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.

[liv]

This is very brilliant. Did you plan it from when you started your proofreading series, or did it just happen? I really do like the analogies you're drawing here, though.

[hatam_soferet]

It's one of those things that rumble along in the undercurrents, and it seemed to fit here, so I wrote about it here.

I'm kind of surprised you're okay with it - this is the area I'm most worried that Hai Yore Privilige is Showin, and you're the person most likely to point that out to me. I guess I'm not doing as badly as I thought I might be.

[(Anonymous)]

I see where you are coming from regarding the braille Torah. However, as far as someone writing a Torah with pen in teeth, I don't see how that should be disqualifying, and I wonder--if the shayla went to a different rabbi, would the answer have been yes, it's kosher.

Ruth

[hatam_soferet]

Oh, quite possibly. It makes sense to me because in some sense the Torah scroll is linked to communal experience, and as well as writing with the teeth being waaay out there on the fringe of conceivable, in a way it's saying a) we think having no hands is a lechathilah way of being b) wild ways of engaging should be made part of the central narrative. Both of which are very dicey territory; I can see a rabbi wanting to play it safe.

[liv]

I'm not an expert on that stuff, by any means. The trouble is that the baseline is so ridiculously low; I'm pretty happy when someone manages to mention a situation involving disability without talking about how that impairment must be worse than death (wow, I'd rather die than have no hands and have to write with a pen in my teeth!) or what a horrible burden disabled people are on society (isn't it terrible that the community is obliged to feed and clothe such a useless person when he can't even contribute by writing halachically valid Torahs!)

In some ways I'd really like to use the no-hands guy's Torah in my community, because it would be such a powerful statement. And yes, it would be a bit like the way that some non-halachic communities have comissioned you just because you're female. (Originally I thought it would be great to use the blind guy's Torah too, but then I realized that the only possible use for it would be as a teaching tool to point out what makes a Torah pasul, and that would definitely be worse than refusing to use it at all due to the hundreds of critical errors per column.)