Faces of women in public and Jewish law

Waiting their turn at an Israeli polling station.

What is the halachic (Jewish Law’s) basis for a ban on pictures of women’s heads in some ultra-Orthodox minds? This must be the result of extreme piety that Haredi Jews must aim for. But is it?

Jewish women should, Jewish law dictates, not dance or sing in public. Except in front of women-only audiences or her own close family members (husband when they are not separated for the month and she didn’t return to the ritual bath yet, father, sons) and not show too much flesh or coiffure — if they’re married. But even the most pious of them don’t walk around veils — except as a bride (free crying, some privacy) and the “Taliban Mother” and other Haredi burka sect members, which is not the Haredi norm. But why not? If going the extra mile is pious, why not have very dedicated women cover their faces?

I learned why from my teacher Rabbi Zeev Leff, chief rabbi of Matisyahu.

Why do we insist on women covering enough leg and arm (and married ones enough head hair) but don’t expect them to go veiled? And why don’t we put pets in clothes if showing the body would be filthy nudity, unwanted provocation? (Except in places where animals wear clothing — there the people go around naked — he quipped. He first worked in Miami.)

First of all, know that Judaism doesn’t see sex as coarse. Sexuality is a beautiful thing. It’s even a holy encounter. The inner walls of the Holy of Holiest had pictures of unclothed couples “in intimate embrace” symbolizing the deep connection between the Jewish people and G^d.

So, sex should be reserved for special circumstances not because it’s dirty but because it’s holy. Don’t squander it. And to show that we’re not animals run by instincts but rather creatures who can say “no” or “later.”

Back to why Judaism teaches that women should cover up but not veil themselves. Many men cannot see the soul, personality in a woman when she’s showing off too much body. And like you don’t scream in front of a very sensitive person, it’s not bad for women to take others into account and have a modest way to dress. It builds good character.

Self-respecting women like to be recognized, love to be seen for who they are, not for their body parts. (Don’t blame women who succumbed to sexism and now think that their bodies are their best merchandise. We should not blame the victim.) To dress up so that men less can dress them down with their eyes and may see the person(ality) instead. Animals don’t need to be covered up. Their nudity doesn’t eclipse their soul.

Good for Muslims to abandon alcohol and good for Haredi Jews for banning pornographic body parts from ads. But here we’re not talking about body parts. We’re talking faces. If you’d want to ban women’s faces it seems that you want to see women only for their bodies.

Then there are Jews who think that all women should rule their homes but have no power in public because that would be unbecoming for the female soul. Guess what, Western society has moved on and this vision has been defeated forever. What these proponents could do is point out that total equality between the sexes is untrue and mere pretense and that we should honor the differences — but not by suppressing women.

They should learn the wisdom behind their daily blessing that G^d didn’t make us women; it’s to help us not be consumed by jealousy. Because when men face reality, how could we not be deeply jealous of them?

There are two more reasons why some people would avoid portraits.

Some people hang their house full of headshots of one or many rabbis because children behave when strangers are around. Their piousness might also inspire the onlooker. But some very pious Jews believe just the opposite, that it’s immodest to look at saints’ faces. When they paint biblical stories, you won’t see the facial details. They would not claim to be able to portray such holiness. Like in Islam — but don’t tell them.

Or maybe, anything female reminds some men of sex and they try to cover up an immodest oversexed brain by taking away women from the public sphere. They need medical attention but they won’t go. (Many aren’t oversexed but peer pressure makes them support this.) Anything female is sex is dirty. Like classical Christianity. But don’t tell them.

Israel needs a tongue-in-cheek civil law that allows men to ban women from the public eye only to Muslim and Christian men. That may teach self-styled pious Jews what they look like when they want that too.

