Damaso
Photojournalist
"An Ultra-Orthodox Hasidic Jewish newspaper, Der Tzitung, has determined that the photo of top U.S. leaders receiving an update on the mission against Osama bin Laden was too scandalous. What was so offensive about the image? U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in the photo and, based on good intel, the editor of Der Tzitung discovered that she is a woman. The Hasidic newspaper will not intentionally include any images of women in the paper because it could be considered sexually suggestive."
http://www.thejewishweek.com/blogs/...paper_photoshops_hillary_clinton_iconic_photo
http://www.thejewishweek.com/blogs/...paper_photoshops_hillary_clinton_iconic_photo
Turtle
Veteran
One of the many examples of very unreasonable behaviour from very religious folk....
To use a faith-based argument; if 'men' can't cope with women as God created them, surely men have the problem?
Seems like Der Tzitung should team up with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda on how to deal with 'the female question.' Oh, the irony.
To use a faith-based argument; if 'men' can't cope with women as God created them, surely men have the problem?
Seems like Der Tzitung should team up with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda on how to deal with 'the female question.' Oh, the irony.
Neare
Well-known
Judaism acknowledges that the problem is with the men, that is why women are allowed to view men in what ever way and men not allowed to view women.
Whatever, the Hasidic are a tough crowd. We don't have to agree but what they do keeps them happy, so be it. I'm sure they are not trying to rewrite history, quite certain they will all know who Hillary is.
Please just don't let this turn into a thread of people trying to force their own values on to others.
Turtle
Veteran
I hear you, but I do find it 'challenging' when faith based arguments are used to justify this sort of behaviour, or attitudes that run contrary to everything that western society has been trying to achieve over centuries i.e. marginal groups which possess views that run contrary to (and are in some cases an existential threat to) the wider society within which they are tolerated. Many such groups would enforce their view on others, if given the authority to do so and this grates.
Religious dogma is a poor excuse for arguments that cannot be justified rationally and I am firmly with Richard Dawkins on this sort of thing. I am certainly not anti-faith, however!
I agree, there is no suggestion that they are trying to change history and form a photographic perspective this is just an interest article I suppose. Unfortunately, in the process it has shed light on behaviour that is starkly contrary to what most people believe is reasonable. Photographs are often used to portray an account of 'what happened' and in this case what happened has been manipulated because it is somehow sexually subversive. I find that perverse and believe it speaks of an inability to face and/or deal with reality.
When the day comes that a 64 year old woman in dull suit and pearl set represents a serious threat to male self-control, it really is time for us all to be consigned to the fires of salvation.
Religious dogma is a poor excuse for arguments that cannot be justified rationally and I am firmly with Richard Dawkins on this sort of thing. I am certainly not anti-faith, however!
I agree, there is no suggestion that they are trying to change history and form a photographic perspective this is just an interest article I suppose. Unfortunately, in the process it has shed light on behaviour that is starkly contrary to what most people believe is reasonable. Photographs are often used to portray an account of 'what happened' and in this case what happened has been manipulated because it is somehow sexually subversive. I find that perverse and believe it speaks of an inability to face and/or deal with reality.
When the day comes that a 64 year old woman in dull suit and pearl set represents a serious threat to male self-control, it really is time for us all to be consigned to the fires of salvation.