Nonsense. Go read the rebuttal column. If the artist is good enough, her size will not distract from her dance. There are some fabulous thin dancers and fabulous thick dancers. If Mrs. Ringer doesn't want someone to focus on the fact that she is not a thin dancer then dance better!

If you don't want to be criticized as a fat dancer, don't dance like a fat dancer. Go watch some videos of famous larger dancers and notice that they dance as though they were light as air. If someone is called out as fat, then it probably means their dancing was heavier than they are!

This calls to mind the time that Chris Farley had to compete against Patrick Swayze for the job of dancer at Chippendales.

The late great Mr Swayze got the job because of having a much better body, despite the fact that the later greater Chris Farley had some of the most stunning dance moves the judges had seen.

When it comes to being an entertainer, your body is part of the job, sorry.

Had he said that her size detracted from her performance, or that she wasn't as light on her feet as she could have been, I don't think there would have been as much of an uproar. But to say she looked like she'd had "one sugar plum too many" is just being nasty, and it's not saying anything about her dancing, just her figure.

No one took issue with what might be considered a much more severe criticism, that the two danced "without adult depth or complexity."

So you see, he did review her dancing. She wasn't the only one he criticized either. Go read the review and decide for yourself people!

Quoted from the NYT rebuttal article, by the way. Since the Article neglected to link to it, I'll do that here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/04/arts/dance/04ballet.html?_r=1&src=mv&ref=arts

Alastair Macaulay is simply another ordinary commenter who is trying to make a splash and get fame from what he said.

One can only ignore the idiots of the world who think they're fabulous when they're rude and uncouth.

fat people are the next target for health nazis. they'll probably use the same playbook they used for smokers, starting by crying that fat peeps drive up insurance costs, then maybe a bogus study claiming second hand fat causes cancer. next, fat folks will be hit with higher insurance costs, maybe higher food prices just for them, soon after it will ok not to hire someone based on their weight.

land of the free? yeah, right.

In his next life, Mr. Macaulay will indeed be fat........

No one is critical of the review of her dancing. That's fair game. The "sugar plum" remark was rude.

Having at one time aspired to become a professional ballet dancer, only to be told I was too tall at 5'7", I can somewhat sympathize. I think a dancer has to be "willowy" but that doesn't mean anorexic. She needs to be healthy and strong but light enough to be lifted and jump gracefully. A fat ballerina in a tutu looks ridiculous, but the critic is way off-base calling this woman too fat.

Nasty is, as nasty does.... I'd love to watch Mr. Macaulay dance as a sugar plum fairy and then see how well he weathers the criticism.

All right, I've read the original MSNBC story, the original review, and the rebuttal. Watched the video of her performance.

The reviewer has a right to his opinion, and in my opinion he's full of crap.

The performance clip shows beauty, grace, and a superb line. The dancer's conformation to first-rate balletic positions is flawless.

Her physical appearance is absolutely not that of a "fat" person in any sense.

This flap is yet another legacy of George Balanchine, who ruined generations of dancers by insisting on a flat-chested, anorexic appearance. There is no reason whatsoever that women should continue to submit to that sort of standard - whether as dancers or as models. The reviewer is wrong, and his rebuttal article is literally disconnected from reality.

Can you argue that the "health nazis" SHOULDN'T go after people that ARE driving up health costs? Obesity and it's related illnesses now cost the country more than smoking. It needs to be cracked down on, but they are too worried about offending people. You would think that people would have a thicker skin to go along with thicker other parts.

And yes, I need to lose about 10 pounds, but compared to the rest of my family, I am thin as a rail.

jwhite:

"So you see, he did review her dancing. She wasn't the only one he criticized either. Go read the review and decide for yourself people!"

Right, he criticized her dancing, and no one took issue with that part of the article, because that was what he was there to do. He was there to criticize her (and others') dancing. I don't agree with his assessment, but that's how he viewed the dance, so that's it. However, saying she looked like she had "one sugar plum too many" was just taking a pot shot at her weight.

That's why people take issue with it. That critique wasn't at all about the dancing, just about her figure.

And I read the rebuttal article. And I still think the guy has a screw loose.

It was basically "I liked a different fat dancer, and I've called other dancers fat and no one got mad, so that makes my comment okay."

Despite what he thinks, that doesn't make it okay.

ScottHutch,
Yeah, but they've gotta pay!

CMon,
Yeah...and the next thing you know the health nazis are gonna come up with some bogus studies saying that excess weight leads to diabetes and heart disease. Heck, they may even try to encourage people to do things that might cause them to lose all the beautiful fat. That would be an atrocity. I for one am happy to pay higher health insurance rates to subsidize the cost of someone's triple bypass. It is that person's RIGHT to eat 4 big macs in a sitting and I am glad to sacrifice my money for him to have that right, dagnabbit! Just like I am fine with having to pay more money for my airline seat when the airline can only sell tickets to half as many people, because millionaire Kevin Smith should have the right to board the plane taking up as much room as 3 people. Why should he have to pay for 3 tickets? Once again, it is millionaire Kevin Smith's RIGHT to eat 4 big macs in a sitting and take up three seats and pay the same price as everyone else!

Watched the video...her performance is PERFECT and she's NOT FAT! She isn't waif-like either THANK GOD! Cannot stand watching uber thin, skeletal like dancers...THEY distract from the performance as I'm always noticing their chest ribs and sterno-clavicular joints protruding, and I'm always wondering when they have eaten last, or if they have enough strength to make thru the performance. Having been anorexic in my past, I can tell you this dancer has moved beyond the ignorant and rude commentary on her performance. She KNOWS she's damn good AND healthy!

As for Mr. Macaulay...I'm not sure he will be received as a credible reviewer any longer.

By the way - Macaulay's rebuttal does reveal that he is one of those who still worships at the tomb of George Balanchine. Too bad, Balanchine has by now been exposed as a man who was very sick, abused women, and above all exerted far too much authority over all things balletic.

I saw the picture of jen ringer, she looked great... the new york times writer I found criticizes alot of other dancers about weight..of course he never puts his picture anywhere..he must struggle with his own body image...I conclude: she is hot, his writing is not...

Alastair Macaulay - YOU ARE A LARGE PART OF THE PROBLEM IN AMERICA TODAY!! How dare you! How many young ballet dancers are anorexic and bulemic just so they can score a great review from a critic such as yourself?

Mr. Macaulay, please submit a full-length photo of yourself so we can all critique your body in unison with your skills.

I hope you can take what you will be told!!

The guy is a salaried employee paid for his opinion, which he expressed. The beauty of free speach is that there is then room for rebuttal. The ballerina expressed herself eloquently in reply to him and addressed the issue of eating disorders among dancers as well. She is also a salaried employee in her role as the Sugarplum Fairy as well. If she weren't selling tickets and filling the theatre she would be fired. It seems the theatre is full and she is doing a great job. His rather inane statement allowed her to speak on television nationally to address the issue in the fine manner in which she did. Free speach reigns, as does the Sugarplum Fairy. She looked beautiful in the video.

Her "sugerplums", demure as they are, look pretty good to me. This guy's clearly got some sort of problem with the dancer's womanly appearance. Hmm... I wonder why that might be? He probably likes 'em better if they look like 14 year old boys.

and we wonder (not really) why women fixate on cosmetics, clothes and bodies.

Pretty funny about the critic going off on his own little world during the second article....must be much all about his self.

But mostly, who cares what a critic thinks ? While they often get it right with reviews...mostly most people do too.

Can you argue that the "health nazis" SHOULDN'T go after people that ARE driving up health costs?

Sure. It's been proven time and again that people who live unhealthy lives (smoke, drink, are obese, motorcycle riders, etc) cost society significantly less during their lifetime because they don't live as long. It is easy to find these studies so if you're really curious and want to educate yourself you can look this up on your own. If you're really concerned about saving us all money then you should be encouraging people to be as fat as possible, to smoke as much as possible, etc.

Now if you just find the overweight to be personally offensive then I'd say too bad. It's not your job nor the job of a free, democratic government to dictate how someone can or should live their life. Following your line of thought would mean a government ban or tax on riding bikes on city streets, scuba diving, using ladders, etc.

BatteryChecker,

I'm a little skeptical about these studies you refer to. I have a difficult time imagining how weight related diabetes and lung cancer treatment cost less than healthy living even if the victims of these horrible conditions die earlier.

What's the data? Since you're the one making the outlandish claim, you back it up with facts. What links or evidence can you cite to support your assertion?

I went ahead and checked anyway...

Smoking: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/08/how-much-does-smoking-cos_n_184554.html

Obesity: http://www.endocrinetoday.com/view.aspx?rid=35574

The smoking link agrees with your point, the obesity link refutes it. So, you're at 50/50. And I stand corrected on the smoking side. Ya learn somethin' new every day.

Oh, how I wanted to make a joke about this. Especially since she's a recovering anorexic. But she's thin. WTF?

Hope, your wrong...I hope he has all daughters, so he can deal with the heartache of having to deal with all the emotions and damage he helps inflict on these girls sense of self worth with his "witty repartee" about a girls weight. If you couldn't tell, I have daughters...I would like to put my boot in his ass...he better be an Adonis to make those comments.

Why does he need to be an adonis to make those comments? He didn't choose a role that is contingent upon your physical appearance, the ballerina did. This would be like a sports critic criticizing a player for being too slow and out of shape. If they aren't fast enough, you wouldn't have people whining about how mean the sports critic is. You certainly wouldn't hear people talking about how the sports critic has no right to criticize because he isn't as good an athlete. It is the ballerina's job to look beautiful on stage. It is the critic's job to write about whether the goal was accomplished or not, and in his opinion it wasn't. If you disagree with his skills or opinion, don't read him, but if he wasn't on the mark a good percentage of the time, then he would not have a job being a critic for the NYT.

It's also the ballerina's job to make sure she has the strength and stamina to perform her ballet perfectly-if not starving herself means that she can do this, bravo for her. Her health is also important-starving yourself keeps your immune system at risk, more sick time out of your job, out of your life-you can't be a dependable performer if you're home all the time with a cold because you're not taking care of yourself as much as possible. This critic obviously has never danced professionally a day in his life, doesn't know what sort of conditioning it takes, and characterizes himself as a critic because of his exposure to the greats in the business, comparing this girl to their gift, which is totally different judging than their weight/body structure.

Don't insert your own emotionalism into the dialog. He was not critiquing her on her appearance, or her fitness, or her dietary routines. He was criticizing her (and others) as a choice for their particular role.

He never said she was fat.

But she was cast as the Sugar-Plum Fairy, and she clearly did not represent that role. This is not gymnastics, where as long as she can get through the routine her appearance shouldn't matter. Ballet is a carefully crafted assemblage of music, visuals, and motion.

The SPF role must be light and airy, as a fairy must exert effort to remain on the ground and not the other way around. This person was simply a bad fit for this role.

It's ballet, people. If no one anywhere danced another ballet, the sun would still come up the next day. Who cares what some over the hill critic says about it?

We have lost our vision in regards to weight and ballet. This young lady is the correct height and weight.

Perhaps Mr. Macaulay needs his eyes checked.

Eric,
This is not just a ballet thing. Put it in this context. The woman has a physical job that requires certain conditioning, weight, and abilities. Firefighters are held to certain physical capabilities and weight limits, or they can not be firefighters. Military people have certain fitness tests they need to pass, or they can not remain in the military. The Navy even has height requirements that if you are too TALL you can not be in the Navy. If the critic had wrote "I just had a hard time buying in to the quadripalegic that played the Nutcracker" there would not be an uproar. This isn't a whole lot different. When you are playing a fairy, you have to portray a sense of weightlessness, which is tough for a larger woman to do. Not that she would be large walking down the street...but in terms of ballet she is large for ballet. Just as not everyone walking down the street can be a firefighter. This doesn't mean they are "out of shape" per se. Just not in good enough shape to be a firefighter.

The reason so many people in this country are overweight now is because we as a society have said that you can no longer call someone out over it, even if they are voluntarily put themselves in a job where it is a requirement to be skinny. We say things like "everyone is beautiful in their own way" and "it is ok to be overweight" so people will be over weight. For the record, I am a little over weight. I used to be a lot over weight. When I was little and fat, no one was doing me any favors saying that it is ok to be over weight, but if you say anything to the contrary in this society, there is hell to pay.

flbikerchick - Excellent point! Not being a fan of ballet, my only response to this is to encourage her to be healthy, even if it means a 'critic' can take a cheap shot.

After all, the critic isn't actually contributing to society in any useful way.

Well he should be strapped to a chair and watch Black Swan since thats the whole point behind the movie. But he has his right to an opinion. I'm glad more people came out in support of her. If people stop paying attention to the reviewer's column , bye bye column.

