Rabbi, My husband wants a Blowjob: A Halachic Analysis of Fellatio in Jewish Marital Intimacy (Marital sexuality and Halacha) (Volume 1) Paperback – August 11, 2014

Why I love Judaism. Don’t forget the sequel: Rabbi, My Husband Wants Anal Sex: An Halachic Analysis of Anal Sex within the bounds of Jewish marital intimacy (Marital sexuality and Halacha) (Volume 2)

* Fellatio in Halacha:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
Within the guidelines of halacha as presented by chazal and early rabbinic authorities, fellatio is classified as ביאה דרך איברים Penetration by way of the limbs) or מעשה חידודים בעלמא (General acts of sharpening).

Peripheral Halachic discussion of the topic revolves upon whether or not a husband may engage in varying sexually-gratifying acts with his wife – of which include fellatio – performed up to and including a complete extra-vaginal ejaculation.

The discussion includes the opinion of the permitting-authorities limiting their permit to specific frequencies and timings with the consensus being that any halachic-permit (“hetter”) is solely applicable within the exclusive framework of a Torah-permitted marital relationship and strictly during the time that one’s wife is not in her Niddah state.

The original Hebrew text of the mishna torah of the Rambam as translated by Yosef Qafih shows the rambam takes a lenient approach that permits all that a man desires to do with his wife. The presentation omits the customary prohibition on extracting semen in vain, which Qafih quarantines as an addition by a subsequent unknown editor. The Rambam’s commentary to the mishna likewise hints at a lenient stance[1]

On occasion[edit]
Although chazal have in certain instances permitted intentional extra-vaginal ejaculation in tandem with one’s wife.[2] Tosefot cites the opinion of Rabbi Yitzchak (Isaac ben Samuel) who permits an occasional complete extra-vaginal ejaculation with one’s wife on condition that one does not accustom himself to always doing so (Tosfoth, Yebamoth 34b, Tosfoth Sanhedrin 58b)). The Bayit Chadash (Yoel Sirkis) commentary to the Rabbeinu Asher (ibid.) explicitly permits this foreign ejaculation with Rabbeinu Asher siding with the tosafist opinion.[3] This opinion is likewise quoted in Tur Shulchan Aruch, Even Ha’ezer ch. 25.

Rabbenu Asher sourced his views based on the talmudic tract of yebamoth;

It isn’t comparable to the action of Er and Onan only if one is accustomed to doing so all the time, but if it is performed on occasion when he desire his wife for non-vaginal relations – it is permitted ..as whatever a man desires to do with his wife he may as per the (chazalic) parable of meat that is acquired from the butcher and fish from the fisherman(tractate nedarim, 20b)

—Rabbein Asher to tractate Yebamoth 34b
Thus Rabbenu Asher, followed by Rabbi Elijah Spira, commented that an occasional exterior ejaculation in tandem with ones wife is not considered “extracting semen in vain” (and not banned by the talmud) as long as the intention is not to avoid impregnating one’s wife and it is done on occasion, as this is not likened to the desire of Onan who wished to avoid impregnating Tamar entirely.[4] The Aguddah work also sides with the lenient opinion permitting an occasional extra-vaginal ejaculation with one’s wife,[5] whilst Rabbi Samuel Eidels (the Maharsha) likewise taking a lenient view.[6]

Parable of meat and fish[edit]
In a varying text of kallah rabthi as printed in “battei medrashoth”[7] Rabbi Werthheimer notes the significance of the Talmud quoting both meat and fish in its parable depicting the enhanced permissiveness of sexually gratifying activities that one may perform with his wife;

Since the Torah forbids cooking one’s meat in milk, a parable quoting just meat would not suffice as meat has this restrictive element whereas fish has a lesser restrictive element, thus implying that man has an enhanced level of (sexual) freedom with his wife.

As often as needed[edit]
A more explicit permissive stance is that of the tosafist rabbi Isaiah di Trani the elder who hints that a complete extra-vaginal ejaculation is permitted whenever needed to “seat” one’s desire with the stark exclusion being to avoid pregnancy;

What was the (forbidden) action of Er and Onan that the torah prohibits? that committed with the intent of not diminishing her beauty (due to pregnancy) and he doesn’t desire to fulfill the mitzvah of procreation (פרו ורבו) with her. But if his intent.. is for his inclination and to satisfy his desire and his intent is not to avoid impregnating her, it is permitted, ..he whose intent is to fulfill the desire of his inclination does not transgress as “all that a man wants to do with his wife he may do” (tractate nedarim, 20b) -and this isn’t called “wasting his seed”

—Tosfoth Ri”d to tractate Yebamoth, p. 12b (Yad HaRav Herzog, Jerusalem)
Rabbi Isaiah the elder’s view is likewise echoed by his descendant, rabbi Isaiah di Trani the Younger.[8]

Rabbi Eleazar of Worms, in his recently published Torah commentary to the verse “Adam and his wife, and where not embarrassed” (genesis) permits any activity with one’s wife necessary to “quiet (lit. seat)” his desire.[9]

Active participation[edit]
Later rabbinic authorities differentiated between masturbation (self-extracting semen in vain) and an extra-vaginal ejaculation achieved with the active participation of one’s torah-permitted partner – with the former being forbidden under most if not all circumstances. Apparently, any halachic permit for an extra-vaginal ejaculation must be accompanied by the active participation of one’s wife.

From among rabbi’s of the achronim era, the Tzemach Tzedek differentiated between extracting ones seed alone (“masturbation upon trees and stones”) and extra-vaginal extracting of one’s semen with the active participation of one’s wife, with the latter classified as a form of a tandem relationship.[10]

Posted in Judaism, Sex | Comments Off on Rabbi, My husband wants a Blowjob: A Halachic Analysis of Fellatio in Jewish Marital Intimacy (Marital sexuality and Halacha) (Volume 1) Paperback – August 11, 2014

Thoughts On My 49th Birthday

* “There’s nothing in the Big Book that says, ‘All will be revealed.'” (DA)

* “Nothing outside of me is going to save me. It’s an inside job.” (DA)

* “Resentment is like body odor. People can smell it on you.” (DA)

* I want to become the kind of person people pay lots of money to.

* “A solid decade goes missing from the addict’s life.” (DA)

* I should’ve saved for retirement.

* The five most dangerous words a debtor can say is — “I’m going to graduate school!” (DA)

* Race = the last thing a normal white person wants to talk about.

* Ari 818 left me a message seeking kosher certification for his new bakery. I think this could be a new business for me. How many people would eat by places and peoples if I gave them a hecsher?

* How come the Scandinavians don’t have white trash?

* I just yearn to feel like a winner again.

* In a year, I’ll be my dad’s age when he was embroiled in the Glacier View controversy.

* A year ago, I was with my family in Tannum Sands, Australia celebrating my 48th birthday.

* A friend says: “I kinda want to move to Israel. You can be openly racist there.”

* I was animatedly discussing how different groups have different gifts when a rabbi walked over and admonished me, “Don’t corrupt the young.”

* I had this awesome dream I was covering a basketball tournament and making time with this brunette reporter by playing on our common Seventh-Day Adventist background. There’s a purity and wholesomeness about SDA girls. And then my alarm went off and I had to get to shul and I never got to experience the amazing parts of where this dream was headed.

* The most common feedback I get at work is, “You’re a charmer.”

Posted in Personal | Comments Off on Thoughts On My 49th Birthday

Steve Sailer: The Huddled Masses Of Beverly Hills

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* The naked contempt with which many immigrant groups now view founding-stock Americans is pretty striking.

Hey – you guys hate us – message recieved. And filed for future reference.

* This is like the Seinfeld version of the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”. Is it for real? Do white bread Americans not read these things? Or at least have someone to read it for them and report on what the minorities think?

* Having lived on the Westside since 1964, I can tell you that the Persian invasion was detested by all locals of every group and, over time, that detestation was proven correct.

Persian diversity is plain bullshit. None of my Jewish friends ever liked or trusted them.

The men stank of cologne while they clinked from gold neck chains. As for the women, most of their own men disliked them.

Frankly, we whites never needed no stinkin’ diversity. Still don’t.

* I can’t imagine why anyone would dislike Gina Nahai. She sounds like an agreeable, pleasant person, and highly grateful to the country that took her family in when they were unceremoniously kicked out of Iran.

I’m also sure that she didn’t write her own Wikipedia page, especially the line about how she arrived in L.A. the night Elvis Presley died. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_B._Nahai

I also accept her thesis that Southern California was a sleep-inducing backwater in the mid-70s when she and her Persian relatives arrived. It’s not as though it enjoyed a worldwide reputation for being the most exciting place in the world or anything. That’s polyester history.

Finally, I appreciate her dig at the overrated Charles Dickens, who was, as we all know, “paid by the word.” At the above-linked Wiki page you can find some novels that are actually good, like how 2015 Los Angeles is good.

* What would an updated version of the Beverley Hillbillies look like? An unsophisticated family who struck it rich and then relocated from elsewhere who has to deal with the local elites. Perhaps a family from Baltimore (however improbable) or Mexico who won the Power Ball. To keep it current, Mr. Driesdale would have to be a Jewish Investment Banker and Jane Hathaway some sort of SJW. The possibilities are endless.

* In San Francisco the hippie/Puritan assimilated Ashkenazi, with their tasteful historically preserved houses and conspicuously old but perfectly maintained cars, feel the same way about the new BMW driving Russian and Israeli immigrants.

* Don’t Jews always view assimilation as bad? If they assimilate, they’ll cease to be Jews in a couple of generations. Can’t have that.

* Most of the visible Iranians in SoCal in the second half of the 1970′s were pro-Khomeini. Thousands of them went to Westwood to shout “Death to dee Shah! Death to dee Shah!” and “KHo-KHo-KHomeini!” in front of the Federal Building. Americans wished they would go demonstrate in Teheran instead of jamming up traffic in Los Angeles. By the late 1980′s the Khomeinites had left town in (vicarious) triumph and pro-Shah Iranians had taken on the perennial chore of demonstrating in Westwood. Americans still wished they would go demonstrate in Teheran instead of jamming up traffic in Los Angeles.

Gina Nahai claims that “If anything, [Iranian Jews like herself] were too assertive, too proud of their cultural heritage, too determined to remain distinct and separate from the rest,” and proves her case by insulting and deprecating everyone else in L.A.. There you have it. Iranian Jews are obnoxious and proud of it. Don’t you forget that, you elderly cranky Ashkenazim and dimwit badly-dressed ex-midwesterners.

* WASPs are a minority within a minority in Los Angeles because the Non Hispanic White population there also consists of large numbers of Armenians and Persians. And than of course there are the Italians, Ashkenazis, and the Irish. And than there are the Germans who could go either way as some people consider them to be WASPs and some people do not. Either way Americans of either predominantly or entirely English ancestry are still a minority within a minority in Los Angeles just like in New York City, Philadelphia, Boston, San Francisco, Miami, etc.

If you want overwhelmingly English stock White Americans, you have to go to fly over country.

* It’s petty stories like these that reminds me of Socrates’ saying, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Well, in this case, maybe it is. In other words, if a group or people are constantly, obsessively examining every single tiny little thing that has happened to them personally as well as on a larger scale (to their group) whether perceived or real, then….is it really all that worth it? Is that how humans really were intended to live their lives, examining every single petty thing that happens?

Really? Seriously?

From this vantage point, todays WASPS must really be the saps since they don’t spend most of their lives examining, delving into, obsessing over until compulsions develop into neuroses, etc. They just go about their lives and live, hopefully their request, to live as far away from as many of these obsessive weirdos as possible, is honored. But of course it seldom is honored.

Maybe on some things Socrates was wrong. Maybe constantly examining things and finding new things of which to examine doesn’t make for healthy and stable living on a day to day basis.

* They are also arguably the most inconsiderate/aggressive drivers in LA. And they seem to be big on fraudulent handicap placards. Just about everyday, I see Persians in their 30′s and 40′s driving $100k cars parking in handicap spots.

* There is a subtext of propriety in many discussions about cultural direction and influence. That includes a consideration of how to deal with opportunism versus responsibility.

The US was founded on values such as the importance of ethical behavior. Those continue to be acknowledged, if more these days in the breach, by so many of its perceived leaders (e.g., politicians, businessmen). Nonetheless, the deeply-held beliefs of so many Americans continue to reflect that sense of propriety. Yankee ingenuity, for example, is not on the same spectrum as opportunism.

The instant case of Iranian Jews in Beverly Hills provides yet another example of how opportunism versus responsibility plays out in the public sphere. Here are a few driving anecdotes to illustrate the clash.

A shopper awaits a mall parking space, stopped with turn signal on. Another shopper swoops in quickly to seize the spot. The first shopper says “you took my spot”. The swooper says “no, you took my spot”, while getting out of her car in that newly-claimed spot. The patient shopper moves on. The mall parking lot security guard witnesses the interchange, and says that he now referees numerous such incidents daily.

A driver on Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills is stopped at a light behind another car. The car ahead somehow backs up into the stopped car. The stopped driver says “you ran into me”. The reverser says “no, you ran into me”, and eventually files a police report. The matter is resolved against the reverser based on witness testimony.

The swooper and the reverser are examples of personal opportunism in action. The lack of a sense of propriety evidenced in the flagrant lying is indicative of a type of decline in responsibility.

When people are guided more by a sense of what they can get away with (e.g., Wall Street) than what is right (e.g., common courtesy and self respect), then the social fabric gets frayed. A good question for Americans is whether they have stopped to consider the implications of allowing their society and that of their descendants to degrade further by being unduly influenced by uncivilized behavior.

* Don’t dwell on the negative. The author just taught us a valuable lesson in code words. We’ve just learned that “verve” is the wealthy, sophisticated version of “vibrancy”. Now you’ll know what kind of immigrants live in an area based on which V-word people use!

* As me sainted mum used to say, “They’ll never rest until every nice place is ruined.”

* Is it too late for a new “300″ to fight them off at Mulholland Drive and keep the Persians from Hidden Hills?

* It’s like the author is daring non-Jews to dislike them. “Come one, you can say it, Jews are difficult people, I’ll say it for you. Try it and see what happens.”

It kinda reminds me of my days as an undergrad at an Ivy League university when I worked part-time at the admissions office. One of the assistant deans there pretty much came out and admitted that he wanted more liberal, secular Jews and fewer “math nerds” (=Asians) and “Jesus-freaks” (= rural, non-Jewish whites). It was as if he wanted those of us near him who fit the category to hear him and do something about it if we could.

It struck me as both a confession and a public proclamation of power.

* High trust people think everyone is the same.

* People from that part of the world have the mentality of the near-Orient and think differently. Their psychology is really not compatible with that of people in the west. People who get to know their way of thinking often come away with negative impressions of them and their culture. Words used to describe them often are variations of ‘dishonest’ or of being ‘oily’ in some way.

* I had the misfortune of living next door to a Persian Jew when I was in high school. A garish monstrosity of a house filled with eight (or was is nine?) loud kids always hanging out outside, but they mostly kept to themselves.

One day, we come home and find half of the branches from our massive, beautiful tree in the backyard sawed off!! We look over at the Persian’s yard, and see a few stumps and naked trunks where there used to be trees. THIS MOTHERF**ER HAD THE GALL TO COME ONTO OUR PROPERTY AND TAKE DOWN A CENTURY OLD TREE, THE CENTERPIECE OF OUR YARD, WITHOUT ASKING. Why you may ask? Because the pine needles and leaves blew into his pool!! When confronted, he acted like he was doing us a favor, since we can now spend less time sweeping outside. Teenager me was fuming, pushing my parents to sue and wanting to deface his property. Adult me would do what my parents did — sell the house and move.

I’m European Jewish and I don’t know a single one of us who wants to interact with the Persians beyond buying the occasional rug and jewelry.

They do however fit in LA better than any other city…

Posted in Beverly Hills, Jews, Persians | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: The Huddled Masses Of Beverly Hills

How Come We Have No Christian Clergy With This Buddhist Monk’s Moral Clarity?

I think I’m going to shave my head and dress in simple saphron robes. I love this monk!

WP: By all appearances, Wirathu seems an unlikely leader of sectarian violence. He speaks in soft, measured tones, clasping his hands thoughtfully. Like all Burmese Buddhist monks, his head is shaved and he is draped in a simple saffron robe. He teaches at a quiet and dimly lit monastery in Mandalay where monks kneel in study or prayer and flowers and images of religious figures decorate the walls. It’s every bit the Western stereotype of Buddhist tranquility.

But the exterior of the monastery is gruesome, coated with propaganda posters depicting violence he claims has been perpetrated by the Rohingya, Burma’s Muslim ethnic minority: collapsed temples and blood-streaked bodies.

“These pictures are here to protect our religion and our national interest,” the monk calmly explained to a BBC reporter in a 2013 documentary. “If we do not protect our own people we will become weak, and we will face more mass killings of this kind when they grow to outnumber us.”

Posted in Islam | Comments Off on How Come We Have No Christian Clergy With This Buddhist Monk’s Moral Clarity?

David Brooks Is All For America Taking More Immigrants, Israel Not So Much

Steve Sailer writes: “Does anybody know what duty the Israel Defense Force has assigned David Brooks’ son, the one who moved to Israel and enlisted in the army? It would be kind of ironic if Brooks the Younger turned out to be one of the Israeli soldiers keeping out African economic migrants at Israel’s new border fence…”

Luke asks: Why would the United States want its citizens enlisting for armed service for foreign powers? Asking for a friend.

From Josh Brooks FB in 2013:

davidbrooks

Posted in Immigration, Israel | Comments Off on David Brooks Is All For America Taking More Immigrants, Israel Not So Much

WP: Indian Americans dominate the National Spelling Bee. Why should they take abuse on social media for it?

How exactly should white Americans react to being displaced? What are socially appropriate ways that they can express their disdain at being overwhelmed and replaced by brown people?

I only want to see white Americans winning anything significant in America or Australia or England or any of our historic homelands. I want to see Jews winning Jewish contests. I want to see my group triumph. I root for my group. I think my reaction is universal. I don’t expect that India would react with glee to white or black people winning awards in that country. I expect the Japanese to root first for Japanese and for Mexicans to root first for Mexicans.

WP: Kimble and other bee organizers were appalled by the reaction to last year’s contest, when Sriram, then 14, and his co-winner Ansun, then 13, were greeted with a barrage of racist comments on Facebook and Twitter:

“The kids in the spelling bee should only be AMERICAN”

“No American sounding names who won the spelling B. #sad#fail”

“We need an american to win this spelling bee #tiredofindians”

Posted in Whites | Comments Off on WP: Indian Americans dominate the National Spelling Bee. Why should they take abuse on social media for it?

Different Races React Differently To Alcohol

I thought there was no such thing as race?

REPORT: Compared with no alcohol consumption, sensible levels of drinking have correlated with better heart health. However, a new analysis has revealed that a cardioprotective link from moderate drinking is not the same for people of African ancestry as it is for white ethnicity, and nor across the sexes…

For males, the lowest risk of mortality was:

For white men, linked to having 1-2 drinks on 3-7 days a week
For black men, found in those who never drank.
Moderate drinking was protective for females similarly – for white, but not for black women:

The lowest risk of mortality was among white women consuming one drink on 3-7 days a week
But among black women, the lowest death rates were among those having one drink on 2 or fewer days a week.

Posted in Alcohol, Blacks, Health, Race | Comments Off on Different Races React Differently To Alcohol

I Start My Day Witnessing A Car Accident

I saw a car accident a hundred feet in front of me this morning at 6 am on La Cienega Blvd just south of Pico Blvd. There was an old white guy waiting for the bus on the west side of La Cienega. I’m listening to the book “Modern Times” on my phone. I hear a horn, a screech of brakes, a collision, and a new red car is clipped (perhaps because he was trying to change lanes) and the red car plows into the bus seat/wall next to the service station. Luckily, the old white guy jumps away on to the street and is not hurt. The young black kid gets out of the red car and he’s ok but his car is totaled. The other driver has sped away. This is the third time I’ve seen a car accident right in front of me that sends a car speeding on to a sidewalk.

Posted in Traffic | Comments Off on I Start My Day Witnessing A Car Accident

The Fight Against Circumcision

Circumcision is central to my religion but I see nothing sinister in people who oppose it. They have strong arguments too. Different groups have different interests. The same holds for those who oppose kosher slaughtering of animals. They see it as unnecessarily cruel. They have some good arguments on their side though of course I support the right of Jews to slaughter animals how they see fit.

Opposing Jewish interests does not make you a bad person (even though I generally support Jewish interests).

Chaim Amalek writes: “But the fewer the goyim who get circumcised the easier it will be for the goyim to find us just by making us drop our pants.”

So what’s good for the Jews (widespread circumcision among the goyim) might not be good for the goyim?

WP: For nearly three months, no one could find 4-year-old Chase Ryan Nebus-Hironimus.

In late February, his mother, Heather Hironimus, took him and fled their home just before his father was due to pick him up in accordance with their child custody agreement. She then checked into an undisclosed domestic violence crisis shelter, out of reach of the boy’s father and law enforcement, which had labeled Hironimus a fugitive and ordered her arrest.

While the real life Chase was hidden, his name was everywhere — on court documents and Facebook pages, news headlines and protest posters. The Florida toddler has become the focus of a controversial and emotionally charged health debate. Or rather, his foreskin has.

Hironimus opposed circumcision for her son, saying it would be physically and psychological traumatic. His father, Dennis Nebus, wanted him to undergo the procedure, which he said had health benefits and was “the normal thing to do.” But what would normally be a debate between parents has instead played out in a strange and fiercely public manner online, thanks to ongoing legal disputes and a very vocal “Intactivist” campaign to stop the surgery.

Intactivists, who say that circumcision is a medically unnecessary “barbaric violation,” have made Hironimus a martyr and her son a cause celebre. A group called Chase’s Guardians has raised more than $50,000 to pay Hironimus’s legal fees. Intact America, a New York-based nonprofit, is urging Florida doctors not to perform the surgery if Chase is brought to them. Protesters gathered outside the Palm Beach County Courthouse after Hironimus was jailed last week holding signs that read “Free Heather” and “Keep Foreskin and State Separate,” according to the Associated Press.

Posted in Circumcision | Comments Off on The Fight Against Circumcision

LAT: Op-Ed Wrongfully treating academic debate as anti-Semitism

I love Israel. I think it is the most free and most dynamic country in the Middle East. I also see nothing sinister in non-Jews such as Arabs and Muslims frequently having conflicting interests with the Jewish state and therefore opposing it. I expect every group to pursue its interests, even when they clash with my interests. This essay contains many good points that are familiar to my readers:

“Scholarship is not validated by how it makes us feel, however, but by the extent to which it stands up to reason and evidence. To prioritize feelings over arguments — and to police arguments to safeguard feelings — constitutes a dire threat to academic and intellectual freedom, not least because of the mobilization of outside political forces to intervene in on-campus discussions.”

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on LAT: Op-Ed Wrongfully treating academic debate as anti-Semitism