 |
| Mishpacha Magazine cover this week (JTA) |
I’m not sure this counts. But I will admit that it is a
first – perhaps setting a new precedent for a Charedi magazine. Mishapha has a
picture of Hillary Clinton on its cover. For those who don’t know, pictures of women are taboo
in most right wing Charedi publications.
One of the reasons for that taboo is that the more right
wing Charedim among them (mostly of the Chasdic variety) consider photos of
women to be immodest. It matters not if a picture of a woman is dressed modestly - even by the strictest of modesty standards. They simply avoid all pictures of women.
Why? There is a principle in the Gemarah called Lo Plug. This means that in some cases the sages did not make any exemptions in their pronouncements even if in theory there could have been. They decided to make their pronouncements across the board to avoid confusion. Mishpacha’s blanket taboo is based on the fact that it would be
insulting to say that the woman in the published picture is not attractive enough to be
banned. I never quite understood that since being modest does not mean one can’t
be attractive.
I’m not sure how right wing Mishpacha is, but they are
definitely Charedi. And they (as well as other Charedi magazines) have adhered
to that taboo so as not to offend the more right wing readers among them. Until
now that is. Witness Mishpacha’s front cover this week.
Well if the attractiveness of a woman is the real issue, I
guess the ‘negative’ of a picture will avoid that problem. Negative pictures of
human beings are - generally speaking - pretty grotesque looking. As are the pictures of both Hillary and Donald
on Mishpacha’s front cover.
For those unfamiliar with this Charedi ‘taboo’ Mishpacha’s negative cover picture might be chalked up to the theme of the cover story - executed by
a talented graphic designer. Although that may be true (I have not read
the story yet) I think it may be a way for them to observe the ban’s intent
while at the same time making their
point better by including both candidates for President on their cover. A
negative image of a face is a distorted image of a face. Almost like pixilating
it. That may have been their thinking.
I think there may be more to it though. Although there are
no guarantees it seems like we are on the verge of electing the first woman to
be President of the United States. Mishpacha is a glossy magazine with state of
the art graphic design whose pictures are integral part of its success. It
would be highly unusual for a magazine like that to never publish a picture of the
current head of state – about which there will no doubt be many future
articles. Especially when Jewish issues are involved. For example she may
be photographed with the Prime Minister of Israel. Can anyone see her being
photo-shopped out of a picture with Netanyahu when the title of the article might
read ‘Clinton meets with Netanyahu’ and all we see is Netanyahu? With the President
being cropped out because she is a woman?
This picture may have been a precursor to actual pictures of
the President - preparing their readership for the likely event that Mrs. Clinton will be elected. I recall reading an article not long ago where editors of these magazines were asked about it. There was an
admission by at least one of them that they might have to reconsider their
policy if a woman is elected President.
Many questions come to mind if this happens. Will Mrs.
Clinton be the exception? Or with they make other exceptions? If not, why not. What
about the ‘Lo Plug’ argument of not publishing
pictures of any women lest those whose pictures are published will be insulted
by not being considered attractive enough to be banned? And what does this say
about Mrs. Clinton. That she is indeed not attractive enough to be banned? Is this
not insulting to her? And how will those
among their readers who see this as a violation of the Lo Plug standard see it?
Will they continue to read these magazines? Or will they boycott them? What
will their leaders say? Will they ban it?
If it is not banned, how will their more right wing publications
react? Will they continue to ban pictures of women even though their readership
will be allowed to continue reading Mishpacha and the like? Or will they ignore
a ban on Mishpacha should it be instituted by their leaders?
I have no clue what the answers to these questions are. But this
is the 21st century and I’m glad that Mishpacha is finally getting
close to abandoning a practice that contributed to the erasure of women – or even
the word ‘woman’ entirely from the public square. An already existing mindset in some circles. Even though that may not have been Mishpacha’s intent, it was surely a contributing factor.
If anything positive is to come out of the election Hillary
Clinton, this would be a good start.
