This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 23 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 1221Bambino, Phthalate-esther22, StCharlesGilbert.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Translated from Hebrew Wikipedia -- Midrashah ( talk) 15:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I would love to change around the structure of this article. Currently the structure states that some things are forbidden acts in Judaism, while others are okay. I think that if the titles were just the actions themselves then it would be possible for different denominations and sects of Judaism to express their views on the subjects. Tsg1998 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:46, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
This article is a mess, and it would probably be best to delete it and start over again. Hznhr ( talk) 05:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
We have a reliable source written by a professor from American Jewish University who stated what Maimonides has written. A direct reference to Maimonides' work is prohibited by WP:OR and WP:PRIMARY. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
See salso WP:BURDEN. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
His work has been published by Jewish Publication Society. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
We have to distinguish an empiric-analytical claim about the texts written by Maimonides from a theological claim which would require assent from a community of faith. So, unless someone is prepared to affirm that this claim was made up (and prove it with reliable sources), Wikipedia defaults to keeping it per WP:VER. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:48, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Thiss article reads like it was written by Shmuley Boteach (an Orthodox rabbi who has written on sexuality). It's all Orthodox. There are millions who call themselves Jews who reject halakha partially or totally. Our views deserve inclusion.
On the same topic, there are quite a few people who by religious law are unquestionably Jews, who reject Judaism as a personal religion and would probably answer "no" if asked "are you a Jew?". Yet they are unquestionably of Jewish descent and culture, and halakhicly Jews no matter what they said or did. Among them are many sexual innovators and radicals: among others, Sigmund Freud, Magnus Hirschfeld, Wilhelm Reich, Ruth Westheimer (a Haganah sharpshooter), even Annie Sprinkle, Nina Hartley, Susan Block, Al Goldstein, Harry Reems, Jamie Gillis, Ron Jeremy, Philip Roth, Erica Jong, and we shouldn't forget Emma Goldman. (Who could forget her?) See "The Jewish Masters of Porn", http://jewishfaces.com/porn.html and Category:Jewish American pornographers. This is a simcha (joy), not a shonda (disgrace), and needs treatment somewhere. deisenbe ( talk) 20:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
In general, in contrast with Christianity, Judaism views sexuality positively, a gift from God that is by no means limited to reproduction. Celibacy is no virtue; there is an informal but strong expectation that a man, and especially a community leader, should have a wife. Lovemaking on the Sabbath is appropriate and commendable.
In Jewish law [originally said "Judaism"], sexuality is viewed as having both positive and negative potential...
deisenbe ( talk) 00:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Which sentence did you leave?
The talk page is the WP designated place for discussions of an article and how to improve it. deisenbe ( talk) 11:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
The paragraph that begins "In Judaism" I changed to "In Jewish law", which is all the section goes on to talk about. Judaism and Jewish law are not the same thing. Rabbis from previous centuries, or millenia, do not have the sole authority to say what Judaism is or what Judaism's view of sexuality is. In my opinion, anyway. deisenbe ( talk) 11:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
As long as this article goes on to talk about the view of Judaism and ONLY quotes Jewish law as the sum total of Judaism, it does not have neutral POV. This is not a neutral POV sentence, from the intro:
It implies that Judaism's views on the topic are known by looking at the Tanakh and rabbinic literature, AND NOTHING MORE. I call that not neutral. deisenbe ( talk) 20:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Here's another example of lack of neutral POV:
Debresser, you're absolutely right I strongly believe there should be an article on Jews and sexuality. The fascinating topic definitely merits an article (and this one isn't it, as you correctly pointed out). I do not have the knowledge to write it. I could perhaps write (assemble reliable sources) for "Jews and sexuality in the United States", but don't think that would be a valid stand-alone article (and it would be a lot of work, and I've got plenty of other things, arguably more important things, to work on).
But THIS article is about Judaism and sexuality. I think there's pretty much a consensus about what "sexuality" is. Not about how people should ideally behave sexually, but about what human sexuality is.
