Home

Why do you want women in a Magazine
  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 19, 20, 21  Next  Last >>
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Poll

Why do you want women in magazines
For inspirational reasons (Role Models)
 20%  [ 33 ]
I believe equal for men and women
 21%  [ 34 ]
Only little girls
 15%  [ 24 ]
It's not a halacha, I don't believe in Chumros
 42%  [ 68 ]
Total Votes : 159


giselle




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:34 am
Gingertop, just wanted to say that your comments on this thread are spot on 👌🏻
Back to top

gingertop




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:34 am
amother [ Linen ] wrote:
I also dont understand how not putting women's pictures in a paper makes them a s@uxual object... I just don't get it.


If every picture even of a tzanuah woman is not tznius --> women are not tznius creatures. A man has to be petrified of every woman who are a whole bunch of walking Liliths out to make them sin!

Quote:

I read a newspaper that has a small picture next to the article they wrote. But, I like their articles regardless of if their picture is there or not. It really doesn't make a difference to me.


It doesn't have to bother you. The point is, it bothers other people. I find it frustrating. I'm visual and I like seeing who I'm reading about.

And I find advertisements with families without a single female member weird and off.

Quote:
The magazines that dont include women is a different type of orthodoxy, catering to ppl who accept this as "law" which is not any different than "laws" of not wearing denim, not wearing bright colors, no long sheitels, seemed stockings etc.....


I read the Mishpacha and Ami and Bina occasionally. I still find these magazines the best fit for my reading taste. I don't think that this is a law and I don't know too many people who think so.
And even if people do think this is a law like not wearing denim, I can object on the grounds that I think it's wrong.

Quote:
We all keep different things. I dont understand why these two women are trying to influence a group that clearly will never agree with their"laws". We all keep /observe Judaism differently. I stll don't understand the connection of not showing pictures means they are "saying" women are s@xual objects.


Which two women? And again, whether or not I fit into the typical frum readership, I can consider this offensive . If I think something is wrong, even if I'm not part of that community, I can choose to fight against that policy.

Quote:
I actually think it may be a "geder"(fence) on a "geder"(fence) which may be a little overboard. But, on the other hand, one of the papers showed pics of women and now are way too lenient such that they allowed a fashion article which included really inappropriate pictures. This newspaper went too much the opposite extreme bec. They started allowing pics of women and then were too lax/open about it, and they didn't make proper boundaries.


Extremes go in two directions. In Israel, there's an expression that more modesty is immodesty. There is such a thing as going overboard on tznius. I know some shawl ladies (long story!) and I must say that some of the nivul peh and stuff that I've seen around them is not very impressive. Being so busy with modesty is a sign of obsession- which is the opposite of modesty.

Quote:

So, yes, maybe they are taking it too much to the extreme, and maybe other newspapers went in the opposite direction, of allowing inappropriate pictures. But, everyone lives differently and keeps different boundaries /fences /gederim. I still dont understand how their "not putting women pictures" is negative.


We agree! Going too much to the extreme is bad on both ends of the spectrum. Not putting women pictures is negative for all the reasons listed above.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:34 am
Angel wrote:
Who are these women endorsed by?


My question too.
I went to the website to the about us section to see who they are. They look like three accomplished women whose CVs and other works I have no idea about. They partner with a number of organizations, some of whom I can get behind, others not.
YMMV.
Back to top

shabbatiscoming




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:47 am
Angel wrote:
Deff not something I want to be part off, I agree with some of their things but other stuff they deff got wrong.
Sorry
No need to be sorry. Im not part of this org either. I was just showing an org that counters the erasing of women in magazine etc.

(can I ask out of curiosity, what do you believe they got wrong?)
Back to top

Laiya




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:47 am
amother [ Rose ] wrote:
It's not a chumra. A chumra has some basis in halacha.

People can keep all the chumras they want. I have a few myself. They can't rewrite Torah.


This.

It's a business decision, nothing more, nothing less.
Back to top

amother




Pink


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:50 am
Of course it is. But rather than come out and admit it, they try to make it sound like it is rooted in Torah. Which is damaging and a slippery slope all of its own (trying to justify no pics of little girls, etc).
Back to top

shabbatiscoming




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:53 am
watergirl wrote:
Re: the bold - Mishpacha does not cater to this type. They are very careful to cater to all of orthodoxy, as shown in their choice of weekly articles and columnists .
Ive read mishpacha magazine once, when a friend left it at my house. Im not sure what articles or columnists there are, but I found none of the articles to my taste of what I read. I dont know anyone that I know who reads the magazine. I also know that mishpacha is not sold in my area, at all. Its a dati leumi/modern orthodox area. Im going to disagree with you watergirl and say that no, they do not cater to all orthodoxy. Many people will not buy the magazine. I found it very flowery or fluffy, personally.
Back to top

Laiya




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 8:55 am
PinkFridge wrote:
My question too.
I went to the website to the about us section to see who they are. They look like three accomplished women whose CVs and other works I have no idea about. They partner with a number of organizations, some of whom I can get behind, others not.
YMMV.


I'm not familiar with them either, but if their work has nothing to do with halacha, why do they need endorsements? For ex, I just read on their website that one of their goals is to spread breast cancer awareness and the importance of screening. Why would this be something that requires endorsement?
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:00 am
Laiya wrote:
I'm not familiar with them either, but if their work has nothing to do with halacha, why do they need endorsements? For ex, I just read on their website that one of their goals is to spread breast cancer awareness and the importance of screening. Why would this be something that requires endorsement?


See who they partner with. I have some reservations about JOFA, for example. This wouldn't be enough for me to say that I wouldn't read it, or that I don't share concerns with all the partners. But it is enough for me to say that I wouldn't send this link on to someone else.
Back to top

Laiya




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:00 am
amother [ Pink ] wrote:
Of course it is. But rather than come out and admit it, they try to make it sound like it is rooted in Torah. Which is damaging and a slippery slope all of its own (trying to justify no pics of little girls, etc).


Do they even make that claim? I'd be curious to see how they worded it, if so. I'm also not sure how they could make the claim that there's a halachic basis, but then violate their own rule on their facebook page by displaying pictures of their female authors.

I think people are just innately impressed with anything published, and give it more deference that it deserves.
Back to top

amother




Rose


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:09 am
amother [ Linen ] wrote:
I also dont understand how not putting women's pictures in a paper makes them a s@uxual object... I just don't get it.

I read a newspaper that has a small picture next to the article they wrote. But, I like their articles regardless of if their picture is there or not. It really doesn't make a difference to me.

The magazines that dont include women is a different type of orthodoxy, catering to ppl who accept this as "law" which is not any different than "laws" of not wearing denim, not wearing bright colors, no long sheitels, seemed stockings etc.....

We all keep different things. I dont understand why these two women are trying to influence a group that clearly will never agree with their"laws". We all keep /observe Judaism differently. I stll don't understand the connection of not showing pictures means they are "saying" women are s@xual objects.

I actually think it may be a "geder"(fence) on a "geder"(fence) which may be a little overboard. But, on the other hand, one of the papers showed pics of women and now are way too lenient such that they allowed a fashion article which included really inappropriate pictures. This newspaper went too much the opposite extreme bec. They started allowing pics of women and then were too lax/open about it, and they didn't make proper boundaries.

So, yes, maybe they are taking it too much to the extreme, and maybe other newspapers went in the opposite direction, of allowing inappropriate pictures. But, everyone lives differently and keeps different boundaries /fences /gederim. I still dont understand how their "not putting women pictures" is negative.


Saying that the sight of a woman is always inappropriate means that people cannot see women as anything but zexual creatures. If you can't print a picture of Theresa May or Angela Merkel, it's because you are relating to her body, not her accomplishments.

It is forbidden to add a geder to a geder. Really. Chazal knew what they were doing.

Even people who don't wear denim don't think that's a halacha. It's just a community norm, which is fine. You're entitled to say that you prefer one style of clothing over another.

But to say that a woman is inappropriate simply for existing is silly at best, dangerous at worst. Unlike clothing rules, that doesn't stay within a small community of extremists. It's an attitude that affects and infects even those who live outside the community. And that's why you can't just live and let live.
Back to top

Laiya




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:12 am
PinkFridge wrote:
See who they partner with. I have some reservations about JOFA, for example. This wouldn't be enough for me to say that I wouldn't read it, or that I don't share concerns with all the partners. But it is enough for me to say that I wouldn't send this link on to someone else.


