Comments on: Why is God “He”?…ask the Rabbi https://www.jwire.com.au/god-ask-rabbi/ Australia, NZ and worldwide Jewish news that matters Sun, 19 Jun 2016 01:30:38 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Debbie Scholem https://www.jwire.com.au/god-ask-rabbi/#comment-185279 Sun, 19 Jun 2016 01:30:38 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=64236#comment-185279 Liat has said everything so well however here’s my tuppence worth. Rabbi, with the greatest respect you are male and will stay be male and you cannot possibly know how it feels to be a female Jew. The de-gendering texts used in the Progressive/Reform movement are wonderfully inclusive and sit well with the congregants beliefs and prayers. Please don’t assume you know how Jews feel just because you belong to the ‘Orthodox’ club of Judaism.

]]> By: Liat Kirby-Nagar https://www.jwire.com.au/god-ask-rabbi/#comment-184982 Tue, 14 Jun 2016 08:56:37 +0000 http://www.jwire.com.au/?p=64236#comment-184982 Dear Rabbi Apple,
I would suggest to you that there is no reason why ‘female language’ should be restricted in description to ‘reproductive capacity’, or thought of in opposites, such as near/far and kindly/stern. Both women and men are capable of being kindly and stern, soft or tough, emotionally strong, resilient … Neither should such total emphasis be placed on the ‘maternal’, as important as that is, both to mothers and the survival of their children. There is more to a woman than her capacity to bear children and her maternal instincts and actions in that regard. Just as there is more to a man than being a father. There are so many facets to a person, so much capacity of all kinds.

What makes you think that ‘male language’ is better at denoting ‘power and dynamism’? I would like to understand what you mean by that. Because I have here in my library many works of literature, some written in female language that is both powerful and dynamic. By that I mean the language expressed by a female, and surely that is the only female language there is. Let us not consider female language as being that assigned to the female by a male – that is male language speaking. And how does male language better denote power and dynamism?

You say it’s a pragmatic fact that maleness is the common human and theological norm. I can accept the latter, because in the main the theological interpretations are made by men. But, maleness as the common human norm?! What is that supposed to mean? Women make up approximately 50% of the human species, so what sort of human norm are we talking about here? Language is actually riddled with the politics of sex, and that of course is dictated by who is writing it or speaking it. We call God ‘He’ and use male metaphors because by and large liturgical writings have been from the pen of man and oratories from the mouths of men. Personally, I don’t mind particularly if He is attributed to God, because to me God is so far removed from the notion and/or reality of man (universally meant), that it’s not an allocation of significance. We are in the image of God, a far cry from the divine – and there’s no reason why females and males alike can’t speak or write of God in imagery that’s powerful and dynamic – this is not the God given right of men alone, nor are men so special to language that they alone have the capacity to do so.

It’s a good subject for discussion, but can we please consider the female aspect of it with more acuity and depth, thereby exposing the fullness of being woman. The fullness of woman, and of man, each complementing the other. It will be a day to celebrate when women can choose to practise Judaism as they might wish, instead of being paternalistically patted on the head and told they ‘are not obligated to do so’. That is also male language.

]]>