Do you want pics of women in the frum magazines?

Simple1

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:34 am

A blanket rule of no women has led to lack of common sense in deciding which photos are appropriate . Like mentioned up thread the provocative male ads. Or a front page extreme close up of man where every blemish and wrinkle shows. (Not that those are bad, but why not focus on the bigger picture? No pun intended ) They are putting girls in some magazines, and some of those seem to be trying for a "look". A small bio pic of the author seems more aidel than any of those.

sky

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:37 am

A. I don't care

B. You have to take the person in account who will be pictured.

Do rebbetzins and their families want their pictures in a paper?
Do the authors of articles in the Binah magazine really want their pictures in the paper?

C. I wouldn't want my picture in a paper - so why would I wish it on someone else?

D. Based on what I see on Instagram the posts - I don't need those pictures in papers in my home - example: https://www.instagram.com/theg.....hl=en . The women are tzinius - but I'd rather not have such ads and images in magazines in my home.

E. Who defines what is tzinius? Many magazines have ads of little girsl. I've been dissapointed when an ad for shells features girls who look well over 7 were theirs skirts are well above their knees. I don't think anyone will 'go astray' due to such a picture. However, if I'm buying a frum publication I think the images should be tzininus - but according to whose rules is that defined?

Last edited by sky on Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:41 am; edited 1 time in total

Zehava

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:38 am

amother wrote:

The magazines don't bother me as much as the children books that don't come with illustrations of women. Makes me so mad!!!! I do not not those books and wish we can widelyboycott boycott them.
(also, I won't buy books for my kids that seem to promote gay living lol. Men and boys only
Rolling Eyes

)

The most frum yiddish books have illustrations of women

Simple1

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:42 am

sky wrote:

A lot of that can apply to men. Unless you think that women are more camera shy.

I can understand a policy of no women in ads. Not that the male ads are much better

Ima_Shelli

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:42 am

sky wrote:

I wouldn't want pics of male models posing provocatively either. But I trust the magazines enough to censor those pictures. I am going to trust them to know the difference between a discreet headshot of a rebbetzin and a posed pic of a model with a dress that happens to cover her knees.

amother

Gray

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:43 am

sky wrote:

It doesn't matter if you want your picture in a magazine. It matters if we redefine Judaism to pretend that the sight of a woman is inherently indecent.

The fact that some pictures are immodest doesn't mean that a woman per se is immodest. Does the presence of nonkosher food mean that I can't walk into a supermarket?

Zehava

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:46 am

I will mention that those pics of little and not-so-little girls are often of non jewish professional models.
And I agree some of them seem to try for a replacement of provocative womens pictures. They seem to be designed to catch the eye.
And it seems wrong to me to do that using a child.

amother

Crimson

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 7:47 am

hila wrote:

Is this a Purim post ?
Are you serious ?

I do not understand. No one is asking for naked pics. Just nice pictures of frum women or little girls.

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing naked pics of ladies in frum publications. I want to know what underwear is in style now in case someone sees mine in the locker room of the gym.

tigerwife

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:08 am

Zehava wrote:

The most frum yiddish books have illustrations of women

Yes, I was also wondering what kind of books she was referring to. Can't say I've read them all but I've definitely seen chassidish children's books with illustrations of girls and even mothers.

tigerwife

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:12 am

Out of curiousity, do any of the writers here prefer to have their photo published? I know I'd prefer not to (not even from a tznius POV, more for privacy. I never post my face on SM either.) what about men- do they ever get the choice to withdraw?

From what I've worked with and seen in these magazines, little girls are definitely being featured more and more, both frum and models. There are also illustrations of women- not sure if that was ever a thing to get rid of.

Simple1

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:14 am

tigerwife wrote:

Again, I'm curious do you think women are more camera shy? Do men mind their photos in the magazines?

iyar

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:30 am

Ima_Shelli wrote:

I do think there should be an alternative to Shop Rite magazines with women splashed all over the cover and inside pages. I don't think that alternative excludes female images entirely. I worry about the message that it sends when we think the only two alternatives are either excluding female images completely or having splashy Shop Rite magazines. I think there is a beautiful, holy, tzanuah middle ground.

Haven't read this whole thread but ima sheli said exactly what I'm thinking.
Out of respect for the men in my house, and for myself, I don't bring those "shop rite magazines" into my house any more. The pictures of women in them are not the kind of pictures any of us want to see. That's not quite the same as not being allowed to look at a picture of a rebbetzin whose obituary I'm reading. But notice ima sheli's last two words. Middle ground. The middle ground in our society is on the road to extinction faster than the middle class. Our loss.

amother

Gray

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:41 am

tigerwife wrote:

An advertisement with a picture gets more results than an ad without a picture. If I were advertising my business, I'd want to do whatever maximizes revenue.

There is a reason for author photos on book jackets and at the top of articles. They create a sense of relationship between the reader and writer. Just because you (and I, as it happens) would be happier not to be pictured doesn't change the fact that photos matter.

Why do you think people hang pictures of gedolim in their houses? Why not just a picture of a sefer? Pictures of faces create closeness. They add a dimension that writing alone does not provide.

tigerwife

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 8:43 am

Simple1 wrote:

Do men mind their photos in the magazines?

That's exactly what I'm asking. I personally wouldn't like it though I don't mind seeing others. What do other writers here think? And what about men- are they given a choice? My DH sometimes ends up in published photos due to circumstances and he would much rather not have the attention.

This is just in response to people pushing for writers to have their photos published in their bylines. Ironically, I think a lot of the writers in Binah publish under pseudonyms.

amother

Blush

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 9:33 am

amother wrote:

I agree wholeheartedly with sky.
You can't draw the line just at rebbetzins who have short shaitels and little makeup. Yes, I don't walk around on the street like that either, but I do think it's wrong to display a picture of me fully made up and attractive to men all around the globe. (and yes there are many men reading the family first, you think only women like serial stories?)
You can't compare the type of graphics that we use today to the Jewish Observer with black and white fuzzy photos.
No-one is saying that the sight of a woman is indecent. What we are saying is that it is not refined to splash pictures of women in magazines.
Kol kavuda bas melech pnima has nothing to do with preventing men from going astray.

amother

Salmon

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 9:55 am

amother wrote:

This. She said it way better then I did.

amother

Olive

Thu, Mar 16 2017, 9:59 am

icebreaker wrote:

If the women are okay with their pictures being shown, sure, why not? I'll admit, this is an issue I don't really understand why it's an issue in the first place.

All models are okay with their picture splayed across magazines. does that make it okay? it's not only about the person. it's about the viewers too.