Religions restrictions on touching opposite gendered partners in training

[tempus]

Just to shy away a little from the original question, but it is still in the same area. I studiy Nihon Goshin Aikido and with any type of Aikido there are there are throws, grabs, flips, etc... Like any other Martial Art there is physical contact between two people training. I have seen some individuals come into the dojo, from a particular religion, that require they cannot be touched by a woman. None have joined when they see that some of the sensei's are woman. Some day I hope to open my own dojo when I attain my black belt, but has anyone else had to deal with this and if so how do they handle it?

 

[Kacey]

I posted this in another thread, in a supporting members-only area, and I am reposting it because it addresses your question, at least in regard to a specific religion.

Being Jewish myself, maybe I can shed some light on this for you.

There are several levels of observation of Judaic tradition; the most commonly known 3 are Reform (least observant), Conservative (middle), and Orthodox (most observant), along with outliers on either end. All Orthodox, most Conservative, and some Reform Jewish men will wear yarmulke or some other form of head covering. The religious requirement is to cover one's head out of respect for God - the type of covering is not important, and many men who wear yarmulke will wear a hat over it for one of several reasons - to keep it from falling off, to fit in better (baseball caps are common), personal preference, etc. Some, especially those from the middle east, will wear a cap resembling the ones worn by Muslims. So just wearing a yarmulke (or not) is not a clear indication of the level of a person's observance of Judaism.

First of all, Hasidism is a sect of Judaism, whose members are Orthodox (often ultra-Orthodox), but it is a belief system, and Hasids do not all necessarily wear the clothing you are referring to (black suit, white shirt with no tie, hat, etc.). The clothing style stems not from Hasidic tradition, but from a group of Hasidic Jews who lived in northern and middle Europe in the 1800s when that was the common style of dress - when styles changed (and became less modest, in their opinion) they maintained the style of dress, but it has nothing else to do with their belief system.

As far as not touching a woman who is not his wife, this is an Orthodox Jewish (rather than Hasidic) issue. Back in Biblical times, a woman who was menstruating was considered ritually (and often, literally) unclean, and anyone who touched her became likewise unclean. Rather than ask a woman if she was unclean (that is, menstruating), men avoided contact with women other than their wives, whose cycles they presumably knew. Because the contact in class is a requirement of the class, he is allowed to touch you then, the same way he would in any other activity that requires contact with the opposite gender to complete. This is actually a modernization, and is proof that he is neither Hasidic nor traditionally Orthodox - if he were either, he would be unable to touch you at all, no matter the requirements of the activity. An example of the extent of this would be that Orthodox men in cities with subways and buses will not sit down because a menstruating woman might have sat on the seat at some point. Many Jewish men who are Orthodox will avoid non-professional contact with women because of this requirement. This is why, when you see Orthodox Jews portrayed in film (Fiddler on the Roof is a prime example) they dance with their own gender, and when they do dance with the other gender, they don't touch except through a handkerchief.

The man you are referring to may be considering you a professional contact so that he can actually touch you during class, as not doing so could cause significant problems, but outside of class this interpretation is not possible, so he can't touch you. I would give him credit for telling you what was going on (although I would take some away for not explaining it more fully), and not worry about being the only woman besides his (currently non-existent) wife he is able to touch.

I hope this helps!

 

[MardiGras Bandit]

Don't sweat it. I train BJJ with a Muslim women whose parents try to hook her up with blind weddings. BJJ positions are damn similar to sex positions, and she has no problem doing it with men. She is the exception (not a lot of women do it for that reason), but my point is that their will always be someone who will train. If one person doesn't want to for whatever reason, that is their loss.

 

[DeLamar.J]

Wow, just wow! When will people ever cut this stuff out and just live there lives and have fun. Thats why I am an athiest, no way as a way, you know what I mean? I do what I want to do based on my own personal logic. Life is to short to live by superstitions.
I dont mean to offend anyone, but living your life by some of these crazy religious rules is just plain unnatural, and very illogical. I feel that loosing a student with those types of religious rules would be no loss to the school at all.

 

[MJS]

Just to shy away a little from the original question, but it is still in the same area. I studiy Nihon Goshin Aikido and with any type of Aikido there are there are throws, grabs, flips, etc... Like any other Martial Art there is physical contact between two people training. I have seen some individuals come into the dojo, from a particular religion, that require they cannot be touched by a woman. None have joined when they see that some of the sensei's are woman. Some day I hope to open my own dojo when I attain my black belt, but has anyone else had to deal with this and if so how do they handle it?

I've never had this experience dealing with a religion, but I have had females in a class that felt awkward about working with a male when it came to certain grabs, ie: lapel grabs, bear hugs, etc. I'd always do my best to accomodate them, by pairing them up with a female, even if it meant having 3 people working together.

IMO however, I feel that with the scenario I posted, it does them a great dis-service due to the fact that a female is more likely to get attacked by a male than another female. Having them work with someone larger, stronger, etc. will in the long run help them rather than hurt them, in the training.

In your situation, I'd do your best to accomodate them. I'd have them watch a few classes, talk to them, answer any questions, etc. If they have any doubts, then unfortunately, it would probably be best if they found a different activity.

Mike

 

[mantis]

Wow, just wow! When will people ever cut this stuff out and just live there lives and have fun. Thats why I am an athiest, no way as a way, you know what I mean? I do what I want to do based on my own personal logic. Life is to short to live by superstitions.
I dont mean to offend anyone, but living your life by some of these crazy religious rules is just plain unnatural, and very illogical. I feel that loosing a student with those types of religious rules would be no loss to the school at all.

not before you start respecting what others believe.

 

[mantis]

Don't sweat it. I train BJJ with a Muslim women whose parents try to hook her up with blind weddings. BJJ positions are damn similar to sex positions, and she has no problem doing it with men. She is the exception (not a lot of women do it for that reason), but my point is that their will always be someone who will train. If one person doesn't want to for whatever reason, that is their loss.

what does blind wedding have to do here?

anyway, I know a lot of women who ask for women-only classes. A significant chunk of them are muslims yeah, but there are others too. There are gym's that are women-only too. it's not a strange thing.

 

[Kacey]

Wow, just wow! When will people ever cut this stuff out and just live there lives and have fun. Thats why I am an athiest, no way as a way, you know what I mean? I do what I want to do based on my own personal logic. Life is to short to live by superstitions.
I dont mean to offend anyone, but living your life by some of these crazy religious rules is just plain unnatural, and very illogical. I feel that loosing a student with those types of religious rules would be no loss to the school at all.

Many of these laws are "crazy... just plain unnatural and very illogical" - however, many of them have reasons behind them that are not. For example (although this doesn't affect MA very much), the food laws common to many Middle Eastern religions are based largely on the same idea: if you eat something and it regularly makes you ill, then it is a sign from God that you shouldn't eat it. Today, we know the scientific causes of illness and can avoid them - for example, improperly cooked pork causes trichinosis, which can be avoided by proper cooking. Even though many people who still follow these laws now know the scientific rationale behind them, the sense of continuity with the past and future that following those laws can bring a sense of contentment; also, it brings a sense of community with others who also follow those laws and the belief system they come from.

If you don't agree with it - and that's certainly your choice - then don't do it - as is also your choice. I don't agree with it myself - but neither do I deride those who do. People who choose to follow those laws because it is important to them, who choose to commit their lives to their beliefs, have my respect for the strength of their convictions - even if I find their actions occasionally imcomprehensible.