Women in Jewish magazines

[hvaces42]

Right, which shows that its the content that matters, no? And that their picture doesn't define them; they don't feel "humiliated" when their picture isn't shown.

Not all columns in heimishe publications have pictures of their authors, either.

Someone please post the missed the point gif...

Here tattelleh...we will spoonfeed it to you so you get it...every male writer in the frum publications can have his picture posted. No women are accorded the same respect.

[etech0]

[etech0]

[shlonx]

Someone please post the missed the point gif...

Here tattelleh...we will spoonfeed it to you so you get it...every male writer in the frum publications can have his picture posted. No women are accorded the same respect.

Point boomeranged, came around and hit me in the face.

Still, is it "humiliating" not to be offered to have your picture? Disrespectful, as you put it? Do the women in the magazine even want their pictures in? If they want their pictures printed alongside their articles, they can submit them to publications that will do so. Why demand of the heimeshe publications to accede to their demands?

Ms. Keats Jaskoll published her article in a place that gladly puts the author's picture in, and she is entitled to do so, obviously. She is free to read and publish in places that have women's pictures. But why impose her demands on other communities that don't?

[hvaces42]

Point boomeranged, came around and hit me in the face.

Still, is it "humiliating" not to be offered to have your picture? Disrespectful, as you put it? Do the women in the magazine even want their pictures in? If they want their pictures printed alongside their articles, they can submit them to publications that will do so. Why demand of the heimeshe publications to accede to their demands?

Ms. Keats Jaskoll published her article in a place that gladly puts the author's picture in, and she is entitled to do so, obviously. She is free to read and publish in places that have women's pictures. But why impose her demands on other communities that don't?

Impose her demands. You guys make it sound like its such a burden. Oy, these impossible women. Misogyny, much?

The question still remains, where, when and how did this become the norm in orthodox publications? When did little girls become sexualized that frum men cannot be trusted to look at them? When did tznius dressed women become vixens to be avoided at all costs.

[aygart]

The question still remains, where, when and how did this become the norm in orthodox publications? When did little girls become sexualized that frum men cannot be trusted to look at them? When did tznius dressed women become vixens to be avoided at all costs.

The big issue will be that there is no way these publications could make anyone happy with defining tznius.

It is definitely the easy way out to avoid having a big advertiser submit an ad which may be suggestive even with all lines kept to and have to deal with explaining to the advertiser why the ad they spent money on making doesn't meet the standards.

Some of the more chassidish it is ideological. That has at this point spilled over into other communities as well. I think some is not having the backbone or the interest in standing up to those who go overboard but some is also to avoid what would become constant haggling over standards.

[hvaces42]

Lowest common denominator = ideology = misogyny

Got it. Thanks. Makes perfect sense now. No room for common sense in any of this.

[aygart]

Lowest common denominator = ideology = misogyny

Got it. Thanks. Makes perfect sense now. No room for common sense in any of this.

1=2=3

[efflpetzel]

In telushkin's book 'Rebbe' I loved the Rebbe's response when asked whether to include pics of girls when the tzivos hashem magazine was first published

[Yammer]

204 comments and some nice Sparks...

Bottom line.

Ppl that don't want pictures of women in the publications believe that it will cause harm to their children/families yiddishkeit and will stop a subscription of any paper if they were to change. While the others don't have .05% of that conviction.

Therefore they win.

And while some 100s of women wrote letters to the publications, there are every week 10s of calls to publications complaining about how their  standards have fallen. ( I have heard this first-hand from the publications biz )

[hvaces42]

204 comments and some nice Sparks...

Bottom line.

Ppl that don't want pictures of women in the publications believe that it will cause harm to their children/families yiddishkeit and will stop a subscription of any paper if they were to change. While the others don't have .05% of that conviction.

Therefore they win.

And while some 100s of women wrote letters to the publications, there are every week 10s of calls to publications complaining about how their  standards have fallen. ( I have heard this first-hand from the publications biz )

And those phone calls are the product of an intolerant misogynist and perverted form of Judaism.

[sky121]

204 comments and some nice Sparks...

Bottom line.

Ppl that don't want pictures of women in the publications believe that it will cause harm to their children/families yiddishkeit and will stop a subscription of any paper if they were to change. While the others don't have .05% of that conviction.

Therefore they win.

And while some 100s of women wrote letters to the publications, there are every week 10s of calls to publications complaining about how their  standards have fallen. ( I have heard this first-hand from the publications biz )

Are the ones who 'yell' the loudest always right?

[gingyguy]

And those phone calls are the product of an intolerant misogynist and perverted form of Judaism.

i  dont think thats even close to being true. you will not find any mainstream rabbonim that will tell you to be printing pictures of women in  magazines. people have a misconception that צניעות means covered. the true definition is hidden . כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה. while that doesnt apply to pictures of little girls ( which im assuming no one really cares about that anyways ) it definitely applies to anyone over the age of בת מצוה no matther how well they are dressed

[Sport]

204 comments and some nice Sparks...

Bottom line.

Ppl that don't want pictures of women in the publications believe that it will cause harm to their children/families yiddishkeit and will stop a subscription of any paper if they were to change. While the others don't have .05% of that conviction.

Therefore they win.

And while some 100s of women wrote letters to the publications, there are every week 10s of calls to publications complaining about how their  standards have fallen. ( I have heard this first-hand from the publications biz )

Your argument just underscores the issue that she and others take with this policy.  Yes, the magazines are free to do as they want, but why is there such an impassioned protest against something that has little to no basis in Judaism. And if @aygart is right that it's just easier to have a zero tolerance policy than figuring  out where to draw the line, why would anybody be offended if the magazines tried being more subtle, and nuanced with a clear policy of which images are acceptable?

[Sport]

i  dont think thats even close to being true. you will not find any mainstream rabbonim that will tell you to be printing pictures of women in  magazines. people have a misconception that צניעות means covered. the true definition is hidden . כל כבודה בת מלך פנימה. while that doesnt apply to pictures of little girls ( which im assuming no one really cares about that anyways ) it definitely applies to anyone over the age of בת מצוה no matther how well they are dressed

Valid point, but why do you think no one cares about the lack of pictures of younger girls? To me thats more indicative of a dangerous and unhealthy extremism than anything else.