Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Platonic Relationships Redux

Another long guest post by JS:


I would have written this post earlier, but I couldn't stop thinking of all my female friends...

One of the main issues people seem to have with TO's post is exactly how one defines a Platonic friendship. I would define it as a friendship - a sharing of thoughts, feelings, emotions, trust, etc - that not only does not have a physical sexual component, but sexual thoughts are absent, or nearly absent from the relationship and if present are only fleeting and inconsequential and have no adverse bearing on the friendship itself.

As I understand it, Chareidim believe in separating the sexes as much as possible for the following reason: it is impossible to have a friendship between a man and a woman that is halachically acceptable. The relationship will either lead to an inappropriate physical relationship or to the man (or woman, I suppose) having inappropriate thoughts.

As has been pointed out, many people, including non-Jewish experts believe the exact same thing. I would note that these same people are not forcing segregation of the sexes through separate schools, separate seating at weddings and other events, walking on opposite sides of the street, etc. The difference being that Chareidim see the possible results of the friendship not just as "inappropriate" but as a serious sin. As Bray would I'm sure like me point out, this is in line with the Ramban's introduction to Parshat Kedoshim where he explains that kedusha is more than just following the letter of the mitzvot, it is following the spirit of the Torah as well.

I don't disagree with the philosophy of the Chareidim (especially as laid out by the Ramban), but I do disagree with the practice.

1) Simple human nature tells you that if you say something is forbidden a person will desire it more. This doesn't mean we shouldn't forbid wrongful acts, but it does mean we shouldn't forbid innocent acts. This is the lesson of Chava (Eve) who wrongfully said she was forbidden from touching the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil when in actuality she was just forbidden from eating from it. It is this wrongful forbidding of an innocent act that led to her desire and sin.

2) It promotes an all or nothing approach to mitzvot and aveirot. Similar to #1, once Chava touched the tree and saw nothing happened, she had no inhibitions against eating from the tree. Similarly, so much emphasis is placed on the innocent act, that when it is violated it doesn't just end there, many more violations ensue. Life is more nuanced, there are shades of gray between the white and black. This type of approach encourages one to see things in a binary manner, such that when one falters one falls.

3) It can lead to an abuse of power by those in control. By forbidding contact between the sexes, an entire people are dependant on shadchanim and the various rules and customs imposed by the shidduch scene. This is what is leading to the shidduch crisis moreso than anything. Those who aren't upright can exhibit sexual control over others which is just wrong. Similarly, completely forbidding outside influences like TV, secular books, newspapers, music, Internet, etc can lead the unscrupulous to fully control the hearts and minds of their followers on numerous issues due to lack of knowledge.

4) It promotes antiquated gender roles. If all a man sees growing up is women who have children, care for those children, cook, clean, and take care of men and never sees a woman in any other context, he will think women are only capable of this.

5) The sexes will have no concept of how to interact beyond established gender roles and will need to seek out rabbinical therapeutic help when more intimate issues arise. People who have been separated from the opposite gender don't understand how they think, how they behave, how they react, how they respond emotionally or intellectually, etc. Their interactions become stilted and remain along gender lines - a wife shows her love by cooking, a man shows his love by learning or taking the children to shul. Maybe this is controversial, but that's never stopped me before, there are many Chareidim who have genuine marital trouble for this reason and in particular problems in the bedroom - there are numerous sites and therapists out there now that this issue is being recognized more.

6) Interacting with the opposite gender can not only be harmless but can be highly beneficial. Someone who is around women often, doesn't think of them as purely sexual objects. Similarly, one who sees a woman's elbows or ankles daily doesn't find these parts of a woman's body terribly alluring. I won't say that men don't look at women sexually even if they are used to them being around. However, for most men, I think this sexualization takes place on a highly impersonal level - walking past a woman on the street, sitting next to a stranger on a train. Also, it is generally brief and not a lingering feeling. When one knows a woman, these feelings go in one of two directions, they expand and the man wants to date the woman (or have an affair if he married and a sleaze) or they diminish and disappear or become nearly nonexistent. For the man in the first category, he is like an alcoholic and should stop before the first drink. For everyone else, the benefits of a friendship with a woman are many and provide something that just "hanging out with the guys" does not. However, I will acknowledge that there are boundaries put in place subconsciously or even consciously in male-female interactions simply because no one wants to slip into that first category. I don't see how this diminishes the friendship just because there are limits. For example, I don't talk about every aspect of my life with my male friends - I don't talk about anything personal between my wife and I with my friends. But more commonly, I have male friends I talk about sports with but not my job, and those I talk to about my job but not what I like to read, etc. We compartmentalize our friends naturally and seek out people for certain types of interactions and others for other types of interactions, yet they're still our friends.

To wrap up and talk about sexual feelings in a friendship, it seems some want to diminish it as the guy may harbor desires that are never acted upon and the woman never knows about. So what? This is the age old question posed by Aristotle as to whether a person can be happy if everyone he thinks is his friend treats him as such but completely unbeknownst to him hate him. It has no answer, we only know and feel what our senses tell us. Lastly, acknowledging or feeling someone looks good does not necessarily have to be sexual just as being upset at someone doesn't mean you experience hatred.

---------
Buy DB's book. (please)

No comments: