Does it pass the ‘would you want this as a headline on the first page of the newspaper?’ test? Does it pass the ‘would you want your mother to know this?’ test? Does it pass the ‘appearance’ test? If the answer to all three is ‘yes,’ then it (whatever it is) may be all right; but Rabbi Barry Freundel’s activities overseeing the mikveh and conversion process pass none of those tests. http://www.jta.org/2014/10/21/default/op-ed-what-the-freundel-scandal-says-about-orthodoxy-1
Anger, betrayal, humiliation, violation ~ to name just a few of the emotions that the revelations and allegations of his setting up recording equipment in the changing room of the mikveh have raised. Those who hold the most power over our lives – whether by love or authority – are those who have the power to betray us on the deepest level. If the mikveh is a “women’s commandment” as it has been promoted to be, then men should not be in control of it. Rabbi Elyse Goldstein has argued eloquently for a new approach to the mikveh http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/take-back-the-waters/ .
But back to that ‘appearance’ test. Judaism has a concept called ‘ma’arit ayin’ – what something looks like. Really, perhaps there is a need for a digital clock in the changing room. Perhaps there is a need to security cameras. But need has to be weighed against the appearance. And the supervising rabbi setting up and removing digital equipment is ‘ma’arit ayin.’ It just looks bad, even before the investigation concludes, before his day in court.
I know ~ we all make mistakes ~ but if we kept those three questions in mind and made the ‘appearance’ test part of our daily lives, we could save ourselves a whole lot of tsures, or trouble. Pity Rabbi Freundel didn’t think about ‘ma’arit ayin.’