Kiddushin 80: Presumptive Status and Defence of One's Lineage

The Gemara continues to discuss the Mishna introduced yesterday regarding men who return from overseas with wives and children.  When do we need to determine the lineage of those women and children?  

The Gemara notes that in many cases, we assume that a person or thing has ha chazakot, the presumptive status, of its past state.  If a woman's neighbours know that she is menstruating, for example, and her husband has intercourse with her, he will be flogged without further investigation into her status.  Another set of examples are concerned with forbidden sexual relationships.  A case is described: a mother arrives from overseas with her son.  When he grows up, they have intercourse.  Both are brought to court and stoned for transgressing the Torah law prohibiting intercourse between a mother and son.  The rabbis suggest that she hold the presumptive status of the boy's mother, even if they were not related by blood, for the boy was clinging to her skirts. Their attachment was enough to create a presumptive status.

The Gemara also considers at length the example of a small child who is near unfinished dough.  Because it is the nature of a child to handle items within their reach, is the dough impure?  The rabbis teach us that the dough holds its presumptive status of purity unless there is a reason to assume that the child has touched the dough.  What is the likelihood that the child has done this, for we know that children handle things within their reach?  If the 'majority' suggests that the child has touched the dough, then the dough is considered to be impure.  

Another example is used in comparison: if a home has frogs and creeping animals in it, and the leg of one of those creatures is found in the dough, is it more likely to be the leg of a frog or a creeping animal?  This determination will help the rabbis know whether or not the dough can maintain its presumptive status.  A similar example is introduce involving chickens and a coloured liquid.  We are asked about dough that has holes in it and red liquid around those holes.  If the chicken was pecking at the dough, is it impure because the liquid has touched it?

One point that is unclear to me:  why doesn't the leg of a frog or holes from the touch of a chicken's beak enough to impart ritual impurity?  Would those types of contact make the dough fleishik?  Or would they be too small a part of the dough to 'count'?  

A new Mishna teaches us that a man may not be secluded with two women but a woman may be secluded with two men.  Further, a man may be secluded with his mother or daughter and they may sleep together, when the child is young, with bodily contact - without clothing - because there is no risk of intercourse.  Once the child reaches the age of majority, they must wear their proper garments and sleep in their own beds.  

The Gemara discusses why women are more "light of mind", as Eliyahu taught.  Does this mean that they are more susceptible to enticement?  How does this help us understand the Mishna's instructions?  The Gemara also discusses aninut, the stage of acute mourning that comes immediately after learning that a loved one has died.  In this state, people might do very bizarre things.  The rabbis describe cases where women allow themselves to be secluded with men for purposes including burying a baby and stealing a husband's body from the grave.  In these moments people are questioning the existence of and/or the justice of G-d.  The rabbis remind us that the life we have been given is sufficient for us.  

Our daf ends with reminders of our learning in Masechet Sota, where we also learn about seclusion.  On their way to Jerusalem to determine whether or not a wife has been adulterous, the couple is accompanied by two Torah scholars whose advanced morals will ensure that the couple does not have intercourse, which is prohibited at that point, on the journey.