Dress III: More Details לבוש (ג): עוד פרטים

Yabia Omer I OC 6

Indeed, in Berachot 48b, Shemuel said “in order to look at the beauty of Shaul” and he was not concerned about this difficulty [of women ogling men], therefore we are not concerned about women [ogling men], for they are not prone to physical effects …One can justify the practice to be lenient about this because the Yalkut Shimoni is not in accordance with the halacha, in light of what is explained in Berachot…The fundamental halacha is as I wrote to permit this [women looking freely at men].

Responsa Shevet Ha-levi 5:197b

One cannot deny that if they [women] really look [at men] for the purpose of sexual pleasure, women transgress like men. For “you shall not stray after your hearts and after your eyes” is a negative commandment that applies equally to everyone, for women are obligated in negative commandments like men. If so, there is no doubt that the holy Tanna Rabbi Yosei was correct that a woman too should not feast her eyes on a man who is not her [husband] But feasting her eyes is more than looking or just seeing, as the language indicates. But just to see or to look at men without feasting their eyes, i.e., is without sexual thoughts, as they see them regularly from the women’s section of the synagogue, certainly we did not find that our forefathers and rabbi were concerned about that.

Tosafot Ha-Rosh Berachot 24a

A tefach of a woman is nakedness [erva]. Meaning, that which is typically covered in a woman, if a tefach of it is uncovered, that is considered erva.

Yechaveh Da'at III:67

The matter is clear that women who go in the street in immodest garments like these also transgress the prohibition of not placing a stumbling block before the blind, for they cause men to gaze at them and to have improper thoughts of transgression, which are more serious than [actual] transgression.

Rav Yosef Kara, Yeshayahu 47:2

Reveal your shok – the upper thigh.

Tosafot Yeshanim Yoma 71b

It is different from the language of Scripture, for the language of the sages is its own entity. So too we find regarding the shok [thigh] of the peace offering over which they dispute with Rabbi Yehuda in the end of the Mishna in Chullin, which is from the knee and up [because it is mentioned in the Bible], even though in every [other] place in the Talmud, “shok” means from the knee and down.

Chazon Ish OC 15:8

The shok seems to be the lower portion (of the leg) from the knee to the sole of the heel, but from the knee and upwards, they would not have had to teach….It is difficult to decide the matter.

Minchat Shelomo III:103:15

Regarding the matter of “shok,” it is known that there are those who think it is only the thigh, but there are many dissenters, and therefore one must certainly be careful not to go out to the street without stockings. But one should not criticize those in a place where the masses are not meticulous to observe this. However, one should not take into account at all the custom of those women who are not careful even about what is clearly prohibited according to all opinions.

Iggerot Moshe Even haEzer IV 100:6

Is there reason to insist that girls wear stockings, without insisting that they shouldn’t be too sheer, so that skin should not be visible through them? As there are men who insist that their wives and daughters not go without stockings on their feet, but they do not insist that these stockings be the type though which it is impossible to see. You [kevod Torato] asked what difference there is, for if they consider even below the knee to be erva, this does not accomplish anything, for erva through a glass is forbidden. And if [they follow the opinion] of the Mishna Berura that it is not erva, then there is no need for stockings! The truth is that it is for greater tzeniut, since halachically until the knee is not erva.

Yabi'a Omer VI YD 14

Regarding girls who wear short skirts or short dresses above the knee, one must make an effort to influence them in pleasant ways to wear modest skirts or dresses, in a manner that covers the knees even when they are sitting.

Yabia Omer 6:14

Since the matter of women wearing trousers has spread nowadays to many places, there is no issue of keli gever, since in any case it is not designated specifically for men. Even more so since there is a recognizable distinction between women’s and men’s trousers.

Tzitz Eliezer 11:62

…Really [it is a case of] “jingling with their legs” [to attract attention, cf. Yeshayahu 3:16] with a noticeable split of the legs [pisuk raglayim] and with the emphasis of the figure of their bodily structure, God forbid…For wearing trousers like these is in and of itself ‘ervat davar,’ a matter of erva.

Yaskil Avdi 5 YD 20:6

It [trousers] is not clothing of the modest, since the legs are split one from the other up to the crotch…

Responsa Olat Yitzchak I EH 148

For our trousers [of men today]…are not really narrow that they cling to the flesh like the custom of the immodest, for those are certainly prohibited…

Benei Banim I Article 1:38

I asked him [Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin] if it is permissible for a woman to wear trousers. He responded to me that if the trousers are loose and do not cling to the body, he does not see any prohibition in that. On the contrary, it can have [a quality of] tzeniut. But if they are tight and cling to the body one should not wear them.

Si'ach Nachum 1-9

Therefore, women’s trousers that are modest, if the matter is accepted in the community in which you live, are permissible. Regarding a tunic over trousers, if it covers most of the thigh (the area between the pelvis and the knee), then the legs are covered, and the upper part of the leg is also covered as with a skirt, and this is modest dress…However, if you go to a place where this is not accepted, as when you travel to visit a community where women do not go about thus, it is fitting to respect the manner of dress in that place…In matters of clothing, there are matters that are halachot, and there are matters that are customs that are set by social mores of that time and place…In all matters of tzeniut of clothing, a person should not have his path depend only on the technicalities of the law, but rather it is fitting to respect local customs of the society of those who observe Torah and mitzvot with which one wishes to affiliate.

Rav Elyakim Ellinson, The Modest Way, English ed., 263, fn. 128

Another factor that must be taken into account, however, is the existence of a community of modest Jewish girls with their own standard. The fact that they are careful to wear only skirts, affords significant weight to this stricture. By wearing a skirt, a Jewish girl identifies with this group…To a certain extent, in the last few decades the skirt has become a sort of ‘yarmulka’ for the scrupulously observant…

Yabi'a Omer 6 YD 14

In any case, I agree that ideally one should not permit girls to wear these trousers, for they are haughty clothes…Kosher daughters of Israel should not go about in them at all. Especially in trousers that are really tight…But still, if the girls will not listen to the voices of parents and teachers to avoid wearing very short skirts, and they go in the marketplace with their thighs exposed, which is exceedingly immodest, one should choose the less bad option and instruct them as a temporary ruling to wear trousers.