Regarding the April 22 editorial "Nigeria's glass: half full": I very much agree with you about the successes in the elections that recently took place in Nigeria. It is indeed the first time a civilian government has handed over administration to another civilian government without the usual military intervention. However, I do not agree that the result shows a wider gap between the Christian south and the Muslim north. Looking at it from the perspective of the political parties, they did have their strongholds, but the All Peoples Democratic Party captured places one would have thought impossible, especially in the south. On an individual basis, President Olusegun Obasanjo won in parts of the north as well.
Oluwabukola Oyetunji Idowu
Regarding the April 15 editorial "Valuing 'women's work'": A line about the disparity of women's incomes and the need for child-care policies to allow women to work struck me. The assumption seems to be that the answer is to farm out child-care and family responsibilities so that women could be free to work more efficiently and advance into higher echelon jobs.
This ignores the fact that such work would require long hours leading women to ignore and neglect their families, as career-oriented men have done in the past. I predate women's lib, and am aware of the problems of being a woman in a man's field. But this argument ignores the fact that women carry and bear children - and that most women want to nurture their children. It is wrong to make policies based on a theory that assumes work is the highest goal in life - as if happiness for most people is found not in relationships with their family and friends but in a job.
Ignoring the family responsibilities of women - and men - ends up dehumanizing us in the name of equality.
Your April 22 article "Kindergartners, raise your pencils" about writing in journals recalls my best and worst memories of being that age in 1949.
After learning the alphabet, (I still remember walking home from school wondering what comes after "k"), our class wrote a newspaper each morning. We gave news to our teacher to print on the board: the date, the weather, who was absent, who had a birthday. Then we copied each word letter by letter onto wide-margin paper. Teacher walked among us as we scribbled, pointing out an uncapitalized "j" or an uncrossed "t." Spelling and printing correctly was the worst part of my day. But now I'm a newspaper reporter who knows what comes after "k." Let's hope today's tiny journalists can someday say the same.
After attending the movie "Holes" recently, your April 18 review "Dig right in to the eccentric 'Holes,'" proved quite accurate with regard to staying true to the novel, and its PG rating for violence and dark themes. Although I liked the film, I'm puzzled by why Disney's name is so clearly associated with it. What happened to using the Touchstone Pictures label for Disney-produced movies not suitable for the whole family? Years ago, the Disney name meant everyone in the family could enjoy watching a movie together. Now, parents need to investigate, review, and decide what is appropriate for their children - including Disney entertainment. I have a hard time believing this was Walt Disney's vision for his signature production company.
N. Tustin, Calif.
The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. We can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number.
Mail letters to 'Readers Write,' and opinion articles to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to 617-450-2317, or e-mail to email@example.com.