To the Editor:
Re “It’s Not You: Dating Apps Are Getting Worse,” by Magdalene J. Taylor (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, March 16):
With more people on online dating platforms than ever, we have entered a new era rife with hot takes and opinions based on a narrow set of experiences. Recent surveys say that dating apps are the No. 1 way people meet today, and nearly 70 percent of individuals who met someone on a dating app said it led to a romantic, exclusive relationship.
I am not here to question individual experiences, or pretend that every date will lead to success. Matching two people is an imperfect science and rests on shared interests, complex personalities, timing and more. It’s an age-old axiom for a reason: You have to kiss a few frogs before you find your prince or princess.
But lately, we’ve been building to an environment where critiques of apps are presented as a monolith and pessimism over a bad date is taken to signal the end to a generation’s romantic future. There’s this false notion suggesting that dating apps don’t work. The numbers tell us that broadly speaking and for more people than ever: They work.
Bernard Kim
Los Angeles
The writer is chief executive officer of Match Group.
To the Editor:
Re “With Lackluster Growth, Dating Apps Are in Need of a Spark” (front page, March 13):
There was a time when finding a partner was an adventure that played out in public spaces: the park while walking your dog, the bar while calming down from a hectic week, the art class that opened you up to new experiences and people.
Now apps let you sit on your sofa in your slippers and shop, viewing only what the app reveals. Are they kind? Would their smile make you look twice?
We used to live somewhere, interact with people we found there who had our approach to life — and would actually move if we found no synergy (why live somewhere that is like that?). These were all actions that led to personal connections.
So unless you are forced to live somewhere totally out of sync with your values, stop playing the game the apps have created and get off the sofa!
Susan Fraser
Jacksonville, Fla.
Donald Trump and Louis XIV
In 1709 the French bishop and theologian Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet’s tract on royal absolutism, “Politics Derived From the Words of Holy Scripture,” was published posthumously.
Bossuet affirmed that the king is a sacred being who represents the divine majesty; he is God’s “lieutenant on earth.” But Bossuet also underscored that the king “is not exempt from the law; for if he sins, he destroys the laws by his example.”
Though the king, endowed with “a divine quality,” was “not subject to the penalties of the law,” the American president is not so endowed.
Susan Dunn
Williamstown, Mass.
The writer is emerita professor of humanities at Williams College and the author of “Sister Revolutions: French Lightning, American Light.”
To the Editor:
Re “The Safety Net Is on the Ballot,” by Paul Krugman (column, March 17):
Mr. Krugman’s astute assessment of our nation’s entitlement programs was a timely reminder of two of the many things at stake in our next election.
I fear that many Americans lack an interest in understanding the catastrophic possibilities should Donald Trump be re-elected. Many voters would choose to form their opinions around sound bites from social media or partisan cable channels rather than taking the time to read up on the issues that will ultimately matter most to them and their futures.
I fear that another Trump presidency will mark the end of many time-honored traditions and programs that have become a bedrock in our society.
Mr. Krugman gives President Biden his due on Mr. Biden’s understanding of and commitment to our Social Security and Medicare programs. Should Americans fail to heed Mr. Krugman’s warnings, it will be far too late to walk back the damage Republicans would do.
Amy M. Ferguson
Dunmore, Pa.
The Music Business: Tough for New Talent
To the Editor:
Re “Why Does Every Song Sound Familiar,” by Marc Hogan (Opinion guest essay, March 24):
The commodification and exploitation of music are as old as selling sheet music by Tin Pan Alley song pluggers over 100 years ago. The hitmakers have always driven revenue, while the wannabes eternally struggle for traction.
While Mr. Hogan criticizes the current monetization of hit songwriters’ catalogs — and ties it to the dearth of opportunities for new talent — the richness and breadth of musical content these days are remarkable and overwhelming. It’s just difficult for new talent to break through and make a living, and I’ve never known it to be any different.
“Music business” is two words. I’ve been a songwriter, recording artist, record producer and music executive for more than four decades, and the song remains the same.
Robert Kraft
Encino, Calif.
The writer is former president of 20th Century Fox Music.
Killing Animals: Avoid the Euphemisms
To the Editor:
Re “OK, Class, First We Shoot the Deer” (Food, March 20):
Can we please stop using euphemisms such as “harvest” and “cull” when referring to killing animals? Let’s not sugarcoat it: School hunting and animal agriculture programs take impressionable children who are considered too immature to make responsible decisions about voting, smoking cigarettes or operating a car, and teach them how to kill living beings.
It’s especially troubling when you consider that a large number of U.S. mass shooters were exposed to or took part in violence against animals or other forms of cruelty at an early age.
Having been a teacher in the Bronx for many years, I feel strongly that educators have an obligation to model kindness to those different from us and compassion for those weaker. Children are naturally empathetic, and we do them and the greater population a disservice when we teach them to suppress that.
Lisbet Chiriboga
Norfolk, Va.
The writer works for TeachKind, PETA’s humane education division, but is not writing on behalf of the organization.
To the Editor:
The photos of the blood and organs of the deer were somewhat repulsive, but the article’s title is cruel.
But then, it was truthful. My memories of “Bambi” haunt me still.
Rosemary Abbate
Moorestown, N.J.
Memo to Liberals
To the Editor:
Re “Should Wildlife Advocates Help Set Hunting Rules in Vermont?” (news article, March 26):
As a liberal non-hunter and non-fisher (I live in Brooklyn, for goodness’ sake), I read the article with interest. My conclusion is that for each of my fellow liberals’ attempts to regulate something like this, it becomes obvious why Democrats are losing the nonelite working class.
Let it go, people, or you will continue to feed the class anger that led to a Donald Trump presidency.
Paul Swetow
Brooklyn