Saturday, August 8, 2009

Soul Producer

(Don't ask how this thought entered my mind!, but) I've recently been considering the part the male plays in reproduction: I think the woman's prominent place is slightly overrated. I mean, what help is an egg if there is nothing to place within it? Anyway, the child is only held in the womb nine months. The real source of "life" is the male. It is the males constant responsibility to be the bearer of this life till it can safely be placed in an egg. Yet until that time, and forever after, it is solely the male who is the "factory of life". That is no small job. So, while the actual burden of birthing is far more difficult than the transfer of this life from the male to the female, it very much cannot be said that he has no part in the birthing responsibilities himself. ....why do I feel like a moron saying this...?

19 comments:

C said...

nothing to say, but interested in what others will say

Jessica said...

The male having no part is obviously wrong, but saying that his part has more weight than the woman's is laughable. Those "short" 9 months aren't as easy as they look. The labor and delivery don't go anywhere close to as smoothly as they are portrayed on tv (even on documentaries like "A Baby Story"). Definitely the male has a huge part in the process of making a baby, but let's say it like it is: A man has sex with a woman to make a baby. The woman is the one who has to deal with the "consequences".

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

"let's say it like it is: A man has sex with a woman to make a baby. The woman is the one who has to deal with the "consequences""- I feel I anticipated your response in my saying that the burden of birthing is far more difficult than the "transfer of life from the male to the female". i.e. the "transfer of life" is pleasurable to both parties (hopefully!), but childbearing is, in fact, quite painful.

But there is pain as well in being a "life-bearer". For example the fact that for males the "urge to engage in actions whose end is reproduction" is more of a "pressure" than an "interest" or an "urge", which is, of course, a life-long burden (in contrast to the relatively reserved reproductive urges of females). That also has chemichal and psychological efects on male as as well, which, of course, afect the whole of ones decisions. There's more to it than that, but that's as far as I'll go!

Jessica said...

I'm not sure that I'm following how the act of reproduction is more of a pressure than an urge for men? Please explain further.

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

I myself was kind of wondering what I meant after I wrote this(!), but from what I understand males are generally more "reproductively-inclined" than females as a result of their being the bearers of the "factory" I was speaking of. I termed the female inclination for reproductive activities an "urge" and the males a "pressure". To me an urge is something that can be left unfulfilled if one wishes, whereas there is a certain inevitability in a pressure. A pressure is similar to being pushed, against ones will. I think it's obvious that since it's the 'active' responsibility of the male to place the offspring in a womb, "G-d decided" that his urge should be stronger than that of the female, whose initial part in the womb-transfer is relatively passive. ...I know only 10% of this is actually directed towards what you asked, but...whatever.

C: I hope we're keeping you sufficiently entertained!

C said...

Shriki-Thanks for that.

Just wanna put it out there that none of us has experienced both the female sexual urge and the male sexual urge and therefore not one of us is qualified to determine which is more "difficult" to bear.

Just a thought.

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

Ha. Yeah, I tried to overlook that because it would cast doubt on my idea. All we really have is verbal and written testimonies about how others relate to these things, but that's still pretty substantial (the Gemara in Ketubot actually mentions that "the mans inclination is external and the woman's is internal", so..).

Though, like I said, what's "difficult" isn't necessarily just the heightening of sexual urges..

Source:
(כתובות סד:ב, אמר ליה ר' חייא בר יוסף לשמואל מה בין מורד למורדת אמר ליה צא ולמד משוק של זונות מי שוכר את מי דבר אחר זה יצרו מבחוץ וזו יצרה מבפנים).

chanie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chanie said...

"Why do I feel like a ... for saying this?"
...because you are? Sorry, but you asked for it. :D

I feel bad for the guys, I really do. I mean, for all their "shelo asani isha" shtus, they really do have a tough time...

And yeah, I think males are more reproductively inclined- especially since womens' hormone levels will rise and fall, and mens' are stuck at the same [high or lower, depending on who you are] level till they get old and gray...

Also, you don't say that women lose a soul each month, while go look at Breslov and Zohar, etc., where it talks about how men kill their babies. So really, poor men.

But.....poor women, too. It doesn't hurt him nearly as much as it hurts her to have a baby- at any stage of the game. So perhaps mens' roles are not tiny- but then again, women still bear the brunt of it.

Sorry for being a feminist...

C said...

ATTN Chanie-The reason we have nidda is because a women's period is a "whisper of death" (at least that's what we were told in high school-but you know how they gloss over everything in those years...). So yeah, we do lose a baby-and it is death to the point where we are impure. A man doesn't become impure...

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

C: Hm. First of all, I find my previous comment didn't make a lot of sense after editing..

I'm addressing you first since I find what you're saying to warrant more comment that what chanie said. In what way is menstruation "death"? The decay of an egg causes no death. I think what chanie was getting at is that a man's leading sperm to anywhere besides a womb (which is the only other place it can survive) is, in fact, a form of "killing babies" in a sense. Again, women, without having those "life producing" qualities are not capable of becoming guilty of such "atrocities".

Also: According to.. ...I mean, I don't know how applicable it's become today, but "officially" men can be rendered impure under similar circumstances.

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

""Why do I feel like a ... for saying this?"
...because you are? Sorry, but you asked for it. :D"- I tried to figure out why I take pleasure in your saying that...but I've given up. ..and why didn't you want to quote the word "moron"?

"I feel bad for the guys, I really do. I mean, for all their "shelo asani isha" shtus, they really do have a tough time"- I mean, you know as well as I do that that bracha isn't a comment on the general differences between male and female life, but is discussing the rather specific topic of mitzva obligations.

"I think males are more reproductively inclined- especially since womens' hormone levels will rise and fall, and mens' are stuck at the same level till they get old and gray"- I wonder what sense you see that as making? Being in a sexual mood at infrequent intervals doesn't make women less interested at a period of a high hormone level.

"Sorry for being a feminist"- That doesn't really strike me as being entirely feminist.

chanie said...

C- Um, do you get a sin for killing your baby when you get your period? I highly doubt it...
Oh, and is getting your period chayav misa biydei Shamayim? Again, I highly doubt it. I have no doubts that tuma is related to and caused by a "death" of some kind, but I don't think that women and men are equatable in this instance. Now...if you require more detail, please email me.

sshriki1- Yes, but I wasn't willing to put in graphic details, for reasons obviously unbeknownst to others on this comment thread.
re Also: Um...how so? (Maybe it's better that I don't know...)

sshriki2- "I tried to figure out why I take pleasure in your saying that...but I've given up. ..and why didn't you want to quote the word "moron"?" You got pleasure because it was unexpected and because that's what you were looking for, and I didn't understand that enough to avoid it. And also because you like feeling like one. Why didn't I say the word? Because it didn't feel like an appropriate word to say, for some reason.

"I mean, you know as well as I do that that bracha isn't a comment on the general differences between male and female life, but is discussing the rather specific topic of mitzva obligations."So? There are guys out there who mean it in more ways than just the mitzva-related ones, and there are guys who taunt women because "we're better than you bc of this bracha". So, I'm answering to all of them, even the ones who don't have sources for their chauvinistic claims.

"I wonder what sense you see that as making? Being in a sexual mood at infrequent intervals doesn't make women less interested at a period of a high hormone level."Look, if you're looking at it from a perspective where at least some is from the y"h, and therefore not intrinsically good...then women have a break and men don't. Unlucky men. That's all.

"That doesn't really strike me as being entirely feminist."Guess I have to try harder next time, then.
Actually, it was a disclaimer....

Looking Forward said...

women do kabalisticaly give life... first of all.

thats why they become nidah.

second, talmud says that women's yeitzers are much much worse than mens, they just operate in a different fashion. (thats one reason why talmud says that women shouldn't be rabbis)

a woman's yeitzer doesn't over power her until she meets someone she trusts, then it wiggs out and goes into overdrive. (and she also is driven to find someone she trusts to have children with)

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

It's funny, I actually remember responding to this, ..though I actually didn't it seems (it's kind of like accomplishing something in a dream).

"women do kabalisticaly give life... first of all. thats why they become nidah"- Well, they give the sperm their only chance for survival, but they don't originate life..(but, yes, in reality they're obviously the ones that have babies).

"talmud says...talmud says"- I don't suppose you can source that, because I'm almost 100% sure it doesn't say the second one the way you're phrasing it (hey, I actually have a post about women rabbis!).

"a woman's yeitzer doesn't over power her until she meets someone she trusts, then it wiggs out and goes into overdrive"- Yeah, I've heard of that and find that phenomenon very interesting. I've heard there are women whose sexual drive actually grows when they're married and getting into their 30's...

Looking Forward said...

the first thing that comes to mind is that the nefesh hachayunis lives in the blood, and tanya states that everything red in the body (including and especialy blood) is from the woman, hence the woman actualy provides the baby with life...

though the truth is all of that was based off of faulty medicine and talmud says that its assur to rely on the medicine of previous generations (mashma because its wrong, and medicine continualy improves)

so it got included in a sefer? who cares.

medicaly, 99.99 percent of the material and all of the machinary in the zygote comes from mommy, all dady contributes is half the genome.

and get this, you can make a baby out of two ova, you can not make a baby out of two sperm of any sort.

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

Ha, it must be something abut you; again I thought I responded to this! ..or maybe it's something about me...! : @

Either way,

"..and tanya states that everything red in the body (including and especialy blood) is from the woman"- He quoted that from the Gemara.

"talmud says that its assur to rely on the medicine of previous generations (mashma because its wrong, and medicine continualy improves)"- Seems like you don't like the word the" that much ("talmud says"). The Talmud doesn't say that and wouldn't say that. From what I understand that statement is from the responsa of Sherira Gaon and Hai Gaon. They were asked if makes sense to use the remedies found in the Talmud, that were written in the pre-Islamic period in Iraq, where medical knowledge wasn't as prevalent as in the era of the later Gaonim. They answered that "the rabbis were not doctors" and had the Amoraim seen the medical improvements of modern (Islamic) science they would have agreed. ...that's actually a long story in itself..

"so it got included in a sefer? who cares"- wha??

"medicaly, 99.99 percent of the material and all of the machinary in the zygote comes from mommy, all dady contributes is half the genome"- That's like saying "look, I can create life because I genetically engineer plant seeds." Yes, but you could do nothing without a seed.

"and get this, you can make a baby out of two ova'- Definitely never heard of that before! .I'll have to look into it..

By the way, what's up with the blocked profile? I'd rather have some idea of ho people are..

Looking Forward said...

i'm chana's fiance. :)

my blog is here: Http://yonirants.blogspot.com

הצעיר שלמה בן רפאל לבית שריקי ס"ט said...

Oh, Yoni, what's up (I comment sometimes). That's kind of funny you two should be talking about this, then. Though in that case you should be agreeing with me! You're a guy!

...you guys didn't meet through blogs, did you? ..cause if you did the whole Chanan/Elisheva thing is overrated!