Dress The Part

The hardest thing about working in a law office is having to get dressed up in a suit, makeup, and jewelry everyday.

I thought I would enjoy wearing suits. They're so easy, all you have to think about is what shirt to put underneath. Wrong. There's a whole lot more to the female suit. The clothes-i.e., deciding on pants or skirt, A-line or pencil, dark or light, and which goddamn blouse highlights my silhouette without making me look like the office slut-are just the beginning. Theres the shoes, the makeup, the hair, the jewelry. It never ends.

I put up with all that in the name of professionalism. I tell myself that clients will respect me more if I look put-together. But WHY? Shouldn't they prefer that I spend that hour in the morning working on their case, rather than trying to remove the clump of mascara in my eye while throwing foundation on my face while deciding on earrings, all while the curlers are warming up my head? Such is our society.

Recently, I read an article in Marie Claire magazine about a female MIT Physics professor. She said that one of the hardest things for her was forcing herself to not wear makeup to work, so that her male colleagues would take her seriously.

Seriously?

She was complaining that she was taken more serious WITHOUT makeup, and that bothered her? What I wouldn't give to be able to be that Teva and jeans wearing professional, judged for her work performance and not for her appearance.

And yet, she was being judged for her appearance, only in the opposite way I was. She was more professional if she didn't dress up, and I am considered more professional if I do dress up.

I could easily fall in to the trap of blaming the male-centrist society, the society that reduces women to nothing but pretty faces who might have brains if they look like they have brains, but it goes beyond that. Men are judged on their appearance too. Like it or not, the lawyer who dresses in a sharp, fitted suit with the shined shoes and the silver cuff links is more "professional" than the one who comes in dressed in khakis and a polo. The problem is that we judge people, all people, based on appearances.

Some may say that's not so bad. They say that there's a reason we judge books by their covers, the covers convey what the author thinks is a central theme of the book. Our dress is what we present to the world.

The truth is, the covers don't convey what the author thinks is the central theme of the book. They convey what the publisher, publicist, and managing editor thinks is the central theme of the book. Someone way back when decided that professionals wear suits, so suits indicate a professional employee. The employee that takes more time for his work and less for his appearance, he's not professional. Neither is the hard worker who saves her paycheck to invest and buys fake jewelry rather than expensive gems. At least not according to the publicist. And frankly, why should they get all the say?

When Humanities Majors Take Science Courses

This, a direct quote from my physics textbook:

"If neon tubes appeal to you for illumination, you probably march to your own drummer. Most people opt for a somewhat better simulation of sunlight in their discharge lamps. As an energy-efficient source of artificial sunlignt, it's hard to beat fluorescent lamps."

The previous section talks about how neon tubes work, while the subsequent section talks about how fluorescent lights work. For some reason, the editors of this textbook decided to insert their own opinions into a compilation of facts. Come on, guys. You're scientists, you know you're supposed to avoid bias and insulting readers. This is unprofessionalism at it's best, or worst, as the case may be.

Little Boxes

Ikea, the world leader in efficiently-packed, mass produced, globally distributed housewares, now builds houses!

Nearly my entire apartment is from Ikea. Before school started, I spent a week putting together a bunk bed, 2 desks, 2 bookshelves, and a dresser, all from Ikea. Many of the tools in my kitchen are also from Ikea, and lest you think that all kitchen utensils are packed the same way, I also had to assemble my pots and pans-it's cheaper to ship them with the handles removed, and placed inside the pots.

I can spend days walking around the Ikea store. The fact that there is the entire second floor dedicated as a showroom, there just for the benefit of the design-less like myself, makes me smile. But Ikea houses? I'm not so comfortable with that. My desk is a bit wobbly, and we had to return the bunk bed because some of the boards didn't fit into where they were supposed to. All that is fine for furniture that I'll be done with in 2 years, but a house is a long term investment, and I'm not sure I trust Ikea with that.

Living For Herself

If I had it to do all over again, I may or may not have chosen to go to the high school(s) that I went to, but I definitely would not have gone to the seminary I went to. I just didn't know what I wanted out of a school. I basically asked my principal, who I highly respected, where he thought I would like, and he told me to go to the school that I did.

Even before I went there, I was a little apprehensive about it. I knew that it was more right wing than I was, but I wasn't sure that was a bad thing. I knew that the girls from my high school who'd gone there weren't exactly like me, but then again, who IS exactly like me? It seemed that everyone who spent a year learning in Israel came back at least a little, if not a lot, more religious than they were when they started.

I bring this up now not because I'm dwelling in regret, but because my sister is a senior in high school and is deciding where she wants to apply to seminary now. Now, my sister and I are vastly different people, and I acknowledge this. However, her arguments for applying to schools that are more right wing than she is sound eerily familiar. "My guidance counselor thinks I will like it, and she knows me well" "So-and-So went to this school, and she's a cool person" "I don't want to go to seminary just to read texts all the time. I like the discussions" "I'm not looking for the same things from college that I am from sem".

I want her to go to the best school for her, not the best school for me. If she wants to go to the same school I did (she doesn't, but for different reasons) then so be it. However, I hope she isn't tricking herself into thinking that because other people tell her that's what she wants, it's what she wants. I want her to have the clarity of mind to choose a place that will affect her positively for the rest of her life, not just for the 6 months after she gets back when she's still on her spiritual high.

Religion and Personal Identity, Again.

Can I just say that I suck at writing. I can't believe how bad I am. I just read the last post I wrote, and found at least twenty grammatical mistakes, just by skimming it once.

That being said, I have another thing to say about it.

The friend I referred to has started becoming more religous. He's set up a chavrusa, he comes to minyan several times a week, and I see him at many of the shiurim that I go to.

I'd love to say that this makes me really happy, but it doesn't.

He's also stopped wearing his rugged baseball caps and put on a kippah. Instead of his grungy sweatshirts (or tee shirts, now that it's warm), he has started wearing polo shirts.

I see him slowly changing, exactly how my father changed. I'd love to say that I'm happy for him, but I'm not.

Since when is giving up your personal identity part of religion?

Proud To Follow Halacha

I'm trying to sort out how I feel about this issue as I'm writing this, so bear with me if it's not so coherent.

Last year, I was in an environment where part of the dresscode was that girls were required to cover their legs, either with a long skirt, or the more popular option, with tights. The head of the school's wife taught a class on tznius, and this issue came up alot. The class was based around the book Hatznea Lechet, by Rabbi Getsel Ellinson. After going through the sources, it was clear that one is in no way obligated to cover the bottom part of the leg, unless one defines that as the shok, in which case the skirt would have to go all the way to the ankles. There is some discussion of minhag hamakom, and many people say that when one enters into a place where it is customary for women to wear tights, one must respect the people of the place and wear tights. My school was of the opinion held by Rav Elyashiv, that the minhag Yerushalyim was for girls to cover their legs.

So the obvious next question to this seminary leader was "what do we do when we get back to America?" In most communities in America, there is no clear minhag of all girls wearing tights. Her answer was "Look at the women you want to emulate. Even in these communities in America, the vast majority of them cover their legs. It's not a minhag hamakom,per se, but its more like a minhag kedoshim." (I thought about this and realized I don't know any women that I would really like to emulate, period. I can think of a few men, and I highly doubt that they would wear tights year-round. But who knows. Maybe they would. Or maybe they're just not kedoshim.) She told us that in no way can she tell us we must cover our legs. But she just can't tell us NOT to, either.

Well, I don't. And I don't feel like I'm not a kadosh person for it, either. (Maybe for other reasons, but certainly not because of my lack of tights.) But, thats not really the issue here. The issue that I've been grappling with is, why do religous women wear skirts? There are three answers traditionally given for this question:

1. The Torah prohibits men wearing womens garments and women wearing mens. Pants are considered clothing of men.
2. The pants show the outline of the leg.
3. The pants show the split between the legs.

Out of the three, only the third is, in my opinion, somewhat valid. Black sweatpants with pink lettering are certainly not anything a man would wear. If the pants are loose enough, you can not actually see the outline. So loose, feminine pants should be OK, if not for number three.

However, I have a problem with both the second and third reasons. Where in the world do they come from? Is it just a general prohibition, like not wearing tight clothing, that violates the "essence" of tznius, without violating any actual halachos? I don't know, I see plenty of girls walking around in very nice, professional pants that do not look especially immodest. So I turned to my guide, Hatznea Lechet, and I found the followings answers:

Avnei Tzedek responds to a question about women wearing pants under their skirts "Surely, pants under a girl's clothing, or even on top of them, are permissible, since the woman will ultimately be recognized as such by her other clothing, and since she is only wearing this garment as protection from the cold."

He obvioulsly is of the opinion that pants are neither beged ish, or promiscuos. If so, he would have outright prohibited them. The like "even on top of them" leads one to believe that he feels that in certain instances, it is OK for girls to wear pants in public, although he does not seem to be advising this on a constant basis.

The Yaskil Avdi (who, I must admit, I have never heard of) writes that women's pants are certainly not k'li gever, but "should be forbidden for a different reason. Pants are immodest clothes for women, since the legs are seperated to the top. Someone who sees a girl wearing pants may be led to bad thoughts..."

I don't have a copy of the yaskil avdi, so I could not read this inside. No sources (of the yaskil avdi) were quoted in Hatznea Lechet (sometimes sources are quoted.) I don't know where he gets the idea that all pants lead to immoral ideas. They just don't. He seems to be referring to specifically the pants that are cut to fit in a certain way, and this would fall into the general prohibiton of not wearing tight clothing because it arouses attention. I was reading this and thinking, it's really not so bad to wear loose sweatpants. It would be so much more conveniant for rolling out of bed and going to class, and not wearing pants is not spelled out expicitly in halacha. (hehe, maybe my friends in israel were right...)

Then I read Rabbi Ellinson's footnote. He wrote that

"Another factor which must be taken into account is the existence of a
community of modest Jewish girls with their own standard. The fact that they
are careful to wear only skirts, affords signifigant weight to this
stricture. By wearing a skirt, a Jewish girl identifies with this group and
seperates herself from other more permissive circles.
To a certain
extent, in the last few decades the skirt has become a sort of Yarmulke for the
scrupulously observant girl who strives to follow our sages ethical guidelines,
as reflected in their halachic rulings. By her refusal to wear trousers, she
demonstrably declares that she is unwilling to resign herself to the dictates of
modern style, and that she takes exception to the immorality so rampant these
days in society at large."

He then quotes his daughter as once saying:

"Even if it could be proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is nothing
wrong with wearing trousers, I would still continue to avoid them."

I though about the Orthodox people that I know that wear pants, and I realized he is right. I can think of one or two people I know that wear pants and that I respect as being very commited to torah and mitvah observance. But as a whole, there is this category of "people who are Orthodox but wear pants." These are generally the same people who look forward to shabbos because of the "onegs" after dinner and don't really care so much about being shomer negiah.

Then I though about what my seminary teacher had said about tights. For a minute there, I condsidered digging out my old knee socks. It seemed like exactly the same idea. But it's not. Only because, for some reason, wearing skirts has become a UNIVERSAL sign of religiosity, where as wearing tights is only a universal sign of chareidism.

When I first got to college, I mentioned to a friend that if I was a guy, I would definately want to wear a yarmulke here, as opposed to a cap. It's so nice and refreshing to see guys walk around stateing clearly "I'm proud to be Jewish." I think that wearing a skirt is the girl's equivalent. It's not just a mere following of halacha, but a sign that says I am proud to follow halacha. And I am.

p.s. This post definately accomplished it's purpose as stated in the first 2 lines. And the conclusion is in the title.