My concern is "what Judaism is this article discussing"? Jews by anyone's definition disagree about what Judaism is. It could perhaps be:
Perhaps you could add to this list. The Rebbe's version of Judaism? My point is that whatever your personal belief is that's fine, that's between you and ha-Shem. But as an editor of Wikipedia you have to take a neutral POV. The point I'm making is that by privileging halakhic Judiasm as the sum total of what Judaism is (please correct me if that's not precisely right), you are not displaying a neutral POV.
A principle of WP that I much admire is "assume the best". So I'm assuming that this had not occurred to you, you thought you HAD a neutral POV. That the idea that someone might say "I'm a Jew, you agree I am, or assume for the sake of argument I am, but I don't think Judaism and halacha (correct me again if I haven't got it precisely right) are the same thing". You're right and I'm wrong? According to whom? And what gives he/she/them the right to make that decision? Gee, this is getting philosophical. I guess that's good.
What I will ask of you is similarly to assume the best of me, that I believe it is my responsibility as a Jew and as a WP editor to raise this question. And not attribute it to my own sexual behavior, or interests, which, whatever their vices or their virtues, are totally irrelevant. deisenbe ( talk)
I made this a subsection of the previous section, since I think it is really a continuation of it. As to the question itself, I do not think we need an article "Jews and sexuality", in the sense that we do not need to know the opinion of every Jews dead or alive on the subject of sexuality. That is the what I had in mind. Debresser ( talk) 13:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Surely he knows more about Christian beliefs than a Jewish rabbi right? I'll just have to find a secondary source that states his statements. 112.211.214.39 ( talk) 12:24, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
The basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is opposed to the Christian theory of original sin, which does not view sex favorably.sourced only to Rabbi Gold, I don't see the "contaminated by" line in the current article. Seraphim System ( talk) 19:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Since virtually all denominations of Christianity have "an issue" with sex, see original sin- is POV and OR. That is not a consensus discussion, for a consensus discussion you need sources. If you have better sources then this quote, which you are cherry picking to insert your own POV into the article then I am willing to discuss balancing. Seraphim System ( talk) 21:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Rabbis are experts in a different field - being an Old Testament scholar requires knowledge of Hebrew and sometimes even older forms of writing. I had a professor in college who was knowledgeable about cuneiform and other ancient writing systems that I don't even know the name of ... Christianity is no less demanding. Usually experts specialize in one field or another. I have never encountered a Bible Scholar who was specialized in both fields. The is not prejudice, it is a fact - these are separate areas of study. Again, I think you should be careful that your expertise does not become disruptive, or lead you to cast aspersions about other editors. Seraphim System ( talk) 23:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm the one who made the change to Catholicism, I've restored it, and I'm going to defend it. To identify the Catholic (including St. Thomas) tradition with the Christian tradition is just as wrong as identifying Orthodox Judaism with Judaism. If you go back, sure, there are some versions of Protestanism, like Calvinism, that were pretty sex-hostile. But Martin Luther was (marital) sex-positive. A growing number of Protestant denominations support or perform gay marriage. None has the Catholic church's blanket prohibition of birth control devices or medicines. None has Catholicism's prohibition of divorce. Many are supportive of abortion, which Catholicism views as murder.
The article is, from its title, not about the history of these questions, except as background. It's about the present.
If this is reverted again I plan to request outside intervention. deisenbe ( talk) 14:33, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. It should not have been started here. Please do not restore it. John ( talk) 18:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Once again you're equating religion with theology. That theology changes slowly, is irrelevant. Religions can change quickly. The "theory of original sin" hasn't changed much, but that's not the point. The point is that it is nowhere as widespread as it used to be. I don't know if this is typical of a Haredi rabbi (not of some types of rabbis, for sure), but you constantly look at written sources from long ago, and all but ignore what is going on today. Lack of neutral POV. Like when you accused me of an ad hominem attack, then went on to make a more inflammatory one yourself. Against me. Your claim that I should not have restored Catholicism because of talk page discussion is self-serving. The opposition is from you and only you. No one on the talk page supports you. You're the one being disruptive. deisenbe ( talk) |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Judaism and sexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.jewishpress.com/uploadedimages/stdimage/june%202008%20edition.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Debresser claims to have seen a consensus here that says we shouldn't go into the details of the Christian view s on sexuality because this is not a Christian article, but I don't see the consensus he speaks of. Where is it? 112.211.214.39 ( talk) 00:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Which of these two versions should be included in the article: Seraphim System ( talk) 19:40, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Version 1 The basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is opposed to Christianity, which does not view sex favorably. [1] [2] [3] [4]
Version 2 Some theologians, including Rabbi Michael Gold, have argued that the basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is opposed to Christianity. [5] [6]The BBC reported that "Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of 'the fall' are absent" in Jewish tradition, which holds that God commanded his people to "be fruitful and multiply." [7]
Christian writers developed more restrictive views of sex then rabbis. [8] Early Christian writers, including Clement of Alexandria, were influenced by the philosophy of Stoicism. Clement wrote that "moral self-restraint is common to all human beings who have chosen it." Under this view ascetic Christians could submit their bodily impulses to the "rational will". [9] James A. Brundage points out that in Jewish tradition rabbis did not think enjoyment of sex needed to be restricted because God has given humans the capacity to "produce exquisite pleasure" through sexual acts. [10]
References
Judaism rejected the negative teachings about sex that later became prevalent in Christianity
Hebrew tradition viewed marital sex as a divinely ordained component of human life. Since God wished humans to increase and multiply and since he had endowed their sexual organs with the capacity to produce exquisite pleasure, the rabbis saw no reason to limit the individual's enjoyment of sex... Christian writers began nto express much more rstrictive view of the role of sex in human life.
Judaism has had a largely positive attitude to sex since God commanded his people to 'be fruitful and multiply' (Genesis I:28; 9:1). Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of 'the fall' are absent.
Leif Carlsson, a speaker at the Hönö Conference, wants Christians to come to terms with the faith's negative views on sex and compare them with those found in Judaism, according to a report in Christian newspaper Dagen... Within Judaism, sexuality has always been viewed as something fundamentally good.
Judaism rejected the negative teachings about sex that later became prevalent in Christianity
Leif Carlsson, a speaker at the Hönö Conference, wants Christians to come to terms with the faith's negative views on sex and compare them with those found in Judaism, according to a report in Christian newspaper Dagen... Within Judaism, sexuality has always been viewed as something fundamentally good.
Judaism has had a largely positive attitude to sex since God commanded his people to 'be fruitful and multiply' (Genesis I:28; 9:1). Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of 'the fall' are absent.
Hebrew tradition viewed marital sex as a divinely ordained component of human life. Since God wished humans to increase and multiply and since he had endowed their sexual organs with the capacity to produce exquisite pleasure, the rabbis saw no reason to limit the individual's enjoyment of sex... Christian writers began nto express much more rstrictive view of the role of sex in human life.
Hebrew tradition viewed marital sex as a divinely ordained component of human life. Since God wished humans to increase and multiply and since he had endowed their sexual organs with the capacity to produce exquisite pleasure, the rabbis saw no reason to limit the individual's enjoyment of sex... Christian writers began nto express much more rstrictive view of the role of sex in human life.
