When the Israeli newspaper HaMevaser published a photo of world leaders at the Paris Unity Rally, it edited out the women from the photo, so they were entirely absent from the result. The explanations I've seen for this is that men aren't allowed to look at immodestly dressed women. My question is: was there a religiously based reason for not just putting black bars over the exposed skin (and perhaps hair) that was considered immodest, or was the reason purely one of aesthetics?


You'd have to ask the editors of the newspaper to understand their reasoning, so this answer is just my own thoughts of possible factors involved in the decision.

Aesthetics is one possible reason.

Other possible reasons that spring to mind are that the newspaper doesn't approve of the idea of men and women together, or of female leadership in general. Blurring out the women would make it obvious that there are still women in the photo.

One last reason is that however bad the backlash was with them edited it out of the photo completely, it would have been even worse if the women were merely blurred or blackened out. Then anyone picking up the newspaper would realise women were actually at the march. At least now you have to find the original photo online to realise that people are missing from the picture.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .