Mishpacha Magazine had photos of women in Shavuos issue

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Hobbies, Crafts, and Collections -> Reading Room

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

shabbatiscoming

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 2:50 pm

hot chocolate! wrote:

100% no point and seems to be upsetting some ppl.
I guess opinions differ, strongly.

Yes, very strongly.

amother

Aquamarine

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 3:51 pm

hot chocolate! wrote:

umm this is a very heated thread that I find
SAD SAD SAD.
why on earth would anyone want pics of women in magazines? YES Men should respect women for who the are,yes,pics of little girls are ok,but this is yiddishkeit, yes yes yes YES YES YES. yiddishkeit comes with boundaries everything about judaism is about boundaries, and without it judaism's would be gone chv. Halalch dictates that from a girls certain age she should be modest. being in a magazine read by men is immodest at best.
And for those who make the ridiculous claims that no rabbis assured it well I could get you ALMOST ALL orthodox rabbanim saying that its not appropriate and the reason no one has any is bec no one has ASKED THEM ,its such an obvious NO NO that it doesn't even need an answer. will you asks your Rabbi if you may eat bugs? if you may turn on lights on shbbs?no.
this is so so obviously wrong. doesn't even deserve t be asked. duh
But that's not the point. look into our TORAH. CHUMASH. 'SARAH BAOHEL" - what does it mean? women in magazines?
no I don't think that in 2019 this means bundling up in thick waters or staying indoors. but showing women in public magazines is UNJewish .
If you want to officially see women in frum magazines then keep on waiting. I for one ,hope that this never happens,
I for one was DISAPPOINTED (come ahead bash me all up, all of you"!) I was disappointed to see pictures of women in the shavuot magazine. perhaps it was a mistake. I hope.

Our purity is our strength. please , please Jewish women.

Thank you, hot chocolate! I am with you 100%. It seems like we are the minority on this frum website...

amother

Aquamarine

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 3:53 pm

shabbatiscoming wrote:

Im just going to be honest here. When I read your reply, I couldnt pick my lower lip back up from the floor. shock

I can not believe there are frum women out there that believe this.
And if you are so sure that almost all orthodox rabbi will say it is is inappropriate, I have a bridge to sell you.

And I am shocked that so many women don't believe this and feel this...

amother

Ginger

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 3:54 pm

amother [ Aquamarine ] wrote:

Thank you, hot chocolate! I am with you 100%. It seems like we are the minority on this frum website...

You are in the minority in the frum world too.

amother

Aquamarine

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 3:57 pm

amother [ Turquoise ] wrote:

Surely you know that the malachim wanted Sarah to come outside, so they could speak to her directly, not through her husband.

The malachim were sent by Hashem. Is Hashem not frum enough for you?

FIrst of all malachim are not people. So no point proven there. Secondly women are allowed to and should go out, and even interact with men if they need to. We dont literally have to stay indoors. But our essence is to figuratively remain ba'ohel.

Our whole existence in this world is completely different thna that of men. We have a different purpose. YOu don;t have to like it., but its true

chestnut

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 3:59 pm

hot chocolate! wrote:

Halalch dictates that from a girls certain age she should be modest. being in a magazine read by men is immodest at best.

And for those who make the ridiculous claims that no rabbis assured it well I could get you ALMOST ALL orthodox rabbanim saying that its not appropriate and the reason no one has any is bec no one has ASKED THEM ,its such an obvious NO NO that it doesn't even need an answer.

But that's not the point. look into our TORAH. CHUMASH. 'SARAH BAOHEL" - what does it mean?

Our purity is our strength. please , please Jewish women.

Does halacha dictate that a boy from a certain age be modest? Men's pics in mags read by women are modest? Or tznius is only for women?

Yes, please. Get the rabbonim saying it's against halacha, just as eating bugs or desecrating shabbos are.

Sarah baOhel - why do you go outside? I mean it. I bet Sarah wasn't going to a marketplace

Are you sure it's our purity that's our strength? How do you know? I'm assuming by purity you mean tznius. Maybe it's our ahavas Yisroel? Or shabbos observance? Or being free of lashon hara?

marina

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 4:00 pm

It’s also sad to me when women value themselves only in as much as they are erased from existence.

Mommyg8

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 4:04 pm

hot chocolate! wrote:

I'm wondering if you're old enough to remember the Jewish Observer. Or The Jewish Homemaker. They both had pictures of women.

The Jewish Observer was published by the Agudas Yisroel, and considered itself the periodical for the ultra Orthodox. They mostly published essays from Rabbanim and gedolim. So obviously you're wrong.

If Sarah be'ohel is so important, why are women going to work? Going shopping? Someone told me that in Europe, pregnant women did not walk outside. For those who keep talking about mesorah, I'm really wondering why they pick this one- which is at most 30 years old, and not the much older mesorah.

Laiya

Thu, Jun 20 2019, 5:37 pm

Mommyg8 wrote:

I think your description of the JO is the key point. The JO's entire focus was articles on Torah topics.

Lifestyle magazines, by definition, cover topics such as leisure, fashion, travel, culture.

The frum lifestyle magazines actively promote secular values, and I'm not even referring to this topic of photos. Maybe not every article, but certainly the majority of the ads. Of course without the ads there would be no magazine, so what can you do. [/sarcasm]

I just find it rather disingenuous that people claim to support the lack of women in photos out of concern for looking to preserve our values, yet apparently are fine with the other, very clearly secular values that are promoted in the magazines.

Last edited by Laiya on Fri, Jun 21 2019, 8:43 am; edited 1 time in total

amother

Coral

Fri, Jun 21 2019, 1:20 am

At most, you can intepret "Sarah be'ohel" to mean that women shouldn't be socializing with men. That has nothing to do with being invisible.

imasoftov

Fri, Jun 21 2019, 8:52 am

hot chocolate! wrote:

100% no point and seems to be upsetting some ppl.
I guess opinions differ, strongly.

You've been a member of this site since 2017, and this is the first time you became aware of that?

amother

Linen

Sun, Jun 23 2019, 12:01 am

I was thrilled when I noticed that in this week’s Mishpacha Jr., they no longer had the clause “Please note: we only publish pictures of girls under age 6.”

amother

Lemon

Sun, Jun 23 2019, 1:34 pm

Yes, but were any of the pictures of girls over 6?
I have a feeling they are still abiding by the policy, they just took out the statement because of how creepy and perverted it sounds.....

shaqued_almond

Mon, Jun 24 2019, 9:21 am

Another thing: The lubavitcher rebbe insisted in having girls pictures for materials that are also targeted at girls, I.e. tzivot hashem. Because how can the girls identify with Torah if they won't see themselves in it.

amother

Mauve

Mon, Jun 24 2019, 1:48 pm

I dunno. I'm pretty feminist, but it doesn't bother me much, I guess because I see it as a business decision. A mag is just not gonna risk alienating a huge chunk of its demographic regardless of their personal feelings on the topic. Readers write in flaming at the mouth over far smaller issues (and whatever my personal feeling is, I'm gonna respect others' choices and beliefs here and say they're perfectly entitled to prefer their mags women-free or men-free or fragrance free or whatever) - this is a fairly polarizing topic and it's just bad business to open the worm-can and make a stand over something you really don't have to from a business standpoint.

Personally, I'm okay with enjoying pics of Jewish women in the OU's Jewish Action and seeing live, 3D versions in my friends and neighbors, and viewing non-Jewish women in the Wall Street Journal if I get hold of it. I don't need visual representation to feel valid. If there would be no CONTENT by women, on the other hand, I'd feel that disgustingly misogynistic, so I guess everyone feels the way they feel and is able to make the reading choices they prefer accordingly.

amother

Lemon

Mon, Jun 24 2019, 1:59 pm

So are you ok with the policy of no pics of girls since it is merely a business decision? How do you explain the concept that it is "immodest" to publish a photo of a 7 year old without admitting it is s-xualizing girls. How is that not a slippery (dangerous) slope?

amother

Mauve

Mon, Jun 24 2019, 2:18 pm

Meh, I don't have to agree that it's 'immodest', only know that the printers feel it is.

I only have control of my own life and choices, and my own thoughts. If I don't feel it's immodest, then I can decide whether or not I choose to read a paper that does. I don't have to take a printer/editor's viewpoint on a subject as Toras Moshe MiSinai.

Maybe it's immodest, maybe it isn't. The printer's choice is not commentary on how I should live, or make that personal choice. That's something I reserve for my Rabbi, my DH and myself.

amother

Lemon

Mon, Jun 24 2019, 2:27 pm

Obviously.
But I guess it doesn't bother you that it is normalizing the s* sexualization of little girls.
It isn't something that most rational adults would agree with. But it is seeping into our community and affecting the attitudes of impressionable children/young teens. Not sure if it's more harmful to boys or girls in our society, tbh.

amother

Mauve

Mon, Jun 24 2019, 8:00 pm

Tbh I don't think of it as s*xualizing little girls so much as 'people can be stricter than I am, holier than I am, less religious than I am, more religious than I am, wronger than I am, righter than I am, and I'm glad I'm me and live within the spectrum of religious Judaism'.
If it bothers some people to see little girls, I'm gonna roll my eyes and move on. I'm gonna post pictures of women on my walls and still wear colorful clothes and live my life.

Tbh I don't see the big panic here. I don't see it as sexualization, I see it as people being overcautious and maybe messed up (or not, ask your LOR), but such is life. Society will always be flawed. I can't control the world - there's always gonna be messed up messages re: s*x out there (Lord alone knows how much messed up stuff I got from just living on the East Coast and reading the New York Times every morning, insular society or not) and honestly I'd rather my own girls infer an overcautious message from our media and then have me personally encourage their s*xual identity on my own.

But to each his own. I respect everyone's right to their own opinion even if it doesn't really register much to me on my 'push button topic' list beyond being a punchline to a bad joke once in a while.

shirasingsalot

Wed, Jun 26 2019, 3:52 pm

[spam removed]

Page 8 of 9

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next