How far can the concept of "modesty" protect sexists?

Yes, a last bastion of sexism - protected by laws designed to protect a freedom... thus laws that are hardest to assail. Or substitute 'political worldview' for 'laws'.

Of course deleting women from photos is part of deleting women from public life, and thus from having power.

An interesting part of your question is 'especially' in NYC. You have a concern about who has influence to shape views, think their location in NYC boosts their influence? I've lived and worked in NYC for over 30 years. Actually, lived and worked in Brooklyn for that time. Interesting thing - here in NY, 99% of the city's national and world identity is centered in Manhattan. Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island are peripheral to the power. The Hasidic communities of Brooklyn are well known but isolated - viewed as oddities. They do have local political power, but it is local. As a Jewish friend once put it, 'those Hasidim are some strange puppies.' Several Jewish friends have, at different times, taken pains to point out that the Hasidim aren't representative of traditional Judaism, but are sects that arose in Europe, and became defined by their isolationism and inward focus. (Paternalism in the various forms of Judaism in the present day is an interesting spectrum, an interesting question - but too much for here.)

It is hard to see girls being raised in various 'power-paternalism' religions, as I do here in Brooklyn - Muslims, Hasidim, and a few fundamentalist Christian.

Yes, your question ties into a much larger question - where should the limit be on people's freedoms when they impinge on other people's freedoms. Ultimately sad that some insist that their worldview demands that they be able to dominate and control others.

Of course this is relegating women to a lower status, indeed, imagine if you will if Secretary Clinton were the President of the United States, then they surely would NOT have published the photograph at all, again citing reasons of "modesty" but this is obviously a ephemism that Rabbi Friedman uses aptly to describe the inherent sexism that ultra orthodox Juidaism is predicated upon.

But the big picture here is that we're dealing with freedom of religion taking precedence over any other matters of gender equality... Clearly this group's right to practice their religion which includes overt sexist practices including but not limited to simply photoshopping this image and then offering a soft, laughable apology for it, supersede their interest in ensuring equality of the genders... They do NOT force women to participate in their sect nor do they impose their views on everyone... It's just a matter of, hey, if you're gonna participate in our "religion" then you have to play by our rules which include relegating women to a lower position in society, there's no doubt about it.

Perhaps they should take the position that "we cannot publish photos of anyone who is not Hasidic, ... in accordance with our religious views, y'see." Then their little newspaper can get even smaller.

Save a tree.

@Myron: No one questions the right of the paper's editor/publisher to practice his or her religion. But the photograph's copyright holder (the OWNER) gave permission to publish the photo only if UNmodified. So the newspaper in this case ("Zeitung" means "newspaper" in German) broke the law in publishing that photo.

It may be new york but it target audience is definitely very religious customers of the paper. Editing people out based o ngender is by definition treating the sexes differently so therefore sexist. Especially if therer's no good reason given.

Also I'm not sure about the "you can see 10 years of tension and heartache and anger in Hillary's face" Don't know what this means at all. Because if you look at obama his face is very expressive of how he feels but becuse he's black or at least male his facial expression is omitted by women's groups not surprisingly.

Furthermore we could go into asking is it sexist against women (or men) to hide their faces from the papers when she accuses a man of rape or sexual harrassment/assault while printing the accused man's face everywhere. Or is this the area where it's good to hide women's existence away from the media and treat the sexes different because it serves a feminist view? Im trying to say that if hiding women away from papers is sexist because it treats the sexes different then the view must be held consistant in other areas too, unless a good reason is given.

Well, I wouldn't see it as being "protecting sexists" ... Yours seems to be chicken-and-egg logic. Are they infusing sexism into their religion, or is their religion the source of their sexism?

This is an interesting question, don't get me wrong. I really appreciate an actual gender-studies question, and not the typical series of rants and whines you find on this board, as well as immature commentary on who guys think that girls prefer to date.

I think that these ultra-religious whackjobs are in a league of their own. They are editing out images of women using a religious excuse. But it is more like a "we're here and were queer" kind of self-outing. They are making a political statement, as an effort to legitimize themselves.

And this strategy seems to work. They are making enough controversy for you to initiate this conversation with me, and these other people. We all bit.

But I think that is what it is. But like another poster said ... don't give these guys too much credence.

I wasn't surprised one bit. I asked a question about it, too. Given the way the Hasidic Jews treat their women - don't touch their wives while they're menstruating, make them shave their heads and wear head cover once they're married, have sex through a nuptial sheet so their wives don't enjoy it - for procreational purposes only - but then brag about having sex slaves from poor East European countries, this is zero surprise to me. I'm willing to bet that if this was in a Muslim paper, people would make such a big deal about it. But we can't say anything about it because, you know, they are Jewish, "the chosen people," because we help the state of Israel, because of the Holocaust etc. We never seem to learn from these horrible mistakes, do we?...

I think it shows how in Judaism woman is just not. Let's not forget that Christianity is an extension of Judaism. Islam ironically is one of the most liberating religions for women, if practiced with common sense.

I realize I may have not exactly answered your question, but I figure at least I'd give it a shot, you know, my two shekels or dinars.

Being wrong is a good thing because it means you're learning. If you're always right, then you need to start worrying. That's what happens when people think theirs is the only way, unfortunately.

There is no sense in making sense of the actions of ultra religious nuts.

A cursory glance in the internet reveals that Fex is just talking bull,

http://www.snopes.com/religion/sheet.asp

clearly states that this is an urban legend tht the hasidics have a nuptial sheet, and what is this thing about muslims being so much liberal to women? Yea tell that to the afghan women, the saudi women.

I believe that religious fundamentalists of all kinds should protect themselves from reality, because they don't seem to be strong enough to handle its deteriorating effect on their fragile senses. The world at large and everyone in it should pay no attention to hysterics of over-self righteous zealots, because their presence in our taxpaying society is thankfully insignificant. We simply could not care less of what they think, feel and suspect of dangers behind self expression of middle aged conservatively dressed female politician.

"For one, how is photoshopping women out of political photos NOT relegating them to a lower status?'

What say you about women who want to walk around topless? Hmm??

I compare the political right in america to the feminist movement in america.

At one time both had real strong points. But as they got more & more of their issues passed into law, & those laws made things even worse than the original problem, they both seemed to get crazier & loonier.

Now both whats left of the feminist movement & what is now the far right has to come up with crazier & crazier stuff in order to get anyone to pay attention.