Has anybody seen the photo in the '03 WT on marriage?

by SAHS 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • SAHS
    SAHS

    Has anybody seen the little photograph at the beginning of the study article in the September 15, 2003 Watchtower (on page 10) about marriage? I have scanned, annotated, and attached it here.

    Notice the large discrepancy between the eye levels depicted of the husband and wife. The wife is looking way up at her husband, and he is looking across toward Jesus God the Watchtower.

    Although I myself am not a woman (yes, I?m male), it still sickens me to look at this type of imposed stereotyping of the God-assigned Watchtower-assigned roles for men and women. I would imagine that this would be rather offensive to women with any shred of dignity and sense of fairness and justice. (I suppose I?m sort of a ?male feminist? in that I have empathy for anyone who is forced to be disadvantaged by others, whether it be related to gender, ethnicity, orientation, or the like. I?m NOT gay, or overly effeminate ? just sympathetically indignant.)

    I just thought I would run this by you folks here to see what you think of this example of the Borg?s not-so-subtle ?guerilla marketing? tactics to purvey their brand of political correctness.

    ?SAHS

  • Emma
    Emma

    I'm interested but don't see anything.

  • Emma
    Emma

    OK now. Thanks

  • Hyghlandyr
    Hyghlandyr

    I found that picture highly offensive. First of all both of them were smiling. He had grey hair and stuff. Clearly more watchtower controlled propoganda. He has a turtleneck symbolizing that very control..he is a slave. She is smiling because he is in bondage. He is smiling because he is not looking at her smiling at him being in bondage. PLus She has a red shirt on symbolizing the bloodshed of christianity in general.

    Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Now I know I will never go back to the watchtower, the dirty jerks.

  • talesin
    talesin

    SAHS

    ?guerilla marketing? tactics

    I think you are right on point.

    BTW, 'feminist' is not meant to be an exclusionary nor a gender-biased term. Boys are welcome in this club!

    talesin

  • cruzanheart
    cruzanheart

    She's looking adoringly at him. He's looking, in a very smug and self-satisfied fashion, at himself (I'm sure there's a mirror off on Stage Right).

    If I ever looked like that at Big Tex, he'd think he had a piece of dinner stuck on his chin.

    Nina

  • Phantom Stranger
    Phantom Stranger

    Reminds me... there's a remake of The Stepford Wives coming out this summer.

    Yes, I'm male, and I'm pained by it... because a bunch of teenage males are going to see this tripe and be molded by it (those without an ass-kicking mother like mine and who don't read Heinlein books as a preteen, anyway...)

    Unfortunately, it's just one brick in the wall...

  • patio34
    patio34

    A quick way to put it into perspective for me is to think if they have ever, or even to try to visualize the picture, in the opposite way.

    That is, with the man gazing at his wife while she was looking away up towards the sky or something.

    No, I can't picture them doing that because it would be demeaning to the male. So, it is for the female.

    Patio

  • got my forty homey?
  • patio34
    patio34

    Well here's my attempt at Photoshop to demonstrate if the couple were placed differently. I think it shows a difference in status.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit