Letters to the Editor | July 29, 2024

JD Vance has no idea what he has taken on in denigrating women who do not have children.

His categorization of “childless cat ladies” is a cruel classification toward women who are unable to get pregnant or who may have lost children to any number of tragic circumstances over their lifetimes.

There are countless women like me who did not grow up determined to be a mother.

As the oldest of six, I had changed countless diapers and fed endless bottles long enough to want to distance myself from that part of the child-rearing cycle.

As a woman who married late, my ex-husband already had a young son, and I knew our combined incomes would not allow either of us to stay home with an infant. I was not willing to take on the work/family stress of so many of my peers at that stage of my or a baby’s life.

So, JD, I hope you realize your antiquated and abhorrent pigeonholing is offensive and derogatory.

Fortunately, mothers and non-mothers are aligned in their ability to vote. I might even take my dog along with me on Nov. 5.

Mary Kay Owen, Downingtown

. . .

The biggest nightmare for Donald Trump over the next 100 days until the election doesn’t seem to be his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, but rather his running mate, JD Vance. It hasn’t even been two weeks since Vance — who was apparently totally unvetted — was added to the Republican ticket, and he’s already turning out to be the bête noire of his suddenly sputtering campaign.

Every time the increasingly puzzling Vance speaks, he puts his foot in his mouth with another weird pronouncement offending yet another segment of the voting population he is supposed to be appealing to, not driving away.

Among those he dismisses as less than worthy of consideration or respect are unmarried women and any without children (who he derides as “childless cat ladies”), families with adopted children, women with children who are trapped in abusive marriages, day-care workers, and the whole LGBTQ community, among others — all of whom he denigrates as “abnormal Americans,” who should presumably also be denied access to many government services.

Bruce C. Cooper, Ardmore

Andrew Stober’s July 24 op-ed suggesting ways to improve pedestrian and bike riders’ safety in Philadelphia included some worthy suggestions. But, in the context of a major Department of Transportation study into car-pedestrian crashes that concluded pedestrians are as least as often responsible for these crashes as drivers, his suggestions (and his wording) show an unfortunate bias. This same anti-driver bias is inherent in the Vision Zero concept and makes the improvements Vision Zero supporters advocate a hard sell.

By all means, pass Jay Alert legislation so the police can alert body shops to help track hit-and-run drivers. Protected bike lanes as opposed to simple street markings are also a great idea, assuming a majority of car-bike crashes are really a result of the auto intruding into the bike lane.

But let’s also create a more balanced and democratic form of Vision Zero that relies on statistics about crash causes as opposed to focusing almost entirely on slowing traffic with speed cameras, road diets, and other forms of traffic calming. Several major studies make it clear that speed is not the most common cause of car-pedestrian crashes. One of the recent such crashes could have been prevented by reconfiguring the nearby traffic signal so there is never a green light for cars while the walk light allows pedestrians to cross, or by moving the crosswalk well back from the intersection so it would have been easier for the driver to see someone crossing.

We should be looking for the least obtrusive solutions to these problems instead of arbitrarily removing needed auto lanes or installing other traffic calming. When was the last time we read a detailed analysis of a crash and its causes for the sake of educating all involved?

John Baxter, Toano, Va., jmbaxt@aol.com

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 150 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in the Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.