(11d) Female editors and feminism
I quickly return to the publication of photos of the Duchess of Cambridge in some magazines. A photographer took photos with a long-distance lens because he was not allowed in the area. The Duchess and her husband are angry and a French court has banned the publication or distribution of the photos. The magazine can't understand the ruling.
I don't understand that female editors of newspapers defend the publication of those pictures. E.g. Laurence Pieau, editor of the French magazine Closer that published the photos, says the Duchess is a beautiful woman who is in love and that can be seen in those pictures. Therefore, she reasons she should be able to publish pictures taking at a private place. Also Mrs Delphine Pando, representing Closer, said that topless photographs were no longer considered shocking in modern society. She is right, many women don't mind as long as they can decide for themselves that photos can be published but many other women would disapprove with the publication of topless pictures, with or without their agreement.
When some men publish pictures about women without their permission (men such as the previous PM of Italy, Mr Silvio Berlusconi, who agreed to publish some pictures in some of his magazines), I can understand this because some men see women as sex objects while they don't expect someone would ever think of publishing photos about them. And if magazines would, they would disapprove this unless it shows them with a girl so the world can see they "are real men who can impress women".
But that women editors don't explain to their readers why they believe it is wrong to use a woman to increase sales of magazines, I don't understand. These are mostly liberated and independent women. That they agree that women's pride should not be defended, I do not understand. Even when, as some publishers say, the Duchess is a woman as every other woman, and thus should be treated as every other woman, then I think that is correct: we should treat all women much more with respect and thus ask permission to publish instead of exposing them.
I don't understand that female editors of newspapers defend the publication of those pictures. E.g. Laurence Pieau, editor of the French magazine Closer that published the photos, says the Duchess is a beautiful woman who is in love and that can be seen in those pictures. Therefore, she reasons she should be able to publish pictures taking at a private place. Also Mrs Delphine Pando, representing Closer, said that topless photographs were no longer considered shocking in modern society. She is right, many women don't mind as long as they can decide for themselves that photos can be published but many other women would disapprove with the publication of topless pictures, with or without their agreement.
When some men publish pictures about women without their permission (men such as the previous PM of Italy, Mr Silvio Berlusconi, who agreed to publish some pictures in some of his magazines), I can understand this because some men see women as sex objects while they don't expect someone would ever think of publishing photos about them. And if magazines would, they would disapprove this unless it shows them with a girl so the world can see they "are real men who can impress women".
But that women editors don't explain to their readers why they believe it is wrong to use a woman to increase sales of magazines, I don't understand. These are mostly liberated and independent women. That they agree that women's pride should not be defended, I do not understand. Even when, as some publishers say, the Duchess is a woman as every other woman, and thus should be treated as every other woman, then I think that is correct: we should treat all women much more with respect and thus ask permission to publish instead of exposing them.
Comments