Opinion

Advertisement

Supported by

letters

To the Editor:

Re “Barbie Has Never Been a Great Symbol, but She’s an Excellent Mirror” (Opinion guest essay, July 22):

Andi Zeisler’s essay was a walk down memory lane. As a feminist and a professor in a medical school with a young daughter in the 1980s, I was confronted with the dilemma of whether to buy a Barbie doll. Thankfully, the solution emerged when I found a “Dr. Barbie” in a toy store I was browsing in during a weekday lunch hour.

When I showed this doll to colleagues, one immediately renamed her “Dr. Boobie.” For, alas, her medical white coat barely covered her well-endowed upper anatomy. Further, her pink high heels would have left this poor doll exhausted after a full day of conducting medical rounds and seeing patients.

Perhaps this 1980s Dr. Barbie encapsulates the wish “to have it all”: a stereotyped image of ideal female beauty coupled with a traditionally male high-status job.

Judith RichmanChicagoThe writer is professor emerita of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

To the Editor:

The new Barbie movie has inspired much talk about how Barbie has affected the lives of girls. What about her impact on boys?

My younger son, who is now 33, asked for a Barbie doll when he was around 7 or 8. My husband and I were a little reluctant because it didn’t seem appropriate at the time.

I think the tipping point came a few days later when we brought him to McDonald’s for a Happy Meal. Two prizes were offered: a miniature Barbie or a car. My son asked the counter girl for the Barbie. He was upset by her response. She told us that she couldn’t give it to him, that the Barbie was only for girls.

The next day we bought him one.

Nancy LubarskyCranford, N.J.

To the Editor:

I wasn’t allowed to play with Barbies as a kid, yet I saw the film wearing sparkly pink heels and a hot pink dress, excited to have a girls’ night out. I just didn’t expect to be weeping so hard I had to use my sunglasses case as a tissue.

I was absolutely blown away by the giant everything of the film. “Barbie” was wildly imaginative, shockingly poignant, and brilliant in its expansive scope and execution.

What surprised me the most was how much Mattel let the director, Greta Gerwig, take the wheel. It was a movie that looked unlike anything I’ve ever seen, tackling women’s roles with deft precision, heart and inventive humor.

Brava, Greta!

Heather Hach HearneManhattan Beach, Calif.

To the Editor:

Boy, is Barbie getting a lot of coverage (full disclosure: I owned two in the 1960s).

In my view, “Barbie” the movie, and the concomitant buzz around the whole Barbie phenomenon, are a sobering reflection on how fake, plastic, artificial, vapid and shallow we have become as a society.

People, these dolls and accessories are for prepubescent girls, and not worthy of your attention, except to engender serious discussion about the sad series of events in America for the last 30 to 40 years that has led us to this point.

Sheila ReillyJamestown, R.I.

To the Editor:

Re “A Horizon of Hope at Penn Station” (Critic’s Notebook, July 10):

Michael Kimmelman suggests that the public should rally around a proposal by ASTM North America to continue operating Penn Station under Madison Square Garden. Its proposal is greatly preferable to the one submitted by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, but is still a steep compromise. Madison Square Garden needs to move.

Even the M.T.A. has said that Madison Square Garden is incompatible with the functions of Penn Station. Indeed, the columns and piers that support Madison Square Garden impede critical improvements that Penn Station needs, especially at track level. Penn Station’s 1910 track plan needs to be modernized to accommodate regional rail now, not in the 22nd century.

To continue Madison Square Garden above Penn Station would mean that the most expensive civic project for the largest transit hub in the hemisphere is effectively hostage to Madison Square Garden.

Gov. Kathy Hochul needs to do more than improve the status quo incrementally and should instead give us a transit plan for the 21st century and beyond and the aboveground station that the public deserves.

Samuel A. TurveyNew YorkThe writer is chair of ReThinkNYC.

To the Editor:

It is shameful that McKim, Mead & White’s grand architectural masterpiece, the original Penn Station, was the structure demolished in order to build Madison Square Garden in the 1960s. But six decades later, I see the historical value of the arena, a site of many memorable events that has existed even longer than the original Penn Station.

Madison Square Garden is by far the National Basketball Association’s oldest venue — and as a testament to its iconic status, the only one that does not bear a corporate name.

Because of its Midtown Manhattan location, it is more accessible by foot, subway, bus or rail than the metropolitan area’s other large event spaces.

Hopefully we can find a way to have a beautiful and better functioning Penn Station coexisting with Madison Square Garden. The new proposal outlined in this article is promising.

Jeffrey B. FreedmanNew York

To the Editor:

Re “What I Learned in Ukraine,” by Bret Stephens (column, July 24):

With the Ukraine war past its 500th day, it is long overdue for the Biden administration to focus on the painful truth that a negotiated settlement is only going to happen based on battlefield results.

This is the time for the United States, Britain and their European allies to stand firm and provide unwavering support so Kyiv avoids a stalemate and wins. The key is having the political will to act decisively now before the U.S. gets even deeper into the 2024 election cycle.

Vladimir Putin shows no serious desire to compromise. Defeating the Russian military is the only viable path forward for serious diplomacy producing long-term stability and security in Europe. It’s the only option that ensures a democratic Ukraine and holds Russia accountable.

That’s a clear win for America and its European allies, not just for Ukraine.

James L. RegensNichols Hills, Okla.The writer is founding director and Regents professor at the University of Oklahoma Center for Intelligence and National Security.

Advertisement