The Meeting Between The Knees And The Skirt That Never Happened

"We have women who believe sincerely and wholeheartedly in Hashem but who walk into Shul wearing skirts that do not even approach their knees."

Rabbi of a major Jewish community in the NY area. Very frum:).

Something I have wondered about a long time and will probably never figure out. At a non-Jewish wedding the bride is only very partially covered [I stress the cup that is a quarter full] but the groom is always completely covered. If he would dress like her he would be wearing a tank top [with really loooong pants]. But that never happens. Why do women feel a need to show their bodies but not men? I have NEVER had the urge to show my knees or my arms but it seems that for many women this is a real nisayon. I needed to further research this question so I asked my daughter, the holiest Beis Yaakov girl since the lifetime of the namesake of the Beis Yaakov movement [Yaakov Avinu], the light of the Seven Days of Creation, if she understands this phenomenon. She told me that she doesn't. She, like her father, has zero need to reveal what is covered. Oh well. [She doesn't read this blog so she won't see this. She doesn't use Internet. Another reason that she is holier than I am...:)]

I am not making light of the test. If so many women have this issue then there is something to it. Many a husband is extremely bothered by his wife's dress but he knows not to say anything because if he does it is tantamount to telling a woman how to dress [actually - it IS telling a woman how to dress] and most women don't particularly appreciate that. Many a wife tells a husband "You dress however you want and let me dress however I want" [not appreciating that she couldn't care less how he is dressed but he genuinely cares how she is dressed. Incidentally, for shalom bayis purposes it is usually better to say nothing. This is a topic that would necessitate a different post].

I will say this: There should really be nothing attractive, logically, about a woman's legs. It is just flesh, blood, tendons, bones and whatever else is in there ["fibulas"? I know that athletes sometimes injure their fibulas]. But the yetzer hara doesn't work on logic. So the way Chazal phrased it was שוק באשה ערוה - Which would translate into Modern Hebrew as "Being shocked with a woman is nakedness" but in Rabbinic Hebrew it means that a women's legs are [forbidden] nakedness and may not be seen by men [excluding the doctor when a little baby girl is born. He screams "It's a girl and she has thighs" and then looks away].

Here is the question that many rabbis have done a tremendous amount of "leg work" trying to decide. What is the שוק? From the knee and above or from the knee and below. If it is the knee and below that means socks or stockings to cover the lower part. If it means above the knee then just a skirt until the knees is necessary. [One big posek was asked and refused to rule. He was accused of "skirting the issue". I like, completely made that up. Just wanted to get a laff. Why the "ugh" at the end of laugh??]

The Mishna Brura [known as "The Mishna Brura" or "The Chofetz Chaim"] was lenient but many other authorities emphatically held that it means that even beneath the knee must be covered. I, little me, am not on the level to have an opinion but I can say that I am certain that the Chofetz Chaim would be delighted if women were stringent.

Modesty is a special Jewish value. [I am aware that Muslim women also cover up but a Jewish women's modesty comes with a special "chein" that seems to be absent in the Suharra's of the world.]

Just a summer message to help women's bodies not become the object of male desires. It is dehumanizing to women - and in my opinion - even more so to men.