The Talmud brought the tragic story of Rabbi Zachariah ben HaKatzav and his wife, who survived the pagan assault of Jerusalem. Even though Rabbi Zachariah swore that the invaders did not violate his wife, this did not help since there were no other witnesses, and a man is not believed about his own marriage.
As a Cohen (priest), Rabbi Zachariah could no longer be alone with his wife, but he refused to divorce her, and always had their children present so they would not come to intimacy.
Riffing on that, the Gemara notes some laws that apply after a married couple has to separate. They can no longer be intimate, but may be tempted to because of their shared past, so they cannot live in the same courtyard or alley.
Our sages ask who needs to leave, and concludes that the woman should leave unless she owns the property. This is supported by “The Lord will dislocate you the dislocation of a man” (Isaiah 22:17). Rav said: This indicates that the dislocation of a man is more difficult for him than the dislocation of a woman is for her.
Modern research confirms that women are more adaptable to change, tend to have greater social acumen and can make new friends and connections more easily than man.
Men are naturally hierarchical, and often require years in one steady place to prove their worth to other men. It is indeed harder for men to make real friends, but once made, they tend to last a lifetime. By contrast, many women find their friendships to be more transient and dependent on their current social circle.
A man should take into account that when he puts down roots in one place, he should do so with the intent to establish a positive reputation for himself based on his own status and value.
Red Pill Rabbi 
Rabbi Abramson 4:00 into this discussion addresses the subject of Greek philosophy. Honestly how can a rabbi who wants people to take him seriously, present such a casual mentioning of Hellenism’s terrible impact upon Jewish society through the ages?! The “trivial” Chanukah Civil War, for example, fought the issue of turning Jerusalem into a Greek Polis. That bitter conflict hardly qualifies as a polite debate.
The rabbi talks, of Jews love for debate etc, yet fails to mention the unique משנה תורה logic of Sanhedrin Common Law; the Gemara’s prosecutor/defense approach of learning halachic precedents as the means to understand the k’vanna of the language of any given Mishnaic court room ruling. The order of Courts rather than the order of religion. About 7:30, he mentions the “pastry”, Philo of Alexandria. Rabbinic Judaism rejected Philo. This cold hard fact, simply does not disturb the Rabbi; that later generations would completely contradict the earlier generations absolute rejection of Greek philosophy and its logic.
This abrupt about face with earlier rabbinic wisdom, merits more than a simple shrug of the shoulders!! Alas, this revisionist history fails to address this most obvious of all contradictions. Jewish assimilation to ancient Greek philosophy has repeatedly produced the most bitter fruits of Civil War. The Greek philosopher Socrates failed, 4:51, to question the decision to limit awareness of dimensions, the Greek mathematics which restricted spacial dimensions limited only to 3; like as found in the 5th axiom of Euclid’s geometry.
Why the necessity at all, to define Greek philosophy, for 21st Century Jews? Jewish assimilation rates in Western society today,,,, utterly horrific! Alas the rabbi’s view of Yiddishkeit seems to see Torah as limited to a historical, rather than a spiritual education process. Here the Rabbi blunders. Not till about the 7th minute in the clip does the rabbi give a back handed rebuff to the absolute disaster assimilation to ancient Greek philosophy has had upon the Jewish people. It has directly resulted in the destruction and obliterated Jewish civilizations! A “oh by the way” sort of acknowledgment that assimilation of foreign cultures and customs defines the k’vanna commandment “not to worship other Gods”. A real oooops moment.
In the 8th minute the rabbi mentions the success of rabbi Saadia Gaon to introduce ancient Greek philosophy, already accepted within Arab cultures, back into the eye of consciousness of the Jewish people. What he fails to mention: that the influence of the Babylonian Talmudic Academies of Sura and Pumbedita, would shortly thereafter totally collapse. The helm of rabbinic leadership would pass to the Reshonim scholars.
Saadia Gaon introduced Arabic/Greek logic as organized through numbered paragraphs. The Rambam’s Roman statute law codification, the Yad HaChazakah statute Roman law code, also based upon a similar assimilated organization. The simplicity of these foreign organizations on complex subject matters, in effect, the very simplicity of this foreign genius, it caused assimilated Jewry to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Slowly Jews lost all awareness of the Mishna as the codification of Sanhedrin common law courtroom rulings. That justice best defines the k’vanna of the 1st Sinai commandment to do the mitzvot לשמה. Herein explains how the 1st Sinai commandment exists as a Torah commandment.
This Assimilation error, it introduced the philosophy of Jewish religious law. Lateral common law strives for righteous judicial rulings in matters of damages. This premise יסודי, it shares nothing in common with any philosophy of Judaism – which frames itself as a religion of faith in the “Law” of God; a New Testament avoda zarah perversion. This basic fact explains why the Romans viewed the Jews of Judea as atheists. Lateral Common Law Courts do not hinge either innocence or guilt, dependent upon what religious belief a person personally believes. Mobs lynched many a black man, simply guilty for the color of his skin.
The faith of Talmudic common law, the commitment/dedication of the Jewish people to rely solely upon משנה תורה/Common Law – this unique logic of comparing a Case with other similar Case studies – as the basis by which the generations of Israel can learn and interpret the k’vanna of the תרי”ג commandments לשמה. Herein defines the k’vanna of lighting the Chanukah lights. The separation between Torah commandments, from משנה תורה Common law. The later relies upon the comparison of common law precedential comparative case studies, to interpret the meaning and k’vanna of the תרי”ג commandments.
The philosophy of Judaism, by stark contrast emphasizes the Rambam’s 13 principles of faith, or other such worthless narishkeit. Lateral משנה תורה/Common Law shares no common denominator with Creed based theology. A Judge who agrees to hear a legal dispute while holding a belief: A as innocent and B as guilty, prior to hearing the evidence brought before the Court, this tumah corruption of judgment, the Torah abhors. Religious Creeds, based upon theology and personal beliefs share as much in common with judicial justice, as Cancer shares with vibrant human health; or violent murder pogroms shares with the joy of giving birth to a first-born male.
In the 19th minute the rabbi abysmally fails to define משנה תורה common law logic based upon tohor middot. The Talmud exists as a common law legal system based upon the relationship which the Oral Torah דברים\משנה תורה has compared to or with the other 4 Books of the Written Torah. Both Written Torah and Mishna — function by means of common law case precedent studies. Karaism failed to grasp this most fundamental and basic understanding, how Mishnaic common law learns as an extension of משנה תורה common law. How can a modern Jew criticize Karaism as a challenge to Oral Torah Judaism, and yet remain ignorant of this basic fact?!
The rabbi speaks for about 26 minutes in total in this YouTube presentation.
LikeLike