29 April 2006

Equal pay

"If I had abilities, capabilities that the male sex did not, then I found it imperative to discover the power of those parts of me, why I was endowed with them, and what they meant. While my professor’s idea of a powerful woman was one who could hardly be distinguished from a man, I wanted to celebrate the differences inherent in the sexes rather than diminish them." I Am Woman, by Sara Esther Crispe

Man has the requirement (p'ru ur'vu "be fruitful and multiply") to have children, while woman does not. Women have no obligation whatsoever to marry and have children; it's all on the man's shoulders. I'm not sure where I'm going with this - I think this is more random thoughts than anything articulate - but in my mind it relates to infertility. Somehow. Why do we have the ability to carry and give birth to children (jyah, generalizing here, big time) while men do not, yet men are the ones with the obligation? Wouldn't it make more sense that women are required to have children? In Judaism, one cannot be obligated to do something that can be considered life-threatening, and since we all know that pregnancy and childbirth can indeed be life-threatening (anyone read Julie's blog?!), women cannot be obligated to have to children.

If only the desire could be mitigated as easily as the obligation.

2 Comments:

At 29/4/06 9:36 PM, Blogger Lut C. said...

Oh, if only!

 
At 1/5/06 11:20 PM, Blogger Just another Jenny said...

Very interesting. Even outside religion, I have found it is deemed "something a man does" when a woman gets pregnant.
How true about the desire!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home