Mishpacha Magazine had photos of women in Shavuos issue

↑ marina ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 9:28 am

amother [ Blonde ] wrote:

I am sitting here and trying to understand why you all so desperate to see women in a magazine.
And yes, some gedolim to see it as a problem. We recently published my grandfathers book, we went to a few leading gedolim for a bracha, they all told us to omit the picture of my grandmother.

I just want everyone to take a minute and imagine themselves as this grandmother. After 120, your grandchildren will be publishing books about your family with full pictures of all the men - your husband and your sons and your brothers and your father. But none of you.

It's just revolting. There's no other word for it.

↑ PinkFridge ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:08 pm

marina wrote:

When you're publishing a bio, there is control and there are limits. There is one subject - the subject of the biography.
When you're publishing a magazine, the island keeps shifting. What happens when a magazine says, ok, we'll publish pictures of women but they have to adhere to some basic rules. Let's say, collarbones, hair, elbows. (And legs/feet if it's a full picture.) What happens when the subject is an incredibly wonderful woman who should be a role model for us all but she leaves a lot of hair out and the neckline's too iffy? Do they photoshop? Do they ask for a different picture? Is it possible, just possible, that it's simpler for magazines to just avoid the landmine altogether?

amother

↑ Lemon ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:21 pm

Then do a cropped photo or find one from before she was married (if hair is a concern) or ask for another one, etc. There are lots of ways around this issue. If someone more modern is agreeing to be interviewed by Mishpacha magazine, they know the readership and won't be offended by these requests.

And would you still argue the same when it comes to a little 6 or 7 year old girl? I trust the (female) editors to make sure the little girl's photo is in long enough sleeves, etc.

amother

↑ Aquamarine ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:30 pm

Seriously??!! I was hoping this was a joke.
Gosh!
No pictures of women - no pictures of men either?! Do you also want to put on tefillin and read from the Torah?! All of you can go join these women at the Wall - or whatever they call themselves.
You want photos of women in magazines for role models? Whom are you kidding? You want them there because you believe you're being mistreated!!
This is not about tznuis. Nor is it about s3xualizing women!
It is about the very Jewish idea that women are not meant to be in public realm. Bringing sources about Devorah and miriam is no comparison. men and women are allowed to interact if need be - that does not mean that women have to have their photographs in hundreds of jewish homes for anyone to look at. I doubt the neviah Devora would have been to happy if a drawing of her were to be in the hands of anyone that wanted. A man should not look at a woman (other than family) in the face unnecessarily. (Simiiarly, the Mishna says: "Al tarbeh sicha im isha" - not to engage in unnecessary conversation with a woman other than family) I was also taught that a man should not walk behind a women. All of this is not because women are second-rate or not tznius. The torah considers women holy. I think I remember learning that after birth - women traditionally had to wait longer to get tahor after they gave birth to a son, as opposed to a daughter, because girs have less tumah than boys.
I'm sorry that I don't have better proofs and arguments right now, I am too upset to think this through clearly.
I just hope all of you who so desperately want to see women in magazines take two minutes to think about what your motive is behind you opinion.
It seems as if many of you are talking out of anger at a system that placed dress codes at the front and center of Yiddishkeit education, and at the same system who believes they can make rules about how women should dress and other issues.
Aderaba, do some research, talk to a rav you respect that can help you clarify the matter and differentiate what was misrepresented in your education and what is in reality the torah's view.
Unless following the Torah is not a value for you...

↑ chestnut ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:36 pm

amother [ Aquamarine ] wrote:

Ok, you asked for a motive. How about "don't add unnecessary chumros where none existed previously"? Good enough or your parents/grandparents were not frum enough to have women's pictures in Jewish books and magazines?

amother

↑ Aquamarine ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:48 pm

chestnut wrote:

Thank you for responding. But no, it is not good enough. you seem to be motivated by your frustration and anger at the myriads of extra chumros and stringencies that some people in "power" place on us unnecessarily. I agree with you and feel the same way. But you opinion is similar to saying "My mother did not let me ride a bike because it is dangerous and its not true so now I will ride a bike even on the highway". ok bad comparison but you were fed some lies - you can either reject it all or you can earn what is really yiddishkeit. If you learn that there is no issue with putting pictures of women in magazines - great! You may also find out many more things that may make yiddishkeit easier than you think it has to be. But find out. By stating your opinion so strongly without any backup, you are essentially doing what your teachers or parents did to you - teach you things under the guise of halacha - just the opposite extreme.

allthingsblue ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:50 pm

amother [ Aquamarine ] wrote:

7 days for a boy
14 days for a girl...

↑ marina ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 12:59 pm

amother [ Blonde ] wrote:

We (children, grandchildren...) will all remember my loving grandmother for who she was and all her mesiras nefesh to survive and stay jewish.
No need to put pictures in a book for e1 to see her.

Maybe the children and grandchildren will remember her if they met her. But their descendants certainly won't. They'll have pictures of their male ancestors but not their female ones. And it's mind boggling that you cannot actually understand how sad and ludicrous that is.

We have a book published of our family, and I can immediately pull up any grandmother or great grandmother or great great grandmother and we talk about her and who looks like her and it's just so sad for you that your grandchildren won't be able to do that.

Because of some extremist ideas of modesty? Why?

SixOfWands ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 1:01 pm

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.

I feel the same way about men. One day, its a rebbe. The next day, its the Chippendales. Or the Chippendaler Rebbe.

↑ marina ↓

Wed, Jun 19 2019, 1:03 pm

amother [ Aquamarine ] wrote:

At the end of a post full of halachic and historical inaccuracies, we are told to aderaba do some research... lol that's just rich.