a myth

This idea that women are more spiritual than men in Torah thought is a myth. The Baal Magen Avraham says that women are exempt from time bound mitzvos because the woman's yetzer tov is smaller. (See Zies Ra'anan, Yalkut Shimoni, Shmuel 1:1) The Maharal says in many places that men are more spiritual and are on a higher plane. (Tiferes Yisrael 4 and 28, Derech Chaim on "more wives more witchcraft") The Gemara says one who goes about in the counsel of his wife goes to gehenim. (Baba M. 59a) R' Moshe Feinstein says that we are equally holy. He also says that we have mitzvos because of our holiness and not the reverse. So why are women exempt from some of the them, to raise the kids. (Igros Moshe, Orach Chaim IV, 49 and Darash Moshe, Volume II, p. 154, Vayikra, Kedoshim) R' Joseph Soloveitchik says once you say both sexes are created in G-d's image, you can't say one is better than the other. The Rav Thinking Aloud on the Parsha, Sefer Bamidbar, pp. 142-3

What about Sarah? R' Avigdor Miller says that Avraham was her rebbe. Her prophecy was higher because his was affected by being out in public. Tape 412, True Modesty, 1:10:25

The Netziv says his prophecy was higher and the midrash was talking about ruach hakodesh, which is affected by being out in public.

What about other positive statements of Chazal about women? They are positive statements pointing out positive aspects. But we shouldn't get carried away with them. Each sex has its good and bad.
I want to suggest that the author look deeper and think deeper into this topic and the ramifications of his approach. Think what it does to marriages if the wife looks at the man as if he is a nonspiritual wild animal.

Better to just say we are equal but different.

Other authorities that either explicitly or implicitly contradict the notion of generally higher spirituality in the female include Rambam, Mishnah Horarios 3:7; Tur, Orach Chaim 46; Akeidas Yitzchak, Bereishis 6; Bartenura, Mishnah Horarios 3:7; Taz, Orach Chaim 46; Zies Ra'anan (Magen Avraham), Yalkut Shemoni, Shmuel 1:1; Vilna Gaon, Even Shelaima 1:8; Baal Shevet Musar, Midrash Talpiyos, Ohs Aleph, Anaf Isha; Rav Tzadock Rabinowitz, Dover Tzedeck, p. 119; R' Avraham Yitzchak Kook, Olas Re'iah, Birchos ha-shachar; R' Moshe Feinstein, Iggeros Moshe, Orach Chaim IV, 49; R' Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Man of Faith in the Modern World, (Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1989), p. 84; Lubavitcher Rebbe, Sichos in English, Iyar-Tammuz 5744, Vol. 21, pp. 69-72; R' Avigdor Miller, Rabbi Avigdor Miller Speaks, (Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah), pp. 245-246 .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Rav Moshe Feinstein on holiness being a precondition for the commandments

"The mitzvah of You shall be holy, which is followed by a recitation of several of the fundamental mitzvos, is not of the same type as the mitzvos that follow it. This mitzvah means that every Jew should realize that he is sanctified with the holiness of the Jew, and it is only because of that holiness that we were given the Torah and obligated to do the mitzvos. As I have often written, mitzvos cannot be fulfilled properly unless the doer has the holiness of the Jew. The Kohanim, who have additional mitzvos, must have the particular holiness of Kohanim. This is why we make a blessing before mitzvos and say, "Who has sanctified us with His mitzvos"; and Kohanim, before doing mitzvos that are limited to Kohanim, say, "Who has sanctified us with the sanctity of Aharon." The expression "Who has sanctified us with His mitzvos" should not be misunderstood as meaning that mitzvos are the source of the sanctity. It is self-understood that the sanctity the blessing refers to is the underlying sanctity of every Jew -- that which enables us to fulfill the mitzvos."

Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt'l, Darash Moshe, Volume II, p. 154, Vayikra, Kedoshim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question: We see in the case of Rabbi Akiva that a woman can affect the man. How is the reverse and to what extent?

Is the question can a man affect a woman? Certainly. Certainly. What do you think made Sarah great? Here Sarah became a great naviah. כֹּל אֲשֶׁר תֹּאמַר אֵלֶיךָ שָׂרָה, שְׁמַע בְּקֹלָה Avraham was told listen to Sarah. And Avraham is called a tefel b'navuah to Sarah.  That doesn't mean Avraham was less. Avraham was a bigger navi. Only Avraham was always in the street arguing with people. And when you argue you get excited so the schinah is not always able to rest on you. Sarah was magayeres es hanashim in her own home . So Sarah lived a tranquil life and therefore the navuah could come upon her more frequently.  But Sarah was the result of Avraham's tutelage. Avraham was her rebbe, no question.

Rabbi Avigdor Miller, Tape 412, True Modesty, 1:10:25

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“The Chumash in Bereishis says that when God created man בצלם אלקים ברא אתם . Man and woman were created in the Image of God. Equality was taken for granted. If two personae were created in the image of God, you cannot say one is superior to the other.” (R' Joseph Soloveitchik, The Rav Thinking Aloud on the Parsha, Sefer Bamidbar, pp. 142-3)

a problem with shiduchim

Question was asked on yeshiva world news if taking a walk is acceptable for a date. Woman writes in

I’m female and in shidduchim. I’ve been on a walk as a first date and was fine with it, but here are some tips:
1. Don’t go if it’s very cold.
2. If you want to go on a walk, tell her that’s the plan before the date so she knows to wear flats instead of heels.
3. Check in the day of the date to make sure she’s still ok with it—like “funnybone” says, she may have had a long day and be too tired.
4. Always offer to stop and buy a drink. You can go into a Duane Reade and buy a soda/water/seltzer. It only takes a few minutes and shows you’re aware of the fact that she’s probably thirsty after walking for a while.

Dating should not be so focused on making sure the girl is so comfy. We all need to toughen up a bit.

chapter 14 rambam

A woman who withholds marital intimacy from her husband is called a moredet ("a rebel"). She is asked why she has rebelled. If she answers: "Because I am repulsed by him and I cannot voluntarily engage in relations with him," her husband should be compelled to divorce her immediately. For she is not like a captive, [to be forced] to engage in relations with one she loathes.14

[In such an instance, as part of] the divorce [settlement], she does not receive any of the money promised her in her ketubah.15 She is entitled to whatever remains of the possessions she brought into the marriage arrangement, both those for which her husband assumed responsibility and those for which he did not assume responsibility - i.e., nichsei m'log.16

She is not entitled to anything that belongs to her husband. She should remove even the shoe on her foot and her head-covering that he gave her and return them to him. [Similarly,] she should return to him any presents that he gave her. For he did not give them to her with the intent that she take them and [leave his home].

ח

האשה שמנעה בעלה מתשמיש המטה היא הנקראת מורדת ושואלין אותה מפני מה מרדה. אם אמרה מאסתיהו ואיני יכולה להבעל לו מדעתי כופין אותו לשעתו לגרשה לפי שאינה כשבויה שתבעל לשנוא לה ותצא בלא כתובה כלל ותטול בלאותיה הקיימין בין מנכסים שהכניסה לבעלה ונתחייב באחריותן בין מנכסי מלוג שלא נתחייב באחריותן. ואינה נוטלת בשל בעל כלום ואפילו מנעל שברגליה ומטפחת שבראשה שלקחן לה פושטת ונותנת לו וכל מה שנתן לה מתנה מחזרת אותו שלא נתן לה על מנת שתטול ותצא:

9

[Different rules apply, however,] if she rebelled against her husband with the intent of causing him distress,17saying: "I intend to cause him distress this way, because he did this or this to me," "...because he cursed me," "...because he has caused me strife," or the like, she is sent a messenger from the court, [who] tells her: "Take note. If you continue your rebellious conduct, you will forfeit your ketubah, even if it is worth one hundred maneh."18

Afterwards, announcements are made concerning her in the synagogues and the houses of study each day for four consecutive weeks,19 saying: "So and so has rebelled against her husband."20

ט

ואם מרדה מתחת בעלה כדי לצערו ואמרה הריני מצערת אותו בכך מפני שעשה לי כך וכך או מפני שקללני או מפני שעשה עמי מריבה וכיוצא בדברים אלו. שולחים לה מבית דין ואומרין לה הוי יודעת שאם את עומדת במרדך אפילו כתובתך מאה מנה הפסדת אותה. ואחר כך מכריזין עליה בבתי כנסיות ובבתי מדרשות בכל יום ארבע שבתות זו אחר זו ואומרים פלונית מרדה על בעלה:

10

After the announcement has been made, the court sends her a messenger a second time. He tells her: "If you continue your rebellious conduct, you have forfeited your ketubah." If, nevertheless, she continues this conduct and does not retract, she is consulted by the court. [If she does not change her mind,] she then forfeits her ketubahand has no rights to a ketubah at all.21

She is not given a divorce until twelve months pass.22During these twelve months, [her husband is] not [required] to provide for her subsistence. If she dies before being divorced, her husband inherits her [property].

י

ואחר ההכרזה שולחין לה ב"ד פעם שנייה ואומרים לה אם את עומדת במרדך הפסדת כתובתיך. אם עמדה במרדה ולא חזרה נמלכין בה ותאבד כתובתה ולא יהיה לה כתובה כלל. ואין נותנין לה גט עד י"ב חדש ואין לה מזונות כל י"ב חדש. ואם מתה קודם הגט בעלה יורשה:

11

This is the sequence followed with regard to a woman who rebels [against her husband] in order to cause him distress. These laws apply even when the woman is in the niddah state or when she is ill and is not fit to engage in sexual relations. Similarly, they apply even when her husband is a seaman whose conjugal duties are only once in six months, and even when [her husband] has another wife.23

יא

כסדר הזה עושין לה אם מרדה כדי לצערו. ואפילו היתה נדה או חולה שאינה ראויה לתשמיש ואפילו היה בעלה מלח שעונתו לששה חדשים ואפילו יש לו אשה אחרת:

12

Similarly, when the time comes for an arusah to enter nisu'in,24 and she refuses to do so, rebelling in order to cause [her husband] distress, she is considered to be one who rebels [and refuses to engage] in marital relations. Similarly, the above sequence is followed when a yevamah refuses to undergo yibbum in order to cause [her yavam] distress.25

יב

וכן ארוסה שהגיע זמנה להנשא ומרדה כדי לצערו ולא נשאת הרי זו מורדת מתשמיש. וכן יבמה שלא רצתה להתיבם כדי לצערו כסדר הזה עושין לה:

13

When this woman who rebels is divorced after twelve months without receiving [any of the money due her because of] her ketubah, she must also return everything that belongs to her husband.

With regard to the property that she brought to [the marriage arrangement] and what remains [of her trousseau, different rules apply].26 If she takes physical possession of these articles, they are not taken from her, but if her husband takes physical possession of them,27they are not taken from him. Similarly, her husband is not held liable for anything that has been lost from her possessions for which he accepted responsibility.28 This is the law prescribed by the Talmud with regard to a woman who rebels [against her husband].

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/952888/jewish/Ishut-Chapter-Fourteen.htm

No Secular Court

from Rav Gustman, Artscroll Biography by David Page

A MARRIED STUDENT IN THE YESHIVAH HAD A DISPUTE with his neighbor about the ownership of a machsan, a basement storage unit. The neighbor had sued the student in secular court in Eretz Yisrael without bothering to take him to beis din. The only witness in the case was a woman, whose testimony favored the student. This testimony would be accepted and entirely resolve the matter in secular court but not in beis din, where the halachic guideliness regarding testimony apply. A young Rav advised the student to simply accept the summons to secular court and rely on the witness's testimony, indicating that because the neighbor had chosen secular court the student had no obligation to go to a beis din.

The talmid posed the question to R' Gustman who responded that, on the the contrary, everything should be done to convince the neighbor to litigate the case in beis din. The Rosh Yeshiva added,
"It is irrelevant whether you would be more likely to win secular court. If you would be more likely to lose in beis din, and you lose there, it is the will of Heaven that you lose.

David Page, "Rav Gustman," p. 174, Artscroll Biography of R' Yisrael Zeev Gustman, the youngest Dayan of Vilna.

Milah and Length of Purification Period

"The day when the father performs milah, the first duty a man must perform for his son, should imbue the father with the sacred resolve to "raise his son to walk in moral strength before God, the God of the Law," and to serve his son, by his own conduct, as a model for such a way of life. Similarly, the fact that the woman's path to purity following the birth of a daughter is twice as long as after the birth of a son certainly should serve to impress the mother with all the solemnity and grandeur of her own task to become teacher, guide and model for the Jewish woman of the future. After all, the mothers' influence in the molding the moral standards of her daughter is twice as great as her influence on the moral development to her son. With sons, the main thrust of their training comes from the father, to whom they can look as a model for the own future male role. With daughters, on the other hand, the mother is not only their role model but also the molder of their character, so that after the birth of each daughter she will do well to prepare herself with redoubled intensity, both for her own sake and for the sake of her newborn daughter, in order that the both may ascend the lofty path or purity and morality to the heights of God's own idea of holiness." R' Samson Raphael Hirsch, Vaykira 12: 4-5, The Chumash, Judaica Press, Gertrude Hirschler translator.

High Threshold for a Get

THE LEVEL OF SENSITIVITY TO THE PEOPLE OVER WHOM HE had responsibility, the level of creativity, and the level of wisdom that R' Gustman was called on to employ, both as the Rabbi of Shnipishok and as dayan, were high. This was especially so because the young rabbi was being supervised by one of the most sensitive, creative, and wise poskim of his time, R' Chaim Ozer. He learned from R' Chaim Ozer that apparent "common sense" and the" obvious" do not always lead to the halachically correct result.

R' Gustman related a lesson he learned from R' Chaim Ozer in that regard, concerning the high bar for issuing a get. The story the Rosh Yeshiva told was as follows:

In Shnipishok, well-known in his community, lived a couple notorious for their acrimonious and vociferous fighting that could be heard in the neighborhood on any given day. After a few years of fierce battling, the couple decided to divorce and they came to R' Gustman for the get during the very early years of R' Gustman's tenure there.

R' Gustman, who was then still a young rabbi, was sure that this ill-suited, unhappy couple were prime candidates for divorce, and with that attitude, he mentioned the case to R' Chaim Ozer, who asked to speak to the couple themselves. Afterward, R' Chaim Ozer's reply was sharp and unequivocal: "They should certainly not be divorced. Absolutely not."

This response came as a shock to R' Gustman. He remonstrated, "But they are unhappy and fight all the time! Everyone in the town knows how they go at it! Who could be unhappier in a marriage than they are? Who could be more appropriate candidates for the institution of divorce due to sheer unhappiness?"

"We go by the rov [majority]," replied R' Chaim Ozer. "Let us do the calculation together: For eight hours a night, they are asleep and do not fight with each other. Then, the husband is gone all day for at least ten hours, working, praying, etc., during which time they also do not fight. Then there is time they spend alone in the bathroom, again without quarreling. During all of these times throughout the day, they do not fight. Therefore, the actual time they are alone with each other to fight on a daily basis cannot be more than twenty minutes. We go by the rov. Since most of the time, they do not fight, they are not candidates for divorce. It is not worth issuing a get for twenty minutes of fighting."

From this calculation of R' Chaim Ozer's, R' Gustman, as a young rabbi, learned the lesson of the high standard required for breaking up a Jewish marriage. It was this rule he followed as a dayan and later as a Rav and Rosh Yeshivah.

David Page, "Rav Gustman," pp. 81-82, Artscroll Biography of R' Yisrael Zeev Gustman, the youngest Dayan of Vilna.

[I think what's going on here is that he met the couple and could see that nothing extraordinary was happening, that neither of them were insane. They were just two people that needed to work on their middos and learn to control their mouths. The talk about rov is just a cute way of saying, look you are not together all that much, can you just control yourselves for 20 minutes a day? To let you get a divorce would be playing to your yetzer haras and destroying your children and we can't allow that.]

The War on Men - the beginning

When the disease really began to take hold of society, right around 1982. Key line, "I am Edward Kimberly. Edward Kimberly. And I'm not mentally ill, but proud, and lucky, and strong enough to be the woman that was the best part of my manhood. The best part of myself."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smTXkhM6v-Y

What is he saying here that the best part of a man is the woman within him? Is this the beginning of the war on men? That woman good, man bad? Sounds like an Aish HaTorah class on why women are exempt from positive mitzvos.

Rav Gifter, parshas Emor

More mitzvos means more spirituality.

pirkei torah pp. 167-8

We cannot survive feminism

"Throughout our history we have faced extraordinary dangers against our physical and spiritual existence, from Korach all the way to the Karaim and the Maskilim. But there has never been, in all of history, as dangerous an attack on Klal Yisrael's existence as the one that the feminist movement presents to us today. We have been able to survive heresy and idolatry, but we cannot survive feminism.

"You have to understand that Klal Yisrael was given a Torah only because the women accepted it. If the women had not accepted the Torah first, there is no way that the men could have maintained it. If there will continue to be a bris between Hashem and ourselves, it can only be if the women of Klal Yisrael want the Torah and accept it with enthusiasm, willingness, and desire. And it is not simply because they are the guides and primary teachers of Jewish children; it is a great deal more.

"Klal Yisrael lives only through the family. Those in the secular world somehow manage a little without a family, but we cannot. That is because we require a morality and a value system that goes against that which is prevalent among the population in which we live. And giving our different values, outlooks, and purpose in life requires a family environment; there is no other way by which that can be accomplished."

Rav Yaakov Weinberg talks about chinuch, 42a, pp. 124-5, Targum Press, 2006.

Commentary on Avos 1:17

The Maharal writes, “The point is that taking into account that a person is a physical being, he gains from silence. Speaking is... a physically based power. Speech is a physical attribute, not a mental one at all. For that reason, speech should be shunned so as not to suffer from an error or mental disintegration. When a person is involved in verbal activity, he is negating his mental resources… One should, therefore [try to] maintain silence and take initiatives with his intellectual features that are not corporeal, as is the power of speech, thus avoiding errors.” (AbsoluteTruth613.blogspot.com)

Q. How do you answer someone that says religious woman are second class?

Q. How do you answer someone that says religious woman are second class?

A. Religious women are A-1 class. There's nobody better than religious women. Now what about religious men? Also A-1. Certainly. We are not going to say women are better than men. They want to say they are second class compared to religious men? Look. With HaKodesh Baruch Hu there's no such thing. Everybody is judged on his merits. Like I mentioned before, a righteous Torah woman, a woman who is Orthodox, and is loyal to HaKadosh Baruch Hu, and tries her best, can many times outdo the biggest tzadickim.

I gave you one example here, the Rebbetzin Kaplan who made a revolution in America, and she did more than any single Rosh Yeshiva did in America.

But even if you are not such a successful personality, in your own home, if you serve HaKadosh Baruch Hu with a pure heart and you try very hard, there's no question you can become great.

What do you want, you want to hold speeches? Speeches are not for women to hold in public. There's a reason for that. It's a biological reason. Can't be helped. Women can speak to women. But you can't become a Rosh Yeshiva if you are a woman. And don't bewail the fact that you can't become a Rav HaKollel, a chief Rabbi. There's a reason why women cannot do that. It's a technical reason.

Therefore, every person should utilize his opportunities. And women have opportunities to become great no less than anyone.

R' Avigdor Miller, I Created All of Them for You #491 1:13:45

linked post http://daattorah.blogspot.com

Maharal (Avos 1:5):Don’t have excessive idle conversations with women. ...That is because one who does is going towards and is attracted to a reality which is lacking and he is clinging to an deficit which is evil. This is like we said above in the introduction that when the woman was created that Satan was created with her. This is stated in Bereishis Rabbah (17), That the letter “samech” does not appear in the Torah until woman was created. This is to teach us that when the woman was created that Satan was created with her. The explanation of this is as we said. The woman is more materialistic then the man because the man is considered to be on the level of Form relative to the woman. And since the woman is more materialistic the Satan was created with her. That is because the Satan is the Angel of Death which is the power which causes a lack amongst the created beings. That is because the lack is associated with material as is known concerning material which it clings and is attracted by the deficit. This is what is meant that when the woman was created that Satan was created with her. In other words this is referring to the level of man because the male is on a higher level than the female. That is because the female is attached to absence and deficit. Now to explain the Mishna which says that whoever has excessive idle conversations with womem causes evil to himself. That is because when a man follows after the woman who is clinging to the deficit – there is no greater evil than the deficit as is well known. This however is does not degrade the woman herself at all. But rather it is saying that when a man goes down from his level to go after a woman with excessive idle chatter then the man is deviating from reality and moves toward deficit. Thus it is negative and evil for the man when he deviates from his proper level which is the level of the male and goes after something which is lower than his proper level.Thus when the Tanna of the Mishna points this out, he is not coming to diminish the love a man has for his wife. Because unquestionably a man should love his wife as he loves himself and the Tanna is not addressing that at all. He is only concerned with a man having excessive idle chatter with his wife. Because to the degree he has excessive idle chatter with his wife he goes down from the level of the male and is attracted to material which is attached to deficit. Thus he is causing evil to himself.[to be continued] 

Gra (Mishlei 10:1) - Linked Post from daattorah.blogspot.com

Gra (Mishlei 10:1): 1. The proverbs of Solomon. A wise son makes a father glad; but a foolish son is the grief of his mother. ...Furthermore "a wise son...." the kabbalists write that man has within him two forces - the power of the father and the power of the mother. When the power of the father is dominant then he is wise and righteous. However when the power of the mother is dominant then he is a fool. That is why "the wise son makes a father glad" - because the son is manifesting the power of the father. In contrast when he is "a fool who causes his mother grief" - it is because he is manifesting the power of the mother.  In addition "the wise son..." the positive commandments come from the aspect of the father while the negative commandments are from the aspect of the mother - as we explained before (Mishlei 1:8). The righteous are only praised because of the positive commandment while the wicked are only despised because of the negative commandments that they transgress. This is what is meant by "a wise son makes a father glad" In other words he rejoices that the son is manifesting the aspect of the father. In contrast, "a foolish son is the grief of his mother" because he is manifesting the aspect of mother.

Translation by http://daattorah.blogspot.com

Read more

Linked Post: Maharal (Bava Metzia 59a daattorah.blogspot.com

Maharal (Bava Metzia 59a): All those who follow the advice of their wife fall into Gehinom – This is truly incredible. We explain this also in relationship to Avos (1:5), All those who talk a lot with their wives are idle from words of Torah and in the end they inherit Gehinom. You should know that the woman is compared to Substance while the man is compared to the Form in every place. And when the Form is not separated from the Substance but rather the Form follows after the Substance entirely – he falls in Gehinom. That is because it is well known that the deficit is attached and bound with the Substance. This is alluded to by the Sages when they noted that when the woman was created the Samech was created with her. Because we don’t find the letter Samech in the Torah until the woman was created. ויסגר בשר תחתנה Bereishis (2:21) and closed up the flesh. That teaches you that with the woman was attached the deficit which is Satan who is the Angel of Death. When the Form follow after the Substance the Form obtains the deficit. That is because Gehinom is only the complete deficit as we learn from the names Gehinom itself... But this is only when the husband listen to her regarding worldly matters. But regarding household matters, “He should bend down and listen to her”. That is because it is clear that the Form stands on the Substance and the Substance serves the Form and is like a house for the Substance. Therefore regarding household matters “He should bend down and listen to her”. In contrast in worldly matters, if the Form follows after the Substance – then such is loss and deficit for the Form. However according to the other answer of the gemora that a husband should listen to his wife also for worldly matters that is because the Form stands on the Substance and thus also advice worldly matters are relevant. It is only spiritual matters that should be avoided from the wife. That is because the husband is considered the abstract Form but not the Form in the Substance. In such a case if the man follows after the Substance it would be a deficit for him. That would mean that the Form which is the abstract Form is sunken in the Substance which is a completely negative for the Form. Understand these matters in depth because they are very clear.

Translation by http://daattorah.blogspot.com

Read more

Rav Schwab's book

Rav Schwab's book on tefillah is impressive, but I do wonder about the commentary on 'shelo asani ishah.' It comes across as rather apologetic. I spoke to him about this topic and he told me that to say women are more spiritual than men is "ridiculous." He said men are more spiritual in ways, and women are more in ways.

I have some tapes from his tefillah series, but not the ones on the early part of the siddur. And his book on siddur is not his writing but is based on the tapes. I do wonder if his words were misconstrued on this topic. Our generation has become so ingrained in the concept that women "are on a higher plane" that we sometimes imagine that idea in writings that preceded feminism.

For example, R' Eli Munk also did not say that women are more spiritual. (The R' Schwab tefillah book editor references R' Munk as a secondary source for the idea). R' Munk only says that women's creation was positive and affirmative, not that it was better.

The Maharal says in many places that men are more spiritual and are on a higher plane. See Tiferes Israel 4 and 28, Chidushei Agados Makkos 23b, Gur Aryeh, parshas Tazriah, Derech Chaim on "more wives more witchcraft" and "don't speak too much to the woman." 

The Magen Avraham says women's yetzer tov is smaller. (Zies Ra'anan on Yalkut Shimoni, Shmuel 1:1).

I know of numerous other sources like this. As for R' Hirsch, contrary to popular misconception, he says in many places that men and women are equal.

R' Feinstein, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, R' Soloveitchik, and R' Avigdor Miller also assert equality. This women as better speech does not have classic sources behind it. It's a sad result of feminism and other gentile influences.

I asked R' Schwab if the idea could harm marriages. He said that it definitely could and he volunteered to speak to people about it.

I'd like to add one other thought. The teaching that women are more spiritual has a strange implication which is this: if women are exempt from mitzvos because they are more spiritual, then their day must be less spiritual. How else would men catch up? But this is exactly what we fear women will think, that their role is less spiritual. Thus, the apologetics backfire like any untruth.

This is why the approach of R' Moshe, the Rebbe, the Rav, and R' Miller are best for this era. Men and women are equal but different. And this is exactly how R' Schwab explained it to me too. How something other than that appeared in his book, which appeared after his passing, I cannot say.

Maharal (Makkos 23b)

http://daattorah.blogspot.com/2017/01/maharal-because-women-are-on-lower.html

Maharal (Makkos 23b): And He gave him 365 Negative Commandments corresponding to his body and his matter so that he should not do that which was not proper. Because doing something improper applies only to the physical body of man. Therefore the Negative Commandments are 365 corresponding to the days of the year. That is because man from the aspect of his body has the level of the sun which has 365 days. It states in Bava Basra (58a), “I looked at Adam’s two heels and they are like the ball of the sun.” The explanation of this is that it comes to say that Adam was created in the image of G-d (tzelem). He in particular had this divine level completely. And the gemora is saying that Adam’s heels which are the end of the level of image (tzelem) are joined with the body which is like the image of the ball of the sun.

There is no doubt that the image (tzelem) of the face has a level which is more distinguished. That is because the face has the name of image (tzelem) more and therefore it was impossible to look at it. However it was possible to stare at Adam’s heels which are the end of the level of image (tzelem). That is because the end of the level of image (tzelem) has a connection to matter which is the body and it doesn't have such a distinguished level. Nevertheless the heels which are the end of image (tzelem) are like the ball of the sun because the end of image (tzelem) of man is joined with the body. Therefore its level is like the sun whose light is material. Consequently the Negative Commandments which are from the aspect of material which man received and which is below the image (tzelem) – have the same number as the days of the year because it is also below the level of image (tzelem) of man. I already explained this in Avos regarding “beloved is man who was created in the image (tzelem)” . It is important ot understand these great things.

And now we can understand that woman who is material is obligated to observe the Negative Commandments but is not obligated in all the Positive Commandments. That is because the spiritual level of women does not reach to the highest level - which is the level of the Positive Commandments that a woman would function fully - because she is material. She only has the level of image (tzelem) which is relevant to the Negative Commandments. You should also understand why Positive Commandments displace Negative Commandments – because they are on a higher level then Negative Commandments.

Why Milah

Ohr ha-Chayim

Bris milah is an atonement for the sin of Adam. So what about Chava? Since Adam was misled he was granted a one time atonement. Chava initiated the original sin so she needs reoccurring atonement via menstruation. (See The Mitzvot by Abraham Chill, second mitzvah)

Maharal - Avos 1:4

Maharal - Why a husband can go to Gehinom for listening to wife's advice about the world or spirituality