For millennia, Hebrew civilization has maintained a distinct worldview regarding the body, modesty (tzniut), and the experiential pursuit of Divine law. Unlike the dualistic frameworks that emerged in Christian Europe — where the body and its functions were generally viewed as impure, sinful, or shameful — Jewish tradition has historically treated bodily functions with practicality rather than embarrassment.
The Talmud discusses issues like menstrual blood, seminal emissions, and bathroom practices with directness, not shame. It doesn’t demand that these topics be hidden from discourse or relegated to whispers. Rather, they are analyzed as part of the halakhic (legal) system designed to infuse our material existence with sanctity.
Within this framework, women (or their husbands) have historically brought bedika cloths to halakhic authorities without it being experienced as a violation of our people’s modesty standards.
In recent years, however, some women have expressed deep discomfort with this practice. The discomfort is real and the emotional reactions of these women are valid. But it’s important that we ask ourselves where this discomfort comes from. Is it the product of an authentic Hebrew ethos of modesty and self-respect? Or is it the legacy of an imposed colonial framework—one that distorts our traditions through a lens of Christian propriety?
The Christian Colonization of Modesty
To understand this shift, we must recognize the way Christian culture, values, and societal norms have altered the social landscape of Jewish communities over centuries of exile. Western norms have reshaped not only how Jews live but how Jews think — especially in relation to gender, the body, and sexuality.
This has been especially true for Ashkenazi Jews historically but, since our people reunited in our land in the last century, Jews who spent the exile in other parts of the world have also been influenced by Western thought and social norms.
Modern discomfort with the bedika process is not rooted in classical Jewish modesty but in Christian propriety and Western cultural shifts, which:
1. Frame bodily fluids as shameful and best kept hidden.
2. Emphasize extreme privacy in marital matters, beyond what Hebrew law requires.
3. Influence Jewish communities through Western norms of what is considered “too intimate” to be discussed with a spiritual figure.
Victorian morality, in particular, feminized purity and shame, making even medical discussions about female reproductive health deeply taboo in Christian-majority societies. Within this framework, menstruation became a source of embarrassment, women’s bodies were viewed as inherently scandalous, and pious men were expected to maintain complete ignorance of female biological realities.
Over time, these attitudes seeped into Jewish consciousness. What was once a pragmatic halakhic inquiry became, in some minds, an invasive and immodest act — not because our people’s laws had changed, but because the Western gaze had reframed Jewish practice through its own lens of prudishness.
Reclaiming Hebrew Modesty: Rejecting the Colonized Mindset
If a Jewish woman today feels uncomfortable with this practice, her emotional reaction is valid, but its origins are likely shaped more by Christian propriety than by classical Jewish modesty. Jewish legal attitudes towards modesty never demanded a complete separation from halakhic authorities on bodily matters. Western norms of privacy, shaped by Christian moral frameworks, made such discussions feel inappropriate, imposing an alien concept of shame onto a system that never saw bodily inquiry as degrading.
Some have suggested the creation of female yoetzot halakha (legal advisors) as a means to alleviate the discomfort surrounding intimate halakhic matters, such as family purity, by allowing women to guide other women through these practices. While the intention may be to create a more “safe” space for women, this proposal ultimately reflects a neocolonial adaptation of halakhic authority rather than a genuine reimagining of Jewish tradition.
Instead of decolonizing our understanding of modesty and reclaiming the inherent dignity of bodily functions, this approach continues to operate within the framework of Western privacy and shame, which casts these natural processes as taboo.
The discomfort is not actually an issue of halakhic structure — it is a symptom of the cultural imperialism that has influenced our perceptions of modesty, leading us to accept foreign norms about what should be considered private, immodest, or inappropriate.
The true path forward lies not in restructuring authority to suit Westernized sensibilities, but in rejecting the colonial mindsets that have distorted our relationship to the sacredness of the body and its functions.
To move forward, we do not need to westernize our halakhic process by reframing it to fit post-Christian sensitivities. Rather, we need to decolonize our perceptions of modesty and return to a Hebrew paradigm of dignity, not shame.
This means:
1. Rejecting the colonial mindset that equates privacy with holiness.
2. Recognizing that modesty is about self-respect, not secrecy or repression.
3. Refusing to let Christian or even liberal frameworks dictate what is “proper” within Jewish discourse.
The discomfort some women feel around the bedika process is not a flaw in halakha but rather a symptom of cultural displacement, of a once self-sustaining civilization being shaped by foreign moralities.
Reclaiming Hebrew modesty is not just about dress codes or behaviors; it is about liberating Jewish consciousness from the residue of Christian moral imperialism and returning to the unashamed, dignified engagement with the Torah that has always been our heritage.
