Male and FemaleIn approaching the topic of gender, we are essentially attempting to define the essence of the distinction between two groups: males and females. More specifically, in the halachic context, we are looking at the distinction between male Jews and female Jews in terms of their prescribed behaviours, and their legal status and rights. There are two objectives: (1) the clear enunciations of these distinctions, and (2) the essence of this distinction that gives reason or meaning to the difference in behaviour. These two categories are ultimately interconnected. In many ways, our understanding of the essence of this group distinction will necessarily affect our perspective on the nature of these distinctions. If we believe the distinction to be major, reflecting a powerful difference between these two groups, we will approach this distinction in one manner. If we, though, understand the distinction to be minor, a different approach will be undertaken. Essentially, do we see both males and females as human beings with some differences or do we see males and females as vastly different beings? This question may seem strange but it, in fact, is a significant issue in, for example, the debate over same-sex marriages. Advocates of same-sex marriages speak of love as existing between two human beings who happen to be male or female. The gender is secondary; love is a concept that is simply to be applied to all human beings in a generic sense. Opponents of same-sex marriages speak of love as existing between males and females. Gender is significant; the distinction between men and women defines important distinctive categories in the realm of love. Torah clearly advocates for the latter position, thus indicating that, at least in the area of love, male and female are to be seen as qualitatively, distinctive groups. One of the major issues that must be approached in any study of gender in the halachic system is the extent of this qualitative distinction in other areas of life. The issue is not solely one of: which group definition is to take precedence: human being or specific gender. Of course the answer is not always the same in regard to all issues. One other consideration, though, must be the individual himself or herself. How much do we define ourselves by group association and how much do we define ourselves by our own specific individuality. As we apply broader group definitions, we tend to rely more on individuality to explain the differences between people &ndash thus the correlation between the advancement of women&rsquos rights and the greater stress on individuality. Yet, the dividing line between individuality and group identity is not always so easy to define. In the discussion regarding the naming of Chava (See Bereishit 20:23 and 3:20) the commentators (see, in particular, Malbim) deal with the basis of the name &ndash is it tied to the generic category of human being, is it tied to the group identity of woman or is it reflective of this particular individual? Is it some combination of all three &ndash but then how do we understand this combination? In analyzing the halachic distinctions arising from gender, we are continuously confronting this issue. (Part of this issue includes how we look at what we may term exceptions to any general perception such as the case of Devorah.) Previous Topic: Defining
the Individual Back to Issue One: Group and Individual |
©
2005 NISHMA