To the Editor:
Re “Girls in School Sports activities Really feel Stress to Be Lean at Any Price” (Sports activities, Nov. 14):
Thanks for elevating consciousness concerning the dangers of scrutinizing physique composition in school athletes. I’m a medical psychologist specializing in consuming problems, and the highlighted profiles echo tales I’ve heard many instances over.
No proof means that taking part in a sport causes consuming problems, however charges of those diseases amongst athletes are larger than the nationwide common. Athletes who take part in endurance, weight-class or aesthetic-based sports activities are at heightened threat.
A give attention to metrics like physique fats share and physique weight could breed an unhelpful hypervigilance on restrictive consuming, physique dimension and burning energy. School-age women and men are sometimes nonetheless maturing bodily, and by taking drastic measures to alter their our bodies threat their bodily and psychological well-being.
Additionally they threat lacking out on the best pleasures of sports activities: being an excellent teammate and discovering pleasure in competitors even whereas competing at a excessive private stage.
Deborah R. Glasofer
New York
The author is an affiliate professor of medical medical psychology, Columbia Heart for Consuming Problems, New York State Psychiatric Institute.
To the Editor:
Girls in school sports activities are merely the tip of the spear in relation to our prosperous tradition’s broadly promoted supreme of thinness for ladies. I lived in Nigeria for a few years, and there plumpness in a lady is seen as a fascinating signifier of affluence. So this supreme for ladies’s our bodies is something however common or timeless.
Athletes and dancers carry out in public, and the strikes that make up their routines are simpler when there’s much less physique fats to deal with.
This truth extends into different areas of day by day life. However although males carry out these actions too, and may have consuming problems, the truth that ladies are the point of interest of this dialogue, as they had been after I was a professor of girls’s research at Rutgers, says one thing concerning the bigger problem of gender beliefs in our tradition.
To the Editor:
In “Democrats, Let’s Seize This Second” (Opinion visitor essay, Nov. 14), Senator Elizabeth Warren claims, “The so-called specialists who known as Democrats’ messaging incoherent had been simply plain unsuitable — and candidates who ignored their recommendation gained.”
I urge to vary. Surveys present that a big majority of Individuals favor most Democratic insurance policies — authorized entry to abortion, a good and progressive tax construction, robust environmental rules and employee safety, an affordable minimal wage, not reducing Social Safety or Medicare, and the Inexpensive Care Act. But many Democratic candidates barely squeaked by, and the Democrats misplaced management of the Home of Representatives.
It’s straightforward to know what Republicans stand for — even when it’s based mostly on lies. It’s everywhere in the media. I’m unsure that almost all Individuals can say what Democrats stand for, though a big minority of Individuals appear to suppose that we steal elections, and wish to curtail the police, open the borders and hand out giant sums of cash to individuals who refuse to work. Why? As a result of the Republican message (typically lies) is getting by means of.
Democratic politicians could have nice concepts, however they’re horrible at speaking them. In any other case they’d have a a lot greater majority in authorities.
Shaun Breidbart
Pelham, N.Y.
To the Editor:
Democrats squeaking by within the midterms is not an awesome endorsement of President Biden’s spending and different insurance policies. In lots of circumstances it’s voting for the least worst candidate.
Has Elizabeth Warren not seen the polls about dissatisfaction with each former President Donald Trump and President Biden? If “not one of the above” had been a selection, it will seemingly have gained on many ballots.
As a centrist, I would like elected officers to cease speaking and writing about how nice they’re and the way unhealthy their opposition is. Slightly, give attention to what you’ll accomplish, bipartisan cooperation and downside fixing.
Lots of my average Democratic buddies would vote for Liz Cheney if she had been a presidential candidate. Positive, she is extra conservative, however she has demonstrated integrity, bipartisanship and intelligence. That will be a refreshing change.
Gail MacLeod
Lexington, Va.
Eric Adams and the Midterms
To the Editor:
Re “Democrats See Adams at Root of State Losses” (entrance web page, Nov. 18):
Mayor Eric Adams didn’t lose 4 New York congressional seats. Asserting that he’s guilty says, in essence, that almost all of voters who elected Republicans in swing districts selected poorly and that if voters had not been informed crime was an issue, the Democratic candidates in these districts would have gained.
Mr. Adams has recognized crime as a precedence for his administration. By advantage of successful election, he’s entitled to set his agenda. Whether or not the present enhance in crime is a surge or a blip could be debated, definitely, however the concept he ought to soft-pedal issues about public security to assist different Democratic candidates is inappropriate.
Alternatively, the truth that Republicans exploited perceptions about crime for electoral acquire could also be deplorable, however it’s nicely inside the guidelines of the sport.
The Democrats’ lack of New York congressional seats resulted from hubris round redistricting and willful ignorance about public notion of points like bail reform. Eric Adams had nothing to do with both.
Rob Abbot
Croton-on-Hudson, N.Y.
Sue Republican Liars
To the Editor:
Re “Misinformation on Pelosi Assault Unfold by G.O.P.” (entrance web page, Nov. 6):
The notion appears firmly rooted amongst Democratic political leaders that since politics is tough and tumble, they need to rise above it when the G.O.P.’s fabrication machine spews ominous conspiracy theories and baseless slurs to obscure actuality.
However since Republican politicians aren’t restrained by disgrace, widespread decency or respect for the reality, tolerating their falsehoods solely encourages the correct wing to wallow in fact-free filth. As a substitute, the victims of right-wing slanders owe it to themselves — and to us — to hunt cash damages for defamation from reckless Republican liars.
First Modification regulation protects scorching invective. However there’s a restrict. Underneath the constitutional ideas that govern defamation regulation, a political speaker isn’t free to knowingly utter falsehoods or to talk with reckless indifference to fact or falsity.
That precept plainly applies to unfounded Republican claims about Paul Pelosi. It likewise applies to Newt Gingrich’s assertion that John Fetterman has “ties to the crips gang,” and to Donald Trump’s lies a couple of voting machine maker.
Multimillion-dollar injury awards may deter Republicans from fouling the political panorama with lies designed to hide their lack of solutions to America’s issues.
Mitchell Zimmerman
Palo Alto, Calif.
The author is an lawyer.
A Matter of Area
Supply: NY Times
