About the conversion

Rabia's opinion is well known that the Idna does not need to be converted because today the path of freedom is different. The compromise made by the Rema is also well known, according to which women do not party because of Rabia's taste. Things are very puzzling. If we adopt Rabia's position, then men don't care either, and if not – then why do women? Especially women who are important today and there is no reason to differentiate them from men. I once heard a rabbi from Maor Yisrael argue a good point on the matter. There are two reasons for reciting on the night of the Seder: 1. To sit in a way of freedom. 2. To remember what they did when they went out to freedom (I ignore the fact that this way of freedom was probably more common in the Roman period than in Egypt. This is how the Sages saw it and this is how they corrected it). The second law is part of the story of the Exodus from Egypt and its memory, and therefore does not depend on the way of freedom of today, but rather of then. The argument is that the one conducting the Seder is also supposed to tell the other participants about the Exodus from Egypt, and therefore he is reciting for both reasons, and therefore he must recit even today when it is not a way of freedom. On the other hand, those who hear (not necessarily women, but women are usually among those who hear) recit only for the first reason, and therefore since today it is not a way of freedom, they are exempt from reciting. Beyond all of this, it makes sense to sit still today, even though it may not be the accepted way of freedom today. Because when we sit because of the change and deviation from the usual path, we are reminded that we should feel freedom, which will not happen if we sit in a chair or armchair, no matter how comfortable they may be. Ultimately, there is room for leniency, but in my opinion, it is appropriate to change. The organizer of the seder, of course, and the others as well.