After those ridiculous posters

I don't think posters in Yiddish only would be a positive step. That would just be a step towards religious oppression of females that is not obvious to the rest of us, ie misogyny behind closed doors. Quite enough of that already.

faye, with you on that, though I wouldn't be offended, I'd be angry and the segregators would know about my anger.

I'm surprised that there apparently exist gransnetters who are willing to condone segregation on the grounds of gender in a London street.

As others have said, people can believe what they like and keep what customs they like, so long as neither of those interfere with those who don't share the beliefs or the customs. Why couldn't this Jewish sect tell the women which side of the road to walk on privately? I suppose posters only in Yiddish is a start towards that but I don't really see why they need posters (modern things) for an archaic custom.

jingl People are entitled to believe whatever they choose and I am entitled to think their beliefs are nonsense. Believers and unbelievers are entitled to state their beliefs or lack of them. If the womenfolk of Plymouth Brethren want to walk around looking like a badly dressed version of Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm or orthodox Jews in Stamford Hill want to wear black hats and ringlets, that's fine with me. What no one should be allowed to do is demand certain kinds of behaviour from the general public in the public domain based on their religious practices. Public streets are just that.

Profundity, incidentally, does not characterise most of the posts on this site. I am surely not the only one whose comments you can class as hackneyed. You always have the option of ignoring them.

It wasn't long ago that there was discussion about universities "voluntarily" segregating men and women. Universities UK backed off when the PM's spokesperson spoke up.

I would be highly offended to be segregated because of my gender. I thought those days were behind us.

Foisted

And jingle, other people's religious views are everything to do with everyone else when fostered on those with differing views. Ask a raped, pregnant woman in Ireland

Well firstly as my mother would have said, who's she, the cat's mother? Why are you talking about absent as though she's not here? Hello absent. <waves>. And secondly, I don't understand the need for adding 'some' in the comments made.

absent should have added 'some' to a lot of her comments. The practices she describes are not universal to the religions she mentions and in some cases (like the posters) apply to a specific minority group. But it's easier (though untrue) to say 'Christianity', 'Islam', 'Judaism'. Presenting a behaviour noted in one person or group as typical of all members of that group is classic stereotyping.

Quite, Lilygran. And the organisers did say that to avoid doubt in future they would print the posters in Yiddish only.

"Perhaps absent has had or has given herself a very extensive religious education, jings. That isn't outwith the bounds of possibility."

Remarks far too hackneyed to suggest that.

I think since the posters were written in Yiddish as well as English we can assume they were intended for Jews and more specifically, Jews who use Yiddish and can read it using the Hebrew alphabet. Very selective group.

I don't understand why other people's religious beliefs are actually anything to do with anyone else. Unless, of course, they truly harm others. I don't hear Orthodox Jewish women complaining about their lot in life.

Perhaps absent has had or has given herself a very extensive religious education, jings. That isn't outwith the bounds of possibility.

A commenter, "rochefoucauld", in the OP article says this:

"When that message about gender segregation leaves a religious context and enters the public sphere, it becomes everybody's business."

She's right.

You are truly amazing Absent. The way you seem to know the ins and outs of every religion on this planet, including, in this instance, the Jewish one.

Exactly Ana.

The posters were addressing Jewish women only. They were put up in readiness for the procession.

Well, surely that was the intention? Or at least, the particular branch which was holding the celebration or whatever - the posters weren't meant to be ordering non-Jewish female citizens where to walk.

Perhaps they should have made it clearer on the posters, but there would always have been objections in any case.

If the posters had been targeted specifically at Jewish women (or whoever they were intended for), there would have been less of a case for objection. Only a bit less though, in my opinion.

I agree with live and let live too, so long as what is being let doesn't interfere with others' harmless choices. The trouble with rules that remove (or try to remove) people's own choices and keep their choices subject to unnecessary rules, religious or otherwise (cover your face in public, don't show your hair, certain men cannot fly in the same plane as women, no you cannot open your shop/sell certain things on Sundays, eat certain types of food, etc, etc), is that those rules are NOT letting others live as they choose. Those rules are NOT abiding by the live and let live idea and those people are not reciprocating the freedom ideal.

Do we know that? We can surmise it, but we don't know for sure.

jingl I didn't think that there was any reason to discuss why these posters were put up - they were intended to make sure that men and women were kept separate because of a belief that unrelated strangers of different sexes should not touch even accidentally. Men need to be protected from the polluting influence of women. The question of women's safety was never the issue, was raised on this thread and is a red herring.

When I referred to misogyny, I was replying to HollyDaze's last post not specifically referring to the posters.

It isn't hard to find examples of misogyny in the whole of society, even where it can't be blamed on religion. But religion is an easy target; what about misogynistic atheists? Or secularists? I'm with jingl on this one.

How do you know it is "mysogony"? In this instance it was more likely to have been protecting the women. Nothing to do with hating them.

And I thought we were discussing these posters, and why they were put up in the first place and subsequently taken down.

Oh no. Of course. It's another excuse to release the usual anti-religion diatribes.