a fringe view or one that goes against WP:Weight, that is, when we step-aside, and ponder about the import of this article, and what it is exactly that we're trying to convey here. IMHO. We're not saying that Tefillin are never worn by women. Rather, we're saying that it is not a traditional item of dress for women. Davidbena (talk) 00:22, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

I would always prefer not to engage in an edit war, but there is absolutely no reason why that image should be repeatedly removed; it illustrates the point that some progressive Jewish women (Reform and otherwise) do in fact use tfillin when davening, and the only reason it would be repeatedly removed is, to my mind, in service to some agenda that would prefer people not know or see Jewish women using tfillin. Unfortunately for these people, we live in a world where censorship is frowned upon; I am not interested in capitulating to Orthodox norms. The image is important because it illustrates an important concept; in the context of the Orthodox media establishment repeatedly literally erasing women from signage, catalogues, news stories, etc., this does not look good. The image stays. newmila (talk) 00:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

First, the article duly states that some women do, indeed, wear Tefillin (albeit only those of the Reform Movement who have broken-away from tradition). No one has tried to conceal this fact. An image, however, is far more subtle, in that it helps to convey first impressions about a certain thing, without the necessity of having to read through the fine details. At first glance, you would think that pairs of Tefillin are traditional Jewish garb for women, when, in actuality, they are not. To emphasize my point, let's say that we have an image of a religious Jewish woman wearing a man's coat (although she has done nothing amiss by doing so), would we still put that image in this article, to suggest that it is a norm of women's attire? Wouldn't it convey the wrong impressions? Since the title of this article clearly states "Jewish religious clothing," we can naturally expect to find those items that are traditionally worn in Jewish religious circles.Davidbena (talk) 01:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

There are some women in practically all the modern Jewish religious movements (except, perhaps, among the Haredi and the Hasidic) who wear tallit and teffilin, not just the Reform. (Yes, that includes Orthodox Jewish women.) A good reason must be provided to remove the image; WP:IDONTLIKEIT isn't a good reason. We used to experience edit wars at Falafel in which editors would replace all the images with images of falafel prepared by Arabs and add captions about where or by whom the falafel in the images had been prepared, as if that somehow helped the reader better understand a deep-fried ball of ground chick-peas. Unless the image is unclear—and it doesn't appear to be—does removing an image of a woman wearing a tallit and teffilin help the reader better understand what Jewish religious clothing looks like or how it is worn? If your primary concern is that readers may leave with the mistaken impression that they are traditional women's religious garments, edit the caption appropriately. Nobody seems concerned that readers will mistakenly think that all Jewish men wear payos, although every Jewish male in every one of the photos appears to wear them. Or that readers will mistakenly think that Jews only wear black and white clothes, although they appear to be the only colors of the clothes worn in any of the six photos in the article. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:59, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

User:Malik Shabazz, this has absolutely nothing to do with what I like or what I dislike. In fact, I have NEVER deleted the image; not once. Rather, we're talking here about "Jewish religious clothing" that is widely accepted by the vast, vast majority of Jews, and whose view of Tefillin is that they are not habitually worn nor required by Jewish women, as you would normally think of a Jewish woman's accoutrement (e.g. head scarves, etc.) This, my friend, is similar to a religious woman wearing a man's coat. Look again at my previous response. Since we have already mentioned the fact that some women (who do not follow mainstream Judaism) do, indeed, wear Tefillin, and that this practice is scorned by the Jewish orthodox rabbis, I personally see no urgent need to have a misleading image in this important article. Of course, we'll need a consensus for removing the image. So far we have an equal number of editors "for"and "against". -- Davidbena (talk) 05:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

As I understand it, the purpose of this discussion is to prepare the proposed RfC. It serves no one to begin to debate the issue itself here. As it currently stands, the proposed question is should File:Jewish_Woman_Praying.jpg or any other image of a woman wearing a tallit or tefillin be disallowed from this article. Does anyone have any amendment to that as an RfC question? Ibadibam (talk) 06:06, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes. I would point out the two opposing arguments; those, like me, who say that Tefillin do not represent an item of clothing worn specifically (habitually / traditionally) by Jewish women, and therefore cannot be representative of a religious woman's attire.Davidbena (talk) 06:12, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

One more thing: From a cursory review of this subject, one would think by looking at the photo of this woman wearing Tefillin that it is a typical item of Jewish dress for women. Nothing could be further from the truth! We're not writing an article about Jewish exceptionalism, or about changing fads, but rather about Jewish culture and law. There is a Halacha that is well-known to every observant Jew, which states:

"Every affirmative biblical command that is contingent upon time (e.g. residing in a Sukkah on the 15th day of the lunar month Tishri, or donning Tefillin during the day but not at night), men are obligated to perform them, but women are exempt from doing them." (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 29a)

This teaching has been the common practice among Jews in all places for ages, and is forever perpetuated in the legal codes known to the Jewish nation, such as in Maimonides' Code of Jewish Law, the Mishne Torah (Hil. Avodah Zarah 12:3). You see, it has never been vogue for Jewish women to wear Tefillin (phylacteries) and, therefore, the image is misleading.

References

Davidbena (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

This is not Halachipedia. Our article should describe the diversity of Jewish religious clothing, not just a particular Orthodox view on what women must not wear. Jonathunder (talk) 17:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

This is not about diversity at all, but a case of misrepresentation of Jewish "religious" clothing worn by men and women. The emphasis here is on "religious." We're not talking about trends that go against the Jewish religion. If that were the case, we could simply change the title of this article to read: "Popular Jewish Trends in Clothing." This is none other but a fringe view that should have no overdue weight, except as an aside mention in the article itself, and it is for this reason that we have Wikipedia:RfC. Hopefully, the broader input of others will help us reach a consensus here.Davidbena (talk) 18:51, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Jonathunder, what you are advocating here is tantamount to having taken the Wikipedia article on Judaism and uploading an image of Jews praying in a Church. The fact that there are fellow Jews who do this does not make its insertion indicative of the whole, nor the Jewish norm.Davidbena (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Nothing seems particularly "trendy" or "faddish" about women wearing tallit and teffilin, and this encyclopedia hasn't been renamed MaleSupremapedia yet, has it? Please don't start talking about what's indicative of Jewish norms, because if we're being honest, very little of the religious clothing shown in this article is indicative of the norms of what Jewish men or women wear. By wearing any religious garments at all, the people in the images are already outliers among Jewish men and women in today's world. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Nothing "trendy" or "faddish"?! Are you serious? My friend, you're either out-of-touch with reality, or else purposely resisting what you know to be true. We'll leave the matter up to the community at large to decide, once we submit our RfC.Davidbena (talk) 04:29, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

I would remove the section about tallit and tefillin completely, as they are not clothing. The same is true for the pictures. If we do have something about tallit and tefillin, I think that a picture of a woman is a violation of WP:UNDUE. Debresser (talk) 16:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Tzitzit are not clothing. But the tallit to which the tzitzit are tied is a garment, even if it is not a mundane one. Some authorities have said that women shouldn't wear traditional tallitot not only because they aren't obligated in tzitzit but because it is a male garment. Some women only wear tallitot made in certain styles and fabrics that are considered more feminine so as to hold with this distinction. This is the source of the erstwhile policy at the Kotel of allowing women to wear "shawl" style tallitot but not traditional, full-sized tallitot. The fact that Orthodox authorities feel the need to issue policies around women wearing tallitot and tefillin indicates that women are wearing tallitot and tefillin. I doubt there are hard numbers as to what percentage of Jewish women wear these items regularly, but I expect we editors can find sufficient sources to indicate that it is a phenomenon of note. Remember that WP:UNDUE doesn't mean modern or radical practices and viewpoints should be altogether excluded from documentation in this encyclopedia, only that the article should properly contextualize the scope and significance of those practices and viewpoints. Ibadibam (talk) 06:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ibadibam: The explanation which you offer seems hardly satisfactory, given that even the Rabbis whom you mentioned agree that this is not a bona fide Jewish religious custom. Perhaps a good analogy would be this: If an article on Wikipedia deals with America's "Rocket Science Industry," you wouldn't come along and put a picture of a child playing with a "toy rocket" (although there are many children who do so), and say that the picture represents America's "Rocket Science Industry." It is the same here respecting this article and that one image. Even in Wikipedia's Guidelines for good editing, we have been admonished about doing so in Wikipedia:Weight, which I'll quote for you here:

"Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects. Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views. For example, the article on the Earth does not directly mention modern support for the flat Earth concept, the view of a distinct (and minuscule) minority; to do so would give undue weight to it." [END QUOTE]

Let the matter rest until we can defer the question to others, who are our peerage, and who have no vested interest in one side or the other. The better judgment of those who come after us and who have read these conflicting arguments will decide the fate of this image. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm sure you intend no offense, and wouldn't be so sexist as to equate the sincere religious observances of modern Jewish women to children playing at rocket science, although even juxtaposing the two is neither objective nor persuasive. And I'm confused that you would say that religious, non-Orthodox Jews, who make up about 71% of the Jews in my country and 35% in yours, are a "tiny minority". The guideline we're discussing is meant to help us achieve balance, not to encourage us to advance a single point of view that considers itself the canonical or "bona fide" authority to the exclusion of all others.

As for continuing the discussion...I offered draft language for the RfC six days ago, since when you have made six more comments carrying on a discussion you now apparently want to close. I rather think it's productive to get it all out here so that the RfC can be more concise and not burden its contributors with repetitive arguments. Ibadibam (talk) 18:16, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Again, we're not talking here about Jewish clothing in general, but rather about Jewish religious clothing, for which there is a consensus about what is considered "religious" clothing by those who, themselves, are religious. When we submit the RfC it will be concise. This section here will be used merely for their reference.

By the way, have you seen this Jerusalem Post article? Why do Orthodox women not wear Tefillin or Tallit? There are other online articles as well, such as here.-- Davidbena (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Do we mean the same thing by religious Jews? I use that term to mean those Jews who do not identify as secular, atheist, or converts to some other religion, to the inclusion of Haredi, Reform, Modern Orthodox, Masorti, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Renewal and non-denominational Jews. If a Jewish person of any gender wears clothing for a religious Jewish purpose, that person is wearing Jewish religious clothing. Orthodox sources are reliable for documenting Orthodox practices but not necessarily for documenting other streams of Judaism. By the way, I've found some scholarly and journalistic sources that document the modern phenomenon of women wearing tallit and tefillin and do a better job than My Jewish Learning (which in my opinion is borderline unreliable anyway). Do you mind if I go ahead and make some brief additions to the article? Ibadibam (talk) 03:49, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

As shown by the sources provided, it is not an accepted Jewish religious practice for women to don Tefillin, a view clearly proscribed in rabbinic Halacha (Rambam, et al.). Religious clothing worn by each gender (male and female) is clearly defined under the parameters of Jewish law, and it is not something that we personally decide on for our own selves. Modern-day phenomena are just that... "phenomena," not having a solid basis in Jewish Halacha. Since it is a fringe view, even by your own admission, we should only mention this as a side-note, but no more, in accordance with WP:Due. You are free to edit as you wish, but bear in mind that your edits should reflect the general trend. Our discussion here pertains to the image.Davidbena (talk) 04:50, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I hope my additions meet with your approval. I kept it as concise as I could.

Please by all means correct me if I'm making an unfair interpretation, but you seem to assume a single, universal scale of Jewish religiosity, and that the word religious denotes strict adherence to halakha. I understand that viewpoint to be particular to Orthodox Judaism. Adherents of other streams of Judaism express and measure religiosity in different ways that are no less inherent to their respective conceptions of the Jewish religion. So while Reform practices may be less halakhic, they are nevertheless religious. While Wikipedia should absolutely emphasize the significance of halakha—indeed, it is impossible to describe Judaism without it—I think it goes too far to dismiss less stringent Jewish movements as fringe groups that are not actually participating in Judaism, because that is a sectarian viewpoint and, as Jonathunder pointed out, not appropriate to an encyclopedia that follows a policy of neutrality. Ibadibam (talk) 06:21, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree, particularly in an article that is entitled "Jewish religious clothing." What you are suggesting would be more applicable in an article entitled "Jewish dress trends," without the word "religious." To put it bluntly, the image evokes a form of religious rebellion, based on mainstream Jewish religious practice that is practised by 99.9% of all Jews worldwide. Since this is the case, one would not be mistaken if he were to say that the image is a reflection of "impiety." It is counter-productive to what this article is trying to convey. The image, however, can and perhaps ought to be used in an article entitled, "Feminist movement," whose worldview is one of equality between the sexes and which often seeks to advance "masculinity" in women. This is not the article for that, since it contravenes Wikipedia's own interdict, clearly defined in Wikipedia:Due, which requires of us to project the prominent view, with less prominent views mentioned as an aside. By the way, Ibadibam, I saw your edit, and it is very good! Thanks! It adds more clarity to the matter at hand. Davidbena (talk) 14:21, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Where are you getting this "99.9% of all Jews worldwide" statistic? Jonathunder (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

What a load of crap. Most Jews around the world don't wear any religious clothing. Please see WP:PROPORTION. We shouldn't write this article based strictly on halakha, nor should it be weighted based only on how common religious clothing is. It should be based on the relative weight given its various subjects in reliable sources on the subject, including but not exclusively traditional and historical religious texts. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

First, to clarify my statement. I wasn't referring to Jewish clothing as a whole, but to specific articles of clothing worn by religious Jews, which, by the way, there is a clear consensus in Jewish religious law (e.g. Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 29a) what this entails and what is acceptable in our varied societies (which often is merely dependent upon one's ethnic identity and culture). This article is about Jewish religious clothing, not about Jewish trends in clothing. As for the question about percentages, actually the use of tefillin by Jewish women is far more less than what I initially mentioned, with perhaps only 1 woman (Reform) out of every 10,000 Jewish men who will wear them. The figures are only estimates, based on what we've seen. Here, in Israel, I have never seen, in over 40 years of living in this country, one Jewish woman who would wear them, but I have seen literally hundreds of Jewish men wear them. I have been trying to reach an agreement with you, here, before raising the issue in a RfC, since the community at large will most-likely not be knowledgeable about Jewish laws and customs. There is also a possibility that we will raise this issue on the Administrators Notice board about compliance with Wikipedia:Due, as this is seen by many here as a clear deviation from Wikipedia policy. My suggestion would be to put-up a different image of a religious woman's attire.Davidbena (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jonathunder:, and @Newmila:, hoping that all is well. I wanted to ask you about your feelings concerning the following image, here, showing a very limited religious woman's ethnic attire. The emphasis here is on ethnicity, but which has a universal agreement of it being a quintessential "religious" garment worn by Jewish women in Yemen. The specific article of clothing is called gargush, and it was made to comply with the Orthodox mandate on females covering their hair. It acts as a hoodlike headpiece which extends onto the shoulders, and is closed under the chin by a button. If you will agree to its use in the current article, perhaps we can replace the controversial image with this one. What do you think?

References

----Davidbena (talk) 15:01, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Davidbena: If you'd like to include the image of Yemenite Jewish women wearing gargushim, I think that's wonderful, and very inclusive of a minority Jewish practice. However, it's not a ritual garment the way tfillin are, and I think equating women observing kisui rosh using a specific garment, to women wearing tfillin, is absolutely absurd and completely disingenuous. We all understand that you would prefer to put forward an image of Jewish religiosity that's in accordance with Orthodox Judaism, but unfortunately, not every Jew on wikipedia has the same interests as you, and many of us understand that we should prioritize accuracy over ideology. Religious Jewish women (including but not limited to Orthodox Jewish women) do wear tfillin, and your repeated tantrums about this are a clear illustration of why this image needs to stay up. newmila (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2019 (UTC)Newmila

First, no one equated a Head Covering (kisui rosh) with Tefillin. In fact, they are dissimilar. One is a quintessential religious garment worn by women (i.e. head coverings), while the other (i.e. Tefillin) are a quintessential religious artifact worn almost exclusively by men (whereas those women who do wear Tefillin do so by contravening accepted Jewish practice and Jewish religious norms). I hope that you can see the difference. This makes the image a fringe view and misleading, even by your own standards, as this article is neither about ideology or promoting the interests of others, as you assumed, but about accurately portraying what is considered Jewish "religious clothing." The image of the woman wearing Tefillin would be best served in an article like Women of the Wall, who openly admit to their ultra-liberal views and non-conforming practices as related to religion. Since the article does, indeed, accurately mention this fringe view, I see no real reason why we should take it one step further by giving equal prominence to this practice by inserting this misleading photograph, per Wikipedia:Due.Davidbena (talk) 18:20, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

How is tefillin "clothing" at all? StevenJ81 (talk) 18:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you're right. From a pure linguistic perspective, Tefillin are not "clothing" at all, but only an artifact that is worn by men, especially during the morning prayer. That, in itself, is another reason for the removal of the image.Davidbena (talk) 22:28, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jonathunder:, if we can get your agreement to exchange the current image with the picture of those three young Jewish women wearing traditional religious clothing we'll have a clear majority and we will go ahead and do this. Do we have your agreement?Davidbena (talk) 22:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

• There should not be a picture of a person wearing tefillin since tefillin is not clothing, and in this case, the picture of the woman wearing tefillin is there just to be pointy. It should be removed in my opinion. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
• That is my view as well. I will object strenuously if someone tries to remove the same image from Tefillin, but here? A different picture would be better. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:11, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I removed the mention of Tefillin from the article and the picture as well. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
    • And I restored it. When you achieve consensus to remove it, go ahead. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:04, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
      • What does tefillin have to do with this article? And I believe I do have consensus. Also, I understand your MO on Wikipedia is to be snarky and negative, but try to be descriptive in your edit summaries. Furthermore, it appears you are here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS . I repeat, this is not the place to go on a crusade about women's rights. Tefillin has no place in this article. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 03:27, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
        • I noticed you removed the image and mention of women wearing tefillin but not that of a man. Was this an oversight or an intentional differentiation? Ibadibam (talk) 05:17, 22 March 2019 (UTC)