About the Author

MM is a prolific and creative writer and thinker, previously a daily blog contributor to the TOI. He often makes his readers laugh, mad, or assume he's nuts—close to perfect blogging. He's proud that his analytical short comments are removed both from left-wing and right-wing news sites. None of his content is generated by the new bore on the block, AI. * As a frontier thinker, he sees things many don't yet. He's half a prophet. Half. Let's not exaggerate. Or not at all because he doesn't claim G^d talks to him. He gives him good ideas—that's all. MM doesn't believe that people observe and think in a vacuum. He, therefore, wanted a broad bio that readers interested can track a bit what (lack of) backgrounds, experiences, and educations contribute to his visions. * This year, he will prioritize getting his unpublished books published rather than just blog posts. Next year, he hopes to focus on activism against human extinction. To find less-recent posts on a subject XXX among his over 2000 archived ones, go to the right-top corner of a Times of Israel page, click on the search icon and search "zuiden, XXX". One can find a second, wilder blog, to which one may subscribe too, here: https://mmvanzuiden.wordpress.com/ or by clicking on the globe icon next to his picture on top. * Like most of his readers, he believes in being friendly, respectful, and loyal. However, if you think those are his absolute top priorities, you might end up disappointed. His first loyalty is to the truth. He will try to stay within the limits of democratic and Jewish law, but he won't lie to support opinions or people when don't deserve that. (Yet, we all make honest mistakes, which is just fine and does not justify losing support.) He admits that he sometimes exaggerates to make a point, which could have him come across as nasty, while in actuality, he's quite a lovely person to interact with. He holds - how Dutch - that a strong opinion doesn't imply intolerance of other views. * Sometimes he's misunderstood because his wide and diverse field of vision seldomly fits any specialist's box. But that's exactly what some love about him. He has written a lot about Psychology (including Sexuality and Abuse), Medicine (including physical immortality), Science (including basic statistics), Politics (Israel, the US, and the Netherlands, Activism - more than leftwing or rightwing, he hopes to highlight reality), Oppression and Liberation (intersectionally, for young people, the elderly, non-Whites, women, workers, Jews, LGBTQIA+, foreigners and anyone else who's dehumanized or exploited), Integrity, Philosophy, Jews (Judaism, Zionism, Holocaust and Jewish Liberation), the Climate Crisis, Ecology and Veganism, Affairs from the news, or the Torah Portion of the Week, or new insights that suddenly befell him. * Chronologically, his most influential teachers are his parents, Nico (natan) van Zuiden and Betty (beisye) Nieweg, Wim Kan, Mozart, Harvey Jackins, Marshal Rosenberg, Reb Shlomo Carlebach, and, lehavdil bein chayim lechayim, Rabbi Dr. Natan Lopes Cardozo, Rav Zev Leff, and Rav Meir Lubin. This short list doesn't mean to disrespect others who taught him a lot or a little. One of his rabbis calls him Mr. Innovation [Ish haChidushim]. Yet, his originalities seem to root deeply in traditional Judaism, though they may grow in unexpected directions. In fact, he claims he's modernizing nothing. Rather, mainly basing himself on the basic Hebrew Torah text, he tries to rediscover classical Jewish thought almost lost in thousands of years of stifling Gentile domination and Jewish assimilation. (He pleads for a close reading of the Torah instead of going by rough assumptions of what it would probably mean and before fleeing to Commentaries.) This, in all aspects of life, but prominently in the areas of Free Will, Activism, Homosexuality for men, and Redemption. * He hopes that his words will inspire and inform, and disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed. He aims to bring a fresh perspective rather than harp on the obvious and familiar. When he can, he loves to write encyclopedic overviews. He doesn't expect his readers to agree. Rather, original minds should be disputed. In short, his main political positions are among others: anti-Trumpism, for Zionism, Intersectionality, non-violence, anti those who abuse democratic liberties, anti the fake ME peace process, for original-Orthodoxy, pro-Science, pro-Free Will, anti-blaming-the-victim, and for down-to-earth, classical optimism, and happiness. Read his blog on how he attempts to bridge any tensions between those ideas or fields. * He is a fetal survivor of the pharmaceutical industry (https://diethylstilbestrol.co.uk/studies/des-and-psychological-health/), born in 1953 to his parents who were Dutch-Jewish Holocaust survivors who met in the largest concentration camp in the Netherlands, Westerbork. He grew up a humble listener. It took him decades to become a speaker too, and decades more to admit to being a genius. But his humility was his to keep. And so was his honesty. Bullies and con artists almost instantaneously envy and hate him. He hopes to bring new things and not just preach to the choir. * He holds a BA in medicine (University of Amsterdam) – is half a doctor. He practices Re-evaluation Co-counseling since 1977, is not an official teacher anymore, and became a friendly, powerful therapist. He became a social activist, became religious, made Aliyah, and raised three wonderful kids. Previously, for decades, he was known to the Jerusalem Post readers as a frequent letter writer. For a couple of years, he was active in hasbara to the Dutch-speaking public. He wrote an unpublished tome about Jewish Free Will. He's a strict vegan since 2008. He's an Orthodox Jew but not a rabbi. * His writing has been made possible by an allowance for second-generation Holocaust survivors from the Netherlands. It has been his dream since he was 38 to try to make a difference by teaching through writing. He had three times 9-out-of-10 for Dutch at his high school finals but is spending his days communicating in English and Hebrew - how ironic. G-d must have a fine sense of humor. In case you wonder - yes, he is a bit dyslectic. If you're a native English speaker and wonder why you should read from people whose English is only their second language, consider the advantage of having an original peek outside of your cultural bubble. * To send any personal reaction to him, scroll to the top of the blog post and click Contact Me. * His newest books you may find here: https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_27%3AMoshe-Mordechai%2FMaurits+van+Zuiden&s=relevancerank&text=Moshe-Mordechai%2FMaurits+van+Zuiden&ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1