JustASC

Ms. magazine’s pitiful response to its rejection of the American Jewish Congress ad:

Statement of Katherine Spillar, executive editor Ms. magazine

concerning AJCongress ad

January 11, 2008

“Ms. magazine has been criticized for not running an ad submitted by the American Jewish Congress (AJCongress) featuring the photographs of three prominent Israeli women leaders with the statement “This is Israel”. In its press release criticizing Ms., AJCongress has taken the position that Ms. therefore must be ‘hostile to Israel’. This is untrue and unfair.

“Ms. frequently covers women leaders from around the globe. Indeed, the current issue just now hitting newsstands, features a major story profiling Israel’s Foreign Affairs Minister Tzipi Livni, highlighting her career and accomplishments. Livni was one of the women pictured in the AJCongress ad.

“Ms. magazine’s policy, however, is to only accept mission-driven advertisements from primarily non-profit, non-partisan organizations that promote women’s equality, social justice, sustainable environment, and non-violence. The ad submitted by AJCongress for consideration appeared to be a political ad, and as such, was inconsistent with this policy. With two of the women featured in the ad from one political party in Israel, Ms. concluded that in accepting the ad it could be viewed as though it was supporting one political party over another in the internal domestic politics of a country.”

Katherine Spillar, Executive Vice President, Feminist Majority Foundation

Executive Editor, Ms. magazine

433 South Beverly Drive

Beverly Hills, California 90212

kspillar@feminist.org

You really have to see the ad to understand how weak a pretext this is. The ad features head shots of the Speaker of the Knesset, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the President of the Supreme Court, women all, and three simple words: “This is Israel.” True, Livni and Itzik are both Kadima (and how many American Jews, let alone Ms. readers, even know that?), but it does happen to be the ruling party in Israel, so you might imagine that is how they would have reached their positions of power. (What if Germany had placed an ad with a picture of its leader Angela Merkel? Would Ms. have called it political?) Plus, Israel has a coalition government, so the two women represent a larger bloc than just their party. In effect, Ms. is rejecting the ad either because Israel’s most powerful women are not sufficiently diverse for its editors.

Another possibility is that they think, or think their readers will think, that Kadima represents something antithetical to Ms.’s ideals. Considering we’re talking about the centrist Kadima, whose party leader is under fire from the right for even suggesting the division of Jerusalem among other conciliatory moves toward the P.A., what on earth could those “ideals” be?

But to even argue about the ad’s “politics” is to suggest that Ms. is telling the truth. I think the truth lies in what the AJC’s Harriet Kurlander said she was told by a Ms. rep when she tried to place the ad: that it “would set off a firestorm” and that “there are very strong opinions” on Israel. I’m sure that’s true on both ends — that the rep said it and it would set off a firestorm. Sad but true — acknowledging Israeli normalcy and legitimacy is a controversial topic in some political sectors, as if Israel is the sum total of its conflict with the Palestinians.Or perhaps Ms.had a problem with AJCongress, which earlier in the decade had been portrayed as moving to the Right, but has lately embraced positions on “women’s equality, social justice, sustainable environment, and non-violence” that would warm the hearts of many Ms. readers.

Except those, of course, who think you can’t talk about Israel if you’re not willing to rend your garments, beg forgiveness, or condescend to the Palestinian cause.