Ms. Berkenwald, I appreciate your response, and I respectfully disagree with almost all of it. It's unfortunate that your staunch support for womens' rights isn't accompanied by a respect for others. You have maligned my organization, done so publicly so that many others will see that attack, and have yet to apologize. If you had simply emailed Partners in Torah first with the curious question: "Dude, what's with the photo-shop on the girl?", none of this would have occurred. It is this I would suggest that is behind the comment above regarding your journalistic failure; even as a blogger with attitude, you have a responsibility not to wrongly accuse people. Let me be clear: for you to assume we acted unethically, and then fail to even bother to ask us before leveling your broadside, is patently unethical on your part; not only that, but in my view it reduces your credibility and brings you further from your goal of advancing the causes you champion. That you couch your actions in the guise of reason ... "the only possible thing to deduce ..." and make wholly unwarranted speculations ... "this use of photoshop is deplorable and says some really troubling things about ultra-Orthodox attitudes towards women and women's bodies." -- only makes the whole thing worse. If your aspiration were to facilitate a thoughtful discussion, then you might have come back and fleshed out truthfully what this use of photoshop says about the attitudes of the "ultra-orthodox" toward women. As noted earlier, we acted to ensure the J of our logo would not juxtapose the model's breast in a way that objectively looked to be lewd. This use of photoshop therefore says a great deal about how the orthodox view women's bodies -- with profound respect! The truth of the matter is the opposite of your deduction. What would a real dialogue on this photoshop have looked like. Hmm, isn't it curious that there exists a worldview out there that rather than exploit the model's obvious physical beauty to appeal to a college aged crowd, chose instead to ensure she not be objectified as a piece of physicality? Yes, but you reduced her bust; isn't that disrespectful and negating her beauty?!! Great question -- you are right, but at what point does a woman's image cross over to becoming objectified? How do you define that point precisely in the context of a marketing effort? Even more, how does the concept of physical beauty fit within a world of spiritual pursuits? This is a discussion. Nope, none of that on this post. Won't find those difficult questions raised here. Only attacks with attitude. How easy it is to malign a world you do not understand rather than be curious, assume the good, and benefit from the perspective of others. Be well, Yaacov
Ms. Berkenwald, I appreciate your response, and I respectfully disagree with almost all of it. It's unfortunate that your staunch support for womens' rights isn't accompanied by a respect for others. You have maligned my organization, done so publicly so that many others will see that attack, and have yet to apologize. If you had simply emailed Partners in Torah first with the curious question: "Dude, what's with the photo-shop on the girl?", none of this would have occurred. It is this I would suggest that is behind the comment above regarding your journalistic failure; even as a blogger with attitude, you have a responsibility not to wrongly accuse people. Let me be clear: for you to assume we acted unethically, and then fail to even bother to ask us before leveling your broadside, is patently unethical on your part; not only that, but in my view it reduces your credibility and brings you further from your goal of advancing the causes you champion. That you couch your actions in the guise of reason ... "the only possible thing to deduce ..." and make wholly unwarranted speculations ... "this use of photoshop is deplorable and says some really troubling things about ultra-Orthodox attitudes towards women and women's bodies." -- only makes the whole thing worse. If your aspiration were to facilitate a thoughtful discussion, then you might have come back and fleshed out truthfully what this use of photoshop says about the attitudes of the "ultra-orthodox" toward women. As noted earlier, we acted to ensure the J of our logo would not juxtapose the model's breast in a way that objectively looked to be lewd. This use of photoshop therefore says a great deal about how the orthodox view women's bodies -- with profound respect! The truth of the matter is the opposite of your deduction. What would a real dialogue on this photoshop have looked like. Hmm, isn't it curious that there exists a worldview out there that rather than exploit the model's obvious physical beauty to appeal to a college aged crowd, chose instead to ensure she not be objectified as a piece of physicality? Yes, but you reduced her bust; isn't that disrespectful and negating her beauty?!! Great question -- you are right, but at what point does a woman's image cross over to becoming objectified? How do you define that point precisely in the context of a marketing effort? Even more, how does the concept of physical beauty fit within a world of spiritual pursuits? This is a discussion. Nope, none of that on this post. Won't find those difficult questions raised here. Only attacks with attitude. How easy it is to malign a world you do not understand rather than be curious, assume the good, and benefit from the perspective of others. Be well, Yaacov