I'm not familiar with JOFA either, but having just looked at their website, it seems like they may be crossing into issues of halacha. I think that's where you want to look for endorsements.
Back to top

amother




Lemon


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:21 am
Gingertop wrote:
If I think something is wrong, even if I'm not part of that community, I can choose to fight against that policy.
Why would you tell another community how to live?
Back to top

naturalmom5




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:22 am
Angel wrote:
I believe the other thread is all heated up.
Some want for inspirational reasons and some cant understand why you cant have women at all.
If it's for inspirational reasons then putting an old picture as someone has mentioned wont do justice.
What are your opinions?
I personally couldnt care less. It never bothered me not to see women.
The problem if we will have women in magazines is that it will take me much longer to read. I wont have time to tend to my kids since I will be soo busy analyzing the women from head to toe. LOL


I hope you are joking
Anyone who would need to do that should take time away from reading the mag . For the sake of her kids she should use her time to get therapy as to why she feels the need to do that
Back to top

naturalmom5




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:26 am
shabbatiscoming wrote:
I want women in magazines because to not have them is a chumra. Full stop, thats it.

And if one takes away women, why not just take away men as well.


ITS NOT A CHUMRA FULL STOP

ITS A BUSINESS DECISION THAT HAS ZERO TO DO WITH JUDAISM
Back to top

gingertop




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:30 am
amother [ Lemon ] wrote:
Gingertop wrote:
If I think something is wrong, even if I'm not part of that community, I can choose to fight against that policy.
Why would you tell another community how to live?


Rephrasing for clarity-I'm sort of part of the community that would be considered from these magazines' readership. But even if s/o doesn't consider me part of this community, it's a free country. I can voice my objection to something I think is wrong
Back to top

amother




Pink


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:32 am
Laiya. Maybe you missed the whole Yisrael Besser debate of a year or so ago. He kept referring to "our precious mesorah" and that they were following daas Torah and our gedolim as the rationale behind the policy. (Only he never named any actual gedolim )
Back to top

amother




Rose


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:33 am
amother [ Lemon ] wrote:
Gingertop wrote:
If I think something is wrong, even if I'm not part of that community, I can choose to fight against that policy.
Why would you tell another community how to live?


Because the attitudes don't stay confined to a specific community. How do you think the shawl women started? Because if a little bit covered up is good, more must be better. Except that it is not.

Because the people behind erasing women claim to be doing it in the name of tznius. Except there's no halacha, and no precedent, for this behavior. It is a corruption of the religion to make stuff up and pretend it's required. That's my religion you're corrupting. We're all very comfortable saying that people on the left cannot claim to be doing something in the name of halacha when it's clear they are acting out of social conviction. Why not apply the same standard when the corruption comes from the right?
Back to top

chestnut




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:43 am
amother [ Aqua ] wrote:
I dont read these magazines, but,
I guess we can say that the magazine that dont have women dont cater for you ?

Believe it or not, there are plain frum, yeshivishe, and chassidishe women who don't agree with this practice. They want frum reading material and ALL of it follows this stupid invention
Back to top

naturalmom5




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Jun 20 2019, 9:43 am
amother [ Slateblue ] wrote:
If mishpacha and vaccines didn't exist what would we talk about all day? We'd be so bored. Baruch Hashem they exist.


We could still talk about spitzles and nail polish and expensive strollers in BP Very Happy
Back to top
  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 19, 20, 21  Next  Last >> Recent Topics

Page 3 of 21 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Is there a Jewish Women’s Songwriter/Musician Group? 6 Fri, Aug 16 2019, 10:45 am View last post
Hosting divorced women for shabbos meals
by amother
69 Thu, Aug 15 2019, 12:43 am View last post
ISO call in number for women's kinos, Lakewood 2 Thu, Aug 08 2019, 10:39 am View last post
Mishpacha Magazine had photos of women in Shavuos issue 173 Thu, Aug 08 2019, 8:13 am View last post
Frum women in Israel forced to take off their head coverings 38 Wed, Aug 07 2019, 5:53 am View last post

Jump to: