Ruler of my room and all within it ([info]hairsute) wrote in [info]weirdjews2,
@ 2004-10-08 01:04:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Giggle
http://www.yarmulkebra.com/

(X-posted to WeirdJews)

(Post a new comment)


[info]angel_thane
2004-10-08 08:31 am UTC (link)
It's been posted before, and it's a pretty offensive website, desecrating religious items and all.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]angrymonotreme
2004-10-08 09:01 am UTC (link)
And the argument begins:

I don't think kipas are religious items at all. They are a decorative item that fulfill a religious imperative, and not even a mitzvah! The same religious imperative can be fulfilled by any hat (even one made out of folded paper), amusing wig, or any item that successfully provides a barrier between one's head and the part of HaShem that is above one's head.

I eagerly await your response (yes, I know I take all the fun out of arguing) :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]angel_thane
2004-10-08 09:07 am UTC (link)
While any hat can be used as a head-covering, a kippah is specifically designed for the purposes of jewish religious head covering and is as such a religious vestment. It is essential to the entire 'joke' of the yarmulkebra that it's a religious garment. Otherwise, they would just be selling highly decorative bras. But they arn't. They are specifically selling highly decorative bras made from headgear made for religious purposes. And that crosses the line from amusing into offensive orthodox-baiting.

Ignoring for a moment the implicit breaking of the commandment for a woman not to wear the clothing of a man (presumably not even on her breasts) there is the undeniable fact that the reason they chose kippahs and not just any round piece of material is because they view this as funny. All comedy is based in making fun of something, and in this case, it's making fun of the importance that people put in this specific religious vestment (whether halakically mandated or not). As such, it cannot be considered as anything other than religious baiting, and thus, offensive.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]angrymonotreme
2004-10-08 09:26 am UTC (link)
I disagree with your assessment that a kipa is a religious vestment. While I agree that kipas are worn for religious reasons, the kipa itself is not sacred, but the act of covering one's head - Although, the sanctity of this act is questionable as well.

I also disagree that they are making fun of the importance people put into this alleged religious vestment. I think the 'joke' is that they took something designed for one purpose, and based on it's shape, realised that it could be used comically for another purpose.

Based on the wording of the website, I'd say that any charge of religious baiting is ludicrous. It's not just orthodox Jews who wear kipas, and they market it quite tastefully. It's not like they say "buy one for the rebbetzin today!" or anything like that.

Now, tfillin turned into some sort of sexual bondage apparatus would be a different story.

That I wont be able to respond promptly to any retort you make is based on the fact that I'll be driving to Toronto for the next few hours, but don't despair, I'll be back!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]angel_thane
2004-10-08 09:36 am UTC (link)
While I agree that kipas are worn for religious reasons, the kipa itself is not sacred,

The way a kippah is treated would argue against this. If a Kippah is dropped to the floor, is it not picked up - promptly - and kissed? Even if it isn't officially sacred, they are treated as such, and considered as such by a large amount of jews.

I think the 'joke' is that they took something designed for one purpose, and based on it's shape, realised that it could be used comically for another purpose.

I'd have to disagree. They specifically chose kippot. They didn't choose paper plates (or bowls), eyepatches, or slightly melted CDs - they choose kippot. Why? Because the others ones wouldn't have been as funny. Why? Because laughing at 'something being used for something you don't expect' isn't as funny as laughing at the expense of somebody else's beliefs.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]shirei_shibolim
2004-10-09 01:30 pm UTC (link)
The way a kippah is treated would argue against this. If a Kippah is dropped to the floor, is it not picked up - promptly - and kissed? Even if it isn't officially sacred, they are treated as such, and considered as such by a large amount of jews.

I'd say that the majority of my friends are shomrei mitzvot, but I've only ever met one person who habitually kissed his kippah when it fell off. Never understood why he did that . . . it's a hat. It has no inherent sacred value, it's just a style of head covering that is convenient to wear in conjunction with tefillin.

(Several acharonim argue that a man should wear a proper hat when davening, and that a kippah is an informal head covering suitable only for wearing around one's home. We've certainly made a big deal out of them since then.)

I do agree that the site is potentially offensive to a lot of people, and I thoroughly expect those people to visit the site, shudder, and not go back. The site's intended audience is clearly those who find the content artistic and/or amusing. After all, they did sell the things.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]madamebella
2004-10-08 02:44 pm UTC (link)
Ignoring for a moment the implicit breaking of the commandment for a woman not to wear the clothing of a man

Who decided what sort of headgear is for men and which is for women? And that leads me to ask who decided that pants are strictly a man's garment?

If it was a human that decided, all bets are off.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]amawahibiki
2004-10-09 05:09 am UTC (link)
That's a lovely question.
I'd write a lot about it- maybe later but I have to go out now- but there's one of my favourite discussions in the whole of Judaism about these questions.
It's socially determined- i.e. in Thailand there's no problem with a man wearing a Sarong, and in Scotland there's probably no problem with a man wearing a kilt. In China, all women wear trousers, so again no problem. But what defines a society here- very very interesting discussion, and there are a lot of grey areas here.
Got to run now.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]amawahibiki
2004-10-09 08:15 am UTC (link)
OK, back now.
I learnt these Hallachot 3-4 years ago, so I don't remember everything, so anyone who finds something wrong in what I say or who can add, please correct me. It goes something like this.
Everything was pretty simple until the Maharam Mintz came onto the scene. The Maharam was an interesting and mysterious character in Jewish history- he is considered to be one of the greatest Torah sages of all time, but all his work was lost save 16 answers to 16 questions. These became the basis of a huge body of Hallachic discource.
While all of these answers are incredibly deep and interesting, the most fun one for me is about Purim. A man asks the Maharam whether he may dress up as a woman for a Purim party's fancy dress (and this man came from a community where this was the tradition, but he was worried that the tradition was against Hallachah). Until then, it had just been tacitly assumed that this was forbidden, but here comes the Maharam, and says it's OK, since he is obviously a manly man who could not be mistaken for a woman (presumably with a long white beard).
This created a huge stir, which touches directly on the question of what exactly the core issues are with beged ish. To some extent this is still very much an open question- the Rav Ovadia Yosef recently prohibitted certain clothing in some circumstances on Purim. The main for us, though, is that clearly because it is Purim, and because a man with a long white beard isn't going to be mistaken for a woman (and therefore will not be accidentally proposed to by a bloke, for example), he is allowed on Purim to wear a long flowery pink dress- and remember, beged isha is deoraisa!!
So there is clearly something deep going on here. For the exact Hallachot, it's best to study and to ask a Chacham, but the basic rule here is that a man must not dress as a woman because he must not be mistaken for a woman. Moreover, even if it seems very unlikely that such a mistake were to take place, for instance because he is very hairy and macho and with a long beard and peyos, it's still prohibitted because of marit ayin (I think). But on Purim, in a case where it's a fancy dress party (think Cosplay Competitions at anime conventions), there is no chance for a mistake, and therefore it is permitted.
But I do not believe that the laws here are symmetrical. Namely, it is not customary for women to dress as men at any fancy dress party which I know of except perhaps at lesbian get-togethers. Now, one could argue that in certain communities, all women wear kippot that are different from men's kippot, and therefore it's not men's clothing under these rules. Perhaps. I would doubt it. Because I don't think that this constitutes a community as the Maharam Mintz saw it. And I know that in fact, Rabbis come out against it very strongly- the result is that indeed this does not fall under the same heading. The next question would be if the kippot are clearly for women- if they're pink and with frills and pictures of Leonardo de Caprio. Then, I don't know. It's a good question to as a Gadol. But I suspect that again the answer would be "no", because the article of clothing itself is male, the same way as a man may not wear even the most manly of bras.
For this question, however, what is above is a bra. So I see no problem at all.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]madamebella
2004-10-11 09:13 am UTC (link)
This is why I'll never be Orthodox. I like wearing jeans. And if someone cannot tell that I am a woman when I wear them, they really need to get their eyes checked.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]amawahibiki
2004-10-11 09:17 am UTC (link)
This is why I'll never be Orthodox. I like wearing jeans.

:-D
That's a quote I want to remember.
Also, not that it makes it right, but one of the frummest women in this community wears jeans outside shul- he observance is excellent, but I'm not totally with her on this specific issue, although I could never tell her so because I know how much yiras shamayim she has.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]pester
2004-10-11 09:54 am UTC (link)
I turned my freshman year jeans into a great skirt. Fits like jeans; looks like (and is) a skirt.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]kmelion
2004-10-11 08:35 pm UTC (link)
So....since I wear jeans, I'm not Orthodox?

Damn, I better go tell my husband...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]madamebella
2004-10-12 09:18 am UTC (link)
No, but the idea that jeans or pants are men's clothing is something I have heard repeated many times by Orthodox and Chasidim.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]kmelion
2004-10-12 08:23 pm UTC (link)
um...they're only men's clothing if they're made for men.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]madamebella
2004-10-13 09:09 am UTC (link)
Then why do you never see Orthodox women or Chasidic women in jeans or pants? Is it a modesty issue? What law tells them they must wear skirts all the time in public?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]yakkette
2004-10-12 01:24 am UTC (link)
Since it's the custom in America for women to wear jeans - cut for and designed for women (very different from mens' jeans) I still don't see how wearing jeans is cross-dressing.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]madamebella
2004-10-12 09:16 am UTC (link)
Me neither.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]yakkette
2004-10-12 01:22 am UTC (link)
Wow, I never realized wearing my cute kippah made me a cross-dresser!

You should come to my shul and tell all the women who wear kippahs that. It's funny, since women seem more likely to wear kippah than the men.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]madamebella
2004-10-12 09:21 am UTC (link)
My shul is also filled with cross-dressers. :-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]hairsute
2004-10-08 12:41 pm UTC (link)
Sorry about that, I was unaware that it had been posted before, or that it was considered offensive. If the moderator wishes to delete the post, that's fine with me. I had no intention of offending anyone; I merely thought that a "yarmulkebra" was strange enough to fall under the "weird Jew" rubric.

Again, my apologies.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]newsbean
2004-10-08 01:54 pm UTC (link)
Read the discussion in weirdjews about it and um, well yeah. Read that discussion. It's under a new post.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]amawahibiki
2004-10-09 05:03 am UTC (link)
I'm an extreme religious right-wing fanatic, but I don't find your post offensive. It's not a Hallachic problem, since the article of clothing isn't a kippa, it's a bra. I would be far far far more offended by a picture of a woman wearing a kippa on her head, and in fact I would be likely to want such a picture to be deleted because it annoys the hell out of me. But a funky bra? Why not??
I see no problem with it at all. I don't find it particularly funny, but neither do I find it particularly offensive. I would keep the post on wierdjews2.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]yakkette
2004-10-12 01:25 am UTC (link)
I'm going to make an icon of me wearing my (stylish and sexy) kippah just for you, sweetie.

:D

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]amawahibiki
2004-10-12 01:55 am UTC (link)
I'll keep it in my ladies underwear drawer and treasure it always.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]kellev
2004-10-09 02:58 pm UTC (link)
posted before, but still just as funny :D

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…