Bochrim Spray-Paint Over �Not Tzniyus� Advertisement

Well, the next time anti-semites spray paint swastikas on a shul, I should have no sympathy right?

I don’t expect non-Jews to respect our sensibilities. Why should I? Do you respect Christian rights? Would you support a Christian who vandalized something that they felt was inappropriate?

I saw those signs and they weren’t terrible at all. Women walk through Boro Park in much less. I’ve seen them personally.

Its that attitude that allows men to throw acid on a woman dressed inappropriately.

I don’t understand how anyone can support this. We live in a country that grants us tremendous freedoms with the stipulation that we grant others those same freedoms.

I still don’t understand how someone can be following their code of conduct (7 mitzvos bnei noach) and we have the right to say “Too bad. I don’t like what you are doing.” Hashem said that’s enough for them!

SJS:

You have to differentiate between a hate sign and regular spray paint. If the bochrim would have spray painted a “jewish star” over the sign, then we might be having a different discussion.

I can’t think of a good comparative example for non-jews, but lets say there was a new religion that included Mohamud as a prophet, and included his picture as an icon. A Muslim would want to “erase” the picture, and even though it would be illegal, they (themselves) would feel justified in doing so.

“…..our neighborhoods.”

I don’t think we want to go back to times in New York (or any city) when it was unsafe to walk in certain neighborhoods being a certain race or religion. To prevent that from recurring, all citizens must obey the law and the laws should be enforced.

SJS:

I’m not saying it does make it “right”. Right is a very subjective word. All I am saying is that (as I have said before) some (I think most) people are willing to break the law for their cause. If this is their cause, and they are willing to go to jail for it, then it (to a certain extent) changes the action from vandalism to a protest.

I agree with you that the concept is probably foreign to these bochrim, and they are doing it for “shtick”, as a dare, or (least likely) “growing radicalism on Orthodox Jewry”. But hypothetically, the concept of “civil disobedience” does and should exist, and the law is not the end all. I hope we all would have sat with Rosa Parks, or walked from Selma, even though it was “illegal”. If these bochrim were really doing what they did as a protest against the lack of Tznius on the billboard (which I did not see), and would pay damages, etc. to H&M, then OK, but they have failed miserably at that.

GAW,

I absolutely would have supported Rosa Parks. She was also protesting an unjust law – how is the law protecting people’s property from vandalism unjust?

My comparisons are fair, even if abhorrant. But do you like the Mohammed example better? We can’t ask for protection and freedom and then deny it to others. H&M’s sign was a lot less problematic than a swastika, but no one has the right to vandelize other people. Unless you think PETA is correct when they do it?

There is absolute right and wrong. However, I don’t think tznius is in ANY way (especially a sign posted high up, so high that they needed to stand on a vending machine to even reach it) the type of problem that these men were making it out to be.

I tested out walking looking down today – the only time I needed to look up was when my coworker called out to me as we passed in the subway and when I needed to cross city streets. Since these signs are high up, they are not in the line of sight of people, unless people are looking. We should be training men to walk looking down and then these signs wouldn’t be an issue. I didn’t see any advertisements while doing this experiment and I walked on a few city blocks and went into the subway. I also have no idea what people were wearing.

Its kind of like when people throw dirty diapers. Its hard to take their cause seriously. Can you imagine R’ Elyashiv doing this? I doubt it.

and if the sign wasnt so bad and the images of the semi-dressed women could easily be ignored by men, why pray tell is the advertiser paying $30,000 a month (according to an earlier post in this thread) to put that ad up???

If you can give me a good argument why a woman’s CALVES should be spray painted, then go ahead. (Never mind that they left the woman’s pants outline visible which I find strange)

These are NOT lewd pictures. These are pictures of regular clothing that women on the street wear every day (and not even very explicit clothing). Its not bikinis and hot pants!

The sign also mentions not to post pictures of WOMEN. Sorry, I do not support the idea that in America women should be hidden from view.

SJS:

I’m not arguing with you about the specifics of the case (which I stand by what I posted much earlier in the thread, and in my previous post), nor about the generalities (there is a time and place to break the law). I did not see the sign, so I won’t comment on it.

From your last post, you are bothered by the specific unthinking actions of the bochrim, and how it may have hurt their “cause”. No disagreement here.

As a postscript, a story, from a Ran in Keddushin (IIRC).

After Rav (the Amorah) died, his Talmidim decided that each one of them would make a neder to be mekabel one of their Rebbe’s chumrahs. Rav Yosef was the one who was Mekabel not to look outside his own four Amos, so that he should not see things he shouldn’t see. He worked and worked at it, but was unsuccessful. Seeing that he would be unable otherwise to fulfill his Kabalah, he weakened his eyes to the point where he was blinded.

It is easy for a woman to say “just do it” with Arayos. Hashem, in his infinite wisdom, created males with a strong Yetzer Hara for Arayos. Rav Yosef, an Amorah, was unable to “just do it”. It is a lifelong fight, and it never ends.

Or as I have posted before: “You don’t know the power of the Dark Side”.

sorry sjs, but i agree with gavra’s bringing civil disobedience into the discussion. this is a civil rights issue for every orthodox jew. these boys are our rosa parks.

Civil rights for an Orthodox jew is leaving work early Friday, Not working on Saturday. taking off for Yom Tom etc (Dont think this is always so easy, even in NY)

Rosa Parks practiced NON-VIOLENCE, so if a bunch of bochrim sat in front of an H & M store until the sign came down, THATS non-violence.

Disfiguring a Sign in VADALISM

GAW,

I understand that it can be hard for men. However, what was posted on the sign was very similiar (and maybe even more tzanua) than what people on the street are wearing. Are you trying to tell me that a non-scantily clad picture is more alluring than a scantily clad woman walking down the street?

PETA believes this is how to act as well. If someone posted how PETA had vandalized a picture of Chassidim wearing streimels on the street, no one could be ok with it.

When we ask for freedoms we have to grant it to others, or we have no right to ask for it.

For the record, H&M’s marketing department says the following:

creative professionals located in the major fashion hubs of

the world. The advertisements that we produce are largely

identical in all of our markets, but the media strategy is

adapted to local requirements and conditions.

If someone had contacted them to remove the sign, they probably would have done something about it.

SJS:

I didn’t see the picture, and I have a hard time justifying vandalism. I take no stand in this case.

As I am aware, calves are dependent on minhag hamakom. I have heard claims that there is a minhag hamakom in NY, but I do not believe that.

Faces are not ervah.

Feif Un: Then who will the men blame for all the problems in the world?! (separate post in case it is blocked)

btw ive had the misfortune to see other h&m billboards. they are far from innocent. they show below the neckline and worse. the picture on boro park scoop show that the two women on the right are pretty much obliterated, so it is difficult to say for sure, but it is a pretty good bet that they too were showing too much.

PETA believes this is how to act as well. If someone posted how PETA had vandalized a picture of Chassidim wearing streimels on the street, no one could be ok with it.

There you go again, comparing right with wrong as if they’re the same! PETA is wrong! (I’m not saying spray painting the sign was right, but it’s an unfair comparison to compare “Chassidim wearing streimels” to an inappropriate sign.)

There you go again, comparing right with wrong as if they’re the same! PETA is wrong!

LOL! Who says? And does PETA agree?

Maybe there is a parallel thread on the PETA boards discussing this very news item, with some PETA dude saying “but if we spray painted a furry hat, we would be right! We are saving animals!”

cherrybim

you have a good point(s)

cherrybim,

but the chilul hashem created does a far greater disservice to our cause that this destructive message can ever hope to do.

I don’t think that anything which angers non-Jews is automatically a Chillul Hashem, it probably first needs determination if it was acceptable l’halacha. You’re point about it not being worth it is most likely correct, though, even if it’s not technically a Chillul Hashem.

What type of store was it across from Yeshiva Chaim Berlin?

DY,

I don’t personally agree with PETA’s agenda (at least on the whole, I absolutely believe in not being cruel to animals).

However, at least butchering a cow gives sustenance to a person. You can use the leather from the cow to make shoes.

Butchering an animal to make a hat does seem wrong to me. Unless you were going to freeze in the depths of Siberia, in which case it would be pikuach nefesh.

SJS,

I think you or I could more easily manage without meat and leather than a chossid could without a streimel.

And BW, the heilige PETA would love to ban shechita, and complained that an animal was used in an attempt to kill Jews (about the animal). I think we’re in agreement on this.

gavra,

I think your point is that this was not a protest, just removal of a michshol. I think it might have been both, or even just “fun”; I don’t know the perpetrators and can only guess at their true motives.

My point is merely that the same tactics used by two ideologies cannot be compared if one’s ideology is correct and one’s is not.

Pba earlier made reference to Amalek. Any other context would make the idea abhorrent, but it’s a mitzvah, and is correct. I do not want to elaborate here for obvious reasons.

DY, I’m not a fan of PETA 🙂 I think they do a lot of crazy things. I do think they are the type of people to paint of the streimel of a chossid.

But I do think its important to live by the rules of the land, when halachically feasible. In this case it was and given H&M’s own writings for marketing, they would have modified the ad had someone contacted them.

These bochurim covered parts which we can agree are NOT erva (like faces).

I didn’t support throwing acid on women who weren’t dressed properly in Israel either. There are better ways to handle this situation and IME in today’s day and age the zealousness doesn’t often come from Torah.

OK, I’m getting bored of this topic. Next!

agittayid: so the yeshiva objected to a sheitel store which displayed much less sleaze than this h&m ad did. if even that was objectionable, how much more so this ad was.

“so the yeshiva objected to a sheitel store which displayed much less sleaze than this h&m ad did. if even that was objectionable, how much more so this ad was.”

Nobody vandalized the store. Perhaps the store closed due to people staying away because of the conflict between the storekeeper and those who objected to the pictures.

An issue seemed to be that the pictures were on the same block as the yeshiva. Also, according to what was reported on YWN, the storekeeper did not immediately agree to the demand to remove the picture. People do have a right not to patronize a store they are unhappy with. They do not have the right to vandalize.

why dont you quote the full statement in context, rather than a snippet out of context? in that case it would be clear to you that it is permissible to do the right thing (i.e. a bris mila in the soviet union) even if its against the secular law. my quoted point being that if the authorities will harshly punish someone for making a bris (or other good deed), he might be exempt from doing it if he might get caught.