Bar and bat mitzvah

Bar mitzvah is a Jewish coming of age ritual for boys. Bat mitzvah is a Jewish coming of age ritual for girls; the plural is b'nai mitzvah for boys, b'not mitzvah for girls. According to Jewish law, when a Jewish boy is 13 years old, he becomes accountable for his actions and becomes a bar mitzvah. A girl becomes a bat mitzvah at the age of 12 according to Orthodox and Conservative Jews, at the age of 13 according to Reform Jews. Before the child reaches bar mitzvah age, parents hold the responsibility for their child's actions. After this age, the boys and girls bear their own responsibility for Jewish ritual law and ethics, are able to participate in all areas of Jewish community life. Traditionally, the father of the bar mitzvah gives thanks to God that he is no longer punished for the child's sins. In addition to being considered accountable for their actions from a religious perspective, a thirteen-year-old male may be counted towards an Orthodox prayer quorum and may lead prayer and other religious services in the family and the community.

Bar mitzvah is mentioned in the Talmud. In some classic sources, the age of 13 appears for instance as the age from which males must fast on the Day of Atonement, while females fast from the age of 12; the age of B'nai mitzvah coincides with physical puberty. The bar or bat mitzvah ceremony is held on the first Shabbat after a boy's thirteenth and a girl's twelfth birthday. Bar is a Jewish Babylonian Aramaic word meaning "son", while bat means "daughter" in Hebrew, mitzvah means "commandment" or "law", thus bar mitzvah and bat mitzvah translate to "son of commandment" and "daughter of commandment". However, in rabbinical usage, the word bar means "under the category of" or "subject to". Bar mitzvah therefore translates to "a, subject to the law". Although the term is used to refer to the ritual itself, in fact, the phrase refers to the person; the modern method of celebrating becoming a bar mitzvah did not exist in the time of the Hebrew Bible, Mishnah or Talmud. Early rabbinic sources specify 13 as the age.

The Bible does not explicitly specify the age thirteen. Passages in the books of Exodus and Numbers note the age of majority for army service as twenty. Machzor Vitri notes that Genesis 34:25 refers to Levi as a "man", when a calculation from other verses suggests that Levi was aged thirteen at the time; the age of thirteen is mentioned in the Mishnah as the time one is obligated to observe the Torah's commandments: "At five years old one should study the Scriptures, at ten years for the Mishnah, at 13 for the commandments..."Elsewhere, the Mishna lists the ages at which a vow is considered automatically valid. Other sources list thirteen as the age of majority with respect to following the commandments of the Torah, including: "Why is the evil inclination personified as the great king? Because it is thirteen years older than the good inclination." That is to say, one's good inclination begins to act upon reaching the age of majority. According to Pirke Rabbi Eli'ezer 26, Abraham rejected the idolatry of his father and became a worshiper of God when he was thirteen years old.

The term "bar mitzvah" appears first in the Talmud, meaning "one, subject to the law", though it does not refer to age. The term "bar mitzvah", in reference to age, cannot be traced earlier than the 14th century, the older rabbinical term being "gadol" or "bar'onshin". Many sources indicate; some late midrashic sources, some medieval sources refer to a synagogue ceremony performed upon the boy's reaching age thirteen: Simon Tzemach Duran quotes a Midrash interpreting the Hebrew word zo in Isaiah 43:21 as referring by its numerical value to those that have reached the age of 13. This seems to imply that, at the time of the composition of the Midrash the bar mitzvah publicly pronounced a benediction on the occasion of his entrance upon maturity; the Midrash Hashkem: "The heathen when he begets a son consecrates him to idolatrous practices. Masseket Soferim makes matters more explicit: "In Jerusalem they are accustomed to initiate their children to fast on the Day of Atonement, a year or two before their maturity.

Whosoever is of superiority in the town is expected to pray for him as he bows down to him to receive his blessing." Genesis Rabbah, commenting upon Genesis 25:27, says: "Up to thirteen years Esau and Jacob went together to the primary school and back home.


In social philosophy, objectification is the act of treating a person, or sometimes an animal, as an object or a thing. It is part of the act of disavowing the humanity of others. Sexual objectification, the act of treating a person as a mere object of sexual desire, is a subset of objectification, as is self-objectification, the objectification of one's self. In Marxism, the objectification of social relationships is discussed as "reification". According to Martha Nussbaum, a person is objectified if one or more of the following properties are applied to them: Instrumentality – treating the person as a tool for another's purposes Denial of autonomy – treating the person as lacking in autonomy or self-determination Inertness – treating the person as lacking in agency or activity Fungibility – treating the person as interchangeable with objects Violability – treating the person as lacking in boundary integrity and violable, "as something that it is permissible to break up, break into." Ownership – treating the person as though they can be owned, bought, or sold Denial of subjectivity – treating the person as though there is no need for concern for their experiences or feelingsRae Langton proposed three more properties to be added to Nussbaum's list: Reduction to body – the treatment of a person as identified with their body, or body parts Reduction to appearance – the treatment of a person in terms of how they look, or how they appear to the senses Silencing – the treatment of a person as if they are silent, lacking the capacity to speak Nussbaum found people's understanding of objectification too simplistic to serve as a normative concept by which people evaluate the moral implications of sexualization of women.

Thus, her project is to clarify the concept by testing out the 7 dimensions of objectification and distinguish between benign and harmful forms in different circumstances in relation to sex. Nussbaum has argued that the topic of objectification is not only important to sexuality, discussed at length, but to the Marxist view on capitalism and slavery. Nussbaum argues that not all forms of objectification are inherently negative acts and that objectification may not always be present when one of the seven properties is present. Immanuel Kant believes that sexual desire is a powerful desire, objectifying; when people are sexually aroused, we have an urge to take in and engulf the other person for the purpose of sexual satisfaction. Our sexual desire manifest itself as a denial of autonomy which one wishes to dictate how the other person will behave, so as to secure one's own satisfaction, it is as a denial of subjectivity that one stop asking how the other person is thinking or feeling, bent on securing one's own satisfaction.

Sexual desire is so acute and powerful that it drives out other thoughts that consider the well-being of others and people start to reduce others as a set of bodily parts. Sexual Objectification is a general feature of sexuality that both parties eagerly desire both to be objectifiers and to be objects. Catherine Mackinnon and Andrea Dworkin adopt Kant's understanding of sex as inherently objectifying but refuse to accept that both are objectifiers and the objectified one, they argue that objectification of women as asymmetrical. The way men express sexuality and the way women express sexuality are structured by a larger social and culture context that the power between men and women are unequal. Men express their sexuality in a dominant way by objectifying women while women express their sexuality in submissive way by being objectified or self-objectified. Hence, women are more vulnerable to lack of subjectivity and autonomy. Nussbaum argues that it is important to put male-female sexuality in a more macro-perspective in which Mackinnon and Dworkin ignore the personal histories and psychologies that are morally important.

The objectification theory as proposed by Barbara Fredrickson and Tomi-Ann Roberts states that the objectification of a woman or a girl can lead to an increased feeling of anxiety or self-awareness. The woman immediately internalizes the status that the society has given to her and sees this outcome as a primary view of herself. Fredrickson and Roberts argue that in some way, the objectification of women can affect the mental health of the female; the perspective of the public imposed on the female body can lead to body monitoring and obsessive eating patterns which will lead into an internal feeling of shame or anxiety. Fredrickson and Roberts argue that influences from the new wave feminists and scholars have put the female body in a sociocultural perspective; this has led to a new dimension of the perspective of the body, however, it has underemphasized the significance of viewing the female body in a biological as well as a sociocultural perspective. They argue that the one should not be overshadowed by the other, as it is the combined effect that has created a social construction behind the body image.

The objectification theory tries to push the general idea behind the sociocultural analysis of the female body a step further within the psychology of women and gender. As Fredrickson and Roberts state: "Perhaps the most profound and pervasive of these experiences is the disruption in the flow of consciousness that results as many girls and women internalize the culture's practices of objectification and habitually monitor their bodies' appearance." The dictionary definition of objectification at Wiktionary The dictionary definition of objectify at Wiktionary Library resources in your library and in other libraries about Objectification

East Pleasanton, California

East Pleasanton is an unincorporated community in Alameda County, California. It is located 2.25 miles east-northeast of Pleasanton, at an elevation of 384 feet. This region experiences warm/hot and dry summers, with no average monthly temperatures above 71.6 °F. According to the Köppen Climate Classification system, East Pleasanton has a warm-summer Mediterranean climate, abbreviated "Csb" on climate maps. In 2012 existing land uses of the East Pleasanton planning area consist of the Pleasanton Garbage Service Transfer Station and Recycling Center, the City’s Operations Services Center, some remaining storage of materials on the Kiewit site, three former quarry lakes, vacant land. Planning started in July 2012, when the City Council appointed an East Pleasanton Specific Plan Task Force to make recommendations for future land use of quarry property. Three years citing concerns about the ongoing drought, traffic impacts, school capacity, appropriately metering growth in the area, the City Council in June 2015 stopped work on the East Pleasanton Specific Plan.

"Any future decision to restart the East Pleasanton Specific Plan process shall occur as part of the regular City Council priority setting meetings." "East Pleasanton". Geographic Names Information System. United States Geological Survey