Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

US paper editing female White House staff out of THAT White House pic?

14 replies

Camerondiazepam · 10/05/2011 15:33

Any thoughts on this ?

Sorry if this has been done to death, couldn't see another thread on it.

OP posts:
southeastastra · 10/05/2011 15:35

the 'laws of modesty' ?? wtf

SardineQueen · 10/05/2011 15:59

That is completely bonkers.

They won't show photos of women to protect their modesty? Had not heard that one before. Not a mainstream paper, obviously.

Snorbs · 10/05/2011 16:07
Shock

Well, I think that wins the prize for "Most ridiculous thing seen online today".

steamedtreaclesponge · 10/05/2011 16:09

Erm... yes, right Hmm

At least they apologised!

steamedtreaclesponge · 10/05/2011 16:09

Snorbs, yes, definitely the oddest thing I've seen today too!

TheCrackFox · 10/05/2011 16:14

How depressing.

SardineQueen · 10/05/2011 16:15

As someone mentioned in the comments, the apology was for tampering with an official white house photo, something that people were asked not to do.

The apology wasn't for cutting the women out.

IYSWIM

SardineQueen · 10/05/2011 16:17

It's the idea that they have taken it upon themselves to protect the women's modesty, because they have such a great respect for women. But they haven't actually asked the women if that is what they want to happen. How is that in any way respectful?

Appalling.

ThisIsANiceCage · 10/05/2011 16:35

Poor old men, eh? They don't get to be "appreciated for who they are and what they do, not for what they look like".

Der Tzitung should show them more respect.

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 10/05/2011 16:36

Fecking hell. Good comments on the link though.

Camerondiazepam · 10/05/2011 19:17

I'd love to have heard Hilary Clinton's reaction - d'you think she was Fairly Cross or Frankly Baffled? That photo is going to be an enduring historical image, it's just WEIRD to have done it IMO!

OP posts:
tribpot · 10/05/2011 19:21

I'm taking it they didn't publish any photos of the Royal Wedding with Kate airbrushed out? "Prince William the Duke of Cambridge kisses thin air" ... etc. What do they intend to do when there is a female president?

SmellsLikeTeenStrop · 11/05/2011 14:36

''It's the idea that they have taken it upon themselves to protect the women's modesty, because they have such a great respect for women. But they haven't actually asked the women if that is what they want to happen. How is that in any way respectful?''

When I read this in the Huff post the impression I got was that they were trying to protect men from sexual temptation.

This isn't respectful to women, this is treating women in a most hateful degrading way. It's relegating them to being sex objects who need to be 'cleansed' from the environment so that men can go about their daily business without any fear of temptation.

Wordwork · 11/05/2011 14:38

I noticed that respecting men 'for what they are/do rather than their appearance' doesn't require airbrushing them out of the photo.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread