112 Richard Rosenthal

Sexual undertones remain. There are also homosexual undercur­rents in all of this and themes that are hidden; only they revealed in men’s fears of their own and others tendencies. But let me repeat that this symbolism is male. Women who dress like men in our society are seen as seeking power and potency; men dressed as women are often called mentally ill. Looking back at the verse from our present situation we can see the male bias in the law. But we can also see that there are great tensions in the law. It is through the cracks in the law opened by these tensions that we can see women waiting to emerge.

Turning to rabbinic literature at this point we can see the development of our law. The rabbis as they restate the law, con­clude that there was more to it than cross dressing. There has to be intention to do wrong. Sifrei says:“’A woman must not put on man’s apparel.” What does Scripture come to teach us? That a woman shall not put on a white garment and a man shall not be clothed in a colored garment. It is taught(that it is) an abomina­tion.” A matter that is in the category of“abomination” is gener­alized by stating the matter that a women shall not dress in the way a man dresses and walk among men, nor shall a man adorn himself with women’s ornaments and walk among women. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said:“From where do we know that a women shall not wear armor and engage in warfare? We learn it from‘A woman must not put on man’s apparel’® and a man shall not adorn himself with women’s ornaments as our text teaches ‘nor shall a man wear woman's clothing.””'*

David Hoffman's reconstruction of Midrash Tannaim'> says the same thing in a different order. The talmudic passage dealing with our verse makes the new meaning even clearer.“Rabbi Jochanan said:‘One who removes(the hair of) the armpits or the genital area is to be lashed because(he disobeyed the command­ment)‘neither shall a man put on a woman's garment.””'® The text continues by telling us“that a man is not to use cosmetics as women do.” In the same vein we learn in another place in the

Talmud that a man is prohibited from picking“out white hairs from black ones.”"” The Talmud concludes that we do not follow the plain meaning of the verse. But rather it must mean more. What has happened is that we are no longer dealing with the wearing of clothing but the presentation of the self. Men and