I disagree with the unexplained statement (= argument by assertion?) that version 1 would sound denigrating towards Christianity. Version 1 sounds perfectly neutral and matter-of-factly. Regardless, that perceived non-issue can not justify a violation of WP:UNDUE (a quantitatively large violation IMHO in this case) and certainly can not be a reason to reflect sources in a POV manner. Debresser ( talk) 20:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
@ OtterAM: This is a pretty minor reason, it doesnt justify removing an expansion of a one-sentence paragraph. Most of the sources used for the expansion were already cited, and not added by me. I don't object to revising the wording of the first sentence Seraphim System ( talk) 23:09, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
in the Bible, the “flesh” that is spoken of disparagingly is not the human body but human nature in rebellion against God- there are thousands of denominations of Christianity - but what Debresser is calling a "mainstream" view is American Evangelism - even though his sources are discussing Catholicism, and early Christianity. The mainstream view in America is focused on sex before marriage and homosexuality - not sex in a marriage. Seraphim System ( talk) 16:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
"The basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is different from that of Christianity, which historically has had a less favorable view of the subject." This proposal is not completely identical to Steven's text, because on second consideration, the word "restrictive" is factually incorrect in two ways: 1. Judaism has more laws regarding sex than Christianity 2. the issue Christianity has with sex is that sex is regarded as something tainted. That is not "restrictive", that is "less favorable". Debresser ( talk) 19:54, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
" Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of the fall of man are absent in Jewish tradition, which holds that since God commanded to 'be fruitful and multiply', sex is a holy deed." I would change the second sentence of version 2 into something like this. I can of course explain the changes I made, but perhaps it is more purposeful to just ask for comments on this proposal, so: opinions? One thing I like about it, is that it adds a statement about Judaism, which is important in this article, and helps to avoid the WP:UNDUE issue. Debresser ( talk) 19:54, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Your comment there is probably why I intuitively preferred to use the word restrained than restrictive there. But you and I both tend to see the idea of "restriction" through a religious-legal lens, because Halachic Judaism is a religious-legal system. However, I was borrowing language from Brundage, which is the most reliable of the four sources from a WP:RS perspective. And Brundage was looking at things from a more sociological perspective: "...much more restrictive view of the role of sex in human life." That's not a legal comment, it's a sociological comment.
What's more: I wouldn't touch original sin here. It's not a Jewish topic, and while the historical Christian view on sex unquestionably has links to that concept, it is not identical to that concept. In any case, if I could borrow a page from the practices of the US Supreme Court, I would much rather not take the case any farther than I absolutely must in order to make my point. And I don't think we need to touch that concept here. It's sufficient to say:
That makes the point adequately for the purpose of this article. StevenJ81 ( talk) 20:10, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Remember that the only reason to include this at all is because the cultural background of the majority of users (or uses) on this wiki is at least vaguely Christian. The comparison is absolutely not essential to the topic of the page itself. So if you really can't get past this, then I'm going to suggest taking it out and keeping it out. StevenJ81 ( talk) 14:53, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
the negative attitudes toward sexuality that appeared in Christianity and Judaism were not products of ancient Hebrew culture- there are more...a few on Maimonides from OUP and gBooks - I don't really think having this sentence in the article the way it is adds anything necessary to the article. It also seems to be contradicted by a significant number of high-quality sources. Maybe it would be best to take it out. Seraphim System ( talk) 08:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
@ Debresser: Regarding cherry-picking, it does not matter if the results are on the first page of Google.out The statement was originally sourced to only Rabbi Michael Gold (not a well known Rabbi, and you have never shown that he has been cited by any secondary sources - he is primary for his own opinions). All of the academic sources I have seen that compare Judaism and Christianity do this in a historical context, including Brundage. Similarly, they all discuss which early Christian writers had positive views and negative views. It is clear from the context that the sources are discussing the attitudes of "early Christian writers" contrasted with the views of contemporary rabbis - not the attitudes of "Judaism" and "Christianity" - this language is imprecise, and you have been consistently unwilling to acknowledge this (initially you would not even agree to note that the context was historical, though you have changed your position during this RfC). When you went out and found non-academic media sources that supported only the specific language you wanted, that is what I would consider cherry-picking. 23:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
After a young woman marries — often, like the Satmar wife Marcus told me about, to a man she has met and spoken with only once before the wedding — she’s supposed to feel that sex is a blessing, a union full of Shekinah, of God’s light, not just a painful or repellent reproductive chore. Quietly, rabbis refer struggling wives to Marcus’s care. Her task is to instill desire in them.
"menstrual blood is considered ritually unclean" "couples may be confused as to the specific focus of the prohibition, act or object" "there's no point to asking me this since my wife doesn't do anything with me - even when she can! (this was clearly a joke...)" Seraphim System ( talk) 09:27, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello editors, I added the sections: Forbidden relations in Judaism, Consent in marriage in Judaism, and Sexual Pleasure. This is my first time editing a Wiki page so any kind of feedback would be appreciated. Best- Audi072636 ( talk) 20:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
I'd like to add more to the consent section with mentions of biblical literatures that give examples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OH2MI ( talk • contribs) 20:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 23 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 1221Bambino, Phthalate-esther22, StCharlesGilbert.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Translated from Hebrew Wikipedia -- Midrashah ( talk) 15:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I would love to change around the structure of this article. Currently the structure states that some things are forbidden acts in Judaism, while others are okay. I think that if the titles were just the actions themselves then it would be possible for different denominations and sects of Judaism to express their views on the subjects. Tsg1998 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:46, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
This article is a mess, and it would probably be best to delete it and start over again. Hznhr ( talk) 05:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
We have a reliable source written by a professor from American Jewish University who stated what Maimonides has written. A direct reference to Maimonides' work is prohibited by WP:OR and WP:PRIMARY. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
See salso WP:BURDEN. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
His work has been published by Jewish Publication Society. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:45, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
We have to distinguish an empiric-analytical claim about the texts written by Maimonides from a theological claim which would require assent from a community of faith. So, unless someone is prepared to affirm that this claim was made up (and prove it with reliable sources), Wikipedia defaults to keeping it per WP:VER. Tgeorgescu ( talk) 19:48, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Thiss article reads like it was written by Shmuley Boteach (an Orthodox rabbi who has written on sexuality). It's all Orthodox. There are millions who call themselves Jews who reject halakha partially or totally. Our views deserve inclusion.
On the same topic, there are quite a few people who by religious law are unquestionably Jews, who reject Judaism as a personal religion and would probably answer "no" if asked "are you a Jew?". Yet they are unquestionably of Jewish descent and culture, and halakhicly Jews no matter what they said or did. Among them are many sexual innovators and radicals: among others, Sigmund Freud, Magnus Hirschfeld, Wilhelm Reich, Ruth Westheimer (a Haganah sharpshooter), even Annie Sprinkle, Nina Hartley, Susan Block, Al Goldstein, Harry Reems, Jamie Gillis, Ron Jeremy, Philip Roth, Erica Jong, and we shouldn't forget Emma Goldman. (Who could forget her?) See "The Jewish Masters of Porn", http://jewishfaces.com/porn.html and Category:Jewish American pornographers. This is a simcha (joy), not a shonda (disgrace), and needs treatment somewhere. deisenbe ( talk) 20:14, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
In general, in contrast with Christianity, Judaism views sexuality positively, a gift from God that is by no means limited to reproduction. Celibacy is no virtue; there is an informal but strong expectation that a man, and especially a community leader, should have a wife. Lovemaking on the Sabbath is appropriate and commendable.
In Jewish law [originally said "Judaism"], sexuality is viewed as having both positive and negative potential...
deisenbe ( talk) 00:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Which sentence did you leave?
The talk page is the WP designated place for discussions of an article and how to improve it. deisenbe ( talk) 11:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
The paragraph that begins "In Judaism" I changed to "In Jewish law", which is all the section goes on to talk about. Judaism and Jewish law are not the same thing. Rabbis from previous centuries, or millenia, do not have the sole authority to say what Judaism is or what Judaism's view of sexuality is. In my opinion, anyway. deisenbe ( talk) 11:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
As long as this article goes on to talk about the view of Judaism and ONLY quotes Jewish law as the sum total of Judaism, it does not have neutral POV. This is not a neutral POV sentence, from the intro:
It implies that Judaism's views on the topic are known by looking at the Tanakh and rabbinic literature, AND NOTHING MORE. I call that not neutral. deisenbe ( talk) 20:48, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Here's another example of lack of neutral POV:
Debresser, you're absolutely right I strongly believe there should be an article on Jews and sexuality. The fascinating topic definitely merits an article (and this one isn't it, as you correctly pointed out). I do not have the knowledge to write it. I could perhaps write (assemble reliable sources) for "Jews and sexuality in the United States", but don't think that would be a valid stand-alone article (and it would be a lot of work, and I've got plenty of other things, arguably more important things, to work on).
But THIS article is about Judaism and sexuality. I think there's pretty much a consensus about what "sexuality" is. Not about how people should ideally behave sexually, but about what human sexuality is.
My concern is "what Judaism is this article discussing"? Jews by anyone's definition disagree about what Judaism is. It could perhaps be:
Perhaps you could add to this list. The Rebbe's version of Judaism? My point is that whatever your personal belief is that's fine, that's between you and ha-Shem. But as an editor of Wikipedia you have to take a neutral POV. The point I'm making is that by privileging halakhic Judiasm as the sum total of what Judaism is (please correct me if that's not precisely right), you are not displaying a neutral POV.
A principle of WP that I much admire is "assume the best". So I'm assuming that this had not occurred to you, you thought you HAD a neutral POV. That the idea that someone might say "I'm a Jew, you agree I am, or assume for the sake of argument I am, but I don't think Judaism and halacha (correct me again if I haven't got it precisely right) are the same thing". You're right and I'm wrong? According to whom? And what gives he/she/them the right to make that decision? Gee, this is getting philosophical. I guess that's good.
What I will ask of you is similarly to assume the best of me, that I believe it is my responsibility as a Jew and as a WP editor to raise this question. And not attribute it to my own sexual behavior, or interests, which, whatever their vices or their virtues, are totally irrelevant. deisenbe ( talk)
I made this a subsection of the previous section, since I think it is really a continuation of it. As to the question itself, I do not think we need an article "Jews and sexuality", in the sense that we do not need to know the opinion of every Jews dead or alive on the subject of sexuality. That is the what I had in mind. Debresser ( talk) 13:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Surely he knows more about Christian beliefs than a Jewish rabbi right? I'll just have to find a secondary source that states his statements. 112.211.214.39 ( talk) 12:24, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
The basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is opposed to the Christian theory of original sin, which does not view sex favorably.sourced only to Rabbi Gold, I don't see the "contaminated by" line in the current article. Seraphim System ( talk) 19:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Since virtually all denominations of Christianity have "an issue" with sex, see original sin- is POV and OR. That is not a consensus discussion, for a consensus discussion you need sources. If you have better sources then this quote, which you are cherry picking to insert your own POV into the article then I am willing to discuss balancing. Seraphim System ( talk) 21:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Rabbis are experts in a different field - being an Old Testament scholar requires knowledge of Hebrew and sometimes even older forms of writing. I had a professor in college who was knowledgeable about cuneiform and other ancient writing systems that I don't even know the name of ... Christianity is no less demanding. Usually experts specialize in one field or another. I have never encountered a Bible Scholar who was specialized in both fields. The is not prejudice, it is a fact - these are separate areas of study. Again, I think you should be careful that your expertise does not become disruptive, or lead you to cast aspersions about other editors. Seraphim System ( talk) 23:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm the one who made the change to Catholicism, I've restored it, and I'm going to defend it. To identify the Catholic (including St. Thomas) tradition with the Christian tradition is just as wrong as identifying Orthodox Judaism with Judaism. If you go back, sure, there are some versions of Protestanism, like Calvinism, that were pretty sex-hostile. But Martin Luther was (marital) sex-positive. A growing number of Protestant denominations support or perform gay marriage. None has the Catholic church's blanket prohibition of birth control devices or medicines. None has Catholicism's prohibition of divorce. Many are supportive of abortion, which Catholicism views as murder.
The article is, from its title, not about the history of these questions, except as background. It's about the present.
If this is reverted again I plan to request outside intervention. deisenbe ( talk) 14:33, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. It should not have been started here. Please do not restore it. John ( talk) 18:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Once again you're equating religion with theology. That theology changes slowly, is irrelevant. Religions can change quickly. The "theory of original sin" hasn't changed much, but that's not the point. The point is that it is nowhere as widespread as it used to be. I don't know if this is typical of a Haredi rabbi (not of some types of rabbis, for sure), but you constantly look at written sources from long ago, and all but ignore what is going on today. Lack of neutral POV. Like when you accused me of an ad hominem attack, then went on to make a more inflammatory one yourself. Against me. Your claim that I should not have restored Catholicism because of talk page discussion is self-serving. The opposition is from you and only you. No one on the talk page supports you. You're the one being disruptive. deisenbe ( talk) |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Judaism and sexuality. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.jewishpress.com/uploadedimages/stdimage/june%202008%20edition.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Debresser claims to have seen a consensus here that says we shouldn't go into the details of the Christian view s on sexuality because this is not a Christian article, but I don't see the consensus he speaks of. Where is it? 112.211.214.39 ( talk) 00:52, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Which of these two versions should be included in the article: Seraphim System ( talk) 19:40, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Version 1 The basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is opposed to Christianity, which does not view sex favorably. [1] [2] [3] [4]
Version 2 Some theologians, including Rabbi Michael Gold, have argued that the basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is opposed to Christianity. [5] [6]The BBC reported that "Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of 'the fall' are absent" in Jewish tradition, which holds that God commanded his people to "be fruitful and multiply." [7]
Christian writers developed more restrictive views of sex then rabbis. [8] Early Christian writers, including Clement of Alexandria, were influenced by the philosophy of Stoicism. Clement wrote that "moral self-restraint is common to all human beings who have chosen it." Under this view ascetic Christians could submit their bodily impulses to the "rational will". [9] James A. Brundage points out that in Jewish tradition rabbis did not think enjoyment of sex needed to be restricted because God has given humans the capacity to "produce exquisite pleasure" through sexual acts. [10]
References
Judaism rejected the negative teachings about sex that later became prevalent in Christianity
Hebrew tradition viewed marital sex as a divinely ordained component of human life. Since God wished humans to increase and multiply and since he had endowed their sexual organs with the capacity to produce exquisite pleasure, the rabbis saw no reason to limit the individual's enjoyment of sex... Christian writers began nto express much more rstrictive view of the role of sex in human life.
Judaism has had a largely positive attitude to sex since God commanded his people to 'be fruitful and multiply' (Genesis I:28; 9:1). Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of 'the fall' are absent.
Leif Carlsson, a speaker at the Hönö Conference, wants Christians to come to terms with the faith's negative views on sex and compare them with those found in Judaism, according to a report in Christian newspaper Dagen... Within Judaism, sexuality has always been viewed as something fundamentally good.
Judaism rejected the negative teachings about sex that later became prevalent in Christianity
Leif Carlsson, a speaker at the Hönö Conference, wants Christians to come to terms with the faith's negative views on sex and compare them with those found in Judaism, according to a report in Christian newspaper Dagen... Within Judaism, sexuality has always been viewed as something fundamentally good.
Judaism has had a largely positive attitude to sex since God commanded his people to 'be fruitful and multiply' (Genesis I:28; 9:1). Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of 'the fall' are absent.
Hebrew tradition viewed marital sex as a divinely ordained component of human life. Since God wished humans to increase and multiply and since he had endowed their sexual organs with the capacity to produce exquisite pleasure, the rabbis saw no reason to limit the individual's enjoyment of sex... Christian writers began nto express much more rstrictive view of the role of sex in human life.
Hebrew tradition viewed marital sex as a divinely ordained component of human life. Since God wished humans to increase and multiply and since he had endowed their sexual organs with the capacity to produce exquisite pleasure, the rabbis saw no reason to limit the individual's enjoyment of sex... Christian writers began nto express much more rstrictive view of the role of sex in human life.
I disagree with the unexplained statement (= argument by assertion?) that version 1 would sound denigrating towards Christianity. Version 1 sounds perfectly neutral and matter-of-factly. Regardless, that perceived non-issue can not justify a violation of WP:UNDUE (a quantitatively large violation IMHO in this case) and certainly can not be a reason to reflect sources in a POV manner. Debresser ( talk) 20:15, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
@ OtterAM: This is a pretty minor reason, it doesnt justify removing an expansion of a one-sentence paragraph. Most of the sources used for the expansion were already cited, and not added by me. I don't object to revising the wording of the first sentence Seraphim System ( talk) 23:09, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
in the Bible, the “flesh” that is spoken of disparagingly is not the human body but human nature in rebellion against God- there are thousands of denominations of Christianity - but what Debresser is calling a "mainstream" view is American Evangelism - even though his sources are discussing Catholicism, and early Christianity. The mainstream view in America is focused on sex before marriage and homosexuality - not sex in a marriage. Seraphim System ( talk) 16:55, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
"The basic Jewish positive attitude towards sex and sexuality within marriage is different from that of Christianity, which historically has had a less favorable view of the subject." This proposal is not completely identical to Steven's text, because on second consideration, the word "restrictive" is factually incorrect in two ways: 1. Judaism has more laws regarding sex than Christianity 2. the issue Christianity has with sex is that sex is regarded as something tainted. That is not "restrictive", that is "less favorable". Debresser ( talk) 19:54, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
" Christianity's suspicions of sex as an element of the fall of man are absent in Jewish tradition, which holds that since God commanded to 'be fruitful and multiply', sex is a holy deed." I would change the second sentence of version 2 into something like this. I can of course explain the changes I made, but perhaps it is more purposeful to just ask for comments on this proposal, so: opinions? One thing I like about it, is that it adds a statement about Judaism, which is important in this article, and helps to avoid the WP:UNDUE issue. Debresser ( talk) 19:54, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Your comment there is probably why I intuitively preferred to use the word restrained than restrictive there. But you and I both tend to see the idea of "restriction" through a religious-legal lens, because Halachic Judaism is a religious-legal system. However, I was borrowing language from Brundage, which is the most reliable of the four sources from a WP:RS perspective. And Brundage was looking at things from a more sociological perspective: "...much more restrictive view of the role of sex in human life." That's not a legal comment, it's a sociological comment.
What's more: I wouldn't touch original sin here. It's not a Jewish topic, and while the historical Christian view on sex unquestionably has links to that concept, it is not identical to that concept. In any case, if I could borrow a page from the practices of the US Supreme Court, I would much rather not take the case any farther than I absolutely must in order to make my point. And I don't think we need to touch that concept here. It's sufficient to say:
That makes the point adequately for the purpose of this article. StevenJ81 ( talk) 20:10, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Remember that the only reason to include this at all is because the cultural background of the majority of users (or uses) on this wiki is at least vaguely Christian. The comparison is absolutely not essential to the topic of the page itself. So if you really can't get past this, then I'm going to suggest taking it out and keeping it out. StevenJ81 ( talk) 14:53, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
the negative attitudes toward sexuality that appeared in Christianity and Judaism were not products of ancient Hebrew culture- there are more...a few on Maimonides from OUP and gBooks - I don't really think having this sentence in the article the way it is adds anything necessary to the article. It also seems to be contradicted by a significant number of high-quality sources. Maybe it would be best to take it out. Seraphim System ( talk) 08:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
@ Debresser: Regarding cherry-picking, it does not matter if the results are on the first page of Google.out The statement was originally sourced to only Rabbi Michael Gold (not a well known Rabbi, and you have never shown that he has been cited by any secondary sources - he is primary for his own opinions). All of the academic sources I have seen that compare Judaism and Christianity do this in a historical context, including Brundage. Similarly, they all discuss which early Christian writers had positive views and negative views. It is clear from the context that the sources are discussing the attitudes of "early Christian writers" contrasted with the views of contemporary rabbis - not the attitudes of "Judaism" and "Christianity" - this language is imprecise, and you have been consistently unwilling to acknowledge this (initially you would not even agree to note that the context was historical, though you have changed your position during this RfC). When you went out and found non-academic media sources that supported only the specific language you wanted, that is what I would consider cherry-picking. 23:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
After a young woman marries — often, like the Satmar wife Marcus told me about, to a man she has met and spoken with only once before the wedding — she’s supposed to feel that sex is a blessing, a union full of Shekinah, of God’s light, not just a painful or repellent reproductive chore. Quietly, rabbis refer struggling wives to Marcus’s care. Her task is to instill desire in them.
"menstrual blood is considered ritually unclean" "couples may be confused as to the specific focus of the prohibition, act or object" "there's no point to asking me this since my wife doesn't do anything with me - even when she can! (this was clearly a joke...)" Seraphim System ( talk) 09:27, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello editors, I added the sections: Forbidden relations in Judaism, Consent in marriage in Judaism, and Sexual Pleasure. This is my first time editing a Wiki page so any kind of feedback would be appreciated. Best- Audi072636 ( talk) 20:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
I'd like to add more to the consent section with mentions of biblical literatures that give examples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OH2MI ( talk • contribs) 20:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)