I watched the clip. If the weight comment hadn't have been made I would never have considered it. Now that I've seen it I can definitely say, SHE IS NOT FAT. Not for ballet. She has exquisite body line and fluidity.

I was a show skater for a number of years. Weigh ins every day. Fines for every pound over weight. It's just how it is. But to make a comment like that is just plain mean-spirited and tacky.
If the producers felt she had the ability for the performance, than that's the end of it. Now this pischer has made the fat comment, I wonder if she loses her part.

benkyouburito -

He never said she was fat.

Really????

“Jenifer Ringer, as the Sugar Plum Fairy, looked as if she’d eaten one sugar plum too many,” Macaulay wrote in a review published in The Times three days later.

Yep, he pretty much did. Not too many ways to interpret that statement!

very-- Thank you for the quote, it is my point exactly. He did not say she was fat. He said she, as the sugar-plum fairy, was too fat.

Like I, at 5'7 160, am not fat but in my job as a mary-poppins chimney-sweep I'm too large.

As a Caucasian I am not a dark person. But when I went out for the lead in Wiki-Leaks: The Musical the casting director told me I was too dark for the role.

The English language is capable of such subtle and important distinctions, even if many readers are not capable of comprehending them.

sj23: This young woman admirably fulfills all the demands of her profession and in no way is overweight REGARDLESS OF HER ROLE AS BALLERINA. If she were overweight AND it impacted her performance, then his comment might be appropriate, but in this circumstance it is not. Consequently, all your strident defense of this critic's remarks do is reveal your own obsession with weight. If you consider this young woman overweight, you have a truly distorted view of the human body.

spiritdance,
In this ballet, she is playing a part of a character. If the character is written as someone that is very petite and the critic believes her to not be petite, then the casting is not faithful to the role.

You could cast a midget to play the lead in the next Superman movie, and even though as an actor he can technically do everything that he needs to do to fill the role including saying the lines and even flying with the help of special effects, his look would still not make him a good fit for the role, much to the same point that benkyouburito has made.

She is a good ballerina. She is fit and attractive. But she is not a fairy. She just simply is not.

And to bikerchick--

It's ballet, people. If no one anywhere danced another ballet, the sun would still come up the next day.

Engineers, scientists, and builders may tell us how we should build bridges, but the artists of the world tell us why building them is important. It unites a people through shared experience. Without art, who would care whether the sun rose or not? We can see all the "important things" with fluorescent lighting.

The critic stated the truth.

She is heavy for a ballerina.

Her personal problems are irrelevant.

..

It is past time for our society's self-appointed critics of the feamle figure to abandon their love for the anorexic look, before it kills or maims any more young women. We should be past the point where we are comfortable with ruining the health and safety of performers to get what we want in a performance- or are we ready to go back to the time of castrati, as well?

It is past time that we quash people's opinions.

The critic can say whatever he choses.

Maybe she is heavy "for a ballarina"....but that deosn't make it right or O.K. It's the public who pay for that industry and if WE stand up and say its not healthy to be skin and bones they will have to listen.

and jomama88...if you think that media, standards, expectations, ect... are more important than a person and their problems, you need to examine your life a little. If everone had more compassion about eachothers personal problems life would be a lot better.

He can say whatever he choses, but that doesn't mean he is free from the consequences of his choice of words, including outrage from the public.

I think both the writer and the ballerina handled this situation with some degree of class. The writer's snip that the ballerina had one too many sugar plums was not the nicest way of saying this...but on the other hand being skinny and looking the part is a piece of the ballerina's job, and if she is not doing it, it is the critic's job to point that out.

If Stallone had shown up to film the first Rocky movie looking like he did in Copland, critics would also have something to say. If Jason Statham didn't look like Jason Statham, he would not have as many roles in Hollywood. Further, these people are almost considered to be in the role of an athlete. How often do you hear about Shaquille O'Neal being called fat, when probably 80% of the US population has a higher body fat percentage than him?

When your body is based on a physical or visual art, be it theater or sports, your appearance is all a part of the job responsibility, which is why I am sitting at a keyboard at my desk job instead of out acting or modeling or playing pro basketball.

And Terry H, the critic is not "self appointed." He is a paid professional critic for the NYT, which means that someone found his opinions valuable enough to hire him, which is more than you can say for Perez Hilton who is a self appointed critic.

I agree wholeheartedly on Perez Hilton, but I'm afraid that my respect for many critics has been in a death spiral of late. They seem to place themselves so far above the rest of us that they consistently pan artists and features that we, the public, will enjoy. I realize that in some cases they are more discerning, but I also find them more and more irrelevant, if their advice does me no good. Then again, maybe I'm just being grumpy this morning.

jomama88

It is past time that we quash people's opinions.

The critic can say whatever he choses.

stfu

True, but to the gentleman who said she is heavy for a ballerina: you obviously do not know your dance history. She is only heavy by Balanchine standards, which is a point of fashion in ballet. Joffery preferred more athletically built dancers. If you go back in time, it was the fashion at certain points in ballet history for dancers to be petite, but more robust women. This is an opinion, not a requirement for ballet technique.

CMon,
Weren't you the one calling in to question America being the land of the free? Are you a little hypocritical? Isn't the first amendment of the constitution the right to freedom of speech? Yet you are going to tell jomama "stfu?" because he said the critic has that right?

Oh well. It is nice to see that you put the Big Mac down for long enough to excercise your first amendment rights by typing out such a well thought out, intelligent, thought provoking comment

Ah, yes, Lucyyou are right.but you know what they say: "Never try and teach a pig to sing. It frustrates you and annoys the pig." Just sent the critic some sheet music and let him practice on his own.

jomama,

Seems you are very informed on this subject, or you claim to be.

Please enlighten me. Exactly what is the weight requirement for a ballerina? And where did you find your criteria?

2 days and no response.

jomama has confirmed her/his lack of any real knowledge.

What I wouldn't PAY to have her figure. Wow. This critic must be a very shallow person. (Weight can come and go, but shallow, stupid crudeness is forever.)

I'm only 5 feet tall. I would gladly take a little extra weight to have her height. I think she looks lovely.

I did gymnastics and ballet growing up. We did the daily weigh-in thing. I never thought about it. I had a hard time eating enough calories during the day to try to stay between 90 and 100 lbs. We needed the power and energy to compete. There were a couple that had obvious eating disorders. They thought lighter would make them better. However, it made them weaker and they couldn't make it through a complete work out. Of course, if you're too heavy, it's hard to put all of that weight 8 feet into the air. As athletes you learn to compete injured, bleeding and in pain. However, your body will eventually say that's enough!

People should be healthy and not try to make their body into something that it will never be and should never be. However, healthy is the key word. And she looks beautiful and healthy!

Would you rather have a headline that speaks of death and carnage?

Really--you're coming to the Today Show for world or US headline news?? There's a whole Internet out there--you're the one on the wrong page!

Uh, this was on MSNBC.com's from page as the lead-in headline. Sorry that you got it linked from elsewhere.

As for carnage and death? Do I want carnage and death? Not really, but at the same time I don't turn a blind eye to it when it happens. Turning your back on reality is unhealthy and dishonest. And to break from your troll, there are issues that are really much more important that some critic who thinks some dancer is a few pounds over-weight. Wouldn't you agree?

Yes, I agree, but I fail to see how reading an article like this is turning one's back on reality. It's just an article. Honestly, I'd much rather see something like this near the top of the front page than an article about another child being killed by his/her parent, or an accident where many people are killed or injured, or children taken hostage by a mentally disturbed teenager. It's only a matter of time before those headlines come back. You see what I mean?

No, the critic is not setting the expectation that young girls need to be anorexic.

He is setting the expectation that ballerinas should be thin, not thick.

This is not new. It is ballet. If you don't like it, then don't go.

He doesn't need to be nasty about it, he didn't say "I think she'd look better and dance better if she were a little thinner or not as thick"...he thought he was being cute and funny by making the sugarplum comment. He just sounds like a jerk. The debate is not about whether ballerinas should be thin, it's about whether this ballerina is thin. Most people think she is thin, this guy and apparently jomamma, don't.

The anorexic aesthetic isn't as old as ballet - it was basically a fetish of 20th century Russian choreographers that got adopted because some of those dudes happened to also be great choreographers.

He may not have been setting the expectation for young girls to become anorexic, but for all the girls that dream of being pro ballerina, they're going to be paying attention to the dancers who are pro here and now and the media attention they get, what's being said about them, and it will alter their future, seeing how critics are going to take them if they're not "ideal" lithe, thin, and leggy all over-they're going to take that much more risk to their own health because of it. This critic probably isn't the only one who would have said something about her, but it will still trickle down through the professional ballet community at large. Girls aspriring to be her will pay attention to what she's doing "wrong."

The critic did not come up with the standards. He is writing based on a set of guidelines that one must follow. By the guidelines of what is good and bad that the critic has to work with, than he balanced everything and said that her appearance missed the mark (which is a huge piece of a visual performance). If the sugar plum fairy dressed up in burga covering her face because she was muslim, this would be commented on. Would this be called insensitive also? The ballerina's poor choice for her wardrobe was coming in a little heavy for the part. Actor's and actresses gain and lose weight all the time for parts (admittedly the gain part is more on the part of actors). The critic felt she was too heavy to play a fairy. On the flip side, she would be too skinny to play Mrs. Claus. It is all relative, a ballerina's weight happens to be judged on a different scale (literally no pun intended) than those in other roles of our society.

He IS setting the expectation that they need to be wafer thin. Because after you read the article, you look at the dancer, and young girls and other dancers can come to the conclusion that her already trim body is not thin enough.

icstars,
Well, maybe for a ballerina it isn't. In this critic's mind there are other people that would have been more fitting for the role. Once again, doesn't mean the woman is fat, it means she had one too many sugarplums to be a professional ballerina. Ballerina's being skinny is nothing new. At least the young girls and dancers will have an idea first hand of what the expectations are that have been set for them (which actually begins with the high standards set by the instructors and those producing the show, which are probably much higher than the average critic...you just don't hear about it as much). I doubt you will ever hear of any ballet producer encouraging his/her performers to gain some weight.

@jomama- He himself might not cause girls to starve themselves, and develop eating disorders, but there are plenty of ads in magazines, TV, the internet, billboards, with all these girls on there, that have:

Big chests, no fat on their legs, ass, arms, and their bellies are practically beyond flat. And these images are everywhere, and girls pay attention to them, they have been made to believe that the women in all the ads are the standard image of beautiful. And they do believe it. If your boobs aren't the right size, that's your flaw. If your stomach isn't perfectly flat, that's your flaw. If your ass isn't perfectly shaped, and your thighs tight and skinnythat's your flaw. Why do you think so many young girls are "dieting"? My friend was on diet pills when she was SIXTEEN. Unbelievable.

The media will never care that this is an unrealistic standard, so girls have to learn it for themselves. Most women don't look like that, and it's up to parents to tell their daughters that they're beautiful, and that all those ads have been edited, and photoshopped, airbrushed, etc. That way girls grow up with realistic expectations of what beauty is.

Thoughtless comments from a reviewer? I think not. It's quite clear that the comments were entirely intentional. And it shouldn't surprise anyone that it was so.

In this day and age when snarky, hateful, often inaccurate and all too often sensationalized comments are considered normal discourse (look at ANY of the ever so popular so called reality shows for proof of that) - the kind of disgustingly vile comments like this reviewer made are all too common, all too easily accepted by the masses.

We need to rid our society of the established 'norm' that allows people to treat others like gutter garbage. Only then will people like this reviewer and those that support him, reform thier behavior.

You are right, of course -- the comment wasn't thoughtless, it was carefully crafted. It's certainly easier to make snarky and ugly comments from the comfort of your office chair. The critic clearly thought he was being clever and witty; however, many of those commenting here view his opinions as shallow and narrow-minded.

Do you think men who are not 6 foot 6 and built like quarterbacks really worry about comments made about the physique of a quarterback? Hardly.

Instead of blaming men - why don't you blame society for raising weak and shallow women who take offenses from the world that have absolutely nothing to do with them.

Maybe the problem is that women are in self-esteem.

If they are, they are not ready to lead industry or any other field for that matter.

There's an obvious double-standard in society. A chubby, unattractive man can date a good-looking woman, whether he's rich or not, because women are often won over by personality, etc. You almost never see the reverse to be true. Also, a woman can be smart, dumb, successful, bitchy, kind, whatever, but she MUST be good-looking. It's the first comment that's made about any woman in any public situation- politics, business, whathave you. Actresses have debates on their imdb profile pages about their looks, but actors have no such discussions. You need to wake-up, jomamma. No one on here is saying it's ok for ballerinas to be chubby...but most people don't think the ballerina in question is chubby.

It is interesting that you say that, jomama, because your comments are right in line with the people that you are talking about. You are in the minority of the folks commenting on this article.

I suggest you go look up the word hypocrite and rethink what you have been saying. You are just like that newspaper critic.

another idiot comment by jomama88! sandtrich's comment wasn't about men, it was about women.....so of course he must logically conclude this was about bashing men. You are right, SOCIETY objectifies and derides women. This isn't about who's being weak, this is about right and wrong. Regardless of who's weak or not, it's everyone's duty to protect humanity against cruelty. If you can't see that, you are not a member of the human race. By the way, men have self-esteem issues as well....and many in the medical and psychological fields see as many or more issues regarding men's poor health than women, either way this was wrong.

@emily - I just had to comment on what you wrote "A chubby, unattractive man can date a good-looking woman, whether he's rich or not, because women are often won over by personality, etc."

This is completely false and you know it. I can post a few hundred examples of women who date short fat guys, or fat ugly guys, or whatever guys. They are always wealthy. Women look for money men look for looks. That is a drastic generalization, but in some sense true. I have also seen plenty of women dating men that are just complete a-holes, or abusive. I have been raised in the same society as everyone else and do not have these same opinions. Perhaps it is because I choose to think for myself rather than to follow what everyone else says. I really don't care about the critic and actually never read what critics say because they are not me and therefore cannot tell me what to think. The critic is a douche, and both men and women have their flaws. I don't know where the meeting are held for The Men Control Everything Society, but I have never been invited and so no one has ever asked my opinion. I do know one thing and that is I can think for myself and act on what I feel is the right thing to do.

Just to emphasize that ballerina was not fat by any standard and the critic, as all critics are, is a douche.

Emily,
What society do you live in? You will very rarely find a pretty girl dating the fat fry cook at McDonalds with the great personality. And it is also not true that you will NEVER find a good looking guy dating an unattractive girl. I am 6'1 205 pounds, attractive by many measure and make good money, yet my last girlfriend who I dated for 7 years was 5'7, weighed more than me and barely made above minimum wage in a dead end job (and she ended up running off with an EMT instructor she was taking classes from) so how do you explain this? Women are every bit as guility when it comes to judging someone based on superficial measures.

I see A LOT of chubby, mediocre men dating attractive women. I myself would date a cool, fun guy who is a little over-weight and maybe not that good-looking, and I have. Yes, steady employment along the level of my own career is a plus. I have a lot of friends dating and married to men who are homely. Not every woman is chasing money and good-looks.

By the way, SJ23 and etothex, did you consider, perhaps, that you're surrounding yourself with self-centered, superficial women? That's not the world I live in, that's not who I am, and that's not who I associate with.

@ emily - no i do not surround myself with them I am surrounded by them. and just like you or another emily. I would date a less attractive woman who i liked over an attractive woman I did not

jomama88.....you are ill informed and just plain wrong. Regardless of whether a specific profession is rough or not does not make it right. That's why people must stand-up to injustice and persecution without cause. If her dancing was poor, then say it.......say that she was lumbering and not graceful, or not light on her feet......but saying that it looked like she'd eaten one too many sugar plums is not in reference to her dancing, but in reference to her weight or looks. Make it about something that's not superficial, rather at the core of her craft....dancing. The response isn't about this dancer, you fool, it's about all those little girls who will read the review and see those words, and think that being thin isn't enough. YOU are like that bully on the playground who just doesn't get why words can hurt and why s/he IS a bully!

...He said that in the same paragraph Carsonk.

Why don't you go read it?

You don't know your dance history Jomama. She is "heavy" by Balanchine standards, but that is a point of fashion. Joffery (another great in the ballet world) preferred his dancers with a more athletic physic. What body types are fashionable in ballet has changed many times over the course of its history, and I hope it will continue to do so. He is welcome to criticize her dancing (which he did) but his sense that she is overweight is off base. Her body proportions are just fine for the ballet world.

Jedi,
When someone pays for ballet tickets, they are paying to get a performance, an illusion performed on stage. Generally people's preference (including the critic) is to see skinnier ballerinas. In other roles, it is acceptable to be plump as a whale. People generally do not hire skinny mall Santa's (and probably in many cases they also do not hire asian or black mall Santa's). What would you think if George Lucas had hired fat actors to play the Jedi's in the new star wars prequels? You'd wonder what he was thinking, even though them being physically slender had nothing to do with the role. It is all about image. That being said, why should this critic be reprimanded by making a critique on a visual aspect of a visual performance?

Well, whoever produced the ballet didn't think she was too fat, or she wouldn't have gotten the part. She looks gorgeous to me, and I used to be a dancer. Dancing is an athletic sport, the same as any other. If you are healthy, strong and able to do the job is what matters. She has excellent contour and grace.

G.H.
To use my Star Wars analogy since we're posting on Jedi's thread, the last three Star Wars movies that George Lucas produced were absolute stinkers with a lot of bad decisions made. The role of a critic is to criticize these decisions. The critic in this instance has disagreed with the decision of the producer's choice of Sugar Plum Fairy and based on his personal knowledge of and experiences with ballet, has the write to do so. A critic should not be fired for writing criticism, whether it is right or wrong, it is all an opinion. If he proves to have a history of being way off base with the readership, then eventually he should maybe be removed.

this was first page on msnbc you fool. doesnt matter how you got here. some of us were looking at the real news and this was the first article so we are checking it to figure out why. and whether she had an eating disorder in her past doesnt matter one bit, the fact that she puts herself on a stage to be judged for her physical performance means she will be judged. remember, she read the review so what did she expect?

Except that she is heavy for a ballerina.

And I'm short for a hockey player. So be it.

Get out of the game if you don't like it.

It's feminist to think it's gross that many men are attracted to women who look like 12 year olds? It's true, and it's disgusting.

And jomamma, people don't agree with you, stop stating that dumb "fact"....the critic did not have to be nasty about it and many people think she's lovely and thin. And she sounds like she's accepted the comment, so telling her to "get out of the game" is another nasty reply.

Jomama -- since you seem to be an expert on the weight of ballerinas, please enlighten us all in what way she "is heavy." Her arms are slim, her legs are long and graceful, she has no protruding stomach. I've been a ballet fan for over 50 years, and would like a little clarification, other than "she is heavy for a ballerina."

jomama88.....get out of life you arse. Whether her performance was absolutely @!$%#e does not excuse the fact that he commented about her weight first, then her performance. And in a word where being unhealthy is rampant, the last thing we need to do is to set-up people who are more healthy as not, sending them and others in society into a death spiral.

Again, I'm not aware that she complained.....so she shouldn't get out of ballet. This is about "normal" people seeing those words and being hurt by the apparant lack of class, taste and decency of this critic. Everyone has a responsibility for what s/he says....regardless of profession. Be "severe" about the quality of the dancing, but don't cross that line.

She is NOT heavy. She is beautifully proportioned, toned, and athletic.

Much more appealling than any hollow eyed, gaunt and starving stick in a tutu.

You dance girl - You are STUNNING!

More to the point, how is she "too heavy"? Since she appears to be in spectacular shape, there are only two situations in which it might be fair to criticize her weight (indirectly). One, if she appeared to be physically unable to perform certain moves (jumps). Two, if she were heavy enough that her male partners were unable to gracefully and flawlessly lift her (but then, it could just be them being too weak!). Since the critic made NO mention of any substantive criticism in these regards, her actual mass is irrelevant considering she is in PERFECT shape.

I would imagine she is heavy- only because of her muscles though. She is fully toned and I would never see her and think "fat." Anywho I would hate to be that critics daughter.

The critic was for the New York Times.

I Googled the critic to see if you were right. He does not appear to be the least bit overweight or out of shape. He is, however, exceedingly ugly...

I think the critic may have issues of his own because maybe 1. He could never make the cut as a dancer(those who can't dance, teach,those who can't teach, become bad critics) or 2.he was shot down by a ballerina he asked out or he's just a fatso himself so that's why he called this beautiful woman "fat".And for this guy to hide behind The new york times and for them to aid in his disgusting critique it's no wonder why no one wants to trust or read them the way they use to.

I think she is beautiful and graceful. She does not have one extra pound on her frame, you can see her ribs and collarbones through her costume. I saw a photo of the critic and I think his face looks as stupid and ugly as his comments about the dancer's weight.