Letters

• Share

China's Young Rebels
Re your article on China's linglei, the disaffected young iconoclasts [Feb. 2]: It is good that things are getting better in modern China and that linglei can dare to chase their wildest dreams. Those who are choosing an alternative lifestyle have a new kind of freedom. Whether that will enable them to raise openly the issues that truly matter remains to be seen. In the absence of complete freedom, the progress of linglei may only divert attention from real issues. Let's hope that the wait for free choice, both personal and political, isn't an endless one. Moreover, it is better if such freedom comes with the political awareness that encourages linglei to address important issues instead of wasting their independence on superficial matters.
Arvind K. Pandey
Allahabad, India

Crisis in Nepal
In his story on the political instability in Nepal [Feb. 2], Alex Perry correctly portrayed the country as on the verge of anarchy. This is due to the failure of the political parties. In Nepal, elected representatives are not yet wise enough to govern a country under democracy. There is hope, however. His Majesty King Gyanendra has offered support to any of the numerous parties that can rightfully govern the country. It is unjust to say that the King is isolated. The nation is behind him, pledging him the people's support and wishing him the best. We want to see the monarch back where he belongs: in the hearts and minds of the people, who are tired of the public bickering of selfish political parties. Politicians have managed to instill a sense of fear and helplessness in the minds of the people and turned them against democracy. Long live the King; he is our only hope in this nation of fools.
Prasanna Khatry Chettri
Kathmandu

Nepal has some serious issues, but the situation is not hopeless. It is preposterous to consider the opinion of a constitutional monarch, who may not play any active role in mainstream politics, on how vital his responsibility is while sidelining the other major political players, such as the constitutionally elected representatives and the Maoists. Yes, we have been swindled by our political parties time and again, but like it or not, our hopes rest with them. Let's give our infant democracy some time to grow. If Japan and Germany could rise up from ashes, literally, so will we someday.
Biswas Baral
Kathmandu

Free Elections for Iraq
Your article "Dealing with the Cleric" reported on the objections of Iraq's Grand Ayatullah Ali Husaini Sistani to the U.S. plan to turn over control of Iraq by June 30 to a transitional government chosen by a caucus system rather than by direct elections [Feb. 2]. One thing seems clear: President George W. Bush started a war that has claimed hundreds of American lives, and now he wants to have a nice, friendly handover of governance just in time for the U.S. presidential election. Meanwhile, the Iraqis lose out on having a true democracy, something Bush used as a justification for the war. Bush needs to guarantee free, fair and safe elections for the Iraqi people, even if those polls come too late for Bush to use in his campaign ads.
Phillip Chan
Washington

Does Government Know Best?
Andrew Sullivan's essay on Bush as "The Nanny in Chief" should be required reading for all who cherish civil liberties and individual choice [Feb. 2]. The Republican Party preaches about less government, states' rights and individual freedoms but reveals itself every day as standing for just the opposite—and in the most personal of ways.
Richard D. Green
Lilburn, U.S.

Sullivan's accusation that Bush is a big-government moralist, spending the American people's money on social issues, should be taken as a compliment instead of a criticism. Our President is doing his best to stand up for and fund what is right because he knows what is best for Americans: establishing the difference between right and wrong. The people have spoken for morality, a safeguard that keeps our country the model of a shining city on a hill.
Cherie Johnson
Chicago

Critiquing the Players
Joe Klein got it right about John Kerry [Feb. 2]. There is something missing (call it electability), as was the case with Al Gore. It worries me no end that if Kerry is the Democratic candidate, he will lose to the simplistic, shallow, flag-waving appeal of George W. Bush. The U.S. needs someone like John Edwards to inspire its youth and other voters to participate and to get rid of the Bush scourge on America's national welfare and future.
Carl Richane
Slough, England

Not only is Kerry presidential, he is positively Lincolnesque. Maybe if we elect him, the South will secede again, and Congress will finally be rid of those rock-ribbed, Bible-thumping Christian conservatives who have bedeviled it far too long.
John Cushman
Beaverton, U.S.

Sex and Love Explained
Your report on love, sex and health was quite interesting [Jan. 19], if only for the clanging banalities emitted by sociologists and psychologists trying to pretend they are real scientists. But there is a fundamental point that needs emphasis: sex and love are two totally different things. Sex is essentially selfish. No matter how it is dressed up, it is really about scratching that biological itch, about satisfying an internal hunger. In contrast, love is essentially selfless. It is about giving to another to the point of pain and even death without thought of reward. Sex and love can exist completely independently. There are many examples of sex without love—rape, prostitution and maybe even regular sex between couples. And you can love your parents, dog, God, country and football team without wanting to have sex with them.
Mike Shields
Jarrow, England

Surely sex is far more than compounding biology, chemistry and emotion! Your informative and helpful articles about sex were unduly academic, as if to suggest that since the creation, common people have discovered nothing for themselves about this distinctive aspect of their lives. Sex is wonderful, but it can be a curse if it is obsessional. It is at the heart of continuous creation; it happens to affect our sense of achievement and also failure. Sex is about morality, because it defines the boundaries that give security to individuals, families and nations. Sex and sin collide when we take for granted that all we have to do is to be happy and be in charge.
(The Ven.) Dennis Ede
London

Why Go to Mars?
Your article on the proposed manned mission to Mars [Jan. 26] estimated the cost at $600 billion. That was distressing, to say the least. I live in Africa, a continent ravaged by aids and extreme poverty caused by drought and a lack of employment. To spend all that money to see whether Mars has water, check the content of its dust and perhaps provide the trip of a lifetime to some superrich person is nothing short of criminal! We have mismanaged this incredible planet God has given us, so why spend astronomical amounts on so-called scientific research to go to another planet that cannot benefit us in any way? We are tackling the AIDS problem and other issues with limited resources. Imagine how $600 billion could be used in African nations and other countries. God forgive us for this unbelievably egocentric waste when human lives are at stake on Earth every minute of every day.
(The Rev.) Dereck Stone
Howick, South Africa

There are a number of goals that a mission to Mars could accomplish. Once a base is set up there, it could serve as a staging post for space exploration for destinations beyond. Such a base could also be a communications hub for future space exploration and travel. Mars could become the first in a network of space stations throughout the universe. After a stopover on Mars, travelers could venture farther into space and explore new regions of our galaxy. The case for going to Mars couldn't be more compelling. Sure, today's technology is not up to the task. We need to develop lightweight materials that can shield space voyagers from radiation and build spaceships that can fly from one planet to another without cumbersome booster rockets. But technology is developing at a terrific rate, suggesting that long-range spaceships could be carrying humans from this planet to work on other planets within the next 30 years.
Ian Ward
Paisley, Scotland

Student Dress Code
Your notebook item [Feb. 2] on the debate over France prohibiting the wearing of head scarves and other religious symbols in public schools missed one point: France's schools, which close on Sundays and Christian holidays, purport to be secular, but in fact they are Christian schools, pressuring Jews to attend on Saturdays and telling Muslim girls not to cover their hair. If "small crucifixes" are O.K., then why not small head scarves or small Jewish skullcaps?
Joseph A. Feld
London

A Stunning Angel
The tawny hair, the toothy smile and the provocative pose that Tricia Helfer displayed in the PEOPLE item about her portraying Farrah Fawcett of Charlie's Angels fame [Feb. 2] certainly captured the aura of the '70s star. Back when 59% of all U.S. television sets were tuned to the Angels each week, TIME zeroed in on the show, which starred a trio of skimpily clad female detectives [Nov. 22, 1976]:

"Typically, each Angels episode makes sure at least one co-star strips down to a bikini in the first ten minutes, the better to keep males in a state of gape-jawed passivity and expectation thereafter ... Even people connected with the show seem abashed by its implicit sexism ... Farrah Fawcett-Majors, the spectacularly maned frosted blond who is first among equals as a sex object [is] seen braless on all the shows. She has even on occasion refused to don a bikini, not because she has an objection to the costume but because she felt the only rationale for it was that they had 'reached a quiet point in the script and needed my body to liven things up' ... A warm, giggly sort of girl, she has a sense of humor (asked once when she first realized she was beautiful, she replied, 'Just after the makeup man got here; before that it was touch and go') and a developing shrewdness about her own power."

Setting the Record Straight
Unusual Exchange
Our story "The Monster Within," on Pakistan's violent extremist group Jaish-e-Muhammad [Jan. 26], referred to the group's leader, Maulana Masood Azhar. We said, incorrectly, that "Azhar was released from an Indian jail in a prisoner exchange in December 2000." Azhar was released from an Indian prison in December 1999 in exchange for 155 passengers from a hijacked Indian airliner.