Mishpacha Magazine had photos of women in Shavuos issue

amother

Blush ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 10:02 am

amother [ Yellow ] wrote:

I believe that pictures of women should not be in a magazine - for the following reason:
Yes, it starts off with a picture of a women properly dressed, modest etc. but as time goes on those lines may get blurred and slowly it's hard to draw the line. Ex: they put in a picture of a chushuv rebbetzin on her yartzeit, but then when someone else who was not properly dressed has a yartzeit, the family will feel insulted if her picture isn't included and so the magazine is pressured. Or a company that is a regular advertiser wants to put in a picture of a model that isn't so ok, the magazine may not be able to say no.
Yes, it would be nice to be able to only include proper pictures, but this world is very political and over time you can be sure that the standards will be lowered.
It is a lot safer to make a blanket rule of "no women" then to get into these issues.

They shouldn't have any articles that discuss or mention women either, as they articles could become inappropriate at well.

Also, no articles referencing Gemara, in case a woman reads the article.

Rather than have editors to edit and determine what can an cannot be published, we should just be proactive and censor the entire publication. Let's just cease to have any magazines, make that any literature, at all.

(Yes, that is sarcasm)

naturalmom5 ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 10:05 am

amother [ Yellow ] wrote:

Absolutely, yellow there is always that slippery slope.
Today you have pics of a big Tzadekus... Tomorrow you have the yahrzeit pic that isn't quite up to yellow's standards.
Before you know it, you will have Playboy magazine..

Lets make a rule ABSOLUTELY no women may ever leave their home unless they are starving to death, or they need to go for Chemo appointments, Lo Aleinu....

amother

Purple

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 11:21 am

amother [ Copper ] wrote:

Yuck. Mishpacha was the one who started this in the first place.
And the pictures were so subtle. Crowds. Doubt they'll go with individual pictures of specific people they're writing about.

Seriously? "Yuck"??? It's people like you, with attitudes like yours that really makes me question humanity sometimes, and particularly our frum community. There's so much negativity in regard to women, whether it's s*xuality, periods, mental health, careers, body image, beauty etc. and it really sickens me!
The Torah and Gemarah speak extremely highly about women, describing their beauty in eloquent, even poetic manners (Tziporah, Sarah, Shir Hashirim), respecting their knowledge and leadership (Bruria, Devorah). Our community has perverted tznius into suppression.
My opinion on magazines has always been: just like women would never dream of readin the publications that have pictures of the Chassidish Rebbes at a tish or simcha (for lack of interest, obviously), so too, men shouldn't be reading the Ami Living, Family First or Binah! Regardless of the pictures, the content, at times, isn't suitable for them to read anyway. If mothers are concerned about their sons getting a hold of these magazines and seeing these picture, 1) You or your husband should have an open and comfortable relationship with him so you can have healthy conversations about these things, and 2) for goodness sake, it's a picture of a woman advertising a new line of wigs? A picture of a rebbitzen that is being featured in an article? A chef, showcasing new recipes? SCANDALOUS!!!!! Stop acting like our magazines are printing pictures of scantily clad women trying to seduce our men into sin. Banging head

amother

↑ Coral ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 11:25 am

amother [ Yellow ] wrote:

All that applies to men just as much.

amother

Periwinkle ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 11:36 am

amother [ Blush ] wrote:

Better idea: publish magz but only allow them to be sold to men!
For women- theres always the “tzenah-renah!”

Zehava

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 11:41 am

amother [ Yellow ] wrote:

Funny thing, they’ve been publishing photos of men for a while, and I haven’t yet seen a shirtless one.

LovesHashem ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 11:48 am

Zehava wrote:

Funny thing, they’ve been publishing photos of men for a while, and I haven’t yet seen a shirtless one.

It does become a thing though.
What colors are tzanuah? Is her shirt too bright? Too tight?
Is her sheital too long? Her makeup too bright?

Listen, I do think in an ideal world there SHOULD be pictures.
But honestly, if I owned a magazine I would be tempted to not get into the whole ordeal at all and just say NO pictures of women.

amother

Mistyrose ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 2:26 pm

My husband and I ran a community email list for several years, with local ads. We had guidelines we followed for pictures of women. Ads for women speakers who weren't covering collarbone/hair/knees were okay since they were advertising learning opportunities and the focus was on the woman's shiur, not her body, and the ads were not at all designed to be "attracting"; photos of community events of course showed people dressed in a variety of different ways since there are all types in our community; but ads for sheitels/makeup/clothing stores were sometimes problematic since sometimes they were too provocative and focused on looks and bodies in a distasteful way. A few times we had advertisers who were unhappy because we refused to publish an ad until it was fixed, but since we were very open about our guidelines, mostly people were fine with it. It was always interesting trying to make the right judgment call on some of the borderline ads.

Kol hakavod to Mishpacha for taking baby steps with the women's pictures thing!

amother

Bisque ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 4:45 pm

LovesHashem wrote:

But honestly, if I owned a magazine I would be tempted to not get into the whole ordeal at all and just say NO pictures of women.

If you take that approach, why not say NO pictures of people at all! After all, putting in men is a slippery slope too - because it could lead chas v’shalom to (gasp) pictures of women.

sky

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 5:17 pm

ectomorph wrote:

The fact is, it's a slippery slope. Just look at frum women in Instagram.

Or even girls. I posted recently a link to an ad for girls clothing that I felt was inappropriate - not for Tzinius reasons. (Here it is https://www.instagram.com/p/Bx.....hl=en) I feel like it’s putting more materialistic pressure and influence on our girls who are already so steeped in clothing and looks.

amother

↑ Mistyrose ↓

Tue, Jun 18 2019, 5:35 pm

Sky, I agree the ad you posted is in poor taste, I would say not just for materialistic reasons but to me it subtly s*xualizes young girls. Eye makeup and a more mature "look" than the age of the model just seems wrong. But the rest of the pictures I looked through on that Insta account were sweet and age-appropriate.