Proofreading, part 27

[hatam_soferet]

Of course, people say “um, no actually” to me, being female. It wasn’t the handless guy’s fault he had no hands, it’s not my fault I’m female. He just didn’t have the physical makeup to write a valid Torah and that was too bad; I don’t have the physical makeup to write a valid Torah and that’s too bad also.

Really, I do know a lot of decent people who have to say “um, no actually” to me, and they do act like yesterday’s posited rabbi – feeling really sorry that he’s got to say “um, no actually” to this person who’s put in so much effort and so badly wants to be part of the community and it isn’t their fault they can’t participate through this activity.

So why’s it different? why am I expecting the handless guy and the Braille-writer to suck it up, while I go right ahead and write Torahs?

You could say I’m just a hypocrite, a case of “one rule for us, one rule for them.” Some people do say that. I see where they’re coming from.

Way I see it, women doing men’s things isn’t exactly a physical makeup thing, it’s about how gender affects one’s communal status. Women are barred from Torah writing in the context of societal strata; some classes of people may participate, some may not. In particular, the full citizen, the adult male in good standing, may participate in the transmission of the community’s symbolic centre, and the adjunct classes of women, children, and slaves, may not.

This is perfectly sensible as far as it goes, except that in our days it is a matter of principle that women not be an adjunct class.

Such a statement requires some unpacking. More on that tomorrow.

Mirrored from hasoferet.com.

Comments

[pseudomonas]

Hmm. Why do you see it as being the case that having an atypical physical makeup isn't about communal status?

I mean, I get that this guy is writing in a qualitatively different way to you; but if you have no hands then that's a reasonable way to do one's writing, just as if you're not right-handed it's reasonable to write with your left hand. I wonder how much the boundaries are drawn with a concept in mind of "able-bodied = proper". Reminded of the rules about birkat cohanim &c. here.

[hatam_soferet]

Mhm, thanks for pushing me to clarify.

having an atypical physical makeup isn't about communal status

I don't think I quite meant to say that. Atypical physical status bars you from writing on the grounds of "what-you're-doing-isn't-really-writing." Communal status bars you from writing on the grounds of "we-don't-want-you-writing-our-texts." Gender could fit into either box.

Able-bodied privilege means I want to say that atypical physical status doesn't fit into the we-don't-want-you box, but you're right about birkat cohanim, the discussion there is fairly blatantly able-bodied privilege having a field day.

It might be about statistics - enough people are left-handed that we agree lefty writing is still writing, and being lefty isn't seen as a (halakhic) disability anyway, but so few people write with their mouths that it's too anomalous?

Bounce ideas with me. Does any of that make any sense?

[pseudomonas]

It kind of makes sense - I conceded that in my comment above when I said that it was qualitatively different. I just have a suspicion that (in a socio-halachic environment where the birkat kohanim thing is just fine) variations in writing practice that are due to disability are going to be less prestigious and more stigmatized.

I mean, it could be a statistics thing too, but my guess is that it's more due to whether a legislator thinks that it's a reasonable way to write, and it's easier imagining being left-handed than it is imagining being no-handed.