I’ve already written a couple of times about how the victim mentality is directly responsible for some of the worst atrocities against humanity.

The post How Ingratitude Leads to Genocide goes into particular detail regarding the victim mentality inherent among the WWII Nazis.

But now I want to revisit the topic with a more personal spin.

______________________________
This is an issue I’ve thought about a lot because growing up liberal and secular in America's Eighties, we were conditioned to think according to the victim mentality.

And it wasn’t just that we were supposed to consider ourselves as victims, but we were also conditioned to look at “the story” motivating anyone who committed terrible acts.

Any kind of therapy or mediation always encouraged the victim to “understand” and eventually forgive those who’d victimized him or her by realizing that the abusers were once victims themselves.

And as a victim, any deed is excusable—or even heroic in some cases—including murder.
____________________________

Let me share some true stories with you:

Murderous Terrorist or Nice Girl? It All Depends!

After Israeli soldiers correctly shot dead a knife-wielding terrorista from Jabal Mukaber (the recent truck-ramming, which slaughtered 4 Jews, was also committed by a Jabal Mukaberite), a resident from that village came up to my husband at work. 

In a deeply pained voice, the resident said, “Why did they have to kill her? I knew her and she was such a nice girl! She didn’t mean anything by it, she wasn’t going to hurt anybody. Why did they have to kill her?”

Well, Mohammad, they killed her because that is the appropriate response toward anyone who is threatening to plunge a butcher knife into your own personal flesh.

Or, in Leftistspeak, she was violating the soldiers’ “safe space.”
HA!

Only someone with a victim mentality would see a knife-wielding Jew-hater as the victim instead of the perpetrator.

On a visit to America, my 2.5-year-old was struggling to be freed from the grocery cart I had him seat-belted in. We were in line already, so I felt fine taking him out as long as he stayed near me and didn’t touch or take anything. I made this clear to him, stating that the consequence of disobedience would be a return to the grocery cart seat. 

Anyway, he headed straight for a nearby candy display, flipped open the lid of one of the clear plastic containers, and grabbed some toffees.

“No,” I said. “That’s stealing. No-no. Assur.”

Then I picked him up and put him back in the grocery cart seat.

His reaction was to start hollering because he was always like Rambo since he was very young, and Rambo wouldn’t take such treatment lying down, either.

My son was clearly not in any pain or trauma, but just outraged at being restrained from his toffee target.

(Think how Rambo might feel if he was restrained from gunning down Commies.)

Anyway, I was uncomfortable with my child making a scene at the grocery store, but I didn’t see what other choice I had and I knew these things happen sometimes and that it would be over soon.

In other words: No big deal.

But at that moment, a teenage boy dressed like those scary ghetto gangstas sidled up to me and mumbled, “Let ‘im down, why dontchya? Let ‘im go. C’mon! C’mon, be nice. Can’t you see he’s cryin’? Why you pickin’ on him like that? Let ’im go right now!”

His friends gathered around behind him.

This was really intimidating, but I went to school with some kids like them and I knew what he was thinking: Mean mommy—just like mine!

Because they hadn’t seen mothers discipline children—they’d only seen mothers abuse their children—they couldn’t see that I was actually being good to my child.

So I gently (and somewhat naively) explained to the hapless gansta that I wasn’t forcing my child to sit in the cart for no reason, but that my son tried to snatch some candy and needed to learn not to do that. “I want him to learn from a young age not to steal,” I concluded.

But the young gangsta gave me a quick and confused sneer before whining out, “Whaddo I care about that? I don’ care ’bout that! Whad ’re you sayin’?” and then continued to whiningly mumble at me to release my child.

It was weird; it’s like he didn’t hear a word I said. He kept on this long stream of whiny monotone “C’mon, just do it…whadda you care? Jus’ led ’im go, eh?,” etc.

I started to feel bullied at that point. And bullies always tick me off.

“He’s not allowed to steal!” I said. “He’s a good boy and he needs to learn not to steal. He’s not in pain or agony, he’s just mad because he wants the toffees. That’s why he’s crying.”

But the gangsta-wannabee just kept up his monotone mumbling, lifting his chin and jutting out his lower lip as he did so.

Now, even though I was starting to get angry, I was also kind of nervous because I didn’t know if they would hit me or push me and I was wondering how long I could stand my ground before I would be forced to release “Rambo” from the grocery cart to avoid assault from his clueless supporters.

Fortunately, the thug gave up before I did, shot out a few choice words my way, then he and his friends sidled off.

My first thoughts were: “Whew!—Thanks, God!” and “I’m never shopping here again!”

Okay, so any objective observer would describe the situation as a young mommy being harassed in front of her young child by a group of unsavory young male bucks. In addition, their behavior would traditionally be considered unmanly and unchivalrous by any civilized person.

But they clearly saw themselves as brave activists standing against the abuse of a helpless child.

Why? Because that is how they see themselves. They are victims, they are themselves powerless children—even though at their age and size, they could kill anyone who tried to hurt them.

But they are the innocent powerless victimized children.

So that gives them (in their mind) the right to gang up on a young mother who is calmly yet firmly inculcating necessary values into her child.
_______________________________________
The Line between Victim and Victimizer
And this is very, very important to note:

All the evil people you can think of have been traumatized.

Serial killers, dictators, sociopaths, and so on—they’ve all experienced poor parenting, abuse of some kind, and so on.

The problem is that at some point, they crossed the line between being a survivor struggling against PTSD and a victim who then turns into a victimizer, using his or her victimhood to justify the victimization of others.

We can have sympathy, compassion, and support for people who have been traumatized and struggle with unwanted yet triggered emotions.

But when those same people act on those emotions to target people who have not and will not hurt them or anybody else, then they’ve crossed the line and have become a victimizer and a bad person.

(Yet they can always cross back and hopefully they will.)

I have one final very sharp story about this.

Killer or Savior? When the Victim Turns Victimizer

There was a man who’d been arrested for killing his baby daughter.

How did this happen?

Well, he’d grown up with horrific abuse of all kinds, like he was violated by his stepfather when he was only four. And not just one time, either.

Tragically, this man married a woman just like his horrible mother and they had a daughter together. He saw that his wife was neglectful and abusive and kept trying to get help from the various social services that are supposed to help with these situations.

But no help was forthcoming.

(Likely, they saw his situation as less urgent because they are dealing with many cases in which the child has no caring adult around and he, the father, was obviously caring and involved, so his situation wouldn’t be an immediate priority for them.)

One day, he came home from work to find his baby daughter screaming in her crib with a soiled and overflowing diaper. When he picked her up, he noticed a red handprint on her back, clearly slapped there by the mother. And the mother was nowhere to be seen.

Filled with his own pain at all the abuse he’d suffered and desperate not to let his daughter suffer the same, he killed her on the spot with his bare hands.

During his court trial, he was asked what was running through his mind at the exact moment he’d killed his baby girl?

He replied with complete sincerity and tears, “That I loved her.”

Well, he got 25 years, which was a very light sentence considering the crime.

Now, I think we’d all agree that until the crucial moment, he was a decent father. I don’t know all the details, but he was clearly looking to protect his daughter and get help, he was aware that the mother’s behavior was unacceptable, and he was trying to change the situation.

So why did he kill his baby girl?

Because he couldn’t stop seeing himself as the victim.

Inside the head of this fully grown and able-bodied man, he was still that victimized little boy with no one around to rescue him. There is no question that his was an ugly and painful situation to be in. Who can deny that? But in seeing himself as a victim, he couldn’t see himself as a potential hero—or even as someone who could at least somewhat improve his and his daughter’s situation—which meant that he couldn’t see any other options for how to care for and protect his daughter.

Ultimately, this led to him committing infanticide on his own child.

(Note: The Rambam says that as long as one is alive, one should try to atone for even the worst sin, including murder. This means that if one took life out of the world, then one should do something to bring life into the world or to save lives. For example, if a person took another person's life and was not punished with execution, then that is Hashem's way of allowing for some kind of atonement. Such a person could become a doctor, a midwife, a paramedic, build a hospital, donate generously to Efrat the Jewish pro-life organization, etc., to atone for having destroyed a life.)
 
Replacing a Victim Mentality with Emuna - Or At Least Trying To
Realistically speaking, I do not know if all trauma can be healed.
And certainly, no human being can ever be perfect. We all are going to fall on our faces at times, no matter how hard we try.

Furthermore, genuine victimization exists.
A person being mugged at gunpoint, a wife or child being beaten, an employee faced with being publicly and unjustly harangued by a superior or being fired, an "infidel" being pursued by a determined terrorist (or by weapons of terror)—these are all examples of genuine victimization.
 
But victimhood as a set mentality ultimately leads to the worst.
 
Because of this, it’s important to fight it—and find alternatives to it, like developing an emuna mentality—as much as possible.

May Hashem grant each of us the ability to see the world through eyes of emuna and not through the eyes of a victim.

Part I|Part 2
________________

Over Chanukah, we attended a bar mitzvah in Tiveria (Tiberias).

The parents of the bar mitzvah were of Moroccan-Tunisian decent and define themselves as “shomer Torah and mitzvot”—which neatly avoids all the other labels (chareidi, chareidi-dati leumi, religious Zionist, traditional, etc.) and all the philosophical implications inherent in those labels.

It was a spacious hall and there was a mechitzah (partition separating men and women) with plenty of room for dining and dancing on both sides.

To get to the men’s side, you needed to cross through the women’s side and there was a very wide aisle between two rows of tables to facilitate this.

Due to the parents’ families and the connections they’ve made in Tiveria, the guest comprised a wide swathe of the religious spectrum.

You had secular Jews who looked extremely secular (including one woman who was dressed as if she might be auditioning for a Vegas show at any second), secular-looking traditional Jews who went out of their way to dress appropriately for religious simchas, and Orthodox Jews ranging from nominally Orthodox to I-Just-Stepped-Out-of-Mea-Shearim Orthodox (with the men wearing their black pants tucked into white socks just under the knee and the women in the oval-shaped turbans colloquially known as "avocados").

And everyone got along!

Everyone seemed happy to see each other and was generally in a good mood.

And this kind of thing isn’t newsworthy.

You know why?

Because this is how things usually play out.

Everyone is normal and friendly, despite external differences.

No one threw rocks or bleach.

No one protested religious coercion.

Everyone davened the Evening Prayer Service together.

Everyone said “Amen” together at the Chanukah candle-lighting.

One of the Mea Shearim-looking ladies came over to the bar mitzvah boy’s grandmother and gushed about how the bar mitzvah boy’s father was so committed to learning b’chevruta with her husband every single day. “Every day!” she enthused. “I’m not exaggerating! Your son-in-law has amazing dedication! And my husband just loves learning with him!”

Yet if you read newspapers and blogs, you would think it is impossible for a Yiddish-speaking chassid and a Moroccan-Tunisian baal teshuvah lawyer to spend so much quality time together and enjoy it.

You'd think that the chassidish woman would sit off at the side feeling quietly superior rather than going over to the Moroccan grandmother to connect and activate positive feelings among family members.

The bar mitzvah boy’s classmates also reflected unity across the lines.

With all the uproars about discrimination in some religious schools, people overlook the schools that are chareidi-run yet accept everybody. These schools feel beholden to do so because if they don’t, those children may not receive a proper Torah education.

So some of the bar mitzvah classmates wore black suits and black hats. Some wore colored suits with knit kippahs. Some wore button-down shirts with nice pants and knit kippahs. And some wore football shirts with jeans and a kippah balanced over a short Mohawk (these are usually kids from either secular or freshly frum families whose parents were convinced to ensure their children received a solid religious education).

And these boys all got along; no one was snickering behind his hand or making fun from either side of the religious fence. In fact, they all seemed like really good friends.

I’ve seen this kind of thing all the time.

The sinat chinam and incitement are not coming from the average Jew.

Most Jews want to get along. Most Jews want to like each other.

And that’s all I wanted to say.
_________________________
Part I|Part 2

At one point, I found myself with a lot of time on my hands.

So I decided that I would start learning all the Mikraot Gedolot (Rashi, Seforno, Rashbam, Ramban, Ohr Hachaim, Kli Yakar, Ibn Ezra, Baal Haturim, etc.) on the parsha each week.

Ha!

Not surprisingly, it only took a few weeks to discover that I had bitten off way more than I could ever chew, but 2 very good things came out of it:

1. I discovered the poetic beauty and wisdom of the Kli Yakar.
2. I learned how to look at things from a Torah perspective.

Regarding #2:
I realized that regardless of their cultural or economic background or era, the Sages had a common method for interpretation.

• They aimed to understand what the verse really meant.
• They aimed to understand what the Torah wants to teach us.
• They leaned toward a positive spin.

For example, with Hagar’s poor behavior toward Sara Imeinu, the Sages labeled it as wrong while at the same time defending Hagar’s intentions as basically good. In fact, the Ohr Hachaim goes into this whole Talmudic exposition basically explaining how Hagar simply misunderstood the halacha.

In other words, Jewish Sages interpret events according to their context.

Did great people make mistakes?

Yes.

Did that mean they weren’t great or that they were even, chas v’shalom, evil?

No.

Who is this person and what is the Torah saying about him or her?

What is the Torah trying to teach us?

The only way to understand anything in Torah is to set aside one’s cultural context, one’s own background, and one’s ego, and expand the mind to make room for the Torah’s wisdom to trickle in.

Omigosh, God! That is, like, SOOOO offensive!!!
One of the incredibly annoying and mind-shrinking aspects of the Conservative Judaism movement is its insistence on bringing even the greatest Torah personalities down to the level of, say, a typical Jewish Red Sox fan in New Jersey. Or whatever.

The small-minded person reads the Torah and asks, “Well, what would I mean if I said that? What would be my motivations for doing that? Hey, this reminds me of what my teacher in sixth grade (or my dad) used to do or say, and I HATED that!!! So I hate this Torah personality or commandment too!!!”

Me, me, me, me.

This is when people get offended by Judaism.

Instead of trying to understand the Torah or the Sages on the Torah’s own terms, they remain trapped within the limitations of their own mind and experiences and can’t get out.

*I had to struggle with this personally because being raised in secular liberal cultural meant that there was overwhelming social conditioning to view Judaism through an extremely narrow and subjective lens, and then get mortally offended by anything that didn't fit exactly into that into that teeny space (a teeny space which was deceptively portrayed as a wide expanse).

A Deeper Look: The Great Benefit of Being Bothered
Of course, this doesn’t mean you can’t be bothered by something.

You can be bothered by an issue in Torah or Chazal (Sages).

It's even helpful to get bothered by an issue in Torah or Chazal!

Why? Because it’s supposed to motivate people to look more deeply and research the topic, not slam the book shut and say, “How misogynistic! How racist! How primitive! Now I must Tweet out my rage to all my followers and then calm down by watching bad reality show auditions on YouTube and sneer at the losers while exchanging lewd jokes with my latest boyfriend via Instagram! Yeah, I’m the modern superior me and not like those primitives in the Torah! Woo-hoo!”

A deeper look at anything that bothers you in Torah eventually reveals powerful truths. And parts that seem insensitive or ignorant at first glance actually posses great sensitivity and wisdom.

People who study Torah with the sincere desire to be influenced by it start to see how their very thought process changes and improves.

*Note: This is a general truth. For example, just because someone learns Torah all the time doesn't mean he is influenced by it. A left-brained intellectual type could learn Torah the way those same types learn Philosophy or Neuroscience, and not internalize Torah values properly.
In Judaism, actual desire and intention are king.

And then when you read or hear something irksome, instead of automatically feeling appalled, offended, or disdainful, you find yourself wondering what the writer or speaker actually meant.

You step outside of your head and take a peek into theirs.
For example:

• Maybe you realize that the idea is amusing because…it’s actually a joke and not meant to be taken literally.
• Maybe you realize that the idea is correct and you need to internalize it.
• Maybe you realize that the idea is wrong, but the speaker or writer is on the right track and just needs some gentle guidance to get to the right place.

When Denial Goes Glatt
Another example:
In Garden of Emuna, Rav Shalom Arush discusses how Avraham Avinu was in a state of simcha (defined by the Malbim as a perpetual state of spiritual joy) as he went to carry out the famous “binding of Isaac.”

Now, can I personally relate to this?

No.

However, can I at least intellectually understand that someone who regularly communes directly with God in the exalted state of nevuah/prophecy and has access to profound insight and the reasons for everything, someone for whom Olam Haba and death aren’t theoretical ideas (or a truly final end), but very real spiritual places where we all end up eventually (i.e, he’ll see Yitzchak again), someone who realizes that his son won’t truly die and who knows without any doubt that Hashem knows exactly what He is doing and is running the world perfectly in away that is only good—can I understand that someone like that could be in a state of simcha upon carrying out such a command, even though emotionally, I cannot at all relate to that level?

Yes!

And yet…in my experience, every single person who rejected and wholly dismissed Rav Shalom Arush’s book cited this very episode as the reason.

“Avraham Avinu couldn’t have been b’simcha at that moment,” they say. “That’s impossible!”

Seriously. Ask anyone who didn’t like or was not inspired by the book, and they will cite this particular section as the reason.

(As if a bush that burns but is not consumed is possible. Or living in the digestive system in a large fish for a few days. It just shows how painful the concept is for some if people believe in the truly miraculous feats in Tanach, but not in this.)

Now, all these people (as far as I know) have suffered in life. They are disappointed and frustrated, and legitimately so.

Furthermore, many people are afraid to face their true feelings about God:

• They are angry at Him, afraid of Him, feel like He’s out to get them, feel betrayed by Him, feel hurt by Him, and so on.
• They don’t want to develop a relationship with Hashem or start talking to him because they don’t trust Him.
• They’re afraid of what they’ll discover.
• They’re afraid of all their repressed pain and memories.

These responses are quite understandable in light of the suffering and trauma so many have experienced. However, pretending these issues away will ultimately make life worse.

So regarding the one book that actually addresses all the painful and thorny issues holding people back from strengthening their emuna and connecting to God…it's dismissed from beginning to end based on this one issue.

And in this way, the reader needn’t feel any push to do anything advised in the book (and advised for millennia by Chazal).

And because it “can’t” be true, they don’t feel the need to check whether Rav Shalom’s assertion is true.

Remember when we said that feeling bothered by something in Torah or Chazal merely means you should research it more thoroughly?

Well, a quick perusal through the main commentaries reveals the following on Beresheit [Genesis]22:6:
Rashi: “Avraham…was going with desire and simcha…” to bind Yitzchak.

So rather than looking into it, people who are otherwise very religious and educated dismiss the idea out of hand, as if it couldn’t be true.

Without realizing it, they condemn Rav Shalom as wrong; he just doesn’t understand.

The problem is that Rav Shalom isn’t making stuff up, Rashi says it.

Is Rashi wrong? Does Rashi simply not understand? Is Rashi just one of those “wacky Breslovers”?

Of course, such people then reply, “Well, we can’t know what Rashi really meant because, you know, Rashi was just so great, it’s beyond our comprehension.” Or, “He means something different.” Or they go into total self-contradiction and say, “Well, that was Avraham Avinu. But we can’t reach that level.”

(Wait a sec…didn’t you just say that Avraham Avinu couldn’t have been b’simcha? And now you say, oh sure he was!)

Honesty and Humility Lead to Amazing Growth

• You can say you don’t understand.
• You can say that something bothers you.
• You can say that you can’t imagine.

What’s wrong with saying all that?

That’s honest and by being honest, you give yourself room to grow.

Saying, “I’m on a low level and I can’t relate to such lofty concepts or to such great people” is humble and leads one to conclude, “So I guess I’d better learn more about it all. Or ask for help. Or struggle on as best I can!”

On the other hand, where can you go after saying, “I personally cannot relate to this and don’t think like that, therefore, the lofty concepts and great people just aren’t possible and don’t exist”?

Personally, I definitely don’t want to inhabit any world that is as small as I am.

I want room to grow.

LOTS of room!

Being Bothered by Something in Torah: A Gadol's Response
Rav Schach was bothered by the Sages’ condemnation of Yaakov for hiding Dina from Esav.

Yes, he was one of the gedolei hador and something in Tanach bothered him!

And understandably so. Who wasn't at least a little disturbed upon learning that particular Chazal?

He brought up some very good support for Yaakov’s actions by pointing to how responsible and caring parents want only the best spouse for their child.

And of course Yaakov would hate the idea of his daughter marrying and evil and corrupt beast like Esav. YUCK!

So Rav Schach concludes that Yaakov’s mistake was not feeling bad enough about blocking the shidduch for Esav. Meaning, he should have loved Esav enough to feel like, “I’d love for Esav to marry such a wonderful girl and possibly do teshuvah, but I just can’t do that to my daughter.”

And that's what Chazal criticizes Yaakov for.

(I’m paraphrasing here as I do not have access to the book at this time.)

Looking at Things in Context: The Key to a Happier Life
Needless to say, I don’t manage a Torah perspective in every situation.

Sometimes, I just don’t know how.

But the point is, just asking: “What does he/she/it really mean?” can transform a situation and how you feel about it and lead you to the truth of the matter.

Just the thought of that one question automatically prevents outrage, unnecessarily negative judgments, hurt feelings, and lashon hara.

May God grant us all the insight to understand what things really mean.

I've neglected the Aliyah section for so long now, which wasn't my intention when I first started it.

Anyway, it has an update with what's hopefully a helpful new article:
The Beginner's Guide to Shopping in Israel (Tips and Products!)

When I first made aliyah, I found it so frustrating to be faced with either Israeli or European brands I'd never heard of before and not knowing which to use, including ending up with some real lemons (like dishwashing liquid that smelled like rotten eggs and wouldn't rinse off completely, leaving an invisible scum on my pots and dishes, which quickly became visible upon attracting dirt particles from the busy street right outside our apartment).

My only other option was to go to inconveniently located stores to buy the now pricey American brands with which I was familiar.

The first part of the post is filled with my disclaimers (like I haven't been outside of Eretz Yisrael in over a decade, so my standards may be very different from that of a fresh arrival from Brooklyn). But I describe my experience with the product and hopefully, you can make a good decision based on that.

So just scroll down to get to the product list, which is organized in alphabetical order by subject (ie. Bed Linens, Cleaning Products, etc.)

The post also offers sponja tips to make life easier!

You may discover that there are products that you just can't find an Israeli/European alternative for (like roll-on deodorant), but at least you'll have more clarity.

(If you already discovered the post, I added new stuff just now regarding winter bed linens and spray-on deodorants. So click HERE to take look at the update.)

Good luck and may you settle into your ancestral Homeland smoothly and successfully!

When I was in high school jazz choir, we were invited to attend an informal jazz performance at a music college.

One of the boys in our group (let’s call him Linus) was the kind of guy you might remember from your high school days: He was good at completely platonic friendships with girls.
Not particularly hot-blooded or attractive—in fact, he was kind of scruffy and pockmarked—he was comfortable with and accepting of the female personality; he was good-humored and never sleazy.

In other words, he was totally harmless.

(And no, it wasn’t because he was secretly attracted to his own gender.)

For girls, this made him safe and comfortable to be around.

Anyway, we were seated in the auditorium when the first singer plodded onto stage.

We stared at her a moment and then exchanged nonplussed looks with each other.

With a solid build and hardly any neck, she looked like Mr. Potato Head in maroon blouse and a denim skirt. Her armpit-length straggly brown hair looked like it hadn’t been washed in ages.
(Yes, I know I sound catty, but there is a point to all this, so please bear with me.)
She also wore no makeup, which is unheard of when performing on stage.

She slouched in front of the microphone, a morose and bored look on her face.
It was announced that she would be singing, “You are My Sunshine,” one of my favorite childhood songs. I fully expected the cute, light-hearted jazz rendition, à la The Andrews Sisters, although I wondered how this despondent-looking singer would pull that off.

But then she closed her eyes and started humming.

And her head started lolling around with abandon as if it might just roll off her stumpy little neck at any moment.
(And yes, that was kind of shocking and grotesque.)

But her humming…

WHOA.

That was the sultriest humming I’d ever heard and her voice was absolutely captivating—even as a hum.

I looked around to see if I was the only one affected and noticed everyone else gaped-mouthed and looking around for the same reason I was. The boys were either frozen in place or squirming and trying to suppress their sheepish smiles.

Linus was leaning forward, his eyes and mouth frozen wide open.

Then the singer’s head rolled backwards and her mouth dropped open as the melody bloomed out of her throat.

It was amazing.

At that, Linus grabbed the arm of the girl sitting next to him and said, “I MUST HAVE THAT WOMAN.”

Wide-eyed, she looked at him and said, “Okay, Linus, but I’m not her!”

The performance continued and when it ended, the singer slumped back into her morose persona and we gave her a standing ovation.

The guys were all looking at each other with little embarrassed smiles like, What the heck just happened?  How’d SHE do THAT?

Linus recovered enough to turn to me and say, “You have to help me find a way to meet her. Come with me backstage.”
_____________________________________________
The point is that people sometimes get worked up about the limitations Judaism places on women’s behavior when men are around. And the halachic insight that “kol isha erva” (“a woman’s [singing] voice is unchaste”), which leads to the prohibition of women singing in front of men and of men listening to a woman singing, is one such limitation that some people find unnecessarily repressive.

Note: "Erva" is the same word used to refer to body parts that need to be covered (whether male or female), a married woman's hair (which needs to be covered), and a woman's voice, particularly her singing voice.

(Interestingly, these same people rarely find Judaism’s strict limitations on men’s actual thoughts—in addition to the limitations placed on their behavior—to be repressive.)

But there is clearly a certain power in a woman’s singing voice that is so strong that it can move male emotions in a certain way, even if the rest of the package isn’t there (as in the case of the morose, greasy-haired singer above)—and even if it’s just humming.

And that’s all I wanted to say.
 
(P.S. Some Hebrew words are so complicated to translate properly. If anyone has a better translation for “erva,” I’d be very grateful.)