First let's address the term "second class citizen." Dowries were common, jewelry for her and gifts for her family, or long term servitude for her hand in marriage. Sounds like women held a pretty high value in society, as opposed to our society now with equal rights . . . What can a woman expect with equal "first class" treatment? From what I hear, she can pay for her own drinks and dinner before the debate begins about the expected rendezvous. You may think I'm only talking about the "world," but pre-marital, extra-marital, and non-marital relations abound in the church and synagogue, as well. For those who know me, I'm not saying a license from the state constitutes marriage, but couples enter into physical relationships without commitment and/or blessing every day. As for being provided for, seriously? Very few women have the option to stay home with the children and know her future is secure. I know of many couples in which the woman is expected to work outside of the home, or opt out of marriage so she can remain dependent upon the state. Obviously in reading Proverbs 31, the women of Scriptural times were not sitting around having pedicures and eating bon-bons, but their future as "collateral" for a respectable man was pretty secure.
We could all take note of the way men treat their valued possessions, be that a vehicle, tools, a gun or coin collection, something he considers of value. I stated years ago, if a man treated me as well as he treated his most valuable possession, I certainly wouldn't mind being marital collateral. So far, that hasn't worked out so well. When I did have the opportunity to be a valued possession, I didn't yet know this valuable information.
When I read the distance men traveled and the arrangments that were made to obtain a good wife for a man, these women of Bible days do not sound to be "second class citizens" at all. Women were valued. A good wife was considered a great gift and blessing from G-d. They received material possessions, and their father obtained something of monetary value or labor, but more importantly, these women received a "covering." As I've read the Torah portion this week, I was reminded of the special privilege granted women.
Can you imagine the difference in our society if men and kids missed mom for a week every month, instead of tiptoeing around her for "that time of the month?" How would it change a household or even our society if the female in their life were to be missed for a week instead of hearing the screech of PMS? A week of trying to match socks and living off of mac&cheese and peanut butter would give men a different perspective for the rest of the month, I'm sure. Rather than ask their wife what she did all day, they'd know. Now as for women needing a new perspective . . . we do. The only people we'd see for a week would be sharing the same attitude we had. That would be illuminating, I'm sure. Many would realize how much they do miss their family and appreciate what a good man they have to take care of the children for a week every month and continue to go to work and do the best they can to hold the housework together. "Getting all Levitical" would really give renewed meaning to the concept of "long term commitment." I think both genders would gain a new appreciation for their spouse and the kids would learn that each gender is not in competition for control, but created differently. Marriage and child raising would once again become a lifetime commitment.
As a woman, I just can't help but imagine a real Levitical outlook. In the event of household questions, and a messenger was sent outside the camp to make inquiry as to how to sort the laundry or where the unopened jelly was kept, they couldn't stay. A week off every month, where you get to go be by yourself and nobody can touch your stuff! How is that "against women?" Sounds awesome to me.
I'm thinking "Getting all Levitical" sounds first class to me!
No comments:
Post a Comment