Do you want pics of women in the frum magazines?

sky

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 4:54 pm

At the end of the day the magazines cater to those who are buying them.
Many who are complaining don't and won't by a subscription - so the magazines don't and shouldn't really care.
A good business cares about what its readership is looking for and what will increase subscriptions and revenue (and how their board of rabbanim holds).

I'm curious how many of you now don't get the magazine will now get it regularly for a long period of time if they include pictures of women.?

2cents

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 6:54 pm

I would make a differentiation. I don't want models and advertisements showcasing women. In fact, even long and s-xy sheitel pictures annoy me. (I don't have a problem with little girls pictures, and unless it's for privacy or something, find it bizarre when little girl faces are blurred out.)

But when showcasing a personality, like a rebbetzin, speaker, and so on, I like to be able to see a picture. All the artscroll biographies have pictures, why is this different?

Rubber Ducky

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 6:58 pm

sky wrote:

I stopped purchasing Mishpacha a few years ago specifically because of this issue. I would get a subscription again if they start putting pictures of women in Family First , which is geared to women. I don't understand how all the national frum weekly and monthly magazines have this policy.

mirror

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:54 pm

nechamashifra wrote:

Quote:

No, I don't want pictures of women prettier than me.

Why not? Do you honestly think your dh likes you because you're the prettiest girl he's ever looked at? Do you think men are that shallow?

Off Topic: I think this is the basis for the Shidduch Crisis.

Ilovemaryland

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:28 pm

nechamashifra wrote:

Quote:

No, I don't want pictures of women prettier than me.

Why not? Do you honestly think your dh likes you because you're the prettiest girl he's ever looked at? Do you think men are that shallow?

But I am the prettiest girl in the world .DH told me so himself

PinkFridge

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:57 pm

amother wrote:

If it was policy that a writer, including females, could have their picture with their article, I would choose to have my picture printed (from a few years ago, with make-up, much skinnier, etc... Smile

I feel that seeing the person who wrote the article adds so much to an article, it gives it credibility, and as a reader you care more. .

Honest question: what is the credibility? It sounds like the picture that's used might not be close enough for readers to recognize you if they were to encounter you.

gottago

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 11:12 pm

amother wrote:

I'm a regular writer for all the frum publications. if you read them, you know my name. (I'm being amother here, don't need everyone to know my imamother name...) I do write for another secular magazine that does print my picture and I get a real kick out of it (of course its a really nice pic of me, taken years ago when I was about 50lb skinnier, and people who don't me wouldn't recognize me anyhow!)
If it was policy that a writer, including females, could have their picture with their article, I would choose to have my picture printed (from a few years ago, with make-up, much skinnier, etc... Smile

I feel that seeing the person who wrote the article adds so much to an article, it gives it credibility, and as a reader you care more.
I also really don't like that the frum publications don't have pictures of women. I find the graphics sometimes have to scramble and end up not fitting the text. I've had articles about beautiful inspiring uplifting women surrounded by flowers... and I just thought euch. get rid of those stupid flowers that mean nothing and show me the people. its harder to connect, it takes away from the article, doesn't aid it in any way.
by the way, I'm not talking about ami or mishpacha. I am talking about Family first and Binah - magazines FOR THE LADIES! What are men doing reading it anyhow? And if they are reading it and they're so turned on by pics of tznius ladies, well I'm sorry but I think that this is probably the least of their problems.

Thank you for sharing your professional perspective. I'm curious if you have discussed this with the editors of your magazines?

gottago

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 11:18 pm

sky wrote:

This is the purpose of the petition. To show the publishers that there are significant numbers of people who would buy their magazines if they had pictures of women. I don't buy them. I did before my daughters were old enough to read them, but now that I have girls who read, my chinuch philosophy precludes my buying material that sends a message that women are 1) temptresses 2) innately s-xual 3) dangerous for men to look at and 4) ignored, even when they are tzanua

iluvy

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 11:52 pm

gottago wrote:

yksraya

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 11:56 pm

I personally would not want a pics of me to be in a magazine. That's my personal preferance.

I don't see a problem with little girls in ads, but for ayin hora purposes would not want my childs pics in magazines.

I don't see a problem with a pics of a rebetzin etc who passed away or any other old photos of ppl already gone to be in magazines catered to woman.

The reason they avoid putting photos in is:
1. All the letters they will recieve condemning the adding photos.

2. There really is a fine line when adding photos, who is to say inappropriete photos won't show up in any of the ads?

Not saying they should or shouldn't add photos, just trying to see it in their way of thinking as to why they avoid such controversy.

gamanit

Fri, Mar 17 2017, 12:15 am

youngishbear wrote:

And now the feminist ex post facto argument:

Why can't an author's work stand on its own merit? Why does her appearance matter?

If an author is writing half the magazine under 12 different pseudonyms it would be very hard to hid if she has a picture by her name. Unless of course she uses stock photos or photos of her friends Smile

amother

Lilac

Fri, Mar 17 2017, 12:16 am

Between all the magazines there are only maybe one or two articles that don't insult human intelligence . I've stopped purchasing the magazines and couldn't care less about the lack of females pictured . I'd focus more on worthwhile reading, well written articles , articles that are thoroughly researched before printing bs that people believe just because "The Ami" printed it and so on..
There are bigger fish to fry than pics in reading material you CHOOSE to purchase in our community . Honestly this petition is a joke. Noone gives a darn. Every magazine will continue to have their policies they choose to and the buyer can either choose to subscribe or move on.

gold21

Fri, Mar 17 2017, 12:18 am

yksraya wrote:

Couldn't they place the photos only in the magazine targeting women? So don't put them in the main Mishpacha/Bina/Ami, that's too controversial and it would be offensive to some. Only strictly tznius photos, and only in the magazines